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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt3280916 | The Atticus Institute | The story of the film is presented in documentary format, with footage of the events punctuated by interviews with people related to them.
In the early 1970s, Dr. Henry West (William Mapother) founds the Atticus Institute in rural Pennsylvania, hoping to find evidence that proves supernatural abilities such as ESP are real. Despite the best work of West and his aides, however, every subject that comes to the institute seeming to display such abilities are ultimately proven to be frauds. The team is demoralized in their work by the time Judith Winstead (Rya Kihlstedt) is brought to the institute by her sister Margaret, who is troubled by her disturbing behavior. Judith immediately proves to be a different case than the previous subjects, passing all the tests with incredible proficiency and leaving no doubt that her abilities are genuine. Her behavior remains erratic, however, and many of West's staff become uncomfortable with her, even while their boss's fascination with her increases. With the usual tests proving to be no challenge for Judith's incredible power, the team gradually introduces new tests that show her to possess even greater abilities than first imagined.
Judith's behavior grows more unstable as her abilities evolve, disturbing West's staff. Bizarre events begin to happen to the aides and their families outside of the institute, which they suspect Judith is somehow influencing, and many of them resign from their positions to escape from her. As the situation escalates, the team seeks help from the United States military; under the influence of military advisors, they conduct new tests that lead to Judith manifesting new abilities such as telekinesis and pyrokinesis. One day, Judith experiences a violent reaction to a spectral photography experiment, and when the images are checked, a cloud-like entity is observed temporarily leaving Judith's body during her convulsions. This leads the team to realize that Judith's powers are the result of demonic possession.
With this discovery, the military seizes full control of the institute under a pretext of national security, and the situation spirals completely out of control. Soon, the military decides that Judith's abilities can be utilized as a weapon against the Soviet Union in the Cold War, and they begin conducting increasingly inhumane experiments on Judith against West's objections. Using methods such as electroshock therapy, the military try to tame the demon and force it to cooperate in exercises such as identifying the location of enemy bases, ignoring the effects these tests have on Judith. As these experiments ultimately prove fruitless, the military decides to try removing the demon from Judith by having a priest perform an exorcism while a soldier is connected to Judith via machinery. The process shows promise at first, but Judith suddenly lashes out and gravely injures the priest, disconnecting the electrodes attached to her before passing out. As the staff try to reattach the electrodes, Judith experiences a violent seizure while the demon attacks West through the body of the soldier connected to her. An unseen force blasts through the facility, killing all present. As the cameras come back online, Judith - now free of the demon's control and restored to her true self - breaks down when she sees the carnage around her. The demon enters the room in West's body, having fully consumed his soul, and stands before Judith's cell as she pleads for help. West kills Judith by telekinetically bursting her heart, then calmly exits the room and disappears.
The film concludes with a note revealing that Judith's body was buried in an undisclosed location following an autopsy, and her case remains the only instance of possession officially certified by the United States government. Dr. Henry West, after disappearing on October 23, 1976, was declared legally dead in 1982 and his whereabouts have been unknown for over forty years. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | Before long the government get involved and things go increasingly badly wrong.The film-makers have taken some care to present this in a manner that replicates an actual documentary.
To this end we have lots of talking heads footage involving people who were connected to the story and there is also retro looking filmed material as well as stills.
It's one of those films that is shot like one, yet scripted – I think they call them a 'mockumentary.' I've seen the genre before and they can be pretty entertaining; normally they're quite funny and this one is supposed to be scary.
And, if you like 'found footage' films then you'll probably have seen better also.Plus there's a British actress who plays one of the doctors who completely overacts every time she's interviewed.
Now, about the least scary thing I can possibly think of watching is a documentary, and that stands true here.
I suppose it's like having a narrator, but of course a narrator in a horror film is a big no-no, so this was a way around it.
I don't think we'll ever see any big-budget horror films adapt this documentary style, but it was an interesting concept to see done here in a lesser-known film.There are one or two moments of quality horror to be found, where suspense was drawn out of the scene.
Those who watch it won't be disappointed, it's above average as far as some of the garbage horror films Hollywood is putting out these days, but ultimately they won't be blown away by it either..
And if you do control it, then who will be at risk?"You like to watch documentaries about the supernatural, alien sightings or other unexplained phenomena on "National Geographic", then you should see "The Atticus institute" since this is a documentary-style film about a scientific study in an institute led by Dr. Henry West.
Fortunately, the found footage was reduced to the minimum, and the whole movie is a collage of interviews, eyewitness reports and video recordings (both fixed cameras that capture the experiment and in a limited extent some home recording).You can compare it a bit with "The Quiet Ones".
When the official authorities are called for help after they've noticed that the phenomenal forces aren't controllable, those authorities see an opportunity to use this to their advantage and they try to isolate the supernatural power that resides in Judith.In addition to the total lack of tension, there's also the fact that the surprise effect is totally negated by the testimonies.
I will never understand stuff like that.So to sum up, the pacing is good at first, then it gets a little boring, and then it goes down hill.
The film portrayal of titular institution goes beyond average found footage gimmick, its understanding of the presentation makes it as though audience is watching real documentary from science channel.
However, parts of the film aren't as consistently polished and these issues stutter the pace and occasionally derail the tension it has built.Dr. Henry West (William Mapother) runs a small lab to research individuals said to have paranormal abilities.
Characters are pretty convincing at their roles, the use of exclusive camera footages without first hand interaction create credible effect.The Atticus Institute offers several unnerving thrills, although the production has few technical flaws.
These issues could've been just minor hiccups, yet they are persistent enough to hamper the movie.The Atticus Institute has intriguing concepts, its clever style almost overcomes the genre familiarities, but ultimately the production isn't adequate enough to fully convey the suspense..
I don't really know what the point of this movie was.It's not scary at all and it's made as a faux documentary style but all the footage of course is fake and all the people interviewed are actors, William Mapother off 'Lost' fame with a very recognisable face plays one of the psychologists maybe if they would have gone with people who weren't as famous it would have worked a little better.But on the other hand there are plenty of faux documentaries that does work so it's not all just that, it's just really boring.I don't really know what more to say about this movie cause there's really nothing to say, a real big bore of a movie..
It was something we have seen many times in other movies, and it is always great to see a good possession movie as long as it is scary and well made !
Seriously how can you hate this movie?Clever, interesting and original The Atticus Insititute gets a thumbs up from me, hats off to writer and director Chris Sparling.
Frankly I am very fond of horror movies especially those involving demonic possessions based on true stories.
The best thing that I liked about this movie was the way in which the story was told, shot more like a documentary, depicting events using recorded footage's.
In addition there were certain events in the movie which are based on true stories.The movie starts at a slow pace but in a unique way uses some of the characters to narrate the incidents that occurred in 1976 at a paranormal institute.
This film takes its time to build the tension and suspense but it does so masterfully that in the end you are left wandering what you are watching is not really happening.A film is only as good as the cast, which made me wonder how difficult it was to play the Judith Winstead's character.
The Atticus Institute also has some really scary scenes with the demonic possession display shot to perfection.Overall I can say 'The Atticus Institute' is a movie that in a unique way provides a lot of suspense.
There's the main issue of this one cutting away from the story continuously in order to get the talking head interviews and their own personal accounts of what happened that doing so in this manner causes the film to be so start/stop in terms of its pace that it really can't generate much in terms of atmosphere or suspense when it has to cut away when something's interesting to come back to these.
This one goes for brief inserts recreating what happened that are quite hard to make out the point of when they just spend the entire time going nowhere with the storyline as they don't lead up to anything except the next talking-head interview, and there's little to be gleaned from that type of structure.
The other issue here is that it's highlighting how uneventful the first half of this one is where they go into the research institute's background and history with its' patients before getting her there as none of this is really all that involved in getting this one going along at an inviting pace with the main purpose of the film appearing so late into here since all of the lead-up time is taken on setting the stage here with not just the interviews but the footage shot documenting the very same thing we just heard them talk about.
Still, this one isn't all that bad as there's some good stuff involved here with the surprising feat of it not being all that boring at all, keeping this one moving along at a nice enough pace that there's not a whole lot really worth skipping over or just ignoring, blazing through here with a rather impressive pace that keeps this one going along rather nicely.
I rarely, if ever, enjoy the 'found footage/ faux documentary' genre of films.
Enter Judith Winstead (arguably the main character of the film and very well portrayed by Rya Kihlstedt) is a withdrawn and a somewhat vacant woman capable of truly remarkable things.
The story unfolds as a series of interviews between various individuals of interest in centered around Judith's life and her time at the Atticus Institute.What makes this movie more interesting that most is an excellent blend of plot devices.
As the movie progresses, the scientist find the source of Judith's remarkable power, and it becomes a slightly different kind of film.
By the second act the military becomes involved, although it seems like such a preposterous plot twist, it is so smoothly done that it feels like a natural progression of the documentary.There are some rather silly effects throughout the film, a couple of rather predictable jump scares, and several other things that perhaps with a little more effort from post-production could have been avoided.
However, I actually paused the film at these moments and thought they were fairly interesting, and they lend a lot into the story line.
But well, the point is that there aren't as many horror pseudo-documentaries as before, but among the ones which still remain, we can find some competent ones, such as The Atticus Institute.
Built as an authentic documentary with interviews, fixed photography and videos from different sources, this film tells us an interesting story about the formal investigation of extrasensory powers in a scientific context, taking advantage of many events from the real world in order to add credibility to the testimonies of "witnesses" who experienced the horrors unleashed by the well intentioned Dr. Henry West and his psychic star, the unbalanced Judith Winstead.
In summary, The Atticus Institute works better as a pseudo-documentary than as a horror film, something which isn't bad in my own opinion.
I'm the kind of a horror movie viewer who wants the occasional scare but doesn't like too much gore or disgusting content.
For this reason I've grown fond of horror movies filmed as if they we're documentaries made by the people involved in the incidents that occur.
I can even watch the gory parts if the movie isn't about the gore but about really truly scaring and creeping you out till your skin crawls and you have this feeling like something is itching on the back of your head.Good examples of this kind of horror genre are Paranormal Activity and Rec and their sequels.
It's not a horror (there isn't a single scare scene), it some kind of thriller told in mostly in old footage and pictures.
It's not scary, not interesting, and at running time 1 h 19 min this movie drags beyond believe.
"The Atticus Institute" is framed in a documentary style with faux footage from the actual case involving the study of telekinesis and especially the study of one extraordinary subject- Judy Winstead.
There isn't really a lot of creativity in "The Atticus Institute" beyond the initial concept of the military trying to control a demonically possessed person for some twisted warmongering ideology.
It all really has the same quality of effect on the movie goer as those television paranormal documentary series were you know exactly what is about to happen in the recreation because they all but told you so just moments before.
"The Atticus Institute" doesn't really give itself space to build up for some much needed scary moments-and there was plenty of opportunity for some real thrills.
Overall "The Atticus Institute" is one of those mediocre horror films that you can coast your way through if you are just determined to watch it.
If you like móvies about possessions it's not the best but it's not the worst Plot: The movie is about a group of scientists trying to finde someone who can prove that phsiquiqs powers existe and can be use to help people and to defend the country from attacks without warning from other countries or from terrorist It's an interesting plot and i think they did the best they could with the budget Effects,cast and pacing: very little cgi and most of it is adequate Acting is great.the cast is almost perfect(as usual considering the budget) The pacing is a bit slow and the documemtary style could be boring for some people .give it a try ir you like horror movies.
This movie made me wish and want to believe The Atticus Institute was real, that Judith Winstead was a real person, much in the vein of The Exorcism of Emily Rose.
I think the promo for this film spoiled it a little in telling you upfront that this is about possession and the military's attempts to use the powers that are released.
We see what the researchers think is the world's first real case of telekinetic powers then the realisation that dark forces are at work...by then it's too late.Very believable documentary footage, all the government people were brilliantly cast...if you'd stumbled across this half way through you'd think it was a real doc for a while!
watch it not like an usual Horror movie but like a one try to respect your thought...
Credits for that also it almost looked real at some times, old cameras, time scene and all.This kind of thing could be so much better.I understand that it is almost impossible to create so much fictitious stuff like taking some exorcist in the film (what was actually funny) but all I got was boredom.Actors (all but the main character) were very some kind of make-out, they didn't seem to act at all.
Eyes were pretty nice but nothing else to say actually, waste of time mostly.Props for the try, maybe someone will be better in future :) I'm not a director at least in real industry or anything but I never would use this all stuff based on like nonsense.I believe in paranormal things and brain issues but this was just boring for me.
Before anything else, I would like to say for the record, that 'The Atticus Institute' is an entertaining movie, and for what it's worth, I at no point felt tempted to turn it off, like I do with so many of these types of films.
Like Lake Mungo, The Atticus Institute is a faux-documentary including 'found-footage' from a supposed government cover-up over the investigation into military attempts at harnessing paranormal abilities found in a middle age woman who, as it turns out, is probably possessed by some type of malevolent spiritual entity.
Asides from the similar film, 'The Quiet Ones', the premise is rather unique, and the documentary interviews are very well acted.
Unfortunately, it's the 'found-footage' segments that start to fall flat over the course of the movie, bringing my rating down by a few points.For the most part 'The Atticus Institute' is convincing in it's attempt at the mockumentary angle.
Unlike most movies of this ilk, 'The Atticus Institute' is rather pleasing to the eye, another quality it shares with it's superior counterpart, 'Lake Mungo'.The real problem with the film in it's final 30 minutes or so is that it diverges from it's rather interesting and captivating story and takes a turn towards the cliché.
The Atticus Institute is entertaining, and the first half of the film is really quite good.
So I sat down to watch "The Atticus Institute".But I must admit that I lost interest fairly quickly into the movie.
I am sure that some will enjoy the style in which the movie is filmed and set up, but it just didn't sit well with me."The Atticus Institute" just never took off.
I like mocumentary style more than founded footage, but movie absolutely fails in realization.
Much of this documentary-style horror is filmed in flashback.
Although 'The Atticus Institute is as convincing a depiction of supernatural events in the hands of officials as I've ever seen, this results in a lack of pace and spectacle – but that's fine when the results are this good.
One of the best documentary type films i've seen.
This films is basically a reviewing of archived Psychic experiments that went horribly wrong, but it is done so well at times you think its real, you can tell the budget was not huge but it didn't matter because they used it wisely almost to the point of brilliantly, so the story unfolds as an interview type documentary on several scientists while showing the archived videos of the experiments, a bunch of Psychic researchers do simple experiments on hundreds of subjects with little to no real definitive results, they are almost at the end of their funding when a woman walks in and volunteers for testing, she is barely coherent at times but in that very 1st day she proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Psychic abilities are real, in the process of showing the videos and talking about the events, they show the real Black and White videos of the Russian woman that proved she could move small objects with her mind (these video clips are real not part of the movie videos), but this woman that they are testing now is beyond any subject that has ever been tested, suffice to say, things turn from bad to worse real quick, there is real tension throughout the film, the acting is fantastic, the ending felt slightly rushed but over all this was great, it's different and it's scary at times because the story is told in a multi layered type fashion to add realism, the interviewer is asking questions to a person that was present, you see their reactions as they are responding and sometimes showing the actual videos as they are still explaining and then show their afterthoughts, it was great, that's my opinion, you see Hollywood spending $100 million plus of films that end up being crap and you see films like this that the story drives the experience at a fraction of the budget, story telling at it's best, I do have to say that I'm bias in the sense that Psychic powers and Psychic research type films has always interested me tremendously so on films like this one, Chronicle, Scanners or even The Fury 1978 are always going to receive a high score from me if done well, and all those films mentioned including this one are scores of 10 in my book.
And at times,you forget you are watching a film. |
tt0045464 | The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T. | Young Bart Collins (Tommy Rettig) lives with his widowed mother Heloise (Mary Healy). The bane of Bart's existence are the hated piano lessons he endures under the tutelage of the autocratic Dr. Terwilliker (Hans Conried). Bart feels that his mother has fallen under Terwilliker's influence, and gripes to plumber August Zabladowski (Peter Lind Hayes), without result. While hammering at his lessons, Bart dozes off and enters a musical dream, much as did Dorothy Gale in The Wizard of Oz.
In the dream, Bart is trapped at the surreal Terwilliker Institute, where the piano teacher is a madman dictator who has imprisoned non-piano-playing musicians. He built a piano so large that it requires Bart and 499 other boys (hence, 5,000 fingers) to play it. Bart's mother has become Terwilliker's hypnotized assistant and bride-to-be, and Bart must dodge the Institute's guards as he scrambles to save his mother and himself. He tries to recruit Mr. Zabladowski, who was hired to install the Institute's lavatories ahead of a vital inspection, but only after skepticism and foot-dragging is the plumber convinced to help. The two construct a noise-sucking contraption which ruins the mega-piano's opening concert. The enslaved boys run riot, and the "atomic" noise-sucker explodes in spectacular fashion, bringing Bart out from his dream.
The movie ends on a hopeful note for Bart, when Mr. Zabladowski notices Heloise, and offers to drive her to town in his jeep. Bart escapes from the piano, and runs off to play. | whimsical, psychedelic, humor | train | wikipedia | (If anyone watches "Paula" and does not have a lump in their throat at the end they are beyond all hope.)The "Hassidics" with the Siamese beard ("Or you will get choked by the beard of the twins With the Siamese beard With a terrible twin on each end" as it says in a deleted song) are simply the boy's two great-uncles--their photos can be seen on top of the family piano.Originally, Dr. Terwilliker did not appear in the parlor scene at the beginning.
The story involves young Bart, a free spirited little boy who is forced into piano lessons dictated by the pretentious, snobby Dr. Terwilliker (Hans Conried at his nasally best!) In his dreams, he imagines this horrible teacher runs a prison like institute where prisoners are forced to play a silly, large piano meant for 500 piano players all at once.
T. to be held in the sinister Terwilliker Institute.The whimsical world of Dr. Seuss first saw expression in a Hollywood feature film in this fast-paced fantasy which examines a child's musical nightmare.
The action plays itself out over vast, curvaceous sets which will immediately seem familiar to readers of his books, while the brightly colored costumes make the players look like characters from the good Doctor's stories come to life.Completely dominating the movie in the title role is the marvelous character actor Hans Conried (1917-1982), gleefully breathing life into the part of the mad piano teacher who schemes to force 500 little lads into performing his compositions at a gigantic keyboard.
This was Conried's finest on-camera performance, but 1953 would also present him in the part for which he is perhaps best remembered, voicing Captain Hook in Disney's animated PETER PAN.The other three performers in the movie: Tommy Rettig as the much beleaguered boy attempting to thwart the evil Terwilliker; Mary Healy as his lovely, albeit mesmerized, Mom; and Peter Lind Hayes as a friendly, deadpanned plumber, all do very well with their roles, but their ordinariness, like that of Dorothy in Oz, make them pale in comparison beside Conried.The film, which delivers perhaps an unnecessarily nasty knock to piano teachers, does come across with some fine songs, ranging from Rettig's plaintive 'Because We're Kids' to Conried's hilarious 'Dressing Song.' Also on view is the bizarre Dungeon Dance, in which kidnapped male orchestra members present one of the most unusual terpsichorean displays ever seen in a kiddie film..
It combines a mind-boggling storyline (a kid dreams he's trapped in a castle ruled by his satanic piano teacher who is setting up a piano camp for 500 players), intriguing characters (the heroic, down-to-earth plumber, the helpless, beautiful, damsel/mother in distress, the all-American kid on the block, and the disturbing, foppish, freak of a villain, Dr. Terwilliker) weird costumes and sets, and the most outrageous songs ever conceived.
And the costumes that possibly inspired the makers of Star Trek, the hoods in this film look like the Original Klingons (Without the forehead makeup).And the wonderful music and dancing and the insane lyrics written by Dr Seuss!
The story, about a boy who dreams that his mean piano-teacher runs a surrealistic prison-school, is an adventure that holds the attention of young and old, and the excellent performances of Peter Lind Hayes and Mary Healy provide the "love interest" for those who find that necessary.
(Tony Butala, one of the founding members of "The Lettermen," provided his singing voice in this film.) One number, way ahead of its time -- in fact way ahead of THIS time -- makes as clear a protest as I've ever heard against adults who "push and shove us little kids around." A VERY YOUNG Hans Conried as the conceited villain will have you laughing out loud, and references to the atomic bomb should be understood in the context of a year when thousands of people were digging large holes in their back yards.
An alienated boy misunderstood by his parents at home rebels against an exacting piano teacher whom he finds out has a sinister plot to rule the world.I remember it best for its plaintive song "You Have No Right to Push Us Kids Around" later revived by Jerry Lewis in his TV appearances.
Spectacular "blow up" endings such as in James Bond movies satirized by Don Adams (Maxwell Smart) or even Mike Myers (Austin Powers) must have taken inspiration from this very early attempt at such.Much belatedly did I find out that this story is by the revered "Dr." Seuss (he is not a real doctor you know) famous for witty, whimsical stories written in cute rhyming verses about outlandish animals (Green Eggs and Ham, Cat in a Hat)but praised by educators for their effectiveness in getting children to read.
Kids will no doubt identify with the young hero, an unhappy piano student who dreams of liberating, with the help of a handsome plumber, 500 boys held captive at the mile long keyboard of his maniacal music tutor, Dr. Terwillicker (played by Mr. Fractured Flickers, Hans Conreid).
The amazing color cinematography by Franz Ploner gave this movie a great look and Al Clark's editing helped the story immensely.The principals in the film do good work under Mr. Rowland's direction.
Hans Conried's villainous Dr. T is one of the best assets of the film."The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T" is rarely seen these days, but it's worth a viewing for the sheer pleasure of the use of color and Dr. Seuss' wonderful timeless story..
Dr. Seuss must have had a similar experience, because he created the perfect piano student's nightmare of oppression by and ultimate revenge on the musical establishment.What struck me the most about seeing this film (after about a 30-year gap) was the brilliance of color: big swatches of primary colors and every shade in between.
This film delights the eyes with mind-boggling props and Daliesque sets which Fritz Lang would have loved.Tommy Rettig is a child actor with just the right amount of "cuteness factor" to make him watchable without being unbearable.
Younger children seem to enjoy it too as my kids at home have watched it several times.An enjoyable musical fantasy that is not too far removed from "The Wizard of Oz" in its look and style.
I refuse to believe that anything with such a wonderful score, such delightful and clever songs, such beguiling art direction, is REALLY telling us not to bother with the piano if we really want to learn to play it (you'll notice that one or two of the 500 children look quite upset that they don't get to play "Ten Happy Fingers"), or that artists are not to be trusted.The score and the songs and the art, and most of the ideas, are more than enough to compensate for those aspects of the production that are merely competent (there are and were directors who could have DAZZLED us with this material, from the first minute to the last).
But anyone who really thinks this really is anything other than a story about a kid who hates to practice the piano, likes to play with his dog, and wants a father--and that these are reasonable attitudes--probably is in need of a childhood themselves.
That's not to say that the film is a failure, exactly, but speaking as a big Seuss fan, it would have been much better if it had not tempered its Seussian characteristic in such odd ways.The story is basically one long nightmare (literally, that's not stated as a criticism).
But not many films, including this one, could capture the expansive, otherworldly surrealism of The Wizard of Oz. Whether it was due to budget (my suspicion) or artistry (maybe because there weren't many people experienced in creating filmic fantasy worlds?), The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T feels like it takes place exactly where it happens to take place--on a large soundstage, on economically constructed sets.Because color was still exotic enough to be an attraction in itself in 1953, Rowland sometimes dwells on colors in an obvious way.
There are other blatant devices tying The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T to its era, such as the "atomic" substance that appears in the climax.That a fuller commitment wasn't made to creating an authentic Seussian world on film (and why does it have to be a dreamworld?--Seuss' worlds are not dreamworlds, they're "real", alternate universes) means that a lot of dramatic momentum and suspense that feels like it should be there is missing instead, replaced by relatively random dream occurrences.Still, there are aspects to recommend.
While Seuss penned the 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T, the story reminds me more of Roald Dahl, clearly depicting the children overpowering the adults and putting the characters in rather horrifying situations (Case in point, as our young hero fears being punished by playing the drum forever, Dr. T corrects him by noting the man being punished is IN the drum).But if the story is reminiscent of anything, it's something like the Wizard of Oz in the mind of a young child.
Besides a tad too many musical numbers, I was really entertained by this one of a kind film.The film follows a young boy named Bart who's under the tutelage of the uber-obsessed piano teacher, Dr. Terwilliker.
This is an accurate wish-fulfilment fantasy of a nine-year-old, but what I find alienating is that it's played to the audience at face value; I suspect that I personally might have preferred Dr Seuss's original scripting of the plumber as an elderly man to be played by Karl Malden.My other problem with the film was that the excellent Hans Conreid totally steals the show from the other characters -- particularly noticeable when he and the generic blue-collar hero Peter Lind Hayes share screen time, with the latter virtually vanishing into bland nonentity.
By the big escape scene I realised, with a jolt, that as a result I was actually on the side of the villain and was thoroughly gratified to see the heroes' plans unexpectedly foiled; and while I do seem to have this frequent problem with Hollywood output, it's never a good outcome since it inevitably means you end up on the losing side!There are elements clearly recognisable as bearing Dr Seuss's imprint -- the truly bizarre dungeon ballet and Dr Terwilliker's lavish dressing song, with its love of wordplay and preposterous lyrics.
He can't even get sympathy from his friend Mr. Zbladowski (Peter Lind Hayes), the plumber.Out of Bart's fear and longing we are plunged into a nightmare that could only have come from the mind of the film's writer, Dr. Seuss.
Mostly the dream of a fatherless kid (Tommy Rettig, and he's fine) tormented by his overbearing piano teacher (Hans Conreid), it's staged on startling, angular, huge sets and filmed in saturated Technicolor the likes of which we'll never see again.
I couldn't find anyone else that remembered the movie with the kid wearing a beanie with a hand sticking out the top, and the huge, curved piano, Hans Conried, and the kooky set design.
As I watched it recently, I remembered the rumor that Dr. Seuss did not really like children, and I think this film bears that out.
The characters intrigue, with the disturbing Dr T most memorable, and the acting is great.Tommy Rettig is appealing, as are Peter Lind Hayes and Mary Healy, but it is the marvellous titular-role performance of Hans Conreid that dominates the film.
Visually everything is wonderful - sets and costumes are great and are true to the books.Substance takes second place to style but it contains good songs and some very sparkly dialogue (for a children's film).
There's a little boy named Bart Collins (a decent child actor in Tommy Rettig) and he is in the real world kind of pressured/forced by his harsh piano teacher Dr. Terkwilliker to keep playing and playing, and his mother (Healy) does the same.
Meanwhile there is the opposite side of Dr. T, the Nice Guy leading man Mr. Zabladowski (Peter Lynd Hayes, the only plumber I can think of with pomade in his hair all the time keeping it just perfect), and Bart needs to help him so that he won't be turned as a puppet by Dr. T (and as his mother has become in this world), or worse.This moves around with the sort of wild invention, manic and vivid set designs, and sense of continuous, rambunctious, over the top play that has made Dr. Seuss so beloved over the past century.
Then again once it gets into it, and Seuss' creative lyrics start to spout off, it's a lot of fun.Some of the movie drags here and there - yes, even at 88 minutes - primarily with a sequence involving a bunch of green-skinned men who are jumping around and playing musical instruments (it feels like 5 minutes is spent on a xylophone alone).
I should complain about the excessive musical numbers - even a black elevator operator in one scene gets a song (only black man I should note, which is strange unto itself but not uncommon for 1953) - but that's actually where the movie kind of shines and the singers do wonderfully (albeit not the actor actors I don't think, except for Hans Conreid who can do no wrong here).There are a lot of really creative ideas here, such as the device that sucks up all the air in a room and makes it sounds warped and silly, or little things like giant hands and arms that stick out of the wall and can open up doors.
The genius of Dr. Seuss's understanding of fears and insecurities of young children is quite evident in how he wrote Conried's role....and the sad and winsome song that Tommy Rettig sings alone as he feels abandoned by his only confidante, the plumber Zabrodowski after Terwillger entrances Zabrodowski with magic and tainted "pickle juice" is both touching and revealing of just how kids feel when they find they have no one, or no compassionate adult to turn to with their problems.
(Why is it that none of those 5000 fingers belonged to little girls?)Insane Dr. Seuss sets and decoration, nice songs and the spectacular dungeon-symphony scene (watch those limp-wristed zylophonists) are only a few more reasons why I love this movie..
Hans Conried (whose voice would crop up in several Seuss cartoons later) has the best role of his career as the maniacal Dr. Terwilliker, and Tommy Rettig (from the "Lassie" TV series) gives a sympathetic portrayal as put-upon young Bart.
The film is stuffed to the brim with outrageous colors, great sets (that look exactly like Dr. Seuss' books), good performances, and wonderful songs.
With a title like this I was expecting a gloriously cheap and trashy sci-fi or horror film - my initial disappointment on finding that it was a children's musical fantasy was quickly forgotten.'The 5000 Fingers of Dr T' is based on a story by Dr Seuss, who gets a co-writers credit, and produced by Stanley Kramer.
It is a wonderfully inventive, well made fantasy film with great subversive undertones - fans of 'Charlie & the Chocolate Factory' should lap it up.Tommy Rettig (later in TV's 'Lassie' series) plays Bart, the child hero, who finds himself trapped in the castle of Dr Terwilliker where a huge piano is played by 500 other kidnapped boys - hence the 5000 fingers.The film features wonderfully bizarre sets, freakish minor characters ( not unlike 'The Wizard of Oz' ), and musical numbers and dance routines which keep the narrative flowing smoothly.I really cannot praise this film enough - it is a delight from start to finish and with the renewed interest in Dr Seuss generated by Jim Carrey's turn in 'How the Grinch Stole Christmas', 'Dr T' may start to garner some of the attention it deserves..
All-American boy Bart Collins (played by the utterly elfin Tommy Rettig) is forced to endure piano lessons at the behest of one Dr. Terwilliker, his evil piano teacher (Hans Conried, chewing up ALL the scenery).
The only person that Bart can turn to is plumber August Zabladowski (Peter Lind Hayes), who Terwilliker plans to execute once he has finished his sink installations.Children's author and illustrator Dr. Seuss is a national treasure in his native U.S., yet here in the UK, his work is less known and loved.
It is like a Tim Burton masterpiece filmed 40 years early.Bart is fatherless, and his mother is hypnotized by the evil piano teacher.
Little children like Bart, played by talented Tommy Rettig who went on to do a successful few years on TV's "Lassie", want to play outside rather than sitting at the piano and being forced to practice by their parents and the horrible piano teacher Dr. Terwilliker.
He then runs off down the street with his dog, not Lassie Personally I think that Bart, Tommy Rettig and Dr. Terwilliker, Hans Conried should have been co-stars and they both were better actors than the "mother and plumber" who were.
Bad. The film is a dream sequence by Tommy (Bartholomew Collins) and takes place in a castle ruled by his piano teacher, Dr T (Hans Conried) who is intending to put on a piano performance by 500 young boys.
Basically Bartholomew 'Bart' Collins (Tommy Rettig) lives with his widowed mother Heloise (Mary Healy), and has to practise the piano, which he hates, especially because of his teacher Dr. Terwilliker (Hans Conried), he even feels his mother has fallen under his sinister influence, and often visiting plumber August Zabladowski (Peter Lind Hayes).
While practising his piano lessons, Bart dozes off and enters the fantastical musical dream world (kind of like The Wizard of Oz) of the Terwilliker Institute.
As audacious as it is, this Technicolor musical made a few years after the end of World War II deserves more attention, especially because it remains the only full length feature film ever done with live actors from one of the greatest minds in children's literature, Dr. Seuss!
--SPOILERS-- Bart Collins (Tommy Rettig) is a prisoner to his piano instructor, Dr. Terwilliker (Han Conried). |
tt0118275 | Brooklyn South | The focus for Brooklyn South was the 74th Precinct in southern Brooklyn, New York City. Francis "Frank" Donovan (Jon Tenney) was the patrol sergeant who presided every day over the morning shift assignments he gave to the uniformed officers. Donovan was an informant for the hated Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB), and secretly reported to Lt. Stan Jonas (James B. Sikking), who, early in the series, transferred from being an IAB officer to the precinct captain after the officious Captain Lou Zerola (Bradford English) transferred to precinct maintenance. It was later revealed in the season that Donovan became an undercover informant 15 years earlier for IAB to protect his father, a retired cop living in Florida, from indictment for corruption.
In the pilot episode, a psychotic gunman went on a shooting rampage outside the police station, killing a number of policemen and innocent bystanders. He was wounded in the shootout and brought back into the station where he died from his gunshot wounds. It was later revealed that Ann-Marie Kersey (Yancy Butler), a policewoman whose boyfriend was one of the victims of the shooting spree, slipped into the room where the wounded madman was being held and kicked him several times in his chest which caused his death. Because the shooter was black and all of his victims were white, the killer's family pressured the city to launch an Internal Affairs investigation. Eventually, everyone was exonerated for the suspect's death, and Kersey completely got away with it, though her guilt over murdering a critically wounded criminal would haunt her off-and-on for the duration of the series. Kersey then had a romantic affair with Donovan, but it did not last. Kersey and Donovan later got back together. Later in the series, Kersey was designated to detective.
Also in the pilot episode, Phil Roussakoff (Michael DeLuise), a burly officer, transferred to the 74th Precinct and was partnered with Jimmy Doyle (Dylan Walsh), a well liked and respected street cop whose younger brother, Terry (Patrick McGaw), was trying to become a police officer to follow in their late father's footsteps. Terry left the police academy to take an undercover assignment to infiltrate an Irish street gang planning a bank robbery. Roussakoff briefly dated Jimmy and Terry's younger sister, Kathleen (A. J. Langer), but was awkward and uncomfortable to dating. Terry helped foil the Irish gang's robbery, and he ended up joining the police vice squad anti-crime unit.
Jack Lowery (Titus Welliver) was a tough street cop coping with personal demons which included his selfish and nagging wife, Yvonne, who died early in the season. Lowery later started an affair with his female partner, Nona Valentine (Klea Scott), which did not sit well with Clement Johnson (Richard T. Jones), Nona's former boyfriend and the station's traffic cop. Eventually Nona and Clem got back together, then broke up, and by the series end, Nona got back together again with Lowery. Hector Villaneuva (Adam Rodriguez) was a young rookie cop who was tutored by the rest of the officers how to do his job the best be could.
Richard Santoro (Gary Basaraba) was the station's desk sergeant, a police veteran who had seen it all and was the voice of reason in the station house, keeping things calm. Santoro later stuck up for Donovan when he came out as an informant for Internal Affairs Bureau to save Santoro from a corrupt IAB officer who was trying to ruin Santoro's reputation. Ray MacElwaine (John Finn) was a 50-year-old veteran police officer who transferred to the 74th Precinct late in the series and soon proved himself to everyone that despite his age, he could still "walk the beat" and take down criminals. MacElwaine also stuck up for Donovan after finding out Donovan's work with IAB. In the series final episode, MacElwaine decided to retire from the police force, and Santoro was promoted to Lieutenant. So, Captain Jonas threw a double-party for the entire police station in celebrating Santoro's promotion and MacElwaine's retirement. In his speech, MacElwaine changes his mind and decides not to retire, to great celebration.
Other secondary characters included Kevin Patrick (Mark Kiely), a police officer wounded in the opening shooting spree in the pilot episode, which made him a paraplegic, and his wife Noreen (Star Jasper), both of whom were friends with Jimmy, Terry, and the Doyle family. Also, Emily Flannagan (Brigid Brannagh) was a local barmaid and the daughter of Irish mobster Paddy Flannagan who was the leader of the small Irish gang that Terry had infiltrated. After Terry's undercover work was done, he and Emily got romantically together, but the series ended before their romance could go any further. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038762 | My Darling Clementine | In 1882 (in reality, the gunfight at the O.K. Corral happened on October 26, 1881), Wyatt, Morgan, Virgil, and James Earp are driving cattle to California when they cross Old Man Clanton. When they learn about the nearby boom town of Tombstone, the older brothers ride in, leaving the youngest brother James to watch over the cattle. The Earps soon learn that Tombstone is a lawless town without a marshal. Wyatt is the only man in the town willing to face the drunk Indian shooting at the townspeople. When they return to their camp, they find the cattle rustled and James murdered.
Seeking to avenge his brother's murder, Wyatt returns to Tombstone. To identify the perpetrator, he takes the open position of town marshal and meets with Doc Holliday and the Clanton gang several times. During this time, Clementine Carter, Doc's ex-love interest from his hometown of Boston, arrives in town on the stagecoach, having searched for him for some time, and is given a room at the same hotel where both Wyatt and Doc Holliday are residing.
Doc Holiday has a female friend, Chihuahua, who sings in the local saloon. Doc tells Clementine to return to Boston, or he will leave Tombstone. Clementine stays, and Doc leaves, much to the displeasure of Chihuahua. Chihuahua and Clementine have an argument. Wyatt walks in on the two and breaks up the women. Chihuahua then reveals a silver cross that belonged to James Earp. She claims Doc gave it to her. Wyatt then chases down Doc, who is headed for Tucson. Wyatt catches Doc and shoots a pistol out of Doc's hands. The two return to Tombstone, where Doc asks Chihuahua why she claimed he gave her the silver cross. After being questioned, she reveals that the silver cross was actually given to her by Billy Clanton. Billy hears this and shoots Chihuahua thru a window. Billy takes off on horse back, but is shot by Wyatt. Billy keeps riding and Wyatt tells Virgil to chase him down. Virgil chases Billy to the Clanton's homestead, where Billy dies of his wounds. Old Man Clanton then kills Virgil. Back in Tombstone, Doc operates on Chihuahua, but she dies afterwards. The Clantons arrive in Tombstone, toss Virgil's body on the street, and announce they will be waiting at the O.K. Corral for Wyatt. Wyatt, Morgan, and Doc arrive at the O.K. Corral at sun up. The Clantons and Doc are all killed.
Wyatt and Morgan then resign as law enforcers. Morgan heads out in a horse and buggy. Wyatt confronts Clementine telling her, if he is ever this way again, he will look her up at the school house. Mounting his horse, Wyatt says, "Ma'am, I sure like that name..........Clementine." and rides off after his brother. | cult | train | wikipedia | Engel, Winston Miller and Sam Hellman, and the great director himself John Ford, offer this most atmospheric depiction of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday and the most famous of shootouts in Western folk-lore.The story basically covers the period when Wyatt Earp cleaned up Tombstone and wiped out the Clanton gang at the OK Coral.
A synchronous composition of sight and sound that produces a mesmerizing effect which in turn forces any viewer to fall instantly in love with this film.Henry Fonda's portrayal of Wyatt Earp is without doubt the best that has ever been attempted and Victor Mature's Doc Holliday has him in rare form.
In John Ford's celebrated history as a director, particularly in the days when he was making silent films, the real Wyatt Earp acted as Ford's technical adviser bringing a new level of authenticity to gun play that Hollywood in the past had only guessed at.
But in 'My Darling Clementine', the final shootout although well done, has a fantasy-like quality about it that avoids a sense of violent realism and adopts a surreal quality - as if seen through a dream.Because John Ford knew all too well how to make a gunfight look believable, maybe this film allowed him to go beyond what was expected and to produce something a little special, and maybe it was shot in the way that Wyatt Earp wished it could have really happened.
Set amid the sweeping vistas and the towering sandstone buttes and spires of Monument Valley, this John Ford film, about Wyatt Earp (Henry Fonda) and his encounters with the Clanton gang in rowdy Tombstone, Arizona, fulfills our need to experience the Old West as mythic romanticism.
It's a broad-brush character study of historical figures like Doc Holliday (Victor Mature), Old Man Clanton (Walter Brennan), the Clanton sons, and of course Wyatt Earp and his sons.
If you're looking for a straight-forward, fairly factual presentation of the events leading up to the 'Gunfight at the O.K. Corral', watch 'Wyatt Earp', or 'Tombstone'...But if you prefer your history more spiritual, and want to see a master storyteller paint a visual canvas of a West that may never have existed, but SHOULD have, then this film should be a treasured part of your video collection!John Ford knew Wyatt Earp personally, and was familiar with the events surrounding the Tombstone shootout, but one of his greatest assets as a director was his ability to look beyond simple facts, and focus on what 'made' a legend.
It's a classic theme of most great westerns, particularly in Ford's work (he would return to it in 'The Searchers', and 'The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance'), as well as other directors ('Shane', 'A Fistful of Dollars', 'Unforgiven', and 'Open Range' are a few examples).Wyatt Earp (wonderfully portrayed by Henry Fonda) and his brothers have an aloofness that makes their characters both deceptively simple, yet enigmatic at the same time.
The scene of the outdoor church dance, where the stiffly formal Earp dances against the vista of a West being 'boarded in' is symbolic of what his own life, and the West, itself, was becoming, and is classic Ford!The climactic shootout at the O.K. Corral is both powerful and raw, ultimately fulfilling the Earps' commitment to a world that needed their aid, and ending the downward spiral of Holliday's life, in a heroic and theatrical gesture.It's often asked why Wyatt leaves, afterward, when Clementine and Tombstone are so attractive...The answer is simple, really; his work is finished, and his participation was no longer necessary.
John Ford's exquisite film about marshall of Tombstone, Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday and their incredible gunfight against the Clantons at the O.K.Corral.
This is not the first potential classic that Mature ruined with his performance (other one is "The Egyptian", though he got a lot of help there from Edmund Purdom in the main role).And also, how could a smart director like Ford include a scene where Fonda faces Mature in a gun duel and shoots "Doc's" gun right off his hand in the most pure "Lone Ranger" style?
Director John Ford, working without John Wayne this time, instead casts Henry Fonda as Wyatt Earp who, in this version, arrives in Tombstone Arizona on a cattle drive with his brothers Morgan(Ward Bond),& Virgil(Tim Holt).
Along the way, he finds himself romancing the local schoolteacher Clementine...Strangely dull film has some good direction but moves like molasses and takes far too many liberties with history to even resemble the truth; they may as well have told a whole new(and entirely fictional) story for all the difference it makes.
The stories of Wyatt Earp, Doc Holliday and the town of Tombstone are always interesting and have always been told just a little differently through the years on film.I've read where this movie was supposed to be based more on fact than some of the other versions, but I've heard that before, so I have my doubts.
Henry Fonda and the usually underrated Victor Mature give memorable portrayals as Wyatt Earp and Doc. Exciting classy Western with plenty of tension , thrills , shoot'em up , high body-count and it has now become accepted as a classic of the genre .This is a vigorous recounting of a familiar tale , dealing with the legendary lawman from Dodge City who moves to Tombstone , Arizona , aiming to begin a new life along with his brothers , Virgil (Tim Holt) and Morgan (Ward Bond) .
The film focuses Tombstone , 1881 , with stimulating scenes about OK Corral gunfight between Morgan , Virgil , Wyatt Earp , Doc against the nefarious old Clanton , Ike , Billy Clanton ,and other brothers .
This main character is a historical figure , in this case the sheriff Wyatt Earp who participated the most famous duel occurred in the western town of Tombstone in 1881 that has been brought to the big screen many times as in this classic "My Darling Clementine" in 1946 directed by John Ford , in "Gunfight at O.K. Corral" (1957) with Burt Lancaster , Kirk Douglas directed by specialist John Sturges who would resume the same story in "The Hour of the Gun" (1967) ; the demystifying "Doc" (Frank Perry, 1971) with Harris Yulin and Stacy Keach or the more modern ¨Wyatt Earp¨ (Lawrence Kasdan, 1994) with Kevin Costner and Dennis Quaid and Tombstone: Wyatt Earp 's legend (1993) by George P.
Suspecting the Clantons of rustling his cattle and killing his younger brother he bides his time until he can bring the family to justice.In telling the story of Wyatt Earp's tenure at Tombstone the film takes many liberties.
My Darling Clementine (1946) is a western film, directed by John Ford, and based on the story of the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral between the Earp brothers and the Clanton gang.
In 1991, this film was deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the Library of Congress and selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry.SUMMARY: In 1882 (the wrong year is marked on the tombstone of James, since Oct 26th, 1881 was the date of the Gunfight at the OK Corral), the Earp brothers (Wyatt, Morgan, Virgil and James) are driving cattle to California when they cross the Clanton family led by the "Old Man".
Important plot devices in the film, such as the death of James Earp (who actually died in 1926), the death of Old Man Clanton (who actually died two months before the O.K. Corral confrontation), and personal details about Doc Holliday (who was a dentist, not a surgeon, and actually died years later of tuberculosis), are inaccurately portrayed.MY THOUGHTS: I didn't care for this movie because there wasn't any drama to it.
Just a couple of points in the interest of historical accuracy: first, the author of "Wyatt Earp: Frontier Marshal" ultimately confessed that he had fabricated the whole thing and had in fact never even met Wyatt Earp (who himself, it is said, made his own legend because he outlived his detractors): second (and this fits nicely with the earlier comment from Steven Mears on the physical realism of the gunfight), Ford is reported to have gone to Tombstone and interviewed a few old-timers who had been around back in Earp's day - he asked them how the fight played out and they supposedly told him (for example, the Earp group's sending a wagon across the area to raise dust for their cover).
But the approach of maverick filmmaker John Ford is unique: Doc Holliday is shown as a tormented man, both in mind and soul, and Earp is not a hero fighting the evil, but a honest man doing the job he is paid for- and Ford done the right thing calling not the movie-star-like John Wayne, but the more "fellow next door" Henry Fonda, which gives one of his best, if not the best, performances ever.
He takes his own past as a friend of Wyatt Earp himself (Earp used to hang around the sets of Ford silents such as The Iron Horse) and opens out the old story of that old gunfight at the OK Corral.Although the film is called 'My Darling Clementine', and Wyatt Earp is nominally the lead character, there are two others in the cast you will remember - beautiful, tragic Linda Darnell as Chihuahua; and (surprisingly) Victor Mature, not a great actor but here acquitting himself fairly well, as the consumptive cynic Doc Holliday.
As Earp, Henry Fonda is solidly reliable in the heroic tradition of the Old West, but Cathy Downs is forgettable as Clementine.I mustn't forget a quartet of scene-stealers further down the last - the wonderful Walter Brennan, that young cowboy Tim Holt, the ever watchable Ward Bond, and the reliable Jane Darwell.In look and feel this film is as sumptuous as any colour-flooded Ford drama, and it packs a mighty punch in many of its scenes whether action-based, or quiet talks between Earp and Holliday.
I never warmed up to this version of the Wyatt Earp legend for a number of reasons--mainly, because it's told in a style that is bleak and barren of any real emotional involvement and several of the cast members are severely underused--LINDA DARNELL and TIM HOLT are two examples.Furthermore, not being a staunch HENRY FONDA fan, I find his performance pales beside that of VICTOR MATURE as Doc Holliday.
Yes, John Ford is one of the great American directors; yes, Henry Fonda and Victor Mature were wonderful actors in their day...but this movie is simply awful.Where to begin?
I suppose she matches well with the cold, emotionless Fonda, but the point still remains that her character really serves no purpose to the movie as a whole...I could go on about other parts of the film that I found lacking, including the awful, cliched dialogue, the stereotyped personalities, unrealistic and highly inaccurate scenery (the surrounding areas of Tombstone are _not_ like the lush, mountainous scenes of the film), but instead I'll just focus on one more point: Of all the "O.K. Corral" films I've seen (three of them) this is not only by far the worst of the bunch, but it is also the most historically inaccurate.I was shocked that someone above mentioned that Wyatt Earp was a friend of John Ford's, and even helped to consult with him in earlier projects, because this movie basically takes the facts of the historical event and lynches them.
But, despite the claims of such classics as "The Searchers", "Red River", "Shane", and "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" it remains both my favourite western and the film which to me personifies the best features of the Western film.While it is a John Ford film, and peak period John Ford, it may seem to be at a disadvantage in that it doesn't feature John Wayne, nor indeed most of his key repertory players (Victor McLaglen, Ben Johnson).And its key players are actors more famous for either noir thrillers (Mature) or folksy Americana (Fonda).But these are only minor quibbles and its advantages far outweigh them.The story of the Gunfight at the OK Corral has been told many times although other films concentrate more on the killings leading up to and occurring at the legendary showdown.
Mature often derided his own ability as an actor and it certainly often seemed in other performances that his eyebrows were the only features that were overworked, but, in the tragic Doc Holliday role which has tended to be the most sought after in the telling of the tale, he gives the most moving and arguably the finest of all interpretations.Another eye-opener for me, although it may be because it seems so out of character, was Walter Brennan's dark and vengeful Ike Clanton.John Ford eventually had to spell it out for those revisionists who wanted to tell it as it really was.
In almost every way that matters, this movie is a masterpiece: photography, editing, script, direction, and casting, especially Walter Brennan, who is grim, gaunt, and sadistic as Old Man Clanton, and Henry Fonda, who brings a solemn deliberation, physical grace, and quiet dignity to Wyatt Earp.But the movie should—and easily could-- have been even more powerful if it had been more authentic.
However, the film was in general well done with outstanding acting of Henry Fonda as Wyatt Earp, Victor Mature as John "Doc" Hollyday, beautiful Linda Darnell as Chihuahua and always-efficient Walter Brennan as Old Man Clanton.
A mostly entertaining take on the story of the Earps and the Clantons, that culminates of course in the famous gunfight at the OK Corral, the greatest strengths of "My Darling Clementine" are undoubtedly the direction of John Ford, who certainly knew how to put out a good western, and the performances of a strong cast, led by Henry Fonda, Victor Mature and Walter Brennan.
while this western was certainly inspired by the 1939 western Frontier Marshal,it does have some differences.for one,the the story is more fleshed out,and some of the particulars are different.The character of Wyatt Earp has more of a back story.Earp's reasoning for taking the Marshal's job in Tombstone is a much more personal one.Wyatt Earp is portrayed by Henry Fonda here,and Doc Holliday(in Frontier marshal,he was called Doc Halliday)is portrayed by Victor Mature.this movie seemed a bit darker in tone to me.it was a bit too drawn out for my tastes,although i can understand why.Ford wanted to expand the story.i still liked this movie.i just think Frontier Marshal,although over 30 minutes shorter,told the viewer all he or she needed to know.having said that,i think My darling Clementine is worth watching.by the way,after watching this movie,i think it's fairly obvious that Kevin Costner's 2003 epic,Open Range(which i loved)borrows some scenes,or parts of scenes from Clementine.
The great director John Ford out did himself with this film, the characters Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday were two of the most famous of shootouts in Western folk-lore.
We get Wyatt Earp, played in an often subtle and usually uncomplicated manner by Henry Fonda (occassionally he also smells flowery thanks to the barber), and we get Doc Holliday, played in maybe his second best performance by Victor Mature (you know, the Kiss of Death guy) as a hot-head drunk who somehow overcomes his own problems to confront the Clanton clan (led by a chilling Walter Brennan) along with Earp in the quintessential showdown at the OK corral.
The opening sets the standard as we are in the stunning Monument Valley, lush hills and sky that never ends, Ford using the vista as some sort of poetic force.Over the course of cinema history, the telling of the Wyatt Earp story would take on many forms, and although this one may not be quite accurate enough for the historians amongst us, it certainly makes a good case for one of the best tellings purely on character development alone.
Fonda is as good as always as Wyatt Earp, as is the usually avuncular Walter Brennen as the murderous "Old Man" Clanton, but I didn't find Victor Mature to make a particularly convincing 'Doc' Holiday.
And if you're a movie buff, the reputation of John Ford's classic Western certainly preceded your viewing like Wyatt Earp's own when he set his foot in Tombstone.And like Earp, the film deserves such reputation, seven years after "Stagecoach", it marks the director's return to the setting that overarched his body of work: Monument Valley.
Yes, Fonda as Wyatt Earp, Victor Mature as Doc Holliday, Linda Darnell as Clementine, and Walter Brennan as Old Man Clanton bring life to their characters.
Story leads to the famous battle at The O.K. Corral, with Victor Mature as Doc Holliday giving Henry Fonda's Earp a helping hand.
Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday are two of the biggest names from the old western days.Seems quite amazing to me that Henry Fonda had always been cast as the good guy and hero of the movie.
If you were to ask me who was my favorite pick out of all of the actors who have played Wyatt Earp over the past century (Burt Lancaster, Kurt Russell, Kevin Costner, James Garner, etc) I would have to pick Henry Fonda and the favorite film about Earp and the gunfight at the O.K. Corral would probably be the one he's tied to: John Ford's poetic Western "My Darling Clementine." Now if one is looking for historical accuracy, one will be vastly disappointed.
But if one is looking for artistic, allegorical, and poetic film-making at its very best, from one of the greatest directors who ever lived, then, well you get the idea.Unlike a great many other films of the same tale, "My Darling Clementine" may be in plot about Wyatt Earp and Doc Holliday and the plot may lead up to the inevitable gunfight at the O.K. Corral.
John Ford directed two great westerns - "The Searchers" and this film about the famous gunfight between the Earps and the Clantons. |
tt0117561 | Schizopolis | Although the film does not have a linear plot, a skeletal structure exists, telling the same story from three different perspectives divided into three acts. At the beginning of the film, Soderbergh speaks to the audience in a style meant to evoke Cecil B. DeMille's introduction to The Ten Commandments. He states, "In the event that you find certain sequences or ideas confusing, please bear in mind that this is your fault, not ours. You will need to see the picture again and again until you understand everything."
=== Act 1 ===
The film's main character is Fletcher Munson (played by Soderbergh), an office employee working under Theodore Azimuth Schwitters. Schwitters is the leader of a self-help company/religion/lifestyle known as Eventualism, a clear reference to L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. The audience sees the events unfold in the opening act through Fletcher's point of view.
Fletcher sees the underlying meaning in everything, paying more attention to what is meant, rather than what is said. As he progresses through his day the audience sees the lack of attention he is paying to the people around him, degrading to the point where he comes home for dinner and he and his wife illustrate their lack of communication by simply describing what they are saying.
Fletcher: Generic greeting.
Wife: Generic greeting returned.
Fletcher: Imminent sustenance.
Wife: Overly dramatic statement regarding upcoming meal.
Fletcher: Oooh, false reaction indicating hunger and excitement!
When Fletcher's co-worker Lester Richards (a reference to Soderbergh's idol and mentor, filmmaker Richard Lester) unexpectedly dies while getting pictures developed at the drugstore, Fletcher must take his job as speechwriter for Schwitters. His personal life suffers because of his work, and he becomes even more detached from his wife, who is trying to cope by having an affair.
Meanwhile, Elmo Oxygen, a local exterminator, spends much of his time going from house to house, bedding the bored housewives of the men in the community who work for Schwitters (including Richards' widow). In each house he takes pictures of his genitals using various cameras he finds on tables and in cabinets. Elmo and the women speak in a nonsensical code that, for all its complexity, clearly conveys amorous intent:
Housewife: (answering the door seductively) Arsenal. Nose army.
Elmo: (looking to see that they're alone) Nose army. Beef diaper?
Housewife: (Inviting him in) Nomenclature.
As Elmo makes his rounds, he is followed by a couple in an SUV.
Fletcher finishes this act in a parking lot. Finding that his key will not work in his car door, he looks around and finds that his actual car (parked only two spots away) is an exact match for the one he is trying to get into. He goes to enter his own car when he sees a man who is his exact double climb into the car he himself just tried to enter. Fletcher follows his doppelganger home, closes his eyes, and becomes this mystery man.
=== Act 2 ===
Although the second act begins as a direct transition from the first, its events actually unfold simultaneously with the previous act.
The second act follows Fletcher's doppelganger, one Dr. Jeffrey Korchek. Korchek is a conservative dentist who has been mentioned by one or two smaller characters in the first act. He is always in a jogging suit, although he only jogs from his car to the door of wherever he is going. He is also quite a fan of Muzak.
Korchek, it turns out, is the mystery man that Fletcher's wife has been having an affair with, causing Fletcher/Korchek to comment, "Oh my god. I'm having an affair with my wife!"
Despite being with, essentially, the same man, Mrs. Munson seems to feel comfortable with Dr. Korchek. The communication is better and she feels needed and wanted. Korchek suggests she leave Fletcher and move in with him.
The next day, Korchek has breakfast with his heroin-addicted brother, who first asks to stay with Korchek, and then to borrow money. Korchek says he can't help, and that his brother should not be dealing with drug dealers anyway. The brother disagrees, and Korchek goes to work. Once there, he meets Attractive Woman Number 2 (played by the same actress as Mrs. Munson). Korchek falls instantly in love with her and writes a letter professing his love.
"Dear attractive woman number 2, only once in my life have I responded to a person the way I've responded to you, but I've forgotten when it was or even if it was in fact me that responded. I may not know much, but I know that the wind sings your name endlessly, although with a slight lisp that makes it difficult to understand if I'm standing near an air conditioner. I know that your hair sits atop your head as though it could sit nowhere else. I know that your figure would make a sculptor cast aside his tools, injuring his assistant who was looking out the window instead of paying attention. I know that your lips are as full as that sexy French model that I desperately want to fuck. I know that if for an instant I could have you lie next to me, or on top of me, or sit on me, or stand over me and shake, then I would be the happiest man in my pants. I know all of this, and yet you do not know me. Change your life; accept my love. Or, at least let me pay you to accept it."
He leaves this note on her door and goes home. Once there, he sees a car parked in the driveway. It is Mrs. Munson, who has considered the offer and has left Fletcher. Korchek has to admit that he has fallen in love with someone else. Mrs. Munson is justifiably upset, and leaves.
The next day Korchek gets to work and is confronted by a large man who says "Your brother, eight hours, fifteen thousand dollars." In fact, almost all of this man's dialog consists of some combination of these three commands. Korchek goes into the office and finds a registered letter from a law firm representing Attractive Woman Number 2, who is filing a sexual harassment suit against Dr. Korchek.
The day goes from bad to worse when it is revealed that Korchek's brother has stolen all of his money. Broke, tired, loveless and depressed, Korchek leaves work, only to find that the large man's time limit has elapsed. Korchek is shot dead.
During this act, the couple following Elmo in the SUV approaches him to give up playing his role in the film (thus breaking the fourth wall) in order to become a star in his own action show. Contrary to the experience of the other characters, Elmo's storyline seems to move forward in time continuously, without rewinding/repeating between acts.
=== Act 3 ===
The final act is seen through the perspective of Mrs. Munson. We move through the storyline again and see her experience with Fletcher's growing disaffection, Dr. Korchek's affection, and the day-to-day routine of being a mom. The action follows roughly the same events, except that Fletcher and his doppelganger speak Japanese, Italian or French, with the cultural stereotype of each nationality reflecting Mrs Munson's perception of the men. This is in a similar vein to the "generic greetings" of the earlier act.
Once she leaves Korchek, she makes a tired reconciliation with Fletcher and they go home together. Fletcher finishes Schwitters' speech and all seems to be well.
The day of the speech, Schwitters mounts the podium and prepares to give the oration which is, by all accounts, quite good. After acknowledging applause with a "Thank you," Elmo, who has been missing for this entire act, bursts into the auditorium and shoots Schwitters in the shoulder. Schwitters survives and Elmo is arrested. After nonsensical ranting, repeating "nose army" again and again, Elmo exposes his crotch during a police interrogation. The police recoil and shield their eyes, implying that Lester Richards may have died the same way at beginning of the film after seeing photos of Elmo at the drugstore.
The movie ends with a pair of monologues. First, Munson is seen in a shopping mall narrating the events of the rest of his life — his wife will leave him in five years; in eight years, he will drunkenly collapse and fall asleep in a snowbank after a wedding reception in Alaska and be discovered and successfully thawed the following spring. Then, Soderbergh returns in front of a blank movie screen and asks if there are any questions. After offering several responses ("Yes." "Yes." "Foot-long veggie on wheat." "Thank you."), he walks offstage as the camera pulls back to reveal he's been talking to an empty auditorium.
=== Credits ===
The film has no beginning or end credits. A man clad only in a black T-shirt appears at the beginning and conclusion of the film, shown to be chased by men in white coats over a green field. When he is first seen, the T-shirt sports the title of the film; in his later appearance, it says "The End." There is a single frame of copyright information at the end of the film. | comedy, mystery, cult, flashback, psychedelic, absurd, satire, philosophical | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0077031 | The Incredible Hulk | At Culver University in Virginia, General Thunderbolt Ross meets with Dr. Bruce Banner, the colleague and boyfriend of his daughter Betty, regarding an experiment that Ross claims is meant to make humans immune to gamma radiation. The experiment — part of a World War II era "super soldier" program that Ross hopes to recreate — fails, and the exposure to gamma radiation causes Banner to transform into the Hulk for brief periods of time, whenever his heart rate rises above 200. The Hulk destroys the lab and injures or kills the people inside. Banner becomes a fugitive from the U.S. military and Ross in particular, who wants to weaponize the Hulk process.
Five years later, Banner works at a bottling factory in Rocinha, Rio de Janeiro in Brazil, while searching for a cure for his condition. On the Internet, he collaborates with a colleague he knows only as "Mr. Blue", and to whom he is "Mr. Green". He is also learning meditative breathing techniques to help keep control, and has not transformed in five months. After Banner cuts his finger, a drop of his blood falls into a bottle, and is eventually ingested by an elderly consumer in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, giving him gamma sickness. Using the bottle to track down Banner, Ross sends a SWAT team, led by Russian-born British Royal Marine Emil Blonsky, to capture him. Banner transforms into the Hulk and defeats Blonsky's team. After Ross explains how Banner became the Hulk, Blonsky agrees to be injected with a small amount of a similar serum, which gives him enhanced speed, strength, agility, and healing, but also begins to deform his skeleton and impair his judgment.
Banner returns to Culver University and reunites with Betty, who is dating psychiatrist Leonard Samson. Banner is attacked a second time by Ross and Blonsky's forces, tipped off by the suspicious Samson, causing him to again transform into the Hulk. The ensuing battle outside the university proves to be futile for Ross' forces and they eventually retreat, though Blonsky, whose sanity is starting to falter, boldly attacks and mocks the Hulk. The Hulk seemingly kills Blonsky and flees with Betty. After the Hulk reverts to Banner, he and Betty go on the run, and Banner contacts Mr. Blue, who urges them to meet him in New York City. Mr. Blue is actually cellular biologist Dr. Samuel Sterns, who tells Banner he has developed a possible antidote to Banner's condition. After a successful test, he warns Banner that the antidote may only reverse each individual transformation. Sterns reveals he has synthesized Banner's blood samples, which Banner sent from Brazil, into a large supply, with the intention of applying its "limitless potential" to medicine. Fearful of the Hulk's power falling into the military's hands, Banner wishes to destroy the blood supply.
Meanwhile, Blonsky is revealed to have survived the battle and has completely healed. He joins Ross' forces for a third attempt to take Banner into custody. They succeed and Banner, along with Betty, are taken away in a helicopter. Blonsky stays behind and orders Sterns to inject him with Banner's blood, as he covets the Hulk's power. Sterns warns that the combination of the super-soldier formula and Banner's blood may cause him to become an "abomination", but Blonsky insists. The experiment mutates Blonsky into a creature with size and strength surpassing that of the Hulk, but drives him mad. He attacks Sterns, who gets some of Banner's blood in a cut on his forehead, causing him to begin mutating as well. Blonsky then rampages through Harlem. Realizing that the Hulk is the only one who can stop Blonsky, Banner convinces Ross to release him. He jumps from Ross' helicopter and transforms after hitting the ground. After a long and brutal battle through Harlem, the Hulk defeats Blonsky. After having a small, peaceful moment with Betty, the Hulk flees from New York.
A month later, Banner is in Bella Coola, British Columbia. Instead of trying to suppress his transformation, he successfully transforms in a controlled manner. In a final scene, Tony Stark approaches Ross at a local bar and informs him a team is being put together. | violence | train | wikipedia | I remember watching this series growing up, and feeling so bad for poor David Banner, who was played to perfection by the late Bill Bixby; without him, this series would not have worked, and would likely be forgotten.
The sight of David walking away alone on another road, duffel bag over his shoulder, as he hitchhikes or walks into the next episode is so powerful it can make the viewer cry, yet Bixby portrayed David with dignity and respect to balance out the pathos.It should be mentioned that Hulk actor Lou Ferrigno was highly effective in his performance and huge body made him perfect casting.
The Hulk performed physical feats in the comic that would have been impossible to duplicate when this series was running, and comic books are so simplistic and often violent, they never would have allowed it on prime time TV.That said, the Incredible Hulk was a good TV show with strong acting by Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno that was, mostly, harmless fun for the whole family.
He was gentle with animals and young people as well as old.The story is a very sad one: Bixby, playing scientist David Banner, is stuck in a life on the run from an obsessed reporter who wants to become famous by photographing the Hulk.
Banner and the Hulk represent the ultimate misunderstood hero/antihero: someone who is a better person than most of us are, yet is persecuted because of other people's misunderstandings.Harmless fun for the whole family, and some good lessons for youngsters about kindness and not judging others for their appearance..
I am not sure if any other long running TV drama ever had a smaller cast.Interestingly, Bill Bixby's COURTSHIP OF EDDIE'S FATHER co-star Brandon Cruz appeared in the first season of the HULK in the episode "747."Bixby oozed charm and charisma, and made believable the idea that he could so easily win trust and find employment in a new town each and every week.The music was exceptional.
I did a review for the original pilot episode of this drama and I put down my thoughts about the Hulk and Banner as characters and how the themes in the original movie gave us things to think about.
He was pursued by ambitious reporter Jack McGee who wanted to capture the Hulk in order to become a star reporter.Throughout the series Banner would encounter various characters who were having trouble in their lives.
In fact, McGee believed that the Hulk had killed Elaina Marks and David Banner in the original movie.
Simply the show took itself seriously, David Banner was cursed after an experiment goes awry, now whenever he gets mad, he becomes a 7 foot green monster, with incredible strength, and he is on the run hoping to find cure for his transformation, and not be captured by Jack McGee, the reporter who is obsessed with capturing him.
The Incredible HulkThe first episode "Pilot" and "Death in the Family" and "747" and "Never Give A Trucker An Even Break" are the best hulk out of all time.Top 10 Episodes for me is : 1- Pilot 2- Death in the Family 3- 747 4- Never Give A Trucker An Even Break 5- Terror in Times Square 6- Final Round 7- The Waterfront Story 8- Escape from Los Santos 9- Deathmask 10- A Minor ProblemI remember this Quote :David Banner: Mr. McGee, don't make me angry.
Seeing Bill Bixby hitchhike away from another town the Hulk smashed was always dramatic.Okay, sure this show is like "The Fugitive", but I don't see Richard Kimble turning into a green monster every week.
Bill Bixby turns in the performance of a lifetime, and even Jack McGee (the reporter who's after him) is shown in a few episodes to be a decent guy at heart.Every week, David Banner would search desperately for a cure, and every week he'd help some person in need (similar to other traveling angel shows like "Quantum Leap" and "The Pretender").
What could have been laughable television show about a giant green monster strutting around smashing things, instantly became a classic hit when it was deemed a serious and realistic drama for the time.The show follows the compassionate and likable character Dr. David Banner who had been attempting to discover the secrets of human strength after his wife died in a car explosion.
Whenever Banner becomes angry or outraged he transforms into massive green monster which we all know and love as the incredible hulk.After the hulk is discovered and pursued by an investigative reporter named Jack McGee, Banner goes on the run hoping to stay hidden until he can find a way to cure himself from his dreadful manifestation I first discovered "The Incredible Hulk" In my teens when I was greatly entertained by comic books.
My other favorite episodes include: "The First," "Married," "Mystery Man," "The Snare," "The Psychic," "Equinox," "The Harder They Fall," and "Interview With The Hulk." In addition, The 1977 pre-series pilot (simply titled "The Incredible Hulk") was a perfect way to start off the saga.Another significant episode is "Proof Positive" because the Hulk's nemesis, newspaper reporter Jack McGee, is the primary focus.
To add to Banner's problems is the character who is a constant thorn in his side - journalist Jack McGee. From the opening feature length pilot episode, McGee is convinced by the existence of the Hulk after seeing him in person.
The Lonely Man Piano by Joe Harnell is The Incredible Hulk Ending Theme.The show ran on CBS from 1978 to 1982, and starred Bill Bixby as Dr. David Banner and Lou Ferrigno as the Hulk.
In the TV series,David Banner played by the late Bill Bixby was a man traumatized by the death of his lovely wife Laura.
Now that could be because we saw the episodes in first run for four years and Bixby got to know David Banner inside out and his insights were shared with the audience.
No modern gadgetry involved, this could have been set at any time, it could be explained as a Frankenstein type experiment gone wrong.When he was pushed the dark side of the hulk emerged and the late Bill Bixby certainly had a lot of tragedy and darkness to draw from for his Banner persona to fear the results of anger.
A series of events causes everyone to believe that the Hulk has killed Dr. Banner, and now ruthless journalist (and, in comic books, those are the only types of journalists) Jack McGee (John Colvin) is hell-bent on capturing this unpredictable monster.
The late Bill Bixby and Lou Ferrigno thrilled for 5 wonderful seasons as Dr. Bruce Banner and his alter ego the Hulk.
The pilot episode explains, of course, how and why Dr. David Banner (played expertly by Bill Bixby) became the Hulk (Lou Ferrigno), a 7ft musclebound man-monster into whom Banner would automatically transform when made angry, scared or frustrated.
After taking an overdose of gamma radiation and losing his best friend, Dr. Elaina Marks in a fire which was accidentally caused by inquisitive reporter Jack McGee, Banner is believed to be dead so he spends the rest of the series searching for a cure.
Along the way, he has rescued and helped many people, only to change into the Hulk when angered by stressful situations and mainly some villains who stand in his way.I remember back in '89 when ITV repeated the third series of the Hulk, every Saturday evenings, and there were some great episodes such as The Snare, in which David was invited to a man's island, only to discover to his horror that his new 'friend' liked hunting humans as well as animals.Captive Night and Nine Hours were both good, exciting thriller episodes where David had to pit his wits against dangerous criminals, winning out at the end thanks to the strength and brute force of the Hulk.
A young woman (played by Bixby's wife) who can see into the future when having close contact with people knows that David is the Hulk and she believes him to be involved in the assault of a teenager.
Despite the fact that this classic television programme made virtually no attempt to remain faithful to the Marvel comic book from whence it spawned (the producers changed Banner's name from Bruce), it was one of the best genre shows of it's era, mainly because of the exceptional performance by the late, great Bill Bixby as the tortured scientist struggling in vain to 'find a way to control the raging spirit that dwells within him' i.e. former Mr Universe Lou Ferrigno, painted green and wearing a shocking wig and contact lenses.Bixby's performance was extremely sympathetic, and even though the prospect of him discovering a cure for his 'Hulkism' would signal an end to the show, viewers couldn't help but feel sorry for his rather tragic predicament.
You wouldn't like him when he's angry.)Each week, Banner would arrive in another small town, looking for a place to lie low and using an alias, perhaps find some part-time work that he would obviously be ridiculously over-qualified for.Meanwhile, McGee the persistent investigative reporter would be pursuing him in the hope of getting the elusive big scoop he's always dreamt of.Being such a nice guy, David would invariably befriend some poor kid or lonely woman who was in some kind of local trouble with the town bullies, and despite his best efforts to control his raging anger, would always Hulk-out on the bad guys at least twice an episode.This basic formula was to a certain degree borrowed from The Fugitive - a man wanted for a murder he didn't commit, unable to ever really settle down, hunted by the authorities, but also encompassing such classic horror themes as metamorphosis (Jekyll & Hyde) and the sympathetic monster (Frankenstein).
I found the story line very intriguing and I really liked the way Bill Bixby portrayed Dr. Banner, and although at first I found the effects from when Banner would transform to and from the hulk a bit cringy, mostly because I've grown up with movies and shows with more advanced animation, but after awhile I got used to it and honestly it's a bit impressive for the 70's.
Also loved a traumatic dream sequence triggering the Hulk.And then once again walking down the empty road while the sad music plays.How can a CGI ever match Ferrigno's tenderness?A TV series or comic book will (almost) never complete their character's story.
Born in 1978 and growing up on TV in the late 70's and early 80's I remember watching this on CBS I think on Friday nights with mom and I loved it as a kid wow I thought of it as a Green Monster, instead it was "The Incredible Hulk"!
Well anyway this series ran on Friday nights I believe and it involved the stories of one Dr. David Banner(the wonderful Bill Bixbey)who as a scientist worked in his lab trying to do good and fight for a better place, yet fueled by stress and social and environmental problems Banner would often turn into a green monster when angry and would be known as "The Incredible Hulk"(Lou Ferrigno).
Overall this was the best screen and picture time of "The Hulk" much better than those latter CGI and computer graphic films they tried to make of him, so if you can find some episodes please watch as you will have an angry green time!.
David Banner (Beautifully played by the late Bill Bixby)says this line to the annoying as hell McGee (Jack Colvin) and you know Banner means it: he's the Incredible Hulk (Mean, green Lou Ferrigno).
The narration during the opening credits of The Incredible Hulk claims that this show will present a serious context and an epic, story-based, developing struggle with David Banner searching for a cure to his condition of transforming into the Hulk beast involuntarily.Yet, that is *not actually* what the content of the show presents.
The formula of this show is: 90% "David Banner: Self-Help Guru" and 10% "The Hulk appears and uses the environment in some way to 'boff' the bad guys (Ie: pulling the rug out from under them) or throws them around a bit (the Hulk never actually punches anyone with his fists in this show) and then runs away just in time to avoid being captured." All that self-help content is *completely irrelevant* to the premise of "The Incredible Hulk", therefore the amount of screen-time it gets is *ludicrous*.This show has no on-going story whatsoever, it is 'episodic.' Which means that by the limitations of this primitive storytelling-killing formula, there is no way they could have developed Banner, Hulk, or his quest for a cure even if they wanted to, unless they *first* had the fortitude to discard this primitive formula completely.
There's no reason to *care* about the Hulk presented in this series since he's just a big dumb green ape with no potential to change in any subsequent episodes.Banner's quest for the cure is almost completely ignored.
After the pilot, he's *exactly* the same character from the first episode to the last.If they *did* make the show into an epic story where Banner, the Hulk, and the search for a cure, all got developed in a new and continual way in each and every episode -making every episode truly *matter*- it *could* have been one of the best shows ever made: a work of art rather than merely entertainment.
the series came out in the seventies and i was a huge hulk fan, we would run home on Saturday to watch te next episode, there were never any supervillans but what did u expect for the budget, it was funny and occasionally the hulk would smash stuff.problem was i had a black and white TV so i never saw the green hulk he was always grey, this was after my mum and dad split up o we weren't that well off at the time..but my father had to be the first to have everything so he had already bought a colour TV come watch the hulk at my house he said, he has pink gums and everything for a kid growing up it was a cool show other than that the shows only use anymore is for nostalgia.
"He was green with rage!"Considering that this late-1970s, live-action, superhero, TV series came out prior to the wonders of CGI wizardry - I really did try to cut it some serious slack.But, the truth is - "The Incredible Hulk" was pretty corny stuff and muscleman, Lou Ferrigno (as the Hulk incarnation) looked utterly laughable and, yes, downright silly in that horrible fright-wig of his.Anyway - Judging by how marginally entertaining the episodes of this program's first season were - I do find it truly baffling that "The Hulk" actually endured for 5 seasons in all..
Loosely based on the Marvel comic book of the same name, 'T.I.H.' told the story of Dr.David Banner ( Bill Bixby ), a brilliant scientist who got an accidental overdose of gamma radiation during an experiment, and then when stressed out turned into the Hulk - a grotesque, powerful monster with skin the colour of vomit and a tendency towards mindless destruction.
Perhaps the show should have been retitled 'The Incredible Social Worker'.The Hulk, as a rule, only made two appearances per episode, with Bixby's 'Banner' carrying the show.
We were spoiled back in the 70's and 80's with American Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Drama series with gems such as The Six Million Dollar Man, The Bionic Woman and many more but my favorite has to be The Incredible Hulk.I remember watching this many years ago and when i saw the whole series was available in a DVD box set i had to have it.When you watch them all on DVD you soon notice how many actors and actresses re-appear throughout the series in different parts and most i decided to check out on IMDb to what else they have been in and most go through all of the TV series i mentioned above and more.The 1st season stand-out is the 1st for obvious reasons, add the 2nd episode and you are all sorted and ready for this monster of a journey.
A Minor Problem was the final episode of The Incredible Hulk, it was a good one but certainly not a series ender.
The "green monster" is only a small part of the show, and when the "hulk" DOES surface--he ALWAYS changes something for the better, albeit causing a lot of destruction in the process.NO person or persons who got to "know" David "Banner"(or the MANY "B" aliases he used) during the course of the show, came out not being touched, for the better--and often had their business, family or even lives saved.
Bill Bixby played an amazing role as the emotion, intelligent, involved fugitive David Banner, who always knew how to handle a situation, and if he didn't, he turned the stage over to his dark half, Lou Ferrigno (who'se almost completely deaf, by the way), The Incredible Hulk, who knew exactly what to do.
its a sad life for Banner who just wants to be left alone and searches for a cure but each time is unsuccessful.The saga is over five seasons and i would like to pick out some of the best episodes from them: season 1: 747, the hulk breaks las Vegas and earthquakes happen.
Amazing that both the film that set the stage for big screen superheros and the show that set it for the small screen came out at the same time and are to this day getting their due on their respective influences of the modern superhero genre."The Incredible Hulk" tells the story of genetic scientist Dr. David 'Bruce' Banner, (brilliantly played by the legendary Bill Bixby in an iconic TV performance).
The Incredible Hulk aired from 1978 until 1982 in the UK and was about a Doctor called David Banner.
I was more than a little disappointed by the pilot episode: Bill Bixby as Bruce Banner isn't ACCIDENTALLY transformed into The Hulk, he actually irradiates himself... |
tt0150107 | Chief Charlie Horse | Woodcarver Woody Woodpecker specializes in wooden Indians and wooden nickels who is hard at work on his latest creation: a life-sized statue of an Indian chief, which, by coincidence, is an exact likeness of notorious bandit Chief Charlie Horse. The telephone rings, and a customer asks if Woody has any wooden Indians for sale. Woody replies that he has one he has just finished.
Meanwhile, outside Woody's shop, all is confusion as the sheriff and his posse are trying desperately to capture Chief Charlie Horse. They cart the wooden Indian away, believing him to be the real thing. Woody believes that the sheriff is the customer who telephoned, and he thinks that he has been slightly overpaid. Now Chief Charlie Horse himself enters Woody's shop, seeking a hiding place. The sheriff, realizing that he made an error, returns to Woody's shop to search for the live Indian. Charlie hides the statue in a crate, and then, when the sheriff enters the room, he poses as the wooden Indian. Both Woody and the sheriff fall for the trick and believe that Charlie has gotten away. The sheriff takes back the reward money, and Woody starts to work on his model again. When Woody has finished, he tacks a "sold" sign on the carving, and Charlie lets out a resounding yell. Thinking that the real Indian is the wooden Indian, the sheriff throws Charlie out of jail. | psychedelic, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0385639 | Death Bed: The Bed That Eats | Long ago, a demon fell in love with a woman and conjured up a bed on which to make love to her. The woman died during the act, and, in his grief, the demon wept tears of blood which fell on the bed and caused it to come to life. While the demon rests, the bed's evil is contained, but once every ten years, the demon wakes, giving the bed the power to physically eat human beings. Only one man, an artist identified as Aubrey Beardsley, was spared, as the bed condemned him to immortality behind a painting, where he must forever witness the bed taking victims. The bed passed from owner to owner until the present day.
=== Breakfast ===
A young couple trespass into the building and discover the bed. They make love on the bed, and the bed devours them. The artist mocks the bed for its stupidity. Enraged, the bed telekinetically destroys most of the house except for the room it is in.
=== Lunch ===
Three women discover the now-destroyed house. The bed eats one of the young women, but reacts to one of the other women by bleeding in agony. The artist realizes that the bed reacts with pain to the woman because she resembles its "mother" (the woman whose death caused the bed's creation). Elsewhere, the brother of one of the women goes out looking for her.
=== Dinner ===
One of the two remaining women sleeps on the bed. She wakes before it can eat her, but as she tries to escape, the bed snares her in its sheets and drags her back to be eaten. The last woman unsuccessfully tries to save her. The brother locates the surviving woman, only to have the bed trap them both to eat later. Meanwhile, the bed tortures them both with nightmares.
=== Just Desserts ===
The brother tries to distract the bed in order for the remaining woman to escape, but instead, it kills him too. At that moment, the demon that created the bed briefly falls asleep, which renders the bed powerless and allows the artist to communicate with the woman. The artist describes a ritual that will destroy the bed. The woman carries out the ritual, which teleports the bed out of the room and revives the bed's real "mother," but at the cost of killing the surviving woman. The bed's mother and the demon complete the ritual by having sex, causing the bed to burst into flames and allowing the artist to finally die. | gothic, cult, sadist, violence, haunting, psychedelic, storytelling | train | wikipedia | I'm not sure what I can add that hasn't already been said in some of these other fine, and quite hilarious, comments, but Ill try.So you know the plot: there is a bed possessed by a demon that "absorbs" and selectively disintegrates the bodies of whoever (or whatever) lays on it with its orange soda-filled body.
One of our girls believes she isn't liked by the rest of "the gang" and makes sure to tell us all her feelings on this matter through an echoey voice-over, but we don't care; character development was thrown out the window a LONG time before in this film so why start now?
A strange concept for a horror film, indeed, but the presentation is far, far stranger...This no-budget oddity was composed with a very peculiar artistic finesse...not so much pretentious as self-consciously esoteric, it merges trash cinema sleaze with flourishes of oneiric surrealism(it's largely narrated by the spirit of 19th-century nouveau illustrator Aubrey Beardsley, helplessly imprisoned within a painting on a wall opposite the killer bed).
This eccentric admixture doesn't really gel perfectly, but that is certainly not to imply that DEATH BED is a bad film, just that it's very bizarre and obvious of its restrictive budget...I personally consider it one of the most original and inventive amateur horror projects I have ever seen.
As a matter of fact, i suspect their are only going to be a handful of us who truly enjoy this movie.For those of you who like B movies though, this film is a Diamond in the rough.
It pretty much relies on people wandering by and sitting on it.I loved every inch of this movie and have already seen it three times in the scant weeks i've owned it.Like I said, After reading the title of the film, You already know if you'll like it.
Yet, viewers are to find instead an oddly artistic film with what must be one of the most strangest ideas for a film in all the annals cinema.Here goes: a demon falls in love with a girl, but she perishes and his sadness infects a bed which then becomes indestructible and develops an insatiable appetite for for pretty much everything, flesh in particular.
Unlike many odd-concept/low-budget affairs, the film starts and stays weird, but keeps itself contained; it comes off more artistic than it does simply exploitive.Technical limitations aside, the movie is interesting, if not all that entertaining.
Writer / director George Barry's "Death Bed: The Bed That Eats" is one of the strangest films you'll ever encounter.
At first, it would seem that it could only generate laughter due to its outrageous premise, but it's quite possible to take it seriously, as a surreal work of art with touches of exploitation (namely, gore and nudity) thrown in.The title pretty much lays it out for you: the title item of furniture has been possessed by a demon for many years, and claimed many victims, pulling them down into its yellow, frothy, hungry innards.
One of the victims is an artist (Dave Marsh, voice-over by Patrick Spence- Thomas) whose spirit is now trapped behind one of his paintings and can't do a thing to warn anybody who stops by.This film has got a real unearthly vibe and a European sensibility going for it.
"Death Bed:The Bed That Eats" is a supremely bizarre horror film that truly has to be seen to be believed.There is an ancient four-poster bed that just loves to eat humans and it does so anytime it can lure anyone to lie upon it.There is also a long-dead artist,imprisoned behind one of his paintings,who provides a voice-over narration.George Barry's the first and only one film offers some truly surreal moments such as the bed absorbing its victims in a mysterious sea of yellow foam and liquid.The atmosphere is dreamy and there is only a little bit of gore,unfortunately the premise is rather silly and the acting is amateurish.Still as fan of unusual cinema I enjoyed this low-budget oddity.Give it a chance.8 out of 10..
I really couldn't call it creepy at any point, Every minute i was saying to myself "what the hell is this bed/film going to do next!" I watched this with a friend that is in no way a fan of horror or B- movies, and even she was pretty into it.
It was a particular killer podcast (wink wink nod nod) that brought my attention to the George Barry 1977 lost horror film, Death Bed: The Bed That Eats.
It eats through an acidic sudsy substance that overtakes objects laid upon it's mattress.The bed is fittingly located in a remote area of the countryside and we learn of its history and its thoughts (?) through the narration of a spirit that is imprisoned within a painting kept in the same room as the killer furniture piece.Mostly, the bed feasts upon travelers, and more specifically during the mid-chapters, on three vacationing women searching for a bed for the night.We could not ascertain whether writer/director/producer George Barry was looking to make a serious film or if he instead had designs on cinematic glory.
And with adult moments that included various scenes incorporating female nudity, our case is that much furthered.Our appreciation for Death Bed: The Bed That Eats might be more of a surprise than the film's plot points.
I'm not making this up.Completed in 1977 and not officially released until it came to DVD in 2003, "Death Bed: The Bed That Eats" is a movie whose plot is impossible to describe.
You most likely know of it thanks to Patton Oswalt's excellent bit about it, as well as Stephen Throwers essential book "Nightmare USA." While watching it, you wonder the following-Who is George Berry, and what drugs did he smoke/inject/snort before writing and directing this movie?-Is this a horror comedy?
Not only is it intentional, but from what I've read, Death Bed is based on an actual dream, George Barry, the director, successfully transferred dream to film, only a genius could accomplish such a task.Old mansions make for good quality horror, as do portraits.
Exactly what one would expect from a title like that, 'Death Bed: The Bed That Eats' focuses on a possessed bed at an outskirts cottage that dissolves and eventually consumes anyone unfortunate enough to sit or lie on it for extended periods.
Considering the noticeably low budget, the special effects are surprisingly decent and the film comes with the odd artistic touch or two, such as a great shot of one victim's dripping blood extinguishing a candle beside the bed.
If one can get over the second rate acting, strange voice-over narration and such oddities as the bed being spliced into old newsreel footage (!), this is an undeniably unique horror film, and one that - at the very least - manages to makes its possessed object seem sinister without the need to talk or move..
). " I am not really sure, what to say about this!With title like that, I thought it would be funny horror, it wasn't at all, it had serious toneIt was very strange, most of movie was very silent.
There were just handful of scenes, Peolpe spoke, they were very short.Which I thought was good idea as when they dd speak, it felt forced and makes the bad acting more noticeable.This movie also had flashback of black and white.I think they were just to waste time, to fill the short run time.One think for sure, this is original.
. but well above average, for an -amateur- film.First I must say that for having been produced on such a small budget, this sure is quite a capable film - surprisingly so.The story behind this obscure horror film is quite unique, this movie is centered around a cursed antique four-poster bed and the imprisoned soul of an artist, whose held captive behind one of his paintings; he also happens to serve as the movies narrator.
It's a very short film clocking in at a mere 67 minutes, but throughout it's short duration it tells a compelling story, which owes a lot to the voice of Patrick Spence-Thomas; whose clipped and elegant narrations in what sounds a Mid-Atlantic accent, capably guides us through this film that has a most unusual premise, a bed that eats people, with much eloquence and class.
Most of the films complexity revolves around the fact that there are so many characters/victims which represent so many different era's, but once again, the narrator does such an excellent job, colorfully and concisely describing the films many unwholesome events and as a result you never feel lost at any point and though it is a bit slow at times, the coherency of the movie never falters.
However with that being said, if you don't listen to the narrator, nothing about the movie will make sense.Poe Influence: For fans of classic literary horror, I find that this film is very effective in projecting a world that looks as if it came straight from the mind of Edgar Allen Poe (and I don't even like Poe, but it's hard to refute the vibe and air that this film projects), even if it is set in modern times (1977).
This film plunges headlong into the realm of the surreal à la Lynch and Jodorowsky--with an atmosphere that is strangely compelling, lulling the viewer with the dream-like intensity of its images.The narration is to be savoured--the narrator being trapped behind a painting (adjacent to the bed), who often speaks for it, vocalizing its desires and reasoning.
Death Bed: The Bed That Eats is without a doubt one of the weirdest horror films I have ever seen.
It's not just the plot that astounds with its sheer surrealistic nuttiness, but also the execution: the avant-garde direction, the strange music, the kooky performances, the random editing, and the echoey voice-over from the spirit of an artist trapped behind a painting, all of which go to make this a real one-of-a-kind off-the-wall movie.Told in four chapters - Breakfast, Lunch, Dinner, and Just Desserts - the film revolves around a bed that devours anyone and anything that comes in contact with it.
One of these victims was the aforementioned artist, who, imprisoned behind his own work of art for 70 years, bears witness to each and every death.When three young women arrive at the house, the bed begins to feed again, starting with cutie Suzan (Julie Ritter, who gets nekkid before being eaten), followed by Diane (Demene Hall), who might have escaped if it hadn't been for those pesky prehensile bed sheets.
The third girl, Sharon (Rosa Luxemburg), is spared, because her eyes remind the bed of the demon's dead maiden.Crazy moments include the bed consuming an apple and regurgitating the core, Suzan dreaming of eating bugs, the bed devouring an orgy, and an eyeball rolling around the sheets, but for my money the most memorable scene is when Sharon's brother stupidly tries to stab the bed and finds himself wrist deep in acid, the bed dissolving the flesh, leaving him with skeletal hands that start to break apart as the cartilage wastes away.With bonkers stuff like that, I happily recommend the film to fans of bizarre cinema, even if, truth be told, it isn't really all that good..
A bed that is possessed by a demon eats anyone who gets on it.Yes, that's pretty much the story of this film, which was written and directed by George Barry.
Personally speaking, I can see why some would call it one of the worst movies ever made but at the same time you have to admit that the film is original and it does contain some fresh ideas.DEATH BED: THE BED THAT EATS is a very strange and surreal movie.
The entire idea of a movie about a bed that eats people is ridiculous but at the same time how many times do you watch a horror movie and then bash it for being the same old thing that we've seen countless times?
You really can't say that about this movie because it is original and there's nothing else like it.Obviously when you're dealing with a movie about an eating bed, there's not too much that can be done in regards to a story.
The visual images of "inside the bed" are decent for what they are.The performances are pretty much what you'd expect out of a low-budget exploitation movie.
From its title you already pretty much know this just isn't going to be a good movie but you would at least expect it to be fun to watch.
I mean here you have a movie called "Death Bed: The Bed That Eats" about a bed that kills people but the movie just simple falls short on every department.It's really a bed movie, that was putting me to sleep with its annoying, slow narrator and the fact that there is far too little happening.
Really, you just don't ever care about any of the characters or anything that is happening in this movie.Watch the original "A Nightmare on Elm Street" instead for a truly good death bed moment.3/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
I had read online reviews praising this obscure outing as a combination of gory horror, quirky black comedy and borderline art-house; the film has elements of all three, to be sure, but they are at the service of such a supremely silly premise (the title immediately gives the game away) – and amateurish production to boot – that its long-term neglect due to a lack of proper distribution – basically until Cult Epics picked it up for DVD release a full 30 years after its inception!
Seeing various objects – from cigars to pieces of fried chicken – and people getting swallowed up (the belly of the bed is depicted as a vat of honey-colored liquid) makes the film mildly amusing at times (especially when a young man's hands are reduced to their skeletal formation, which he seems to take rather too easily in his stride!), but also awfully repetitious
so that, at even a brief 77 minutes, the whole pointless exercise feels strained and downright desperate..
This film definitely had a lot of potential; it's always going to be difficult to build a plot around a premise as bizarre as a bed that eats people, but it could be great if done correctly.
It has to be said that writer-director George Barry has a great imagination, but the plot doesn't have any coherency, and basically what we have is simply a film about a hungry bed, rather than one with any plot.
There isn't a great deal of blood in the film, but the way that the bed eats is imaginative and done in the best way possible, as we see various thing slip inside it's innards, which appear to be made up of a strange yellow substance.
First off let me say that I consider myself a bad movie connoisseur having sat through my fair share and being a huge fan of things like Mystery Science Theater 3000 and Cinematic Titanic that showcase and make fun of bad movies...So I ordered Death Bed on Netflix.
Much like the equally so bad its awesome Manos: The Hands of Fate except this one makes a little more sense and does deliver some decent gore...All in all I can't say that I'm disappointed, though the movie was by no means good...
When I move my hand, it leaves trails!!" Trust me...you'll know when you get to that point.The only other thing we have to address is this: How good can a film be when at least half the budget was spent on moving a huge bed frame around for interior and exterior shots?
There's this bed that eats people (and fried chicken, apples, flowers, suitcases, and any other darn thing that gets near it) by sucking them inside its digestive-fluid filled mattress.
The film features three young women who come across the mansion which holds the basement containing the death bed.
Patrick Spence-Thomas provides the soft, depressing voice of the trapped painter, narrating the film, lamenting about his current situation, telling us about past victims, and often scolding the bed of it's predatory nature.A definitive, genuine cult film..I expect it's status to soar now that DEATH BED:THE BED THAT EATS has found it's way to an audience(..such as myself)who appreciates the bizarre and grotesque.
Director George Barry often features gags regarding the victims who find themselves in the most unfortunate position choosing the death bed as their place of refuge..the painter gives us a recollection of all the various people who were eaten.
The major imaginative thrive of the movie is that it is narrated by the Victorian artist Aubrey Beardsley who is held captive inside the wall behind one of his paintings next to the bed.
Truly a bed that eats people can be scary in the right hands.
Death bed: The bed that eats.Judging from the title, you can guess what this movie is about.
And yet there is a lot more (background) story to this film then one might suspect.Okay, so the main plot is about a bed eating people and food, but there are also a few subplots.
You might never want to sleep again...Death Bed: The bed that eats is a strange horror gem with a low budget, but I'd still recommend it to fans of horror movies.In conclusion, I give this movie a 7 out of 10 stars for it's creative story and unexpected twists here and there..
In any case, like I said earlier, this is a weird movie and because of that I recommend it only for those who either like bad films for some odd reason or have plenty of beer (or other type of alcoholic beverages) on hand.
It's difficult to criticize a movie with the title like 'Deathbed: The Bed that Eats' and involves a ghost narrator who's trapped behind a 2-way painting he drew and a bed that snores and – if I'm not mistaken, masturbates. |
tt0204993 | Dark Angel | === Season one ===
In 2009 a genetically enhanced nine-year-old female supersoldier designated as X5-452 (Geneva Locke) escapes along with eleven others from a secret U.S. government institution codenamed Manticore where they were born, raised, and trained to be soldiers and assassins. On June 1, 2009, months after X5-452's escape terrorists detonate an electromagnetic pulse weapon in the atmosphere over the U.S. which destroys the vast majority of computer and communication systems, throwing the country into chaos.
Ten years later in 2019 the now 19-year-old X5-452 (Jessica Alba), who calls herself Max Guevara, struggles to search for her Manticore brothers and sisters. In a recovering United States which is now barely more than a Third World nation she tries to live a relatively normal life and evade capture by Manticore, who wish to recover their lost asset. Logan Cale (Michael Weatherly), an underground cyber-journalist with the alias Eyes Only, attempts to recruit her to help fight corruption in the post-Pulse world. She initially refuses but accepts after Cale is rendered a paraplegic attempting the assignment he was recruiting her for. A romantic interest buds between the two. While assisting Cale, Max also makes a living as a bicycle messenger at Jam Pony, a courier company, along with her friends Original Cindy (Valarie Rae Miller), Herbal Thought (Alimi Ballard), and Sketchy (Richard Gunn). Other X5s are periodically introduced, most significantly the unit leader Zack (William Gregory Lee). The Manticore hunt for the escaped X5s is led by Colonel Donald Lydecker (John Savage). Near the end of the season Lydecker is betrayed by his superior, the even more ruthless Elizabeth Renfro (Nana Visitor), and he defects from Manticore. He aids Max and Zack in an assault on Manticore headquarters. Max is badly wounded and captured. Zack, who has also been captured, commits suicide to provide Max with his heart, as she needs an X5 heart transplant to survive.
=== Season two ===
Cale exposes Manticore to the world. Renfro decides to burn the facility to cover up the evidence and is killed in the process. Aided by Joshua (Kevin Durand), a transgenic with canine DNA, Max escapes the facility and frees the other transgenics including Alec (Jensen Ackles), a fellow X5, who later joins Jam Pony. When Max is reunited with Cale he immediately becomes ill and almost dies. Max discovers that Manticore has infected her with a virus specifically designed to kill Cale, and the two must avoid all physical contact to keep him alive. Max learns that Joshua was the first transgenic created by Sandeman, Manticore's founder. Over the course of the season, it is revealed that a millennia-old breeding cult has bred their own super-soldiers who rival the Manticore-produced transgenics. Ames White (Martin Cummins), a government agent tasked with eliminating the freed transgenics, is revealed to be a member of the cult. When a strange message written in Max's genetic code makes an appearance on her skin it is revealed that Sandeman is a renegade from the breeding cult and Ames White is his son. White is still loyal to the cult and hates his father's transgenic creations with a passion. Believing that Max is a threat to the breeding cult's plans they attempt to kill her, but she escapes to Terminal City, an abandoned part of Seattle where hundreds of outcast transgenics have been hiding. When the police begin to surround Terminal City Max convinces the other transgenics to stand their ground rather than run. The series ends with the military surrounding Terminal City as the residents raise their newly designed flag from one of the buildings, and wait for a possible invasion. | psychedelic, sci-fi, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | I would really implore that this continues even if set from a few years later, or another version of Dark Angel is made with the original cast, particularly Jessica Alba.
Jessica Alba is perfect for this role and with the popularity of Arrow, The Flash, DC Legends of Tomorrow, Spergirl and various others, I am positive that Dark Angel in this day and age would be welcomed back with open arms by great deal of people, myself included.I've recently been watching them again and they thrill me every time even though I've seen them all before.
Of course Jessica Alba as Max is a great reason to watch this series, but so is Jensan Ackles.
For those hoping it will come back you are out of luck because it has been years now since it was canceled, but i still haven't given up hope of a feature film sometime in the future.Bottom line: If you are looking for a short entertaining show and you like Alba, this one's for you..
I have to say she did a really good job here.Come on James Cameron, make us happy and start another Dark Angel series.Find someone who looks like Jessica Alba and make it happen, just have a try and I am sure people will like it.Don't do things just because of money.
Reading what other people have commented on the show, it seems this series is a rather mixed bunch, trying to cater to many audiences but apparently satisfying only few.Female viewers are offended because Max is pretty and portrayed as such a sex object in every turn, but love the series because watching a girl kick (male) butt strokes their egoes.Male viewers are offended because almost all the male characters are useless, impotent losers who (deservedly) get insulted and their asses kicked, but love the series for the action, and the hot lead character.Pschah.The series has an intentionally controversial message - with nothing substantial to say.
Actually, it may be that Dark Angel is entirely ironic, in which case it's still bad but at least perversely interesting.If you want to watch a well-written sci-fi series that was cancelled, check out Firefly..
Mainly talking about the BAD characterizations, weak, useless males, and the girls who are each and every one 'sassy'(You know they're 'sassy' because they insult the male characters every time they open their mouths), which gets so bad that at one point, the main character decides that the wife of a man dying of some awful disease, needs to hears terrible jokes about guys being the weaker sex.But the show is also crippled by the sources of it's cribbed ideas(Johnny Mnemonic!) and it's stupid premises(An EMP device has destroyed everything electrical in the place where the show's set, and for some reason, we have no idea at all about how to fix that, even though we created all that electrical stuff basically from scratch in the first place, learned about electricity, engineering and manufacturing, etc).Not surprising it was canceled.
After all, one of the writer-producers declared proudly that he didn't like Science-Fiction and that it therefore was going to help him make a great Science-Ficiton show.Sorry, but that sort of speech is usually followed by a dud, because it is very difficult to excel at something you don't even like.Dark Angel met all those expectations and more.But what really killed this show was Jessica Alba.
James Cameron has created an excellent character in this test-tube genetically modified human being, trying to escape the entrapments of its genesis and the actress Jessica Alba (who I had never heard of before the series)has done a sterling job in her interpretation of the character of 'Max'.
They don't.Dark Angel suffered from about the second or third episode into the second season, and the television networks did well to drop it like the proverbial plague.
Even "The Simpson" has better acting, and they're all celluloid!I think Cameron should have made Dark Angel a movie rather than a television series.
Dark Angel is about a future of political, economic and moral collapse, a genetically enhanced superhuman prototype named Max escapes from military confines and dwells amidst the decadent underground street life of Seattle, WA to avoid government agents who want her back into the fold.
To give you an idea of what sort of person I am, these are some of the other TV series I thought or think were/are excellent: NYPD Blue, Charmed, Profit (short lived 1996 US TV series) and some of the films I really like: The Godfather Part 1 and 2, Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe, Titanic (James Cameron's version), The Bourne Identity Finally I would just like to finish by saying that I cannot overpraise James Cameron's "Dark Angel" and hopes that he produces a 3rd series or that he takes it to the big screen..
She is perfect for the role, and the show is more interested in her filing the shoes of a strange character rather than showing off cleavage which, Alba has since done frequently.the one problem I have with Dark Angel is a certain lack of excitement, Every time Max gets into trouble she gets out pretty easily because she is so much smarter and tougher than her enemies, but I guess that is what makes the show so quirky.
This is one big budget series,which has great landscapes,story and fx.Jessica Alba plays the leading role and she is HOT.After having watched the pilot episode when it came out on video, I couldn't wait for the series to start,and now I think it is one of the best series I have seen.
It is made by James Cameron, and that explains a lot.So if this series comes to your country then try to watch a few episodes and see if you like it,I guarantee that you will..
I think the jury is still out on this one, but it will be an uphill battle for this show, despite some good numbers for the two hour debute."Dark Angel" is the kind of sci-fi I should like, in that it deals with a plausible future and what could be an appealing central character.
Dark Angel is very popular in england, and we are all upset that we don't know what happens after max Jessica alba puts the flag up what Joshua made.I personally am very upset that they didn't make a season 3.dark Angel is a great film and should carry on with the film.my mum and dad are also disappointed because we all feel that we have wasted our money on box set 1 and 2 because we will never know what the ending is.
This show may have survived its hackneyed scripts and boring premise had it cast a great actress as its lead.This show was going to live or die by the acting ability of the lead actress to make us forget the bad lines and get us interested in her character.Instead we got Jessica Alba...Jessica Alba who seems to think that pouting is the highest form of acting.Jessica Alba who seems to think grimacing is what expressiveness is all about.Jessica Alba who is so needful of acting lessons she even dragged down Michael Weatherly's acting into the cellar.Shame on James Cameron for thinking that a Hot Chick is all that was needed for this show.Someone with talent and soul is what was needed..
They add a comic side to the series that it didn't need and doesn't work well as it takes away from the dark thriller side to it.Generally the writing is good but it is full or holes and doesn't stand up if you take a long hard look at the series, also some episodes are very weak or a little silly.
Jessica Alba is Max Guevera, a top secret genetically-engineered but mentally deficient hotty who after escaping captivity lives as a bike message courier in Seattle of a post-apocalyptic world of 2009, while searching for the other government experiments that have escaped,running up against the "evil" Manticor corporation, and learning of her past piece by piece along the way.
If you talk to some of the actors they would be glad to come back and start Dark Angel again.This is suppose to be in future but a lot of thing happening in the series is happening now.
I don't know if you catalog Dark Angel as being full-fledge Sci-Fi series as besides some expectation there aren't really future elements in it, however, I think it actually a good thing and benefit the series.
The characters are really fun to watch (well most of them) and I really like the combination of the series sometimes being light and funny and other time more serious.I heard a lot of criticism about Jessica Alba acting, and I admit she wasn't great at the first couple of episodes but she did decent and she vastly improved in the second season (also not forget she was only 18 at the time, still a young actress).
Season 2 was indeed different with the introduction of mix human-animal, the breeding cult and the transgenic-humans relationship but it kept its main elements.In the end, the series had some drawbacks, maybe the scripts wasn't 'smart' enough for everybody, but it just being picky, some really, really minor continuity problem (that you can't even call secondary plots) but on the other hand the series had a lot of reference to previous episodes, a lot more then I've seen in other series.
It's not all bad though: the "will they/won't they" between Max and Logan Cale turned out to surprisingly effective and watchable - in fact, it is by far the best part of the show.So does "Dark Angel" deserve another series.
10 years later we follow the life of one of the escaped kids named Max, who works at a bike messenger company, but when night comes she turns into a cat-burglar to make what money she can and has plans to buy a better motorbike when one night she burgles the place of an underground cyber journalist named Logan Cale, who broadcasts on T.V about all the bad people who are destroying America even more.
Max tries to find the others like her so she teams up with Logan, who is set to save the world.Great cast, great story, it's extremely funny, i totally love the show but they canceled it.
My favourite episodes are all from Season 1 where we begin to get to know Max (Jessica Alba, her younger brother Joshua Alba makes an appearance at the end of season 1 as Krit), Logan (Michael Weatherly) and Donald Lydecker (John Savage, my new favourite bad guy).Rating?
James Cameron's Dark Angel is an excellent show because it features innovative characters, a unique storyline, and an underlying message of encouraging us to accept people are different.
Each episode of Dark Angel has Max fighting the bad guys and saves the day.
Dark Angel is such a cool show - it's one of my favourites now - I watch it every Monday (I live in New Zealand...)!!Screen Goddess Jessica Alba (90210, Never Been Kissed) plays Max, a genetically-enhanced super-girl who escaped from Manticore (where her and all the other genetically-enhanced super-kids were being trained) as a kid - now she lives in the dark side of Seattle (I think) as a messenger.The year is 2019 (or something) and they States is a 3rd world country, and the town Max inhibits looks pretty crusty.
The fighting looks pretty real.But when Max goes jumping over fences or jumps onto something really high up,the show gets an "F" in reality and graphics.And another thing I have always been interested about is how Logan can drive a car and not be able to walk or feel his legs-hhhhmmmm very interesting indeed!But hey!The show is good and the whole super-charged up people isn't really THAT unbelievable.[Hey we have cloned sheep haven't we?]All in all..The show is good.I hope this show stays around for awhile but I have my doubts it will.The show seems to on every other week now instead of every week!I think its because they writers are having a hard time coming up with new material for the show now.But I think I lot of people like this show and are watching it and want to see more of it![Like me!]So I hope the writers get out of their slump pretty soon!.
I think Jessica Alba was picked for the part for a lot more reasons than good looks, she's a great actor and everything I aspire to be.
Jensen Ackles had always been one of my favorite characters, Jessica Alba was perfect for the job of Max. I would have liked more of William Gregory Lee, he's also a great actor, I remember him from Xena.
1 all-time beauty, stars as Max in this futuristic action/sci-fi series, set in a dystopian future.
I think "Dark Angel" connotes someone (Max, Jessica Alba) who lives in a "dark world" of corruption but who is an "angel" in disguise, helping others and fighting evil with her genetic-engineered powers.
You gotta love a show that has a lead girl character "Max" who rides a motorcycle, her sidekick named "Original Cindy", a bike delivery boss named "Normal", and a co-worker named "Herbal Thought.""Dark Angel", while it has a thread of right and goodness running through it, as a necessity for viewers to sympathize with the characters, is really just good science-fiction entertainment.
We cheer petite and feminine "Max" while we secretly wish we were 21 again with her as our girlfriend.Besides the science-fiction, "Dark Angel" has a great mish-mash of true "characters", much as did "Taxi", "Mash", and "Northern Exposure", all great and long-running TV series.
However, as good as "Dark Angel" is, I believe they will rather quickly run out of innovative plots, the series will be renewed for the 2001/2002 season, and will end after its second season.
The stunts are amazing - watching Jessica Alba perform sommersaults, kick the crap out of Manticore agents, save her friends and rob from the rich to make a quick buck!Heartbreak: Logan and Max: the perfect couple who are continually put at risk because of who they are, forcing a little bit of a bumpy relationship.From the genius James Cameron, Dark Angel is not to be missed under any circumstances!.
The lead character Max Guevara (Jessica Alba, from Flipper and Idle Hands), lives in Seattle, searching for the other "escapees".Great images, a story clear, great performance (don´t miss Original Cindy...
This TV series has just started in the UK on the 17th Jan 2001, and I can say I wouldn't want to miss an episode,because I think that if James Cameron is behind the creation of films like Aliens etc last then I'm sure with the help of Fox,cast & crew behind Dark Angel and viewers ratings I'm sure it has a future on screen...
Max (Jessica Alba) is 'Dark Angel' a genetically engineered soldier, which we initially learn from flash backs to her childhood.
I wasnt going to add a comment until i saw what awfully bad comments many other people have made, Dark Angel is one on James Camerons best!
Fox's television series "Dark Angel" is my favorite dramatic television series and, to me, second only to "Seinfeld." Jessica Alba (beautiful, sexy, talented) stars as Max Guevara (a.k.a. X-5 452), a genetically enhanced woman who is hiding from her creators.
The chemistry between the two characters is sizzling and in the third episode we are getting to see more interaction between Max and her female friends.My only criticism of Dark Angel is some of the dialogue.
And Jessica Alba's beauty is both dark and angelic.
Oh sure, Jessica Alba looks very good, but is this enough to make Dark Angel worth watching?
I don't think anyone else could have played Max as well as Jessica.I found the story lines really interesting because I've never seen anything like it before.I love the background of the characters and how all of them are complex in a way.Max's Jam Pony co-workers are hilarious and bring relief to the "darkness".Some of the effects were a little off I do admit and sometimes the acting wasn't as good as it could be but overall I wish the series would have continued.Because it is a entertaining show if you give it a chance..
Dark Angel has become my one of my favorite shows, I was hooked from the very first episode, Jessica is great.
Jessica Alba is excellent as the role of Max and although some of you slate her as a step forward for her career, you will notice that she has been acting for years previous to Dark Angel and will be for a long time to come.
And Jessica Alba(play Max in the series) is doing the act so great to.
Things didn't really get much better in the second year, but there was some clear improvement, not with the plotting, but with the star.This show had to live or die with Jessica Alba, its butt kicking, genetically enhanced super soldier who longed to be just a regular girl.
Yes, Jessica Alba has only one expression and it is pout with her Angelina Jolie lips and the guy who plays Logan is a one note character, but what keeps me watching Dark Angel are the scenes with Max's Jam Pony coworkers and the scenes where she's kicking ass!
6 August 2006 Hi Folks,I just finished watching the complete second season of James Cameron's: Dark Angel.
I wish only that James Cameron's: Dark Angel series would continue, I want more of MAX and crew.
Fox just plain sux The series Dark Angel was the most well acted and best series I have ever watched in my life.
DA presented many previously rather unknown actors such as Jensen Ackles, Michael Weatherly and, of course, the leading lady Jessica Alba, who have since then continued their acting careers in prime movies and TV-series.The main reason, why I got reeled in, was the undefined "thing" going on between Max and Logan. |
tt0051525 | The Defiant Ones | The film starts with a truck driving at night. It swerves to miss another truck and crashes through a barrier. The rescuers clear up the debris and cover the people killed... mainly prisoners in the back. It is revealed that two are missing: a black man shackled to a white man, because "the warden had a sense of humor." They are told not to look too hard as "they will probably kill each other in the first five miles." Nevertheless, a large posse and many bloodhounds are dispatched the next morning to find them.
The setting is in the American South, the men are the black Noah Cullen (Poitier) and the white John "Joker" Jackson (Curtis). Despite their mutual loathing, they are forced to cooperate, as they are chained together. At first their cooperation is motivated by self-preservation but gradually, they begin to respect and like each other.
Cullen and Joker flee through difficult terrain and weather, with a brief stop at a turpentine camp where they attempt to break into a general store, in hopes of obtaining food and tools to break the chain that holds them together. Instead, however, they are captured by the inhabitants, who form a lynch mob; they are saved only by the interference of "Big" Sam (Chaney), a man who is appalled by his neighbors' blood-thirst. Sam persuades the onlookers to lock the convicts up and turn them in the next morning, but that night, he secretly releases them, after revealing to them that he is also a former chain-gang prisoner.
Finally, they run into a young boy named Billy. They make him take them to his home and his mother (Williams), whose husband has abandoned his family. The escapees are finally able to break their chains. When they spend the night there, the lonely woman is attracted to Joker and wants to run off with him. She advises Cullen to go through the swamp to reach the railroad tracks, while she and Joker drive off in her car. The men agree to split up. However, after Cullen leaves, the woman reveals that she had lied—she sent Cullen into the dangerous swamp to die to eliminate any chance he would be captured and perhaps reveal where Joker had gone. Furious, Joker runs after his friend; as he leaves, Billy shoots him.
Wounded, Joker catches up to Cullen and warns him about the swamp. As the posse led by humane Sheriff Max Muller (Bikel) gets close, the escapees can hear the dogs hot on their trail. But they also hear a train whistle and run towards the sound. Cullen hops the train and tries to lift Joker on as well, but is unable to drag him aboard. Both men tumble to the ground. Too exhausted to run anymore, they realize all they can do is wait for their pursuers. The sheriff finds Cullen singing defiantly and Joker lying in his arms. | suspenseful, realism | train | wikipedia | Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier are white and black inmates who, while chained together at the wrist, escape their captors when their prison truck hits the ditch.
Poitier proves that critics aren't just being kind when they cite him as one of the great black actors of his or any other era (though as we see here, he is definitely no singer!).THE DEFIANT ONES moves just a touch slow at times, particularly when the focus is placed on Curtis.
Still joined at the hip as they are, they do need each other and find eventually there's more that unites than divides them.Besides Theodore Bikel in a strange role for him as a laconic southern sheriff, look for good performances from Lon Chaney, Jr. who runs a turpentine work camp who saves Curtis and Poitier from a lynching and Cara Williams as a trampy white trash farm lady whose needs haven't been met for a while.Tony Curtis in an incredible act of generosity insisted on equal billing for Sidney Poitier since due to the nature of the film, they are on screen together for most of it.
An act that rankles Tony Curtis to this day because at the drop of a hat he will insist Niven got 'his' Oscar.Despite the sour grapes, The Defiant Ones though dated is still a good bit of cinema..
Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier turn in stellar performances as two convicts who get an unexpected shot at escape but are held together by a length of chain.
I found this film very entertaining, thanks in part from great performances by both Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis, and due to great directing by Stanley Kramer.
Sidney Poitier is good as always and Tony Curtis gives what is probably his best performance ever in drama, matched only by his acting in The Boston Strangler later in 1967.
A totally absorbing film showing great acting talents of Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier as escapees from a chain gang.
Possibly Stanley Kramer's most famous directorial entry, THE DEFIANT ONES is the story of "Joker" Jackson (Tony Curtis) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier), two tough-as-nails convicts who are accidentally freed when the truck that transports them overturns.
I had never seen THE DEFIANT ONES and I sat down to watch it a couple of days ago in eager anticipation since this was regarded as a classic American movie from the 1950s , I mean we're talking about the movie with " the white convict and the black convict handcuffed and on the run " .
You might have thought they might have been more surprised that considering the spectacular crash the two escapees manged to run away without a scratch between them The action cuts to the two felons on the run John " Joker " Jackson and Noah Cullen and just in case there's any blind people in the audience who haven't realised that Tony Curtis is white and Sidney Poitier is black they call each other all sorts of racist names .
At this early point I knew instantly where the story was going so all the name calling seemed superfluous in the end and to be blunt I was never convinced that these characters would exist in reality , in fact I couldn't believe they were characters at all , just a couple of actors playing roles And as the story went on I realised I was getting battered over the head with the message " Racism is wrong and we should look beyond the colour of a persons skin in order to survive " .
Most of the prisoners live but two escape--John Jackson (Tony Curtis) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier).
At the time it must have been brave and a point that needed making (it probably still is an important point) but now it just feels like the film has been chained to a heavy partner that slows it down.Part of me felt that maybe the director wanted to labour his message so that everyone got it, another part of me felt that he should have trusted his audience and not rammed it down our throats at nearly every step.Tony Curtis is pretty good.
The writing of the movie is very much in the shadow of Steinbeck and Tennessee Williams, against the background of the burgeoning Civil Rights movement in America at the time, but for me, it buckles under the weight of its own over-earnest good intentions, despite the considerable efforts of both cast and crew.I was surprised to learn that the screenplay wasn't adapted originally from a play, given the amount of static movement in the film coupled with a lot of speechifying.
I also just couldn't get my head round the premise of two racially different felons just happening to be chained together and finding themselves on the run together in the Southern States, all the film's gritty realism scuppered for the sake of allegory.There's still a lot to savour, the cinematography is excellent in its near-documentary realism, while the two leads throw themselves unstintingly into very exacting physical parts.
However as stated above the idea that these two, the racially prejudiced Curtis and the proud Negro Poitier could get along for more than five minutes, never mind pour out their collective hearts along the way as they get all philosophical and universal on us, is too much to swallow.In support, Cara Williams is fine as the abandoned country wife, desperate for love and a future with Curtis (there's an excellent dissolve shot as their relationship is consummated) but what a difference it would have made to the dynamics of the film if she had fallen for Poitier instead - not, of course that such a storyline film could ever have been green-lighted at the time, while Theodore Bikel is excellent as the pursuing sheriff who retains his humanity, refusing to bow to the pressure of his posse to bring the wanted duo back more dead than alive.
No matter, it is a pretty good movie, and Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier do an intense job as John "Joker" Jackson and Noah Cullen, respectively.
Pushing 45 years old, the movie is an often pedestrian manhunt thriller where some occasionally ropey extras lead a hunt, giving Curtis and Poitier chance to sit around and spark racial ethics off one another.It's this heavy-handed approach that often jars nowadays, or maybe history has blurred and we are thankfully blind to a time when Sidney would be mistrusted merely due to his colour.
Both Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier are very good as escaped racist convicts--chained together by one wrist--attempting to allude Southern police and their bloodhounds not far behind.
Considering that this movie was made in the late 1950's, it's a fairly courageous exploration of race relations seen through the eyes of two escaped convicts (Tony Curtis & Sidney Poitier)who, being chained, have to overcome their mutual animosity.It's interesting to watch their relationship progress from mutual hostility to co-operation, genuine affection and even loyalty to each other.
The decision to introduce a "love angle" to the story, as Jackson (Curtis) and Cullen (Poitier) take refuge with a single mother (Cara Williams) was questionable in my view, although it served to further our understanding of how close Jackson and Cullen had become.The exploration of relationships was continued in the subplot about the relationship between the local sheriff's office and the State Police as they try to track down the escaped convicts.
Meanwhile, the State Police plus the local Sheriff and a ragtag bunch of deputies, assisted by tracker dogs, are hot on their trail.With enough thrilling action to keep it enjoyable today, this is an important film that provided Poitier with a breakthrough role and helped Curtis to escape the simplistic hero mode in which his talents had too often been wasted.
Chain gang convicts Tony Curtis (as John Jackson) and Sidney Poitier (as Noah Cullen) make an escape, after their transporting truck overturns on a rainy road.
In convincing small roles, watch for Lon Chaney Jr. lending a helping hand, Claude Akins talking tough, young Kevin Coughlin playing a racist kid, and rascally Carl "Alfalfa" Switzer appearing for the last time.******* The Defiant Ones (7/58) Stanley Kramer ~ Tony Curtis, Sidney Poitier, Cara Williams, Theodore Bikel.
"The Defiant Ones" is a truly great film starring Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier, both of whom earned their money and deserved their Oscar nominations in this exciting and moving film, beautifully directed by Stanley Kramer.Marlon Brando was to star in the movie but when it didn't happen due to Kramer having to wait for Poitier to finish a film, Curtis, complete with nose putty (which he often relied on to make himself less handsome) took over and showed what he could really do with a good role.
Sidney Poitier was another stand out cast member of this film with a believable character who is an African American who is trying to live happy but is constantly getting beaten and abused by the whites such a powerful message about equality.
Prisoners John Jackson (Tony Curtis) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier) are chained together and escape.
Stanley Kramer directed this racial drama that stars Tony Curtis as John 'Joker' Jackson and Sidney Poiter as Noah Cullen, two convicts on a chain gang chained together who escape after the truck carrying them has an accident.
John 'Joker' Jackson (Tony Curtis, but looks like Joan Crawford) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier) escape from a chain gang.
Arguably director Stanley Krammer's only true moment of cinematic greatness, THE DEFIANT ONES is a film that takes a standard plot (two convicts, who hate each other, escape but are chained together and must learn to depend upon one another) and manages to pack an extremely powerful punch.
The 31 year old Sidney Poitier finally got his break by acting alongside Tony Curtis in this rather dated film about brotherly fellowship, 'The Defiant Ones'.
If you've seen Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis chained together and running from bloodhounds, an angry mob, or alongside a train, those famous images are from Stanley Kramer's Oscar-winning drama.The plot is simple but intense.
Sidney Poitier and Tony Curtis give terrific performances, as do Theodore Bikel, as the humanistic sheriff tracking them down, and Cara Williams, as a single woman who gives the men shelter and emerges as perhaps the most vile representative of a kind of white racism rampant then and still rampant now.
Two convicts escape - Johnny (Tony Curtis), a white man, and Cullen (Sydney Poitier), a black man.
Two convicts escape - Johnny (Tony Curtis), a white man, and Cullen (Sydney Poitier), a black man.
John "Joker" Jackson (Tony Curtis), and Noah Cullen (excellent portrayal by Sidney Poitier), have escaped from prison and are shackled together.
The story, well directed by message film director Stanley Kramer (see also the excellent "Ship of Fools", as well as his masterpiece "On The Beach" with Gregory Peck and Ava Gardner).At any rate, the film has some good scenes, they are in the brush and swamps of Georgia, trying to escape a pack of bloodhounds, and the Sheriff well portrayed by Theodore Bikel The fact that the way Poitier is treated , simply because he is black, is a time warp as when a woman offers the refugees food, but first asks Curtis if she "should give the other guy some as well".
If Stanley Kramer dared to produce this movie in 1958 and Tony Curtis (White Male Caucasian) participate in principal leading role, subsequently I don't see reason to swell 60 years later when about half of Hollywood actors are colored and Film Industry in the making depend on this people.
It's a fair coin, I think both Blacks and Whites should understand me."The Defiant Ones" (1958), gave Sidney Poitier his first Academy Award nomination as Best Actor.
The Defiant One. The time of extreme racism has long gone, but this chained-together white and black convicts' escaping adventure simply hasn't waned much for its in-your-face impact of genuine thrill and sympathy, director Stanley Kramer's (from SHIP OF FOOLS 1965, 6/10) third feature, gathering Curtis and Poitier as the "impossible pair", the film would successfully pave the way for Poitier and Kramer's prospective Oscar-winner echelon and afford Curtis a splendid career-turn with his only Oscar nomination.
This movie also earned Sidney Poitier his first Oscar nomination by the way and the movie got nominated for a lot more, including best picture but it eventually won only two, for its writing and black & white cinematography.it's an heavy movie with its subject but luckily the movie overall remains quite entertaining to watch as well.
He jokes with Cullen and tells him to call him names about the whiteness of his skin as a sign that racism doesn't exist between the two.Soon after Curtis made this movie he starred in his most famous film "Some Like It Hot." And Poitier was already known by his star performance in "Blackboard Jungle." Yet together they have chemistry.
Defiant Ones, The (1958) **** (out of 4) Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier, white and black, play escaped convicts, chained together, who are trying to make their escape without killing one another.
This great film follows two escaped convicts (Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier) as they try to out run the law.
Two prisoners, one black (Sidney Poitier) and one white (Tony Curtis), escape after they've been shackled together by the wrists.
When the truck that is transporting convicts has an accident on the road, the inmates John "Joker" Jackson (Tony Curtis) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier) that are chained to each other escape.
Stanley Kramer is responsible for two of the best anti-racism movies, "The Defiant Ones" and "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner", both with Sidney Poitier.
The movie is the story of two escaped convicts, African-American Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier) who hates white people, and bigot white man, John 'Joker' Jackson (Tony Curtis), whom hates blacks.
"The Defiant Ones" was retitled in French, "The Chain", as if the real issue was the relationship between John "Joker" Jackson and Noah Cullen, Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier as two fugitives from a chain gang, a white and a black man shackled together and forced to cooperate and trust each other in order to survive.
In the American south two prisoners escape from a chain gang.The other, Noah Cullen, is black, and John "Joker" Jackson, is white.They can't stand each other.But they are forced to cooperate, despite the racial issues.And eventually they start even liking each other.On the run, they meet a young boy named Billy.He leads them to his mother.At her home, they get rid of their chains.The lonely woman is attracted to John, and wants to run off with him.But friendship wins, in the end.Stanley Kramer is the director of this classic, The Defiant Ones (1958).Tony Curtis and Sidney Poitier make such a powerful couple.Theodore Bikel makes a great sheriff, sheriff Max Muller.Charles McGraw is great as Captain Frank Gibbons.Lon Chaney Jr. is terrific as Big Sam, a former convict, who rescues them from the hanging.Kevin Coughlin plays Billy and Cara Williams is his mother.They're both great.Carl Switzer, Alfalfa from Our Gang movies, plays Angus in his final role.The movie offers lots of thrills and some great drama.The moments around the supply store, which they want to rob, are full of drama and tension.The people there want to hang them.And in the end, when they try to catch the train, but John can't make it, since young Billy has shot him.Noah hops off the train and goes to his friend, singing "Long Gone".Even though they're not wearing the chains anymore, in a way those two are still chained to each other..
The conditions were miserable and the situations Jackson (Curtis) and Cullen (Poitier) found themselves in were both physically and mentally demanding.Obviously, the subject of racism is at the center of the picture, as director Stanley Kramer made the bold decision to challenge the movie going public with a black and white, man to man relationship that was further compounded by their status as escaped convicts.
These two prisoners chained together are white John 'Joker' Jackson (Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Tony Curtis) and black Noah Cullen (BAFTA winning, and Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Sidney Poitier), both despise each other initially, but their hands are chained together as they run across the American South to find a way to break their chains, as well as food and a place to hide.
Curtis managed to shake of his "pretty boy" image playing his bigoted white prisoner, and Poitier became a big star playing the angry southern black man, together in chains for three quarters of the film they are a fantastic duo who hate each other at first but become close friends, this film at the time was definitely a great statement for the need of racial equality, the script is full of both punch and poignancy, and it works really well as an exciting chase movie, a highly entertaining crime drama.
Joker Jackson (Tony Curtis, a revelation) and Noah Cullen (Sidney Poitier, fierce and fatalistic) are chained together and are in flight from a posse of local deputies led by Sheriff Max Muller (Theodore Bikel) and State Trooper Capt.
*Spoiler/plot- 1963, A pair of 'chained at the wrist' racist inmates from a Southern prison (one white and one black that hate each other) escape from a prison truck accident on the highway and attempt to escape to freedom from a prison search party.*Special Stars- Sidney Poitier, Tony Curtis, Claude Akins, Lon Chaney Jr. Director: Stanley Kramer *Theme- Racial hatred is made of ignorance and distrust.*Trivia/location/goofs- Shot on the Universal's hilly back-lot, roads and exterior sets.*Emotion- An enjoyable and rather interesting insight into race relations.
The movie ends with Jackson giving up a chance to escape in order to save Cullen's life.In the 1950s, major film roles for black actors were few and far between. |
tt0076161 | The Hound of the Baskervilles | Dr James Mortimer asks Sherlock Holmes to investigate the death of his friend, Sir Charles Baskerville. Sir Charles was found dead on the grounds of his Devonshire estate, Baskerville Hall, and Mortimer now fears for Sir Charles's nephew and sole heir, Sir Henry Baskerville, who is the new master of Baskerville Hall. The death was attributed to a heart attack, but Mortimer is suspicious, because Sir Charles died with an expression of horror on his face, and Mortimer noticed "the footprints of a gigantic hound" nearby. The Baskerville family has supposedly been under a curse since the era of the English Civil War when ancestor Hugo Baskerville allegedly offered his soul to the devil for help in abducting a woman and was reportedly killed by a giant spectral hound. Sir Charles believed in the curse and was apparently fleeing from something in fright when he died.
Intrigued, Holmes meets with Sir Henry, newly arrived from Canada. Sir Henry has received an anonymous note, cut and pasted from newsprint, warning him away from the Baskerville moors, and one of his new boots is inexplicably missing from his London hotel room. The Baskerville family is discussed: Sir Charles was the eldest of three brothers; the youngest, black sheep Rodger, is believed to have died childless in South America, while Sir Henry is the only child of the middle brother. Sir Henry plans to move into Baskerville Hall, despite the ominous warning message. Holmes and Dr Watson follow him from Holmes's Baker Street apartment back to his hotel and notice a bearded man following him in a cab; they pursue the man, but he escapes. Mortimer tells them that Mr Barrymore, the butler at Baskerville Hall, has a beard like the one on the stranger. Sir Henry's boot reappears, but an older one vanishes.
Holmes sends for the cab driver who shuttled the bearded man after Sir Henry and is both astounded and amused to learn that the stranger had made a point of giving his name as 'Sherlock Holmes' to the cabbie. Holmes, now even more interested in the Baskerville affair but held up with other cases, dispatches Watson to accompany Sir Henry to Baskerville Hall with instructions to send him frequent reports about the house, grounds, and neighbours. Upon arrival at the grand but austere Baskerville estate, Watson and Sir Henry learn that an escaped murderer named Selden is believed to be in the area.
Barrymore and his wife, who also works at Baskerville Hall, wish to leave the estate soon. Watson hears a woman crying in the night; it is obvious to him that it was Mrs Barrymore, but her husband denies it. Watson has no proof that Barrymore was in Devon on the day of the chase in London. He meets a brother and sister who live nearby: Mr Stapleton, a naturalist, and the beautiful Miss Stapleton. When an animalistic sound is heard, Stapleton is quick to dismiss it as unrelated to the legendary hound. When her brother is out of earshot, Mrs Stapleton mistakes Watson for Sir Henry and warns him to leave. She and Sir Henry later meet and quickly fall in love, arousing Stapleton's anger; he later apologises and invites Sir Henry to dine with him a few days later.
Barrymore arouses further suspicion when Watson and Sir Henry catch him at night with a candle in an empty room. Barrymore refuses to answer their questions, but Mrs. Barrymore confesses that Selden is her brother, and her husband is signalling that they have left supplies for him. Watson and Sir Henry pursue Selden on the moor, but he eludes them, while Watson notices another man on a nearby tor. After an agreement is reached to allow Selden to flee the country, Barrymore reveals the contents of an incompletely burnt letter asking Sir Charles to be at the gate at the time of his death. It was signed with the initials L.L.; on Mortimer's advice, Watson questions a Laura Lyons, who admits to writing the letter in hopes that Sir Charles would help finance her divorce, but says she did not keep the appointment. Watson tracks the second man he saw in the area and discovers it to be Holmes, investigating independently in hopes of a faster resolution. Holmes reveals further information: Stapleton is actually married to the supposed Miss Stapleton, and he promised marriage to Laura Lyons to get her cooperation.
They hear a scream and discover the body of Selden, dead from a fall. They initially mistake him for Sir Henry, whose old clothes he was wearing.
At Baskerville Hall, Holmes notices a resemblance between Stapleton and a portrait of Hugo Baskerville. He realises that Stapleton could be an unknown Baskerville family member, seeking to claim the Baskerville wealth by eliminating his relatives. Accompanied by Inspector Lestrade, whom Holmes has summoned, Holmes and Watson travel to the Stapleton home, where Sir Henry is dining. They rescue him from a hound that Stapleton releases while Sir Henry is walking home across the moor. Shooting the animal dead in the struggle, Sherlock reveals that it was a perfectly mortal dog - a mix of bloodhound and mastiff, painted with phosphorus to give it a hellish appearance. They find Miss Stapleton bound and gagged inside the house, while Stapleton apparently dies in an attempt to reach his hideout in a nearby mine. They also find Sir Henry's boot, which was used to give the hound Sir Henry's scent.
Weeks later, Holmes provides Watson with additional details about the case. Stapleton was, in fact, Rodger Baskerville's son, also named Rodger. His now-widow is a South American woman, the former Beryl Garcia. He supported himself through crime for many years, before learning that he could inherit a fortune by murdering his uncle and cousin. Stapleton had taken Sir Henry's old boot because the new, unworn boot lacked his scent. The hound had pursued Selden to his death because of the scent on Sir Henry's old clothes. Mrs Stapleton had disavowed her husband's plot, so he had imprisoned her to prevent her from interfering.
The story ends with Holmes and Watson leaving to see the opera Les Huguenots starring Jean de Reszke. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | Just a few quick words to summarize my experience sitting through what looked to be a promising parody by a couple of generally very funny and talented men - Peter Cook and Dudley Moore.
The rest of the film really became an onerous chore to sit through and only and I mean ONLY was saved by the promise of seeing some great British character actors and funny men/ladies in bit parts.
Peter Cook plays Sherlock Holmes and really misses the character entirely, but he need not fear because Dudley Moore as Watson with a hideous Scottish brogue is even worse.
Maybe some more realistic characterizations and less broad, really broad, and embarrassingly broad portrayals by Cook and Moore and Griffith as a man with a young girlfriend with the bust of a popular stripper and who enjoys throwing chunks of meat on the moors, Joan Greenwood, yes, Joan Greenwood, vomiting pea soup with spinning head, and Kenneth Williams really going over the top- even for him - toning it down a bit and making their characters a bit more believable might have helped.
Their work with Beyond and Fringe and later 'Not Only but Also' and 'Derek and Clive' is unimpeachable and they had impressive solo CVs. But in 1978 some kind of evil curse seemed to be floating about given that this year also saw the release of 'Sergeant Pepper The Movie' Renaldo and Clara AND the 'Star Wars' Thanksgiving Special.
Paul Morrisey decided to direct this Holmes and Watson spoof without making up his mind whether it would be sea-side English bawdiness in the Carry On style or Pythonesque anarchism.
But it is Dud and Pete who really disappoint, affecting (for no apparent reason) Welsh and Stage Jewish accents with Moore playing Cook's insane mother, a potential comedy winner that instead simply irritates.
Elsewhere, Denholm Elliot's urinating dog spraying Moore in the face simply causes the viewer to avert his or her eyes while reheated sketches from their 1960s show (i.e the one legged runner) only underscore the movie's lack of invention.
Paul Morrissey evidently had all the wrong ideas about how to film a comedy and how to illicit comedic performances; he is following the Carry On formula, but this film considerably outstrips the majority of those in terms of the cringe-worthy.
The veteran comic talents of Max Wall - barely in the film, much to his overwhelming relief I suspect - Joan Greenwood, Cook, Moore and Spike Milligan are frittered away carelessly, and allowed to dissolve in an acrid bath of self-abuse.
The ageing Greenwood is given an appallingly crass role and embarrassing 'things to do'; Terry-Thomas, clearly an ill man by all accounts at this time, looks completely out of it: a saddening sight.
Such a waste considering the ill-tapped talent the man clearly had; it is hardly surprising to read his increasing despondency about this project in his diaries.Apparently, Pete n' Dud had a hand in the script-writing, but it really doesn't show; this is committee stuff to the letter, including 'topical' take-offs of "The Exorcist" (1973) as well as the spirit-crushingly inept attempts to 'emulate' the Carry Ons. There are, at best, perhaps one or two middling gags of theirs that surface, but they seem hopelessly out of kilter with the film's remainder.
Moore is worse, faring poorly as an inept, 'Welsh' Holmes; never once amusing.This truly is a dire, unspeakable film.
Cook and Moore didn't have the creative control they should have done, and for whatever reason didn't feel able to pull the plug when it was clear that things were going horribly wrong.The main problem is that Paul Morrissey has no clue about how Pete & Dud's humour works.
This leads him to try and shoehorn them into his idea of "Carry on Sherlock" (a genre which he also fatally misunderstands).Worse, much of Pete & Dud's groundbreaking work from the 60's is recycled in debased form - notably the one-legged man auditioning for the part of Tarzan.I didn't even make it all the way through this when it was on TV a while back.
Following the rudimentary outline of Conan Doyle's famous Sherlock Holmes tale, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore concoct a feast of comical whimsy.
A misguided attempt to present a comic parody of the Conan Doyle tale, with Peter Cook as Sherlock Holmes and Dudley Moore as Dr Watson.
Moore also plays Holmes' mother (!) and in this guise, is possibly the best thing in the film.
Written by and starring Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, who have done many wonderful things, this is such a total misfire that one can only stare in disbelief.
The "humor" is very broad, with Dudley putting on a moronic accent and Cook playing Holmes with seemingly no clear idea of what his character is or how he wants to approach him.
I'm amazed that most of the people who saw this film, thought it was terrible, i have to say, that this was the first film i ever saw of Cook & Moore, and i enjoyed it thoroughly, i know little about direction and all the technical sides to a film, but i know what makes me laugh, and this certainly did....The scene where Holmes has a massage, Max Wall & Roy Kinner flashing, the classic one leg joke, and Moore playing Holmes's psychic mother, who call's Shelock 'Shirl'How can people take a film so silly so serious.This film turned me into a Cook & Moore fan, it cant be that bad...Watch without prejudice!!.
A wonderful cast are here involved in what must be the lowest point in all their careers.For some reason Dudley Moore plays Dr.Watson as a high voiced Welshman,and Peter Cook gives Holmes a "stage Jewish" accent!Made up of series of draggy sketches,everything but the kitchen sink gets thrown into the pot-including "The Exorcist" and Pete and Dud's "one leg short" sketch;the result is an incoherent mess.Most potentially amusing moments are killed dead by the sloppy approach of Paul Morrissey's direction.No attempt is made to capture the mystery of the original story, and the players shout,mug and flail around among pathetic threadbare sets.According to Harry Thompson's biography of Cook,Pete and Dud were deeply unhappy about Morrissey's approach to the material,and saw they'd got themselves into a disaster.No wonder the off screen audience throw rotten vegetables at Dudley at the end.A truly stupid film.
And, if I didn't know it was supposed to be a comedy, I just assumed the people making the film hated Arthur Conan Doyle and his fans and simply made the film to make them angry.
Second, the stars, Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, are dreadful.
Astonishingly Bad. This Paul Morrissey film adaptation of Sir Athur Conan Doyle's mystery masterpiece is the single worst literary adaptation I have ever seen and one of the worst movies I have ever sat through.
The film stars Dudley Moore and Peter Cook, but its all rubbish.
First off, it has to said that the Cook-Moore contribution to postwar British comedy is immeasurable and would probably fit in third place after the Pythons and Goons.
The falsetto Welsh accent of Watson (Moore) and the stage Jewish accent of Holmes (Cook) simply irritate and a very strong cast is completely wasted.
Meanwhile, the look of the movie is cheap and stagey while Moore's piano score is out of place in a comedy.
Hound of the Baskervilles, The (1978) BOMB (out of 4)As a fan of bad movies I quite often find myself trying to track down and locate some of the worst films ever made.
We have Peter Cook playing Holmes and Dudley Moore playing Watson but it really doesn't matter because I think anyone could have been in the roles and things would have been bad no matter what.
Cook, Moore and director Morrissey wrote the screenplay her and I can't help but picture the three of them sitting around, passing a joint and laughing their heads off at what they were writing.
There must be something terribly wrong with a spoof of a famous literary source (that has also managed to rope in a roster of star comedians) if its biggest laughs are provided by the straight actors' willingness to be embarrassed as they had never been before and, worse still, that these same gags are completely extraneous to the narrative and are even repeated twice in the film!
Nevertheless, they did have the good sense to go for Holmes' most famous case and engage the services of that afore-mentioned impressive cast: Peter Cook (as Holmes), Dudley Moore (as, among others, Dr. Watson), Kenneth Williams (as Sir Henry Baskerville), Terry-Thomas (as Dr. Mortimer), Denholm Elliott (as Stapleton), Joan Greenwood (as Ms. Stapleton), Roy Kinnear (as the escaped convict Selden), Hugh Griffith (as a poacher), Spike Milligan (in an irrelevant cameo as a cop on the moors), etc.The blame for this dreadful debacle should be laid squarely at the feet of Cook and Moore who, with Andy Warhol's in-house director Paul Morrissey, concocted the deadly script (described by Williams himself in his personal letters as "a hodgepodge of rubbish").
But this is undoubtedly much worse: in the original story, Sherlock Holmes disappears for a long period of time but here they insist in keeping track of his whereabouts visits to a massage parlor (given him by three fat and hirsute women) and to his mediumistic mother (also played by Moore!), masquerading in a false beard at an auction, etc.
Indeed, Moore (apart from being co-screenwriter and composer) has four distinct roles in the film that also include an irrelevant bit as a one-legged man applying for the position of a "runner" at Holmes' office and a piano player supposedly accompanying live a screening of the film and being pelted with vegetables by a disapproving audience at the end of it!
Truly a case of a hounded (by the way, the 'monster' itself is here no bigger than any normal mutt
as if anyone was truly expecting anything fearsome and, rather than attack Sir Henry, it actually befriends him at first sight!) movie through and through.P.S. Recently, I was stunned to learn that a friend of mine had tried watching Billy Wilder's ill-fated but nonetheless revered THE PRIVATE LIFE OF SHERLOCK HOLMES (1970) and found it "revolting" (and he's usually a big fan of the director!); I really have to wonder, at this point, just what he'd make of this one!.
The Hound of the Baskervilles is never realises its comedy potential as a vehicle for Dudley Moore and Peter Cook.
You rather wish the film had been directed by a heavy weight like Richard Lester or Blake Edwards or Cook and Moore themselves.
At times the movie doesn't know whether it wants to be Monty Python smart or Carry On Corny, and so alot of the ideas that worked brilliantly on Cook and Moores Behind/Beyond the Fringe Days and Not Only But Also dont work here.
Dudley holds his own against British comedy greats such as Kenneth Williams(brilliant in the film), Terry-Thomas and Spike Milligan.
Peter Cook is quite good as Sherlock Holmes, certainly looks the part and given the chance would have made a very good Holmes in a better movie.
But it's Dudleys film, he is the one who makes it work, and things where abi=out to get very interesting for him over the next decade..
Until then, we'll have to go with my initial, head-spinning thoughts on the movie.To say this adaptation of the classic Arthur Conan Doyle story (screenplay by director Morrissey and co-stars Dudley Moore and Peter Cook) is terrible is an understatement.
The look of the film is drab and unattractive, the pacing is slow and the filmmaking is sloppy and scattershot to the point of seeming downright amateurish.Moore and Cook, two comic geniuses, enthusiastically dive into their characters but cannot wring any joy or even mild amusement out of the material.
I thought the pee pee scene was hilarious, and I enjoyed the homages to Moore's and Cook's other works.
With such a classic story, turned on its head in a comedic way (different and could have been funny), and with an array of fine talent with great experience in comedy, 'The Hound of the Baskervilles' could have worked as a guilty pleasure.
Also on its own terms and a comedy and as a film.One of the worst and most shameful wastes of talent there's been and the tagline "Sherlock Holmes has never been like this" doesn't lie, and that is not in a good way.
Can't think of many good things here, Denholm Elliot doesn't come over as badly as the others and does his best, so that's one thing in 'The Hound of the Baskervilles' favour.Rest of the cast are used poorly and the broadness of the style of the acting goes well overboard and often in a vulgar way.
Peter Cook overdoes it and brings no subtlety or nuance whatsoever to balance out the trying-too-hard nature of his acting, while Dudley Moore is an embarrassment.
There are a lot of familiar faces but as said they are generally wasted (Terry-Thomas deserved a much better final film than this, easily one of the worst final films for any actor, and Spike Milligan is even more wronged), stuck in crass roles (Joan Greenwood in one of the film's most distasteful opening scenes) or made to go far too over-the-top to painful degrees (Kenneth Williams).Production values are amateurishly shabby to the extent one has to check that the film was from 1978, it sure doesn't look like it and actually looks worse than most 1950s films.
The one legged man comes off least badly but still doesn't work, due to the overlong repetition and that it feels like a re-hash of earlier Cook/Moore material.
Peter Cook & Dudley Moore at there best & silliest!
'Peter Cook & Dudley Moore' must also be counted amongst the all-time greats for such films as 'The Hound of the Baskervilles and Bedazzled (the original one, not the remake!).
After seven years of searching I am still unable to find a video of this hilarious spoof which contains some truly classic comedy moments..The runner, the incontinent dog, Watsons welsh accent are all gems as well as the usual madcap style of Spike Milligan as the policeman.
I've seen it many times & count it among the funniest movies I've ever seen.It is surreal, absurd & profoundly silly in the way that Cook & Moore's 'Derek & Clive' were masters of.
Peter Cook is hilarious as Sherlock Holmes, not the typical portrayal of the super sleuth that we know and love.
Dudley Moore plays two roles, one as a confused Watson, and also Sherlock Holmes' irascible mother.
Highlights include Holmes putting out a help wanted ad for a "runner of errands" and getting only a one-legged man to apply; Denholm Elliott's pet chihuahua who happens to be quite incontinent, especially around poor Watson; and finally, a scene that appears to be inspired by the Exorcist and presumably penned by Andy Warhol's director Paul Morrissey.
actually it is stupid, but its peter cook and dudley moore...what did you expect?.
Peter Cook summed up the problems with this would-be-outrageous parody of the Sherlock Holmes stories during an interview with comedy historian Roger Wilmut.
In short, Paul Morrissey - best known for his occasionally engaging collaborations with Andy Warhol - was a big fan of British comedy, and apparently enjoyed cordial relationships with most of the performers on the set, but asking him to actually direct a British comedy was like asking Cook to direct an improvised film about homeless junkies in Los Angeles - not at all compatible.
Cook plays Holmes with a muted Jewish accent, Moore plays Watson with a slightly amusing Welsh accent, and the rest of the cast are left to fend for themselves.
In fact, it's worth persevering with this one just to see Terry-Thomas, Spike Milligan, Joan Greenwood, Hugh Griffith, Henry Woolf and all the other lovely old comedians and character actors who seem to pop up in cameo roles every few minutes.
With all the comic talent from the British Isles gathered into one film the Peter Cook/Dudley Moore version of The Hound Of The Baskervilles should have come out better than it was.
Far from the best of Peter and Dudley, but it wasn't all that bad.Certainly Baker Street purists will be offended, but they're always offended in the least deviation of a Sherlock Holmes story.
Peter Cook is as usual a most detached Sherlock Holmes, but not because he's constantly analyzing.
And the man needs a vacation so he goes to Paris to sow a little bit of his version of wild oats.As Holmes fans know, he does dispatch Watson out to Baskerville Hall to lay the ground work while he dons disguise.
The time apart from Watson here though introduces the comedy team of Dudley Moore and Kenneth Williams of the Carry On series.
Well let's say he's been ballyhooed quite a bit.This isn't the best work of Cook and Moore, but it's not all that bad..
I've seen a number of different film adaptations of The Hound of the Baskervilles, so I thought I might enjoy a spoof of this familiar story.
Also, I've seen some of the other work Peter Cook and Dudley Moore did together and thought they might have a chance at success with such a project.
I can't imagine how two talented individuals like Cook and Moore could have concocted such a disaster of a film.
In addition to Cook and Moore, there's a good cast assembled including Joan Greenwood, Denholm Elliot, Hugh Griffith, and the usually entertaining Terry-Thomas.
i mean come on, it had a screenplay written by Dudley Moore and the brilliant Peter Cook, who also give hilarious comic performances as Watson and Holmes.
i love it when Baskerville is insulted and he screams indignantly, "OH!HOW MEAN!".i thought the Chihauhau humour was a little too gross to watch at times, and for anyone who has seen this movie, of course those ain't Chihuahua's. |
tt0462244 | Daddy Day Camp | Four years after the events of Daddy Day Care, Charlie and Phil take their kids to Camp Driftwood, a camp they attended as kids. But once there, they discover that Camp Driftwood is no longer the kindhearted camp site of their time. To save the run down site, Charlie and Phil buy a partnership from the older man that ran it when they were children, after the other partner runs off on vacation. They turn it into Daddy Day Camp. They run into misadventures along the way when the owner, Lance Warner, in the rival camp Canola tries to tear it down. The first day of camp turns out to be a disaster involving a skunk and a bathroom explosion, which leaves them left with only 7 campers instead of the original 35 and in need of help to improve their financial situation.
The next day, the camp is raided by Camp Canola, which has been joined by the 28 campers who left Camp Driftwood, Charlie calls his military father, Colonel Buck Hinton, for help to whip the kids into shape, since they have problems following orders. After getting revenge on Lance for getting his campers to steal the Camp Driftwood flag, he then challenges Camp Driftwood to the Camp Olympian but the kids have to train for it. The kids love Buck because of his military ways and support, However, Charlie disapproves as he recounts that he doesn't want the kids to become like Buck because Charlie believes that Buck only cares about toughness and that he, Charlie, was a disappointment to him. He starts to regret his decision to call Buck when his son runs off to the woods, after some campers tease him about his father's over-protectiveness, because his grandpa Buck told him that he became 'tough' when he ran off to the woods. They find him but when Charlie complains to Phil about Buck, Buck overhears their conversation and leaves camp.
On the day of the Olympian, the others find out that Buck has left. Seeing the kids discouraged, Charlie goes to find Buck and bring him back. He finds Buck and resolves all his problems with his dad. When they return the kids report that they found out that the rival camp has cheated in the Olympiad, and have been doing so for several past years; this is especially true when it's revealed that Charlie lost to Lance when they were kids. Charlie lets Ben do the climbing course, since Ben knows how to climb, but he falls. However, Becca tells everyone that Lance greased the wall, making everyone realize that Lance cheated in every game in the Olympian. While climbing a wall, Ben uses the tree next to it with enough time left to hit the bell giving Camp Driftwood the win.
After all the times his stepfather refused to be his dad, Lance's son kicks him, causing the wall to fall over all of Lance's trophies. Camp Driftwood wins, and the parents who signed their kids to be in Camp Canola originally then ask Charlie for their kids to be in Camp Driftwood, which saves it from foreclosure. | boring | train | wikipedia | After sitting through the entirety of Daddy Day Camp, I have to wonder what was going through everyone's minds who were involved in the making.
The most likely reason was probably them thinking, "Is it really possible to make a movie this year that is worse than Evan Almighty and Delta Farce?
Let's go for it!" Fortunately, Daddy Day Camp is nowhere near as horrible as those other two films, but lord know that it does come very close.
This abomination of a movie somehow manages to feature a great actor, Cuba Gooding, Jr., in by far his worst role yet.Anyone even slightly familiar with the first film will know the deal here.
Low on money, Charlie Hinton decides to open up a camp similar to the day care service he ran in the first movie.
While the first movie wasn't anything to write home about, Daddy Day Camp is about a thousand times worse.
The first film is almost entirely disregarded and almost every role is recast (although I haven't seen the first one in quite some time so there might not be any of the original cast members returning.) When Eddie Murphy turned down the movie, they should have just dropped it and forgotten about it.
His manic energy, his great comedic timing, his general appeal
Cuba Gooding Jr. is a great actor, but this role was just altogether wrong for him.
That being said, however, he was certainly the best aspect about this utterly atrocious film.Daddy Day Camp is missing much of the magic that made the first movie watchable.
None of the scene meld together very well (some of the younger characters go from heartfelt moments, to being rude to other kids for no reason to be rude and increasingly annoying) and the writing and dialogue are as unbelievable as they come.
Since none of the younger characters follow this lesson throughout the movie or seem to have learned anything by the film's end, it all feels just so useless.
In Daddy Day Camp, just like with the first film, it is pretty much lame gag after lame gag, watching flashy boring moments thrown onto the screen in the hopes that something will stick and not come off as completely and totally immature.
In fact, I didn't even crack a smile throughout the whole movie, and I am incredibly easy to please.Another huge problem of the film was that most of the child actors were not only annoying, but their acting was so bad that I wanted to kill myself.
Movies as bad as Daddy Day Camp could at least have the common decency to provide us with a semi-likable cast of children that won't annoy us to death throughout the movie.
The people who cast this predictable shame of a movie should have learned a lesson from the talents of the kids in the feature film adaption of How to Eat Fried Worms.
And not all of the kids were completely terrible.So all in all, Daddy Day Camp was a pretty crappy movie filled with wasted talent and some of the worst child actors I've seen on screen.
Daddy Day Care was a sweet and simple movie that I enjoyed quite a bit actually, I really don't think it needed a sequel of any sorts.
As you may have seen in many of my reviews for his films, I am a huge Cuba Gooding Jr. fan and he is MUCH better than the turds like this that he is producing now a days.
It's a film of unfunny gags for toddlers, and it just has no real heart or soul to the movie other than the relationship of Cuba, his son and Cuba's father which is superbly played by Richard Gant.Performances.
This is good kid-movie!
Jokes makes me smile, but not laugh of course, i am probably too old for this humor :) But kids may like it very much.
I see A LOT of movies every day and to half of them i am not paying attention too much or just turn off after few boring minutes.
Daddy day camp i watched till the end (and with some pleasure).
But, Charlie's kid saves the day by winning.Why would Cuba Gooding be in this.
I'm going to have to say, for Oscar-winning Cuba Gooding Jr. to take a role such as this, he may have risked his entire career's great overview.
The opening movie Daddy Day Care was a found enjoyment, and a nice family movie.
A boring, fun-made family movie that just targets towards kids for their innovative crude and immature humor.
Daddy Day Camp is an humorless piece of garbage, that shouldn't be seen by anyone, at any time..
OK first off i was put off this movie by the fact that Eddie Murphy didn't want to be in it, which looking at the films he pumps out now is saying something (i have Norbit in mind) i only saw this movie as a friend had it so it didn't cost me anything, and i was sorely disappointed.I had always liked Cuba Gooding Jr. since i saw him in rat race, but this has ruined my opinion of him.I found this movie unfunny and as it develops it becomes a poor mans cheaper by the dozen 2 (which was no masterpiece itself) truly a film to avoid.
Charlie (Cuba Gooding, Jr.) and Phil (Paul Rae) have been running their successful Daddy DayCare for several years now.
Charlie's wife thinks it would be good for their now elementary ages son to go to day CAMP.
One day, I would really like to see an interview with Cuba Gooding Jr. as to why he accepted one crappy movie project after another after getting an Oscar, eventually finding himself only able to get work in direct-to-DVD projects - or movies originally intended to go direct-to-DVD, as this project was.
The movie starts off a bit like a slapstick, with humor more aimed at (very) young kids (although it didn't bother me that much; I'm still a child at heart).
The second half of the movie is just good, when the plot picks up, evolving around a rivalry between two summer camps, intertwined with "lessons" about the father-son relationship.
If you want to hire a movie for your kid between 5 and 10 years old, don't be afraid to hire this one and I assure they'll have lots of fun and really feel good afterwards..
This film does depend too heavily on various "stink" jokes, but the performances are generally strong.The father-son relationship is well portrayed, especially by Cuba's father (Richard Gant).
Munro) is a good, bad-guy.Paul Rae, who plays Cuba's sidekick is impressive.
Rae gives a subtle performance that goes far beyond the usual fat-guy role.Fred Savage does a good job with the kids.
I thought it was a good idea not to have Cuba Gooding Jr act like Eddie.
Cuba Gooding, Jr., is not as wildly off the wall as Eddie Murphy, nor as funny.
How else can an actor go from an Oscar-winning performance in "Jerry McGuire" to making crap like "Daddy Day Camp" in a decade?
Of course, occasionally they are just horrible...period.The film begins with a Black actor and a White actor (just like in "Daddy Day Care"--just with different actors).
They are trying to find the perfect summer day camp experience for their kids.
They hit upon the lame idea of re-opening the camp that they'd gone to as kids--as it's bankrupt and COULD be run successfully if they use their "Daddy Day Care" method they used in the last film.As for the camp, the kids and their parents are all kooky characters (or is it 'caricatures'?.
But, given that this is a Hollywood film, you can safely assume that against all odds, everything will magically work out by the end of the movie.
Daddy Day Care was flawed, but actually pretty watchable.
Daddy Day Camp however is a poor film.
The acting is nothing special, Cuba Gooding Jnr tries hard to make something out of his character and replacing Eddie Murphy, but instead comes across as bland and annoying.
Same with Paul Rae, and how Richard Grant got dragged into this I shall never know.Overall, a poor comedy and family film with little to offer, old or new.
I was right, the movie was boring and not much funny at all, the first thing was that Eddie Murphy was missing, he did an great job in the first part and gave a lot to the humorous part of the movie.
I'm fairly certain that in a few years, when people start seriously looking back on the Greatest Films of the 2000s (I call them the "aughts"), Daddy Day Camp will be at the top of most peoples' lists.This film stars Cuba Gooding, Jr., who never really impressed me in his earlier roles in Boyz n the Hood and Jerry Maguire.
I think Savage should have been put in charge of directing the original Daddy Day Care movie; he might have saved it from flopping so horribly!
It's a sequel to a movie starring Eddie Murphy called "Daddy Day Care" which I heard was bad to begin with and I'm not even going to waste my time with that movie.
Great movie Cuba Gooding nailed it!.
First time posting a review, i just had to because i got sick and tired of everyone saying this is a bad movie, they have no since of humor.
Even though Eddie who is my all time favourite actor didn't star in this movie, i kind of like it more then Daddy day care even Big up for this review!.
The first film, despite not being a marvel of the seventh art, still managed to convince the viewer and make him spend a very entertaining time with a story that incited simple humor on the part of the youth under ten years.
But in view of the success of the first, the producer decides to win money to the beast making a sequel very dispensable of this already saga.The second is about Cuba Gooding trying to keep afloat a camp he went to when he was young.
But it turns out that next to it there is a new camp the director of who was old opponent of Cuba (Lochlyn Munro), whose children soon become opponents.
Daddy Day Camp is just simple family friendly entertainment.
Cuba Gooding Jr. actually did pretty well despite what some critics might say about his performance.
Cuba's dad in this movie was my favorite part of the whole film, that was a really good character, and he had some good scenes.
The story had some potential mind you - the guys from "Daddy Day Care" branching out into running a day camp - but it was poorly put together, had absolutely no flow (especially for the first half hour or so) and featured a type of humour that might be best described as juvenile (except that might be insulting to juveniles, so let's call it pre-juvenile) with jokes that revolved largely around burping and farting and various and sundry other bodily functions.
I knew this would be slagged pretty hard because of virtually all the main characters from "Daddy Day Care" being recast, but - not having seen the original - I'm in a position to look at Cuba Gooding Jr.'s performance without the face of Eddie Murphy looking over my shoulder.
In all fairness, Gooding wasn't bad as Charlie Hinton - he just got suckered into starring in a really bad movie.
Having said all that, this movie doesn't really deserve to be ranked in the worst 100 films OF ALL TIME.
There are a lot of movies worse than this (one scene actually made me smile, and I've sat through a lot of "comedies" that didn't even get that much response.) So, it's not one of the worst 100, but it is pretty bad.
I mean let's face it: like most sequels, Daddy Day Camp is not better than the first but still enjoyable.
Of the actors, Cuba Gooding Jr. and the the other camp monitors (which I forget their names) were excellent.
Some of the kids like Cuba's son in the movie could easily start a career, while some others (which I will not name) should be sent down to the Razzies.
Besides Cuba's son, Billy the bully is within the good actors, and Grandpa Buck is hilarious.The emplacements were beautiful, and I just wish for people like major critics to stop saying negative stuff on this movie, because it's a lot better than what you're expected to watch..
this movie isn't near as bad as most of the reviewers on here claim it to be,, I don't honestly know what their expectations were, but they must have been pretty darn high,, they must have been expecting it to be as good as the first one,,, wrong,, course it's inferior to the first one I figured it would be.
Cuba Gooding Jr. however will have you rolling on the floor with laughter,, which is exactly what I was looking for when I bought this movie,, lot's of mayhem and practical jokes about in this movie.
I am shocked this sequel to "Daddy Day Care" was given to Cuba Gooding Jr. Besides the latest Land Before Time sequel, what else has he done?
I sure he and Cuba would work out fine together.The cheesy sequel revolves around a camp that is about to be destroyed, which sounds like "Ernest Goes to Camp" in my opinion.
I don't need to go into details because it has been done one-hundred times before with a better cast and acting.This movie is deserving of its Razzie Award.
Send Fred Savage to Movie-making Day Camp.
Directing his first feature film after years of work in television, he allows Cuba Gooding, Jr. to shamelessly mug the camera as if his eyebrows needed exercise.
The big bully kid (there has to be one, of course) who looks to be about twelve going on thirteen, turns out to have a bed wetting problem (note the originality of this plot twist).
The problem is that even though others are on screen at the same time, Gant is always working alone.Not even the moral of the story - and this being a "family film" there must be a moral - provides any redemption for this movie.
This time however the studio and the director could get no one from the original movie to come back.
I think the preview was funny when it said "from the studio that brought you Daddy Day Care", like the studio ever really matters.
The only highlight of this film is the man who plays Cuba Gooding's father.
Daddy Day Camp.
Basically the story continues where the last film left off, where Charlie Hinton (Razzie nominated Cuba Gooding Jr., replacing Eddie Murphy) and his partner Phil Ryerson (Paul Rae) have made Daddy Day Care a big success.
They start very badly having to clear up the mess left behind, and when some kids do come to the camp hoping for a good time, they lose about half their customers.
After a few cheats by Camp Catona, the good guys do catch up, and eventually it is revealed the rivals were cheating, and the right people do win, and many parents are glad to be signing up to Camp Driftwood for their kids.
I agree with the critics that it is horrible to see a once Oscar winning actor wasting his time with stupid films like this, it is not funny, it is predictable, it is irritating, and I don't think anyone older than three years old will like it, a really awful family comedy.
The entire premise for the story falls apart when you realise the main character could have just called the police on the other camp and solved all his problems, but no, Hollywood has to fill its quota of films teaching manly self-reliance as a religious absolute, and that the little guy can always stick it to the man if he believes (despite the mountains of evidence that this approach fails 99.9% of the time).
Above all, why is it 'the man' keeps promoting this message via terrible children's films?Aside from the crippling problems with the overall story, this so called comedy only ever attempts jokes on a par with The Garbage Pail Kids Movie.
It also teaches a lesson about cheating.Cuba Gooding is one actor I sort of feel sorry for.
He does fine here as the co-owner of Daddy Day Care.Lochlyn Munro plays Gooding's childhood enemy and the owner of a rival camp.
Granted there were moments that the acting could have been better, but overall I thought this was a good solid movie for kids.
Well, this movie is suffering the same problem Son of the Mask has: no Eddie Murphy!!
The plot has made positively no sense by any means and all the characters look absolutely nothing like the originals from Daddy Day Care.
i think it is intended to prove to the viewers that they will make things happen against all odds (& incompetent employees)...boringly predictable too is the attempts by cuba to restore the camp to working order & the mishaps that follow on subsequent visits by kids...for guys who have been running a successful daycare for several years, they are pretty clueless about how to entertain the children as well as how to make profits...also when the competition camp goes on a rampage, more than once, why was the police not informed?
this movie gives me the desire to end my own life.The first one wasn't bad, but a sequel, Fred savage should be ashamed of himself and personally pay all of us who have seen it back.
how old is it, it says it wants to watch nudie movies at home, overall big waste of time, its 90 minutes you're better off watching be kind rewind |
tt0068675 | Hannie Caulder | Hannie Caulder (Raquel Welch) is a frontier wife, living with her husband at a horse station between towns in the American West. After a disastrous bank raid, the inept Clemens brothers gang arrive at the station. They murder Caulder's husband, gang-rape her, burn down her house and leave her for dead. The brothers go on a crime spree, while Caulder recruits bounty hunter Thomas Price (Robert Culp) to help her get revenge by training her to be a gunfighter. The pair travel to Mexico to have gunsmith Bailey (Christopher Lee) build her a specialized revolver, to be a fast draw specialist. When bandidos surround the house, a gun battle erupts but Hannie is unable to kill a man face to face. Price recommends she give up her quest for revenge but she refuses, telling him to get out and that she was only using him and doesn't need him any more. He leaves, telling her she's a bad liar.
As he goes, Price sees the Clemens brothers arrive in town. His attempt to take down Frank goes awry, because Emmet throws a knife into Price's belly, mortally wounding him. Hannie goes after them, killing Frank (Jack Elam) in a whorehouse. The two brothers swear revenge on her but she gets Rufus (Strother Martin) in a store when he tries to kill her. Hannie lures Emmett (Ernest Borgnine) to an old prison for a showdown and almost meets the same fate as Price but Emmett's attempt to throw a knife into her back is thwarted by the Preacher, who shoots it from his hand. Hannie kills Emmett face to face but realizes that Price was right: taking revenge will change her forever. | revenge, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | This offbeat Western could have been another standard revenge flick, but the vivid portrayals from the stars inject lots of spice and no small amount of humor into the proceedings.Raquel Welch portrays "Hannie", and Robert Culp craftily plays "Luther Price", ace bounty hunter, mankiller, and Hannie's mentor.The real stars of this piece are Strother Martin, Jack Elam and Ernest Borgnine.
Another priceless moment is when he presides at a brother's funeral, using a stolen Bible that he cannot even read.Look for Christopher Lee's subtle and well-crafted performance as a former Confederate gunmaker.Not your usual Western, this film is well worth watching despite its flaws.Rated 7.7/10..
After being violently raped, widowed and left for dead by three dirty, cackling brothers, Raquel Welch learns to shoot a gun from hot-headed bounty hunter Robert Culp and hopes to seek her revenge on the mangy trio.
Yes, there are campy moments, but overall this is an interesting movie, especially for the early 70s when the western genre was going into a long hibernation.The worst or campiest elements are the "feminist/sexploitation" aspects...on one hand "Hannie Caulder" wants us to take this story about a woman in the Old West seriously (Hannie is raped, and takes revenge into her own hands) and on the other, it wants to show us Raquel Welch, very sexy and Playboy foldout-ish in a short poncho and nothing else.
Not only that, but it actually plays its nasty bad guys for laughs much of the time, and Ernest Borgnine (as Emmett), Jack Elam (as Frank), and Strother Martin (as Rufus) are priceless as they spend much of their time bickering with each other; Martin is particularly funny.This thing gets off to one Hell of a great start by coming up with a unique way to view a bank robbery: through the barrels of a shotgun!
Hannie Coulder (Raquel Welch) is living along with her hubby when three nasty brothers (Ernest Borgnine , Jack Elam , Strother Martin) kill her husband and she is raped .
Then proceeds to cast the beautiful Raquel Welch (and her tanned, well toned thighs) in a role that in Italy would have been exclusive to the likes of Franco Nero, Anthony Steffen or Maurizio Merli.Three bank robbers on the run from the Mexican Federales stop in a horse station, kill the owner, rape the wife, burn the place down and leave her to die.
By the end of the movie Hannie Caulder has transformed to a gutsy, smart and wisecracking antiheroine and in no uncertain terms has embodied the "angel of death" aspect of the black-clad antiheroes of the spaghetti western - which is also evident in the final fight that takes place in the middle of a sandstorm.A major asset of the film is the cast.
Apart from the ravishing miss Welch, Christopher Lee appears in a brief role as the gunmaker (and it's funny to hear his British accent so far removed from the foggy sets of Hammer studios), Ernest Borgnine yells his way through the film (annoyingly so) as the leader of the three bank robbers and Jack Elam and Strother Martin steal every scene as the other two brothers of this formidable trio..
I first saw this film on TV in early August,1977,and laughed all the way through it.This trio of pathologically stupid villains is first rate,and they obviously had a lot of fun doing their parts.If you can imagine the Three Stooges as homicidal maniacs,you've got a good idea of what to expect.Perhaps it was best to play them that way.If you recall times when these three guys played villains in a realistic fashion,to do otherwise than they did in "Hannie Caulder"would have been much too gross and brutal.Yet,with increasing time and sensitivity,my outlook has changed.Rape and murder are NOT funny.Ask anyone who has been sexually or physically abused,and you'll get the answer.Welch looks good(when has she not?),and as usual does the minimal amount of acting.Culp's portrayal is interesting,being more world-weary,and cynically good-natured than the bloodthirsty,or quietly vindicative characters we've seen in other films(i.e.Nevada Smith).Lee is quite amiable and enjoyable,but I didn't think that he was quite realistic,given the physical location.(He would have been more believable in a British colony or Europe.)So,watch this film,enjoy the antics of the Clemmons Brothers,but remember that rape is an act of power over another human being..
The relationship between Hannie Caulder (Raquel Welch) and Thomas Luther Price (Robert Culp) matures over time and is the really interesting part of this film.
Raquel Welch plays Hannie Caulder, a gorgeous cowgirl who is raped and left widowed by three scuzzy brothers played by Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin and Jack Elam.
Hell bent on revenge, Hannie hooks up with smooth bounty hunter Thomas Luther Price (Robert Culp excellent), learns how to fire weapons and pursues her quarry to the day of reckoning.That is it, it is what it is, Welch is stunningly beautiful and sexy and director Burt Kennedy wastes no opportunities to capitalise on this fact.
Hannie Caulder (Raquel Welch) survives a brutal rape by three brothers who take lowlife scoundrels to a new level After her husband is murdered and she is raped, she goes after them and knows little about gun fighting until she meets a bounty hunter played by Robert Culp who shows her the ropes.
An aside issue is the the three lowlife brothers are well played by Ernest Borgnine, Jack Elam, and Strother Martin who do a good job of channeling The Three Stooges and steal every scene they are in.
After she is raped and her husband murdered, a woman (Raquel Welch) hires a bounty hunter to instruct her in the use of a gun so she can get her revenge on the three outlaws (Ernest Borgnine and two guys) responsible.Quentin Tarantino said the film was one of his inspirations for Kill Bill.
I actually think there's a bit of similarity between Sonny Chiba and Uma (in Kill Bill) and Raquel Welch and Robert Culp in Hannie Caulder." You can totally see it during the training montage, which smacks of kung fu movies more than westerns.And Christopher Lee is in this?
That said, the film is fashionably bloody and amoral (its trio of caricature villains – unconventionally played in broadly comic terms by Western stalwarts Ernest Borgnine, Jack Elam and Strother Martin shoot, pillage and rape their way through the proceedings with abandon and evident glee).
The rest of the cast is made up of: Robert Culp as a conscientious bounty hunter (he always gives back a fraction of the reward money to pay for the victims' funeral expenses!) who befriends the heroine and molds her – against his better judgment – into an avenging angel; a dignified Christopher Lee as a gunsmith with a Mexican wife and a brood of kids in tow (always relishing non-horror parts, this proved his only foray into the Western); Diana Dors barely registering as a brothel madam; and, uncredited, Stephen Boyd intriguingly shrouded in mystery (the finale would suggest that a sequel may have been intended where he would have taken over from Culp as Caulder's mentor, but perhaps the film was not the expected runaway success and the idea was scrapped).Director Kennedy, another genre staple, handles the narrative with customary competence – displaying an eye for wide open spaces (aided in no small measure by a stirring Ken Thorne score) but also a few welcome stylistic flourishes (notably the violation of Welch's character in which the lusty brothers seem to blend into one another as they take turns assaulting her and Borgnine's slo-mo knife throw at Culp's expense)..
Very unusual Western Film for the Year 1971, I was surprised to see Raquel Welch,(Hannie Caulder) "Legally Blonde" '01 being raped by three(3) men, one being Ernest Borgnine(Emmett Clemens) "Marty"'55 and the director having close-up shots of Hannie Caulder's butt in very tight jeans, along with a Sheriff patting her on the butt, it is a wonder Hannie did not shoot the sheriff dead on the spot!!
Despite this spaghetti western have american leading actors,it was an english good production.apart Christopher Lee totally miscasting,all others actors had a fantastic acting,probable the Robert Culp's finest hour,the power trio of badmen Jack Elam, Strother Martin and Borgnine are the three Stooges of west,the most dirty and stinky gang of all time,the gorgeous Welch was in fullness of your career and was hot than never,completely naked covered with a little red poncho showing just a little enough to us....a different kind and the first female leading role since Johnny Guitar!!!Resume:First watch: 1998 / How many: 2 / Source: Cable TV-DVD / Rating: 7.25.
A tasty dish at that in the form of Raquel Welch in the title role of Hannie Caulder.Three fleeing Clemons brothers having just robbed a bank stop at a ranch to water and maybe steal some fresh horses.
As Steve McQueen had a mentor in gunsmith Brian Keith she gets a good one in bounty hunter Robert Culp.Her quarry as the notorious and probably inbred Clemons brothers are Ernest Borgnine, Jack Elam and Strother Martin.
You could also compare them to the Clegg family of outlaws in the John Ford classic Wagonmaster.Raquel Welch and Robert Culp make a fine pair of heroes, if they're not clean cut like Roy Rogers and Dale Evans they sure do look tall in the saddle.By 1971 rape and other sexual issues could and were discussed in westerns.
Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin, and Jack Elam, play outlaw bumbling brothers in "Hannie Caulder".
After killing her husband and brutalizing her, Raquel Welch seeks revenge, with the aid of a bounty hunter, Robert Culp.
Lee Van Cleef's slapping around the whore in "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly", is duplicated by Ernest Borgnine in the rape scene with Raquel Welch.
"Hannie Caulder" is a British picture that was filmed in Spain, though set in the American Southwest and Mexico; does its best to emulate an Italian spaghetti Western; and has as its star a woman of mixed Bolivian/Irish descent.
(I will give your mind a moment to absorb this international stew while I fondly reminisce on the jolting impact that Raquel Welch had on the puberties of millions of us baby boomer boys, by dint of her appearances in such mid-'60s films as "One Million Years B.C." and "Fathom.") In the '71 picture, Raquel (as the end credits inform us) IS Hannie Caulder, the wife of a rancher, whose life takes an abrupt turn for the worse when the bumbling Clemens Brothers--Emmett, Frank and Rufus (played, respectively, by Ernest Borgnine, Jack Elam and Strother Martin)--fleeing from a botched holdup, kill her man, gang rape her, burn down her home and leave her for dead.
Wanting revenge, Hannie Caulder comes across a bounty hunter who she constantly begs to help her and after some time he decides to teach her how to be a gunfighter so she can gun down those responsible.This British shot at a copy-and-paste spaghetti westerner mainly sets itself out from the pack, because its protagonist is a gun-touting woman hell-bent on blood shed, while sporting nothing much but a skimpy poncho and being strapped up in some tight pants.
"Hannie Caulder" is an engaging and rather solid western drama that delivers gritty and spirited action spurts where the red stuff runs freely, fruitful characters (well, mainly the three vulgar brothers), a melodramatic script plays it tough with it's highly witty and quite cheeky humour and how can you go pass a small, but neat role by the iconic Christopher Lee playing a gun-maker.While, the main story is about Raquel Welch's character building up a steady rapport with Robert Culp's gunslinger and then putting her training to good use.
Great supporting cast: Robert Culp, Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin, Jack Elam, Stephen Boyd, and Christopher Lee. One of those rare movies like Casablanca or The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance that you can watch once a year, and every time it is like watching it the first time..
Every time Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin and Jack Elam appear, even in an opening bank- robbery gone bad that comes off more like a Sam Peckinpah parody, their squabbling feels as if the only thing missing is a "nyuk nyuk nyuk."Also, while I understand Raquel Welch is an incredibly beautiful woman, willing to wear next to nothing for a good third of the movie -- but that poncho that she has on in all the publicity shots?
But Raquel Welch can just barely bring the protagonist to life, and while it's always a hoot seeing dudes like Ernest Borgnine and Jack Elam and Strother Martin playing bad asses (not badasses, they're bag guys here), they're thinly written cartoon characters with one characteristic each, if that.
Inane script does have better moments, like those wise words "Win or lose, you lose, Hannie Caulder" but plot is erratic shambles.Should have taken Raquel on an acting course before the movie.
She also elicits sympathy and you cheer for her when her revenge is complete, although it's tempered with sadness because the new man she loves (Culp) is dead and with her only in spirit.Burt Kennedy filled this movie with tons of humor, courtesy of the Terrible Trio: Strother Martin, Ernie Borgnine and Jack Elam.
As strange as this sounds, no account good for nothing,Strother Martin is a riot!Chris Lee does a nifty character turn as a gunsmith, but it's Culp's cool professionalism along with Welch that drives this solid, entertaining Spaghetti-patterned western, which was produced by her then-husband Pat Curtis and England' Tony Tensor of horror factory, Tigon Films.My friend Cindy and I saw it at the drive-in three times the week it came out..
Ernest Borgnine, Jack Elam, and Strother Martin are the villains and Robert Culp is Hannie's reluctant savior/mentor.
She meets a bounty hunter named Thomas Luther Price; the two become lovers and Price agrees to teach her how to shoot like a professional gunfighter.Like a number of earlier Westerns- "The Naked Spur" is an example which comes to mind- "Hannie Caulder" is essentially an examination of the ethics of revenge.
Hannie Caulder is set in the American Wild West where three scumbag brother's Emmtt (Ernest Borgnine), Frank (Jack Elam) & Rusfus Clemens (Strother Martin) rob a bank & in the process kill a few people, they ride off chased by local soldiers.
Eventually they find themselves at a ranch owned by Jim Caulder whom Rufus brutally kills, inside the house the three brother's find Jim's wife Hannie (Raquel Welch) & they take it in turns to beat & rape her before setting the house on fire & riding off into the distance.
Hannie is left for dead but survives & by chance a bounty hunter named Thomas Luther Price (Robert Price) finds her, Hannie convinces him to show her how to shoot properly in an attempt to hunt down the Clemens brother's & take revenge by killing them...This English production was directed by Burt Kennedy & was produced in part by Tigon films who were responsible for a slew of Anglo horror films such as Curse of the Crimsn Altar (1968), The Blood Beast Terror (1968), The Haunted House of Horror (1969), The Beast in the Cellar (1970), Blood on Satan's Claw (1971), Doomwatch (1972) & Virgin Witch (1972) so this cross between an exploitation flick & a spaghetti Western on the surface seemed like a strange choice of film for Tigon to make.
The acting is pretty good by a strong cast including Diana Dors & an unusual role for Christopher Lee, Welch looks nice enough but isn't much of an actress so maybe it's a good thing she doesn't have to say a lot.Hannie Caulder is a neat rape/revenge Western that has some oddball comedy moments in it as well, it's a mixture that doesn't always work perfectly but it's entertaining all the same & definitely worth a watch preferably in it's original widescreen ratio if at all possible.
Hannie Caulder is a 1971 Western movie starring Raquel Welch Ernest Borgnine, and Robert Culp.SUMMARY: The movie opens with Clemens Brothers riding into a Mexican Town and riding up to the bank.
HANNIE CAULDER is a better film than anticipated.Raquel Welch burst upon the movie scene as a sexy bombshell, a woman known for her looks only.
But her acting abilities helped her get better roles and more leads such as this one.The film opens in the old west with Welch as the title character, forced to watch her husband killed by a group of men and raped by all three.
Director Burt Kennedy takes the high road in not giving us more details than we need.HANNIE CAULDER doesn't add much new to either the western or rape/revenge genres but it does tell the tale in a well-crafted manner.
But HANNIE CAULDER is not your typical gunfighter out for vengeance movie, for the gunfighter is a woman and she's played by Raquel Welch, the most beautiful woman of the era.As in all good westerns, the plot of HANNIE CAULDER is basic and simple: the title woman is brutally raped by the three Clemens brothers in the opening scenes after they have murdered her husband.
Raquel Welch was never considered to be a great actress, but I think this is a great performance, especially in her scenes with Robert Culp as Price, we totally understand why this wary bounty hunter would succumb to her ample charms.A great supporting cast, starting with the villains, played by three of the toughest amigos of the day: Ernest Borgnine, Strother Martin, and Jack Elam, expert scenery chewers all of them.
Spoilers Raquel Welsh stars as Hannie Caulder the woman who watches a band of outlaws (the Clemens family, led by Emmett - Ernest Borgnine) kill her husband, rape her and leave her for dead.
Lovely Raquel Welch is the wife of a stagecoach swing station owner, and the verminous Clemens Brothers: Emmett (Ernest Borgnine), Frank (Jack Elam), Rufus (Strother Martin) gun down her stationmaster husband early in the action. |
tt0371823 | Mickey, Donald, Goofy: The Three Musketeers | The story begins with Troubadour, a French speaking turtle who loves songs, backstage of a show trying to remind the narrator that he promised to use one of Troubadour's songs. The narrator ignores the turtle and accidentally falls through a trapdoor just as the show is about to begin. Consequently, Troubadour is ushered to tell the audience the story at the very last minute. Panicking, Troubadour quickly picks up The Three Musketeers and begins reading.
Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy, and Mickey's dog Pluto are street urchins, who, while being robbed by masked bandits (played by the Beagle Boys) are saved by the Royal Musketeers, Athos, Aramis, Porthos and D'Artagnan. Mickey is gifted one of their hats, inspiring them to follow their example and become musketeers; however, in the present day, Mickey, Donald and Goofy are lowly janitors for the musketeers' headquarters. Unfortunately, they are very clumsy and constantly cause messes. After an incident disturbs the captain of the musketeers, portrayed by Pete, he tells the trio that they cannot become musketeers because Donald is a "coward", Goofy a "doofus" and Mickey "just too small", leaving the three downhearted.
Meanwhile, Minnie Mouse, princess of France, and her lady-in-waiting, Daisy Duck, are in a palace discussing Minnie's obsession with finding her "one true love". Daisy says that she must marry someone who is of royal blood, and Minnie insists that she cannot marry someone she does not love. Minnie says she will know "the one" when he makes her laugh. Minnie then takes a walk in the palace garden and barely survives an attempt on her life as the Beagle Boys attempt to drop a safe on her.
The Beagles run to tell their boss, revealed to be Captain Pete, that they were not successful in dropping the safe on Minnie. In response, Pete clobbers them, saying he wanted her "kept 'safe'" until he can take over the kingdom. Pete is summoned by princess Minnie, who demands he produce musketeer bodyguards. Realizing that skilled musketeers will jeopardize his plan to overthrow the princess, Pete quickly goes to the janitor room, and tells Mickey, Donald and Goofy that they passed his test and have what it takes to become musketeers. After meeting each other, Minnie falls in love with Mickey.
While Minnie and Daisy, protected by Mickey, Donald, and Goofy, go on a journey, they are ambushed by the Beagle Boys. Donald hides and is eventually thrown off the carriage, and Goofy is easily defeated, leaving Mickey to fight the intruders. Mickey is also defeated, leaving the three heroes stranded. Mickey encourages his friends not to lose hope and they rush to rescue Minnie and Daisy. Mickey, Donald and Goofy manage to save Minnie and Daisy in a tower where the Beagles are keeping them. Afterwards, Mickey manages to make Minnie laugh and the two mice fall in love and spend time alone with each other.
Pete is furious that the Beagle Boys failed in their task and realizes that the three protagonists are more of a threat than he originally anticipated. He then plans to get rid of them one by one. While on night duty, Goofy is lured away from the palace by Clarabelle and subdued. The Beagle Boys attack Donald, scaring him into hiding, before Pete traps him and puts Donald to the guillotine. Donald escapes his execution at the last second, causing Pete to lose his peg leg as he dove under the guillotine's blade to stop him. Donald returns to the castle and tells the whole story to Mickey (who doesn't understand him at first) before running off in fear, leaving Mickey by himself. Mickey is then captured by Pete, who chains him up in a dungeon in Mont Saint-Michel that will flood when the tide comes in. Goofy is meanwhile chained by Clarabelle and is about to be thrown off a bridge over a river to drown, but Goofy falls in love with Clarabelle and wins her heart with his "numbskull charm". As Clarabelle reveals Pete's true intentions, the bridge crumbles and Goofy and Clarabelle fall to the river below. Donald, who is rowing across the river to escape France, breaks their fall. Goofy fails to convince Donald to help him save Mickey, but thanks to an insulting song from Troubadour, the duo save Mickey and the trio eventually escape and reconcile with each other and set off to rescue Daisy and Princess Minnie.
Minnie and Daisy are captured in a theater and locked in a chest by the Beagle Boys who then impersonate them, announcing to the public that control is now being handed over to "King Pete the Magnificent". Mickey, Donald and Goofy arrive and battle Pete and the Beagle Boys onstage, finally defeating them and saving Daisy and the Princess. Mickey and Minnie finally declare their love for one another, as do the others. At the end, Princess Minnie dubs Mickey, Donald and Goofy royal musketeers. | action | train | wikipedia | I was visiting my grandkids last week and after a long day of activities, and a family supper, my daughter asked me if I wanted to go down to the T.V. room and watch a movie with the kids.At that moment it sounded like the worst idea I had heard in a long time.
So, imagine my surprise when they said they wanted to watch their Mickey Mouse movie.I've been around a long time and I can remember seeing Mickey shorts at the theater when I was a boy, and I had no idea that the kids today even knew who the little mouse was.
In addition, I hadn't heard about any Mickey Mouse movies in a very long time, so I was intrigued to see what this movie that the kids all wanted to see was all about.And let me tell you I sat down on the couch with my grandkids all around me and we all laughed at Mickey, Donald, and Goofy, as they barreled through their own wacky version of the Three Musketeers tale.
We all like the fun music, with the very funny words.I wondered if this had been some old movie that got lost in the Disney vaults, it was that good, and had such a timeless feel.If you want to see a nice little family film that everyone in the house can have some fun with, I recommend this new Mickey Mouse movie to you and yours with full enthusiasm.I'm Tex Nickle and I'm telling you that "Mickey is still Kickin'".
I liked the songs also, with some very funny lyrics(and random in some of them)set to the works of classical composers like Beethoven and Grieg.The story, while not very faithful to the classic tale, is very nice, and goes at a fast pace.
Good things about this film: Very good humour, at least one laugh every few minutes, good use of classical music for songs, good animation, sweet simple images of Versailles, good talent and a good job of Mickey and his friends!
Then they meet the royal musketeers...Good for any Mickey Mouse fan and any lover of classical music used by Disney, people who like good quality humour (both slightly slapstick and humour) and cartoon things which are CGI free!Enjoy "Mickey, Donald, Goofy: The Three Musketeers!
Cute little Disney film with Mickey, Donald and Goofy as The Three Musketeers, or is that supposed to be Mouseketeers?
The plotline is about how Peg-leg Pete is trying to kidnap Princess Minnie and claim the throne for himself, with the help of the Beagle Boys, who, as I have said, steal the film.
Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and Goofy have been appearing together in animated skits for the better part of eighty years and have gone through a number of hilarious, and sometimes touching misadventures.
I wanted more laughs, more heart, more of that wonderful sensation that great animation can give us.In the movie, the three mishaps stumble through predicament after predicament not as window-washers, not as locksmiths, not as painters, but as Alexandre Dumas's Three Musketeers.
To the movie's credit, it makes the appropriate choice of meshing the novel's 18th century setting with contemporary elements: the palace Mickey, Donald, and Goofy tend to is equipped with running water; a trio of hooded villains unsuccessfully attempt to assassinate Princess Minnie Mouse with an iron safe; Donald Duck tears off his uniform to reveal his traditional sailor attire.
The one I liked the most was "Wings of Love," set to the Johann Strauss masterpiece "Blue Dunabe." I even got a chuckle out of a berating song toward Donald with Beethoven's Fifth thumping in the background.
And I did enjoy most of the movie's beginning, with our heroes dreaming about becoming musketeers.The second half of the movie, however, completely thuds, especially in its limp finale at an opera where the Musketeers battle with Peg-Leg Pete and the hooded figures whom I believe were modeled after the Beagle Boys from "Duck Tales." The twists and turns just do not play out well.
Why, if Mickey, Donald, and Goofy are given a feature-length movie, does it have to be so brisk?
This version of "The Three Musketeers" is not bad per se, but I really wanted something special when Mickey, Donald, and Goofy made their big-time debut together..
The characters are put together really well for the story, especially Mickey and Minnie (gee, they make a cute couple, don't you think?), though I wasn't too thrilled about the turtle with french accent, but, oh well.
As usual, Disney has the characterization right-on -- Mickey's the straight, normal guy, Goofy's the clumsy goofball who surprisingly has brief moments of genius, and Donald's the loudmouth with a bad temper.
However, as one reviewer said, the turtle guy at the beginning is a little boring, but the rest of the movie more than makes up for it.All in all, this story of three underdogs really is worth viewing.
It is excellent for kids and adults will actually be able to giggle at some parts and enjoy it, especially since it is reminiscent of old Disney cartoons.
The classic Disney characters are back in their first "full-length" film!
The roles fit Mickey, Donald, and Goofy perfectly -- it's surprising Disney didn't do this story a long time ago.
All the classic Disney characters are part of the cast, with one new supporting character, a tortoise who narrates the story (I like him too, he reminds me a bit of the tortoise in Disney's animated Robin Hood).
Mickey,Donald and Goofy star in this cute musical as three janitors who dream of becoming musketeers because three of them saved them when they were young.When Pete is trying to steal Queen Minnie's thrown,he is hoping that his henchmen are doing a good job in kidnapping Minnie but when one fail attempt to "kidnap" Minnie(they thought they had to kill her)got in the way,Minnie wants musketeer bodyguards and Pete knows he's screwed but an idea comes to his head and he hires Mickey,Donald and,Goofy to become musketeers and protect her.But when Minnie was in a time of need when the henchmen kidnap her Donald hides only leaving Goofy and Mickey behind.Mickey and Goofy succeed but Minnie isn't safe for long....This a good tale on how Mickey's,Donald's and Goofy's dream come true as they go on wacky adventures and do hilarious stuff that can get them into trouble.The songs in it are good for an animated movie and the plot is perfect and goes at a good Pace.No matter what Mickey,Donald and Goofy do their friendship is never broken and they stick together in attempts to stop Pete in becoming king of France and its never too late to see this movie.This a good movie that could make your kids who are fans of Mickey Mouse to be quiet for at least an hour and a few minutes but you watch it too its great!.
Mickey,Donald and Goofy are back in this all new direct to video movie that is sure to become an instant classic.
If you liked the cartoon shorts of these threesomes from the 40s and 50s, You will sure to be delighted by this charming and fun feature film.
Overlong Disney cheapquel made for DVD and based on the Dumas tale, The Three Musketeers.Mickey, Donald and Goofy are the Musketeers wannabees in a film where there is spirited use of music but little else.The movie opens with a narrating turtle where our three aspiring heroes plus Pluto are street urchins robbed by masked bandits and saved by the Royal Musketeers who they now want to emulate.They work as janitors in the palace, dreaming of becoming musketeers but each have flaws.
Donald is cowardly, Goofy is goofy and Mickey is too small.Minnie Mouse is the Princess of France but Captain Pete has plans to take over the kingdom and our hapless trio spring into action.There is very little spark or wit in the film.
The way I knew about this little Mickey Mouse short-like film is that when I bought the DVD of another direct-to-video sequel, "The Lion King 1 1/2" which is this one's rival, if you will, at the Annies (LK 1.5 won, but I would choose this movie), there was a short trailer for this before you had access to the DVD menu.So, I loved this movie in many ways.
This is an hour-long little movie with Mickey and his gang that tells the famous story that the title suggests, taking place in 19th Century France where it is narrated by a tortoise troubadour who plays the lute and sings songs.
When we hear music in the film, it is set to classical melodies like those heard in the projects I mentioned earlier, with original lyrics.
One song in particular I would like to talk about is a major highlight of this cartoon titled "Sweet Wings Of Love", set to the tune of the "Blue Danube Waltz" by Johann Strauss.
Other examples of melodies we hear are "Habanera" from "Carmen", "Orpheus in the Underworld Overture" and the French "Can-can".Another reason I really liked this little concert-type film is that it was released in August of 2004.
Also, I'm not fond of theme parks, and sometimes I like to imagine myself at a Classical concert while I watch this forgotten movie that no Disney fans talk about anymore (I'm a fan of some of Disney's projects, though, and this one's definitely not the only one).
Taking new vacations that summer not only helped in expanding my horizon, it also helped me improve my in-class behavior in school, and I also got better at handling loud noises with PA Speakers, because at Disney Amusement Parks that's what they're about.While I never saw this as a kid, I do like to look back on memories of how I've been a Classical music fan all my life, which I still am to this day..
But as a child, I did not rejoice in anything as much as I rejoiced Mickey and company.Mickey, Donald and Goofy, as three musketeers, are saving princess, followed by original lyrics written on the famous compositions of legends of classical music.
Walt Disney's classic cartoon characters are back for a feature-length adventure.
This hour-long direct-to-video 'toon features longtime Disney favorites Mickey Mouse, Minnie Mouse, Donald Duck, Daisy Duck, Goofy, and Pluto, as well as Peg-Leg Pete and even Clarabelle Cow. These characters all started way back in the 1920s and 1930s, and it's nice to see them dusted off and brought to life on-screen these days, and not merely used to adorn merchandise.THE THREE MUSKETEERS (2004) is not, as one might expect, an adaptation of Alexandre Dumas's classic story (previously adapted by Disney in live-action in 1993), but is an original adventure that uses Dumas as a jumping-off point.
(Mickey, Donald, and Goofy aspire to be musketeers after a childhood encounter with the Dumas heroes.) Set once upon a time in seventeenth-century France, the movie's got Mickey, Donald, and Goofy as misfit musketeers trying to protect Princess Minnie while the duplicitous Captain Pete plots to become king.The film is fast-paced and cartoony, with lots of gags to keep kids' attention.
There's swashbuckling action and some peril, but the henchmen are as hapless as the heroes in this cartoon, so it's entirely kid-friendly stuff.The music is conspicuously recycled from old classical tunes and other pre-existing (public domain?) songs, including several straight-up Gilbert & Sullivan songs in the climactic scene at the opera house ("Pirates of Penzance").
As this movie is clearly aimed at children, one wonders how many of them would realize that the songs are set to famous classical tunes.
But on the other hand, maybe it's a fun way to expose young audiences to classical music for the first time.There's an air of postmodernism about the way the film handles Disney's classic cartoon gang, to freshen them up for today's kids.
There's even a scene with Minnie and Daisy eating fast food in the royal carriage.As the three unlikely musketeers, Mickey is "too small", Donald is "too cowardly", and Goofy is "too dumb".
A French-accented turtle acts as singing narrator throughout the story, and is annoying.While it's encouraging to see Disney put its classic characters to use, this particular film is rather limp.
I admit that I'm not much for direct to video Disney movies.
I mean, it was basically nothing but a feature length Mickey Mouse cartoon, so it made sense it wasn't too long.
I have grown up with Disney all my life, and as a kid, I loved Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and Goofy; along with all the wacky scenarios they would get themselves into.
Donald and Goofy themselves are completely out of character.Donald acts like the Cowardly Lion from "The Wizard of Oz" and Goofy has the personality equivalent of Modern Patrick Star, if you were to put that version of the "SpongeBob" character in a Disney movie.
The only characters that had some likability were Mickey, Minnie, Clarabelle, Daisy, and even Pete.
It's like relating the past with the present, new dealing with the classics, and – most importantly – a way to make the kids, or the less caring about music viewers, know about classics, getting used to them.Look at the list this time : "All For One and One For All" (from Orpheus in the Underworld).
At one hand the "good old" Disney's feature cartoon films are so missed since years (The Pixar effect no doubt).
– 2008), and obviously there was (Mickey, Donald, Goofy The Three Musketeers – 2004) in between.
Heck if I know, but with a series of lackluster productions that tried to bring fast paced humor and slapstick to the movie theatres and home video markets, it wasn't hard to see that it seemed like the folks at Disney were grasping at straws.So it is with this film.
It's cute in this regard that we see Micky, Donald and Goofy (along with a couple of other supporting characters) relive a kid friendly version of the Three Musketeers.My beef is with the fact that it's a pretty lack luster effort in the writing department.
The Three Musketeers is more randomized and off the wall, but to be honest in a bad way.The DVD has a behind the scenes look at the film from concept to execution, and one wonders why more staff were not brought in to review the story board session; i.e. a test audience to see if the gags worked.
I love Mickey, Donald, and Goofy ever since I was born I even remember as Mickey Mouse was the first cartoon I ever watched then Bugs Bunny and I am happy they made a full length movie for these guys finally and I hope they make more so Mickey, Donald, and Goofy can last forever in our hearts and the ones in the future...Without Mickey Mouse the world wouldn't be that much fun without them I wish they made more Mickey Mouse cartoon shows I hope some day they will P.SWalt Disney R.I.P (Thank you for bringing us Mickey and many other good films like "Mary Poppins" And "Lady And The Tramp").
*The Three SPOILERS* A young turtle gets the chance of his life as for a fortuitous accident, he gets to narrate a TV Special.The story he decides to tell is one of how Donald, Goofy and Mickey, after having been saved by the Three Musketeers as kids, made their life goal to become Musketeers themselves.Sadly, Captain of the Musketeers (who all look remarkably like Goofy) is none other than Pegleg Pete, who quickly deems them too chicken (Donald), too stupid (Goofy) and too short (Mickey).Soon after, though, he makes them Musketeers and instructs them to protect Princess Minnie and her Maid of Company Daisy.Why?
Ideal especially for kids.The Three Musketeers (Donald, Mickey and Goofy): 8/10..
A nice Disney production with the Big 3 (Mickey, Donald and Goofy) taking the leads, interestingly Pete reprises his peg-leg from the olden days.
Although the animation, songs, and performances were mostly enjoyable -- Donald's depiction as a coward (who sometimes even turned into a chicken) set my mood off since he doesn't get to expose much of his hotheaded personality, which is what makes him possibly the most amusing of all Disney characters.
However, Princess Minnie could often get annoying (as usual) and the brief Clarabelle-Goofy romance side plot got kind of cheesy in comparison to the somewhat edgier mood of this film (by 'Mickey standards').
A cute and funny Mickey Mouse movie here.
This movie is based on the old story of the 3 musketeers and Mickey, Donald and Goofy are those musketeers.
As always in this Mickey cartoons Pete is the main villain and plans to kidnap Minnie and take over the kingdom, but Mickey, Donald and Goofy stand in his way and save the kingdom.
Mickey, Donald and Goofy make very fine heroes at the end of this and everyone lives happily ever after, except for Pete of course.
Of course you know that in the old Disney Channel show Goof Troop he has a wife named Peg and a son named PJ who also appears in a Goofy Movie.
This Mickey movie is definitely worth watching..
An Instant Disney Animated Classic.
this is one of my favorite Disney full length animated classics.
i love cartoon characters, but for me, Mickey is the best.
any film that showcases the mouse in this way, is big plus in my book.this is Mickey's only full length feature for another thing.
this is Mickey's first true full length role and it's obvious they went all out for this film in terms of concept, story and animation.
i can't think of a Disney animated feature that is better executed and planned and is so very much Disney.i love absolutely everything about this movie.
this is a wonderful looking animated film, and Mickey certainly deserves the best. |
tt1118511 | A Matter of Loaf and Death | Baker Bob is murdered by an unseen assailant that he recognises; he is the latest of twelve local bakers to be killed. Meanwhile, Wallace and Gromit are running a "Dough to Door" delivery service from their bakery "Top Bun". While out delivering, the duo encounter Piella Bakewell, a former pin-up girl mascot for the Bake-O-Lite bread company, and her miniature poodle, Fluffles. The brakes on her bicycle appear to have failed as she careers down a hill and into the local zoo. They narrowly save her from crashing into the crocodile enclosure. Gromit becomes suspicious after testing the bicycle brakes and noticing that they work perfectly fine, but Wallace is smitten with Piella.
A whirlwind romance ensues. Gromit quickly comes to resent Piella for her demanding and controlling relationship with Wallace and insistence on decorating the house (including Gromit's room). He does however befriend Fluffles, realising that she has been poorly treated by Piella. When Piella leaves her purse at the house, Wallace asks Gromit to return it. Upon arriving at Piella's affluent mansion, Gromit discovers photographs of Piella with the twelve murdered bakers. To his horror, Gromit deduces that Piella is the "Cereal Killer" as he discovers a picture with Wallace as her apparent intended thirteenth victim, thus completing a "baker's dozen". Gromit escapes the house after narrowly avoiding Piella.
As Wallace remains oblivious to the danger he's in, Gromit attempts to thwart Piella by installing an airport-style metal detector in their home, locking all their knives in the garden shed, and checking the soup she had brought with her for poison. Piella tricks Wallace into thinking that Gromit bit her and persuades him to chain Gromit up. She then almost succeeds at pushing Wallace to his death, but she is thwarted by a swinging bag of flour from Wallace's dough-mixing contraption. After being struck down and covered flour, Piella snaps into an angry outburst against bakers, then leaves. The following day, she returns to apologise with a large cake, and they agree to share it at a four o'clock tea. When Piella is leaving to attend to the absent Fluffles (who is "not well"), she says he will be getting a surprise. A worried Gromit follows her home only to be caught and imprisoned with Fluffles in a storeroom. Escaping in Piella's old Bake-O-Lite hot air balloon, they arrive at Wallace's house as he is lighting the candle.
After a struggle, the cake falls to the floor and a bomb inside is revealed. While attempting to dispose of the bomb (pastiching a well-known scene from the 1966 film Batman), Wallace and Gromit are attacked by Piella, who confirms her murderous identity to the duo and reveals the reason for her hatred of bakers – she blames them for ruining her figure, and resents losing her job as the Bake-O-Lite girl after her obesity made her too heavy to ride the hot air balloon. While attempting to finish off Wallace, a battle ensues between Piella and Fluffles in a yellow forklift truck covered by giant oven mitts (pastiching the climactic power-loader fight in Aliens).
In the chaos, the bomb ends up in the back of Wallace's trousers. Gromit and Fluffles neutralise the explosion using a large amount of dough while Piella uses the distraction to leap onto her balloon and escape. However, owing to her weight, the balloon crashes into the crocodile pit at the zoo where she is eaten alive (off-screen). Distraught by the death of her owner, Fluffles leaves, with both Wallace and Gromit depressed over their losses. Deciding to take their minds off things, they head out to deliver bread and find Fluffles standing in the driveway. She joins them in the van and the three drive off into the sunset. | comedy, murder, insanity, psychedelic, humor, romantic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | The romance begins while Gromit smells a rat.The Wallace & Gromit films are mostly famous for the couple of big Christmas episodes they did that made them famous across the world and I was fine with the BBC holding this special back till Christmas Day because it did seem like their natural home.
Nick Park's favourite creations Wallace and Grommit are back for another short feature, and 'A Matter of Loaf and Death' will appeal to all who loved the earlier stories.
Perhaps the duo's latest outing lacks some of the freshness of their original appearances; but the detail of Park's gentle parodies of a certain vision of Englishness is as loving and humorous as ever, and the claymation approach saves the film from the curse of excess speed that mars much computer-generated animation.
This was the first Wallace & Gromit short to be made after the big world wide theatrical release and success of the full length animated movie "Wallace & Gromit in The Curse of the Were-Rabbit".
"Wallace and Gromit in 'A Matter of Loaf and Death'" however does what all other previous Wallace & Gromit shorts had also already done in the past and that is to bring some cracking and good looking simple entertainment.It's probably not as hilarious to watch as the previous Wallace & Gromit shorts but the movie is nevertheless entertaining and of course impressive as well to look at.
The animations and possibilities have all advanced, which provides "Wallace and Gromit in 'A Matter of Loaf and Death'" with some even more impressive looking sequences.The movie is probably less hilarious to watch because of its story.
Nick Park seems far removed from Dahl, but the truth is the dark has always been there, it's just people haven't bothered to look.Matter Of Loaf And Death was great BECAUSE it pushed the boundaries.
They warm to each other and romance starts to blossom-but Gromit, wary as ever (what with past experience!) suspects she's trouble, and what with the spate of serial killings involving local bakers that's been going on lately, maybe he's onto something.After the success of 2005's film version The Curse of the Were Rabbit, Nick Park's plasticine heroes have become popular again and got enough publicity for a timely new episode last Christmas, that for one reason or another I didn't get to see all the way through.
But now I have, and while the technical animation never ceases to impress me, it's now becoming quite clear that in my mind, Park'll never make as great an episode as The Wrong Trousers.The serial killing theme of this new story might have been a bit too dark and adult to feature in a family film, but one of the trademarks of the franchise, the cheesy puns, are in abundance, from vinyl records Gromit owns by artists like Doggy Osmond and McFlea (as well as The Hound of Music!), to other clever (but not very subtle!) touches like advertisements for flights by Cheesy Jet. The stories in most of the short films revolve around Wallace warming to someone (or something) he's just met and Gromit suspecting (and being proved right!) that they're up to no good, and this is no exception but most of it is carried off with such technical expertise it's a minor quibble.There's nothing really wrong here, it's just that nothing has (and I doubt ever will) live up to the standard of The Wrong Trousers for me.
Nonetheless, it was enjoyable enough and the animation, as always with Wallace and Gromit and with Aardman was top-notch which is great considering the fact that A Matter of Loaf and Death had the shortest production time for any Wallace and Gromit short so far.It'll please the kids, that's for sure.
The story lacked the usual quirky charm of Wallace and Gromit but it still pretty much worked.
As a fan of the original three 'Wallace and Gromit' short films I was pleased to hear that there would be a fourth outing for the duo.
Much of the film seems to jump from one scenario to the next, never giving the story time to build up, as so wonderfully demonstrated in 'The Wrong Trousers'.Secondly, there seemed to be far greater use of music this time round, but rather than setting the mood, it seemed too 'obvious' in places, and merely felt forced, and comic in nature.
This time the Rube Goldberg-style inventor and his silent but faithful dog have converted their house into a bread factory, and Wallace falls for a woman who used to be the spokeswoman for a bread company...all amid a series of murders of bakers.As always, there's a lot of pop culture references and clever camera angles.
I've liked everything that Nick Park has directed (along with the Wallace and Gromit series, he also did "Creature Comforts" and "Chicken Run"), and "Wallace and Gromit in 'A Matter of Loaf and Death'" is no exception.
This Oscar nominated short animated film is about Wallace falling in love with someone he should not have.
In "Wallace and Gromit in A Matter of Loaf and Death" , the clay figures are well made, cute, have characters of their own and magically conveys a plethora of emotions and feelings.
FGP has been seen more times in Norwegian cinemas than there are Norwegians in Norway through the years, and that should say something...OK, Wallace and Gromit; The creator Nick Park has hit the spot for me when it comes to animations, and that's final, today.
Great stop motion animation and a quite good script.It's not the best Wallace and Gromit movie, but considering the quality, I can't give it less than 9 of 10 stars.
Even my favorite animation movie Flåklypa Grand Prix (Pinchcliffe Grand Prix) is passed by Nick Parks work, I am SAD to say.I REALLY hope that this kind of quality and humor is preserved in the future, including the good looking production (vivid and dynamic colors).
That sounds a bit harsh..." These were my thoughts a few days ago when I heard that there was a new Wallace & Gromit film coming out.
Unlike the first two adventures this short film wasn't suited for small children at all.A Grand Day Out was a very nice and innocent piece of animation.
However nicely it may have been animated I can't bring myself to like A Matter of Loaf and Death.Don't get me wrong.
What I don't like is that Wallace and Gromit films are marketed at an audience of all ages while they clearly aren't suitable for the smallest children anymore.
A Matter of Loaf and Death is just not a cute little film, and if the target is to watch a psychopath killer story, I prefer The Silence of the Lambs any day.(PS.
A cereal killer is targeting bakers, and Wallace, now proprietor of 'Top Buns', a windmill-powered automatic bakery, may be the next victim, but he's too smitten with lovely but kneady Piella Bakewell, the ex-Bake-o-Lite bread girl, to heed Gromit's warnings.
adventures, the story is fun, the voice talent great (sadly Peter Sallis' final performance as Wallace), and the climax suitably climatic.
Having gone all Hollywood on us it was a surprise to see Wallace and Gromit back on the small screen with this 30 minute short (which sounds harsh considering the years that goes into making them) for Christmas 2008.It's great fun from start to finish.
Loads of lovely verbal jokes, as well as the classic Aardman style of visual jokes you only see on second viewing.Peter Sallis is as ever the perfect voice for Wallace, and is much missed.The bar is set pretty high where Wallace and Gromit are concerned, and while I don't think this short is up there with 'A Close Shave' or 'The Wrong Trousers' it's certain good fun..
"A Matter of Loaf and Death" Doesn't Quite Live Up to the Expectations of Wallace and Gromit, but is a Charming Short Nonetheless.
Wallace and Gromit's latest short film, Nick Park's "A Matter of Loaf and Death", is a charming new tale of the eccentric inventor and his brilliant and trusty canine companion, though it just doesn't quite measure up to the previous efforts, both short and feature length.Wallace and Gromit are now spending their time in the world of baking, owning the popular and busy "Top Bun" bakery which is built into their home.
But Gromit is concerned that Wallace's new love may be the infamous murderer whom is killing bakers all around the city.And so, their new adventure begins.The film is full of heart and humor, like the other outings (including their shots "A Grand Day Out", "A Close Shave" and "The Wrong Trousers", as well as their feature-length venture "Cure of the Were-Rabbit"), but there are some major issues holding it back in the end.For one, the humor is much more "American" and mainstream.
Even the climax, which is usually magnificent (think about the amazing chase from "Wrong Trousers" and over-the-top action of "A Close Shave"), is a bit "blah" this time around.Finally, the film is actually quite dark.
The main storyline is a murder-mystery, and there are a few moments that are borderline unfriendly for young audiences.But the continued marvelous performances (especially Peter Sallis as Wallace and the silent Gromit's incredible body language and personality) and the abundance of jokes that thankfully work make up for the shortcomings.
It was still a blast to watch, and it left me eager for new adventures from the duo.I give "A Matter of Loaf and Death" a good 7 out of 10.
while i enjoyed this latest animated Wallace and Gromit feature,a few things disappointed me.the biggest thing,(and i'm sure others have mentioned this)is the running time.both the the artwork on the DVD and the case list it as being 87 minutes.however,the actual running time is around the 30 minute mark.not sure why the discrepancy.the other thing that disappointed me was the lack of humour compared to Wallace and Gromit and the Curse of the Wererabbit.there were some humorous moments,but not as many as i expected,and what humour there was,was much more subtle.although there many amusing moments,there were no real laugh out loud moments here for me,i did however like the story,but because the film was so short,i don't feel they developed it enough.still,overall,it was a pleasant watch.for me,Wallace and Gromit in A Matter of Loaf and Death is a 6/10.
I could go on and on why the Wallace and Gromit shorts are some of the best short films ever made.
It's good, but not nearly as perfect as the other ones.Wallace and Gromit are apparently now bakers, and at the worst time too as there is an unknown baker killer on the loose.
Kids will love it, adults might be mixed, but no matter, it's meant for the younger group, and will entertain.Nick Park has made another entertaining Wallace and Gromit film, though perhaps he should review the formula, because if he wants to do another one, maybe he can shoot for excellent instead of just good.My rating: *** out of ****.
This is the fourth animated short with the characters Wallace and Gromit, from Aardman Studios, a British studio specialized in stop-motion animation.
As Wallace, who has just opened a bakery, engages with a mysterious woman who does not look trustworthy, Gromit begins to distrust and to have reason to fear for his owner's life.Once again, Aardman has shown that knows, like no one else, how to do great stop-motion.
It starts well, with a mystery that reminds us of the very British tradition of police stories, but ends up copying and chewing the previously made "A Close Shave": again, Wallace falls in love with the potential villain, leaving Gromit alone to solve everything.
Watching Wallace and Gromit has become a Christmas tradition so it is always good when a new story is added to their collection.This outing finds the two of then running the Top Bun bakery, unfortunately there is a serial killer on the loose who is murdering bakers.
with some help from Piella's put-upon poodle Fluffles.As with all of the Wallace and Gromit shorts the animation is top notch and Peter Sallis is perfect as the voice of Wallace.
The story however wasn't as good as The Wrong Trousers or A Close Shave.
Curse that prevailing southwesterly
Wallace and Gromit: A Matter of Loaf and Death.
Even though it debuted on British television in 2008, Nick Park's newest installment in the (mis)adventures of his claymation pals Wallace and Gromit finally hit the States last year, just in time to be nominated for an Animated Short Oscar.
By compacting all the humor in less than thirty minutes, the warm-hearted antics of naïve and imbecilic Wallace with stoically intelligent dog Gromit really do excel.The premise is pretty stripped-down, concerning the duo in their new bakery, right in the midst of a serial killing spree of bakers.
To be honest, it doesn't take very long to discern who is the culprit, so the fun really becomes watching Wallace bumble through life and Gromit do his best to save him.
All this is to be expected, as the company has grown and learned a lot over the years--as well as picking up several Oscars along the way for their great work.Now this isn't saying that the new film is total perfection.
Another minor problem is that this film reminded me an awful lot of WALLACE AND GROMIT IN A CLOSE SHAVE.
Both films featured Wallace falling in love and in both cases, the ladies ended up being very wicked, indeed!
In fact, when I first started watching A MATTER OF LOAF AND DEATH, I automatically assumed that lady was the killer--just like the lady in this previous film was the sheep-napper.
And, like in the other film, it's up to Gromit to save the day because Wallace is too big a doofus to realize what is happening...which, by the way, reminds me a lot of WALLACE AND GROMIT AND THE CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT.So, as you can see, there isn't much new under the sun in this film.
The reason these productions are so good it that Nick Parks has retained creative control - if he ever sells out to a big studio house then this - and the terrific creativity - will vanish.Grommit has developed as a character and is very astute whilst Wallace is still a bit of a simpleton.
There will be spoilers ahead: Much will be familiar to you if you've seen many of the shorts and/or the feature starring Wallace and Gromit.
The ending of the short is great and perfect, although the sample of Gromit's musical tastes given to the audience leaves much to be desired.This is available on DVD and is well worth watching.
"A Matter of Loaf and Death" is another quality entry to the Wallace&Gromit franchise and we should be thankful to Nick Park that he added another chapter to their story, even if it was the first time that he lost at the Oscars (to Logorama).
When this one came out it had already been 13 years since the last Wallace&Gromit-short film.
Thankfully Peter Sallis, in his late 80s then, in his early 90s now, is reaching a Methusalem age and could once more lend his unique voice to Wallace.This film is mostly about a series of murders and the victims are all bakers.
Wrong Trousers is unreached, but it's about the same league quality-wise like Grand Day out and superior to Close Shave, which I'm not really a fan of."A Matter of Loaf and Death" was Nick Park's last directorial effort to this day, but he's still at an age where we can hopefully expect a couple more chapters to the story.
For me it is a combination of two factors - the Claymation is extremely well done, with appropriate expressions, and Gromit, even unable to speak, is the more adult of the two in the relationship.Here in this 28-minute short they have opened a bakery, "Top Bun", and their motto is "dough to door delivery." But one day while on an outing they encounter a woman and her pooch on a bicycle, Piella Bakewell, who in Wallace's world is sort of a Paula Deen.
With 3 of the best and funniest short films in years and a fantastic feature length movie they where at the top of their game!
This did not ruin Wallace and gromit, it just wasn't as good as the other shorts.
A romantic girl for gromit is new and I might not like her as much in here, there could be great possibility's and the very end with their coming together.
either being on television - other Wallace and Gromit shorts; Chicken
will still be the best Wallace and Gromit short for me.
Wallace & Gromit: A Matter of Loaf and Death.
Wallace and Gromit were number 11 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and they were number 15 on The 100 Greatest Kid's TV Shows, and as part of Aardman Animations, they was number 15 on The 100 Greatest Cartoons.
The new Wallace and Gromit film isn't as good as the other films.
The film is about the duo going into a bread industry while a serial killer is killing bakers, who Wallace falls in love with and Gromit falls for her dog.
A MATTER OF LOAF AND DEATH is a Wallace and Gromit adventure without the charm that made the Claymation shorts so endearing in the first place.
This is a fast-paced, Hollywood-style adventure packed with in-jokes and scenes copied from anything and everything; the bit that most stood out for me was Gromit's misadventures with the bomb which recall the old BATMAN movie with Adam West.The main plot is a copy of THE WRONG TROUSERS with a less endearing narrative structure and unlikeable characters.
However, I feel that the plot has started to change a little from the classic stories that are simple and easy, to something with a bit more movie humor. |
tt0096869 | Babar: The Movie | On the night of Elephantland's Victory Parade, Babar tells his four children the story of his first days as King of the elephants.
On his first day as king, he is asked to choose a name for Elephantland's Annual Parade. Babar promptly selects one, but is informed by the bureaucratic-minded lords that the matter must be thoroughly examined by committee. Babar's cousin, Celeste, then interrupts to tell Babar that her home has been attacked by Rataxes, the rhinoceros lord, and his horde. The chancellors scoff and rubuff her, but Babar orders an elephant army to be called up immediately to defeat the rhinos, if partly because he wants to impress Celeste.
But, due to the heel-dragging of his ultra-conservative ministers, Babar learns that the muster will take at least three days. Not willing to wait any longer, Babar tells his cousin Arthur, Celeste's brother, to take care of his job as King while he ventures off on his own to help their mother, amid dangerous jungle. He finds Celeste's village aflame; the rhinos are taking the adult elephants as slaves so that they can work on building a rhino city. Babar tries to intervene, but is knocked senseless for his trouble.
When he comes to, Babar rescues Celeste out of the town well, and they set off to rescue her mother, and the other pachyderms, from Rataxes' wrath. Along the way, they meet a monkey named Zephir, who gives them the location of the rhinos' base. The two come face to face with Rataxes himself, who plans to invade Babar's kingdom by twilight, and are put in jail, but they both escape along with Zephir, and race back to Elephantland to save it.
Heading into the rhinos' tents, they disguise themselves as one of the warriors, asking for "special detail" of their plans for attack, but to no avail. They get away from Rataxes quickly, launching from a catapult and landing in a fountain, much to the surprise of Babar's advisors.
The evil rhino proclaims Elephantland will be destroyed in an hour, absent unconditional surrender. To buy time, Babar orders the two ministers to distract Rataxes with their "committee" procedure. The elephant army takes some action into their hands, and a giant elephant float, built by Babar and company, scares off Rataxes and his soldiers.
At sunrise, Babar's friends congratulate him on saving the day and his town, but are surprised to learn that their very first Victory Parade will be held during the afternoon. It has gone by that name ever since, the older Babar recalls, because the committee could not find any other name for it.
As Babar finishes his tale, he finds that his children have all gone to sleep. Right after he closes the door, they re-enact scenes from the story, until their father tells them to get back to bed. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | I'm the First to Comment On This?
What a Surprise!
"Babar: The Movie" is quite good children's entertainment.
Adults can enjoy it as well.
The animation is nice, and it sticks very close to the television show (yes, I've seen the show - kid shows are great!
:).So, I would recommend "Babar" if you've got kids, or if you want a nice night-in watching a funny little elephant on-screen.
Boy, I'm weird.4/5 stars -John Ulmer.
Brilliant!.
I grew up with this film, along with children's classics like Mary Poppins and The Snowman, very surprised to learn as i grew up that no-one else had even heard of it!
I think that this film is great for little kids - no violence or anything and lots of singalong songs (wasn't one of them number 1 in the Uk for a while??) anyway if you have small children definitely consider getting this.
If they're like me it'll become one of those that they'll remember as a childhood favourite - in my case, it's one of those ones which you can watch on the sofa when you're off school ill - hmm a 'comfort movie' i'll call it.
Watch it!.
The greatest kid movie ever.
I have watched this movie a lot i used to rent from the local library all the time.
Its a great movie for any age.
I have just recently bought it on DVD to keep the child memories alive in me a must see.
When i watch this movie I think about the days that used to be.The movie follows the same format as the TV show with Babar telling a bedtime story to his four children.
Kids all over will love this movie even if they have never seen anything with Babar before..
Not just for kids!.
For those that aren't familiar, Babar occupies a curious little niche in children's books, and is sometimes the first exposure children have to cursive writing.
Long story short, Babar is a prince in an elephant kingdom, having all sorts of curious adventures.
In this movie, Babar has been left to run the kingdom while Dad is on vacation - however, the rhinoceroses declare war on the elephant kingdom, and Babar has to decide whether to resolve the problem through peaceful or violent means (pretty heavy for a 4 year old).
The highlight of the film is Babar inquiring of his advisors as to recommendations - said advisors then launch into an amusing song-and-dance number about bureaucratic (in)efficiency being the best solution - "We'll send it to committee for review!" Increasingly funny the older you are .
Great Children's Movie.
My parents bought this for me on video when I was a toddler and I just loved it.
It's an exciting new story.
It has some fun songs in it and an interesting story-line.
Babar is telling his children the story of his childhood, so the movie takes place mostly in Babar's past.
It's a cute depiction of his childhood relationship with Celeste and the rhinos.
It also includes our favorite monkey and rhino villain.
I remember really liking the music.
It's a high-spirited adventure.
I have happy memories of watching it as it was one of my favorite movies as a kid, which is why our VHS copy is in such terrible shape.
If you have the opportunity to see this, I recommend it.
It's designated for children, but I still enjoyed watching it with my little sister.
I loved the "Babar" books, so I was more familiar with the character than perhaps the children of today are.
Give it a chance.
It's an enjoyable movie based off of a very lovable elephant..
My favorite movie when i was younger.
I'm 16 now, and was just thinking of things i liked when i was little.Right away i remembered babar!
he was my favorite cartoon next to my little ponies.lol:).
I had to look up this movie because i was curious.
then i saw the picture of the movie and remembered it!
so weird.
anyway, i liked this movie so much that after 12 years, i still remember scenes from it!
isn't that crazy?
it is a very good and cute movie.
i highly recommend it for 4-8 year olds.
it is hard to find though; i haven't seen it in any video stores since i was little.
maybe you can only buy it now??
don't know..
Unfaithful and Not Good for Kids or Adults.
This film is far inferior to the apparently less-loved and less well-known "Babar:King of the Elephants" and one should not be confused between the two.In terms of style, animation, etc., the two are very similar, and a lot of the same people worked on both.
However, Babar the Movie inexplicably strays from the stories, totally messing with the events as portrayed in the books.
One example is that in Babar the Movie, Babar is a very young, and apparently reluctant, king at first, seemingly thrust into the position, and without Celeste as queen.
This is completely different from the books where Babar, although chosen king, is mature by then; is the one who makes the elephant society "complex" and urban, etc.; and marries Celeste as soon as he becomes king and before he builds the city.
Moreover, the "war" with the rhinos in Babar the Movie is more violent, so it is not as good for really young children, and it is inexplicable and apparently senseless, unlike the fight in Babar: King of the Elephants or the first books.The story and conflict in Babar the Movie may be based on some of the latest books in the series, but not any of the books I have read, and it differs in story and spirit from the Babar books with which I am familiar.
If it is based on later books, then I would venture to say that such books, if actually like this cartoon, stray from the original ones and fail in the same regards and for the same reasons.Also, adults seem to like this one more because it is less "cutesy" and more "dark," but I disagree with any such opinions.
Both cartoons are still child-oriented, neither really is great, neither is very artistic, and neither really transcends the child/family genre to appeal truly to people of all ages.
I don't especially enjoy or appreciate kid/family oriented stuff that much, but I don't find this any more appealing to me because it is supposedly more "mature." In fact, the more artistic sequences of Babar: King of the Elephants I find to be handled much better, with greater care, skill, and art, than anything in Babar the Movie.
I also find the scene in the other film, where the hunter kills Babar's mom, to be more powerful and interesting, even emotionally unsettling, than the stupid war in Babar the Movie, yet, it has an important point, is highly relevant, and is more appropriate an issue for kids.
The war in Babar the Movie is unsettling as it seems totally gratuitous and sensationalized, used simply to create a showy story.
It gives the feel of throwing in elements from a low-grade action film with pointless violence used only to gratify base desires, which simply is not appropriate for a cartoon such as this or for Babar.
Babar: King of the Elephants may be a little more "cutesy" than the books, and suffers for this, but it does basically stay faithful to the original spirit.In sum, if one really wants to watch Babar, then one should watch Babar: King of the Elephants, not this movie.
If one instead wants something more artistic or fitting with "mature" tastes, interests, etc., then one should watch neither.
Babr the Movie seems to try to straddle both worlds (children and adult), and in doing so fails to succeed in either.
Babar: King of the Elephants pretty much knows where it is and it succeeds as a result. |
tt0350194 | Teacher's Pet | Spot is a dog who wants nothing more than to be a boy, a fantasy he has been fulfilling for one year, dressing as a boy named Scott Leadready II, and going to school with his master Leonard Helperman. Leonard is looking forward to spending the summer with his dog, but Spot proudly declares "I Wanna Be a Boy". Mary Lou Helperman, the fourth grade teacher and Leonard's mother, is nominated for a "Teacher of the Year" award, and given use of Principal Strickler's Wentawaygo to travel to the finals in Sunny Southern Florida, under the condition that no dogs are allowed in the RV. Leonard sadly bids farewell to Spot ("A Boy Needs a Dog") as he and his mother depart.
Spot, along with the Helpermans' other pets, Pretty Boy and Mr. Jolly, are left with a pet-sitter when Spot accidentally sits on the remote and changes the channel to The Barry Anger Show. Anger's special guest is a "wacko" named Dr. Ivan Krank, who claims he can turn animals into human beings, who happens to be located in Sunny Southern Florida. Believing it to be fate, Spot chases down the RV. Spot and Leonard meet up at a gas station. Through many quick costume changes, Spot fools Mrs. Helperman into believing that he is Scott Leadready II and that his family, en route to Sunny Southern Florida, had to return home, but he could still go with the Helpermans. Spot, Leonard, and Mrs. Helperman continue on their way to Florida, singing through all fifty states ("A Whole Bunch of World").
Meanwhile, Pretty Boy and Mr. Jolly, back at home, see another episode of Barry Anger in which Anger reveals that Krank cannot turn animals into people, but rather into terrifying mutant creatures. They decide that they must track down Spot and stop him from being turned into a monster, but Mr. Jolly is afraid to leave the house. Pretty Boy assures him that they can be tough despite their size ("Small But Mighty")
Upon arriving in Florida, Mrs. Helperman goes directly to the Teacher of the Year finals, and Leonard is all ready to play fetch, but Spot has other ideas. He reveals to Leonard the real reason he came to Florida, to become a real boy. Leonard is skeptical, but accompanies Spot to Krank's lab, where Krank has just unsuccessfully tried to turn a frog human. He is ready to destroy his machine when Spot and Leonard show up. Spot tells him that his machine can't work with a frog because it's a lower life form, like his other two creatures, Dennis (an alligator-man) and Adele (a mosquito-girl), and that he needs a mammal, like a dog. Krank agrees to turn Spot human, and gives him a nickel as payment for being his test subject. Krank explains that, throughout his entire life, people have mocked his ideas ("I, Ivan Krank") and turns the machine on Spot.
Spot wakes up to find that he is indeed human—but not a boy as he expected, but rather a fully-grown man (he had forgotten to factor in dog time). Still, he is happy to be human, but the happiness quickly fades when Krank tells him that he will have to travel around with him forever to prove that Krank is not a wacko. Krank locks Leonard and "Scott" up, and hope seems lost until Ian, Krank's nephew and Leonard and Spot's classmate, shows up and sets them free. Krank grounds Ian and sends Dennis and Adele off to find his "dog-man". Leonard and Scott, meanwhile, are hungry, and Scott's clothes from when he was a dog disguised as a boy do not fit his adult body. They see a sign advertising a $100 reward for a lost dog. Scott uses the Twilight Bark to locate the lost dog, along with her four puppies that had been born while she was lost. This prompts the dog's owner to give them $500, as they brought back five dogs. Now rolling in money, Leonard and Scott enjoy a day on the town.
The two lose track of time, but manage to make it back to the Wentawaygo just in time for dinner, forgetting that in place of Scott Leadready II is a stranger who Mrs. Helperman will not recognize. Scott and Leonard quickly make up a story that this new person is Scott Manly-Manning, Scott Leadready II had to go home, and he helped him out. Mrs. Helperman invites Scott in for coffee and soon begins to fall for him. Scott presents an idea to Leonard as to how they can stay together: he will marry Leonard's mother and they'll all be able to live together. Leonard is not okay with this; Scott is his dog, not his dad. Scott tells him he's not his dog anymore. Finally fed up with Scott's stubbornness, Leonard disowns Scott as his Dog and he confiscates Scott's collar and tells Scott to leave him and his mother alone. Scott storms off, leaving everyone else lamenting the loss: Mary Lou of her "Manly-Manning Man", Leonard of his dog, Krank of his creation, and Dennis and Adele, along with Pretty Boy and Jolly, search for Spot ("I'm Moving On"). Pretty Boy and Jolly finally make it to Florida, and Leonard tells them the whole story. He comes to the conclusion that the only way he and Scott can be together is for him to go to Krank and have him turn him into a dog. ("A Boy Needs a Dog (Reprise)"). Scott arrives moments after Leonard leaves, and after getting over the shock of seeing Spot as a human, Pretty Boy and Jolly tell him that Leonard has gone to Krank's lab.
Krank plans to turn Leonard into a dog and use him as bait to get Scott back, and then he will have both the boy-dog and the dog-man. Scott arrives at the lab just as Leonard is being strapped to the table. Dennis detains Scott, Pretty Boy and Jolly, but they escape by tickling him. Scott unties Leonard and destroys Krank's machine by inserting the nickel that Krank had given him earlier into a slot on the machine marked "Quarters Only". The machine starts firing at random, turning Krank into a mouse and seemingly killing Scott, turning him into a pile of blue dust. Leonard angrily beats the machine and it fires at the blue dust and turns Scott back into his original dog form. Leonard and Spot reunite, and Spot decides that he is "Proud to Be a Dog". | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Those gags are both audio and visual.Nathan Lane's New York City accent was funny as he voiced the lead character, "Spot," the dog who wanted to be changed into a little boy.
And - I didn't really view this as a kids movie since the vocabulary and the jokes were geared (in a non-offensive way) more toward adults.
Secondly, I am a fan of the TV series "Teacher's Pet" which concerns the exploits of a dog named Spot who dresses up as a boy because he wants to go to school.
But, this film is not only a hilarious and enchanting story to entertain children of all ages (19, since you asked), it is a love letter to the rich legacy of Disney animation.
He sees his chance with Ivan Krank (voiced over the top and beyond by `Frasier' star Kelsey Grammer) a `wacko' scientist who claims he can turn animals into humans.
This is a momentous day for Spot (or `Scott' as he disconcertingly calls himself when he's in human garb) but not so for his nine-year-old master, Leonard Helperman, who just wants a dog to play with.Needless to say, but I will anyway, Leonard and Spot become a boy and his dog again and everyone gets what they deserve, all the ingredients for a happy ending.
The songs are beautifully written with clever lyrics and, again in the Disney tradition, exist to move the story along, as it should be for all musical comedies.I would, however, use discretion in taking my family to this film.
And, ideally, there would be more in Act One to help those unfamiliar with the dynamic of the TV series, though you'll definitely enjoy it anyway.The real strength of this film is in the voice cast, including series regulars Nathan Lane (as the super-intelligent dog himself), Jerry Stiller (as the bird), David Ogden Stiers (as the cat) and Shaun Fleming and Debra Jo Rup (as Leonard and his mother, who also happens to be his teacher.
This movie offers a wider audience the chance to see what makes the show so fun to watch.The story involves Spot/Scott (voiced brilliantly by the always-great Nathan Lane) in his quest to fulfill his dream of becoming a boy.
When Mrs. Helperman and Leonard go to Florida for the NEATO Teacher's convention, Spot tags along to seek out the evil scientist Dr. Ivan Krank who is currently doing animal-to-human experiments.
While this film is a bit on the short side, the story is well told and fully developed (remember that other great movies of the past like Dumbo, Bambi, and Lilo and Stitch all had similar running times).
It just goes to show that you don't need a 3+ hour movie and technology to make a heart-warming and hilarious film.Children and adults alike will love it - there's something for everyone.
A friend needs a friend, a boy needs a dog, and Disney needs to let Gary Baseman make more Teacher's Pet!.
Teacher's Pet, Film of the Year!.
I personally feel the the Teacher's Pet to me is film of the year.
The voices are one of the best parts of the whole movie, Nathan Lane really does an awesome job as Spot, Scott Leadready, Scott "Manly" Manning.
Personally, I would take Teacher's Pet over any of those other movies that came out around that time Barbershop II, Calendar Girl, Along Came Polly etc.
(I'm not telling!) This movie is played like a Broadway musical -- lots of "let's stop a minute and do a musical number" kind of stuff.
The truth is that this movie ranks up there with Emperor's New Groove and Lilo & Stitch as the best non-Pixar Disney movie since Lion King.The animation is top quality based on the drawings of that guy--whose name escapes me at the moment--responsible for the drawings on the Cranium games, among other things.
The songs, especially the opening number Want to be a Boy, are better than anything since Little Mermaid.The writing is far above the heads of many kids, directed just as much at adults as children.
Timothy Björklund gives us a complete box-office flop of a Disney movie.Our story follows Spot the dog on his adventure to become a boy.
This time, in feature-length form, he travels to California to visit the sane (he swears) Dr. Ivan Krank, who says he can turn any animal human.Nathan Lane plays Spot Helperman or Scott Leadready II when he dresses up like a boy.
I love Nathan Lane's voice acting, he was great in the Lion King, and is great in this, no complaints.Shaun Flemming plays Leonard Amadeus Helperman, Spot's owner and best friend.
His voice acting is done well enough, not as great as Nathan Lane's, but nothing terrible.Kelsey Grammar plays the SANE Dr. Ivan Krank, a scientist who has developed a very inept way of transforming animals to humans.
Kelsey Grammar has fine voice acting, probably from his experience as Sideshow Bob on the hit series The Simpsons.I have no complaints about this movie, it was well crafted, pretty well drawn, and I don't see why it wasn't a hit.
Nathan Lane does a great job as Spot the dog who wants to be a boy, along with fellow voices Kelsey Grammar, Paul Ruebens and Jerry Stiller.The animation is unusual (imagine the drawings on the board game Cranium coming to life), but a nice break from the perfect Pixar flicks.
The animation style is distinctively different to the traditional style of Disney animation, but still has a vibrancy and often times insane nature to it that works well to the film's advantage, and moves in such a fast paced manner that helps to compliment the film's humour which, though does consist of it's moments of eye rollers, is decent at keeping a wit to it that slides in, at the very least, some jokes that are clever enough to warrant a smirk.
Filler is not necessarily a bad thing, and even here it isn't horrible, but it distracts too much from the main story and allows less time to focus on the ultimately more interesting concepts that the main plot represents.
The exceptions to this are protagonist, Spot, played by Nathan Lane who does carry some charm and likability to make the audience interested in seeing him progress and grow as an individual, and the film's villain, played by the amazingly talented Kelsey Grammer, who has this unexpected nature to him that makes him quite a lot of fun to watch.
I also do have to give some credit to David Ogden Stiers whose voice is almost completely unrecognizable in this, albeit as kind of annoying as it can be.Final Thoughts: As a film I grew up with, it's easy to get held up on the nostalgia factor of it and talk about how strongly it meant to me as a kid and such.
Though the story easily gets sidetracked and it is quite a short watch, the animation is still smooth and popping with colour, carrying a share of decent visual elements, has a variety of song numbers, all that are energized and fun to listen to, and some well written jokes, all of which ultimately help prevent it from being insufferable to view.
It's zany, and crazy for all the right reasons...But you may just want to make sure you have another movie prepared when this one inevitably ends rather quickly.Rating: 7 Pretty Boys That Want To Be A Rooster In A Henhouse Out Of 10.
Teacher's Pet has an energy that makes it completely different from every animated film ever!
What you find when you look at the movie, however, is an auroma of cute characters, funny jokes, a touching story, and hummable songs.
Disney's new animated film TEACHER'S PET is both patronizing and extremely sloppy.Spot Helperman(Voiced by Nathan Lane, The Lion King) is a dog who longs to be a real boy.
He dresses up like a little boy and goes to school with his master Leonard (Shaun Fleming, Jeepers Creepers 2), and for some odd reason Leonard's mother (Debra Joy Rupp, TV's That 70's Show) is their teacher.
Spot wants to go to Florida to meet a wacko doctor (Kelsey Grammer) who can turn animals into humans.As I sat through this supposed "musical comedy" I asked myself, Why?
TEACHER'S PET is a 15 minute animated short with over an hour of bad jokes designed to stretch the running time.Most would probably say, "why are you being so hard on this movie?
It's designed for little kids not a 24 year old male." I say if you are going to spend large amounts of money on a film and you expect parents to bring their little tykes, and you create a film that makes even a toddler bored, I cannot go easy on it.This film has no charm.
"Teacher's Pet" is a full-length movie based on the television show of the same name.
I have never seen the show, though after watching the movie, I wouldn't mind seeing more.The story begins with a parody of Pinocchio and the scene where the Blue Fairy brings him to life.
What IS surprising is that eventually Spot learns about a mad scientist who claims he can turn dogs into people...and Spot soon learns that wanting something and having it aren't exactly the same!The art style of the film is a radical departure for Disney...and I appreciate how Gary Baseman's art style is realized in the movie.
Nathan Lane voices a little blue dog who dresses up as a boy so he can go to school in this, the latest big screen version of a Disney Channel animated series (like their wonderful "Recess" film...
In the big film story, Spot a.k.a. Scot follows his master and his master's clueless mom to Florida in his search for a mad scientist (voice of Kelsey Grammar) who has been trying to transform animals into people.
More specifically are those people who, when in reference to some of the recent animated features, say things like "Oh it's such a great film, because, not only do the kids love it, it's funny for adults as well!
So while I do hate this growing trend -one that has seen studios offering "condolences" to parents who drag concession-hungry children to see their movies by using two-tiered, age-discriminating humor (I guess so parents can nod knowingly to each other over the heads of their kids, while receiving these studio "winks", as if to say " They didn't get that one, but we sure did -it's because we're OLDER.")- I do feel the need to point out that Nemo is not the first fish to reference popular culture to adults.Enter Teacher's Pet, Disney's hand-animated feature (released on the heels of the announcement that it is shutting down its Florida animation studio) based on the popular kids series about a dog named Spot (Nathan Lane) who wants nothing more then to become a boy.
With its skewed color pallet, course lines and surrealistic characters and environments, creator Gary Baseman offers us a visually stimulating experience one that provides a refreshing (if not nostalgic) breather to a genre on the verge of becoming sterilized by computers.However, it takes a lot more then just strong visuals to form a well-crafted animated feature and Teacher's Pet is a prime example of why.
This is supposed to be a kids film -I don't need to explain to my four-year old niece why Spot is now a middleaged man hitting on moms and shacked up in some sleazy motel- if they wanted "edgy" then they should have pitched it to Matt Stone.
Sadly, the story was poorly written, the songs were boring and repetitive and the humor was just not there.The voice acting talent for Teachers pet is top notch.
It is just sad that they threw together such a sloppy, boring and un-funny script and wasted the chance to make a really great kids movie..
I wasted $7 and saw one of the stupidest movies of the year: DISNEY'S TEACHER'S PET, a concept by Gary Baseman.
It's something that if you saw it on tv, you'd flip the channel after a few seconds if you even have THAT much patience.Really quickly, the movie is about a talking dog named Spot who wants to be a real boy.
Unfortunately for families with little children, other then staying at home, they will just have to grin and bare with what is given to them One feature this year, Teacher's Pet, should be familiar to someone as it was once a highly praised (and lowly rated) cartoon series on ABC's One Saturday Morning lineup.
But in January, as with any season of the year at the box office, there is never such a thing as a `sure thing'.The story follows an ambitious talking dog as he yearns to become a real human boy.
For almost everyday of his life, Spot has wished to become a real human boy like his owner Leonard, so much so that he has disguised himself as Scott Leadready II and attended the fourth grade for the past year.
Now that the school year is over, Spot is left home for two weeks while Leonard and his mother travel to Florida to attend an award ceremony for teachers.
The story for Teacher's Pet is pretty straight forward, simple and predictable.
Basically it is everything one expects from a low-budgeted winter family animated film, which makes it all the more disappointing.
The film ranges from being surprisingly amusing to harrowingly dull and anything in-between as well.Teacher's Pet has a surprisingly decent amount of recognizable names behind the voices of the characters, which makes it all the more baffling at why this film wasn't more entertaining for adults.
The only performer within the cast that even manages to make the more adult audience laugh is Jerry Stiller, who voices a bird named Pretty Boy. He gives a gruff voice-over that just cracks a smile on anybody's face at all the appropriate moments within the feature film.
The reason behind this may be the fact that most older movie-goers may already know who Jerry Stiller is, which may or may not make this role all the more amusing than for those who don't know who he is.Overall, younger audience members will enjoy this heralding story about a dog wishing to be a boy while younger adults will be wishing for the quickest exit out of the theater.
Teacher's Pet borders on the line of moderate animated family entertainment and Ren & Stimpy-like weirdness.
The biggest problem with Teacher's Pet is that it is nothing more then one expects going into this feature and, though it appeals to the younger crowd, doesn't present a level of maturity that many adults, parents or not, would be able to tolerate for over a hour.
Will people stop hating the movie just because of it's animation?.
I honestly don't know how people can judge a movie just based on its animation.
That's a great movie, even though the animation looks more like a Saturday morning cartoon.
Which brings me to "Teacher's Pet".I like this movie, regardless of animation!
It's about a dog named Spot, voiced flawlessly by Nathan Lane (the KING of voice-overs, in my opinion), who only wants to be a boy.
The jokes always made me laugh, the songs were either funny or touching, the actors/actresses were matched perfectly with their characters, and the story is very creative!
And one more thing: Adults will see a child's movie and say it's horrible if it's not funny or has a bad story to it.
If the kid watches the movie and likes it, laughing the whole way, then it's a good movie.
If the kid watches it and gets bored, then it's not a good movie.
Based on the Emmy-winning, yet unfortunately short-lived TV show, "Teacher's Pet" is a colorful, witty animated family comedy that would amuse even those who never heard of the series.The story starts off at summer vacation (Which is weird, since this film was released in January), with super-perky mother/teacher Mrs. Helperman taking her son, Leonard, to Florida("Jersey with palm trees") when she is nominated for a N.E.A.T.O.
When Spot is abandoned at home, he's sad, until he discovers a crazy scientist who thinks he can turn animals into people.Disguising as his school alter-ego Scott Leadready II, Spot hitches a ride to Florida with Leonard and Mrs. Helperman and finds the scientist, Dr. Ivan Krank....And the fun continues."Teacher's Pet" is a really good film, filled with the wild and weird animation of popular artist Gary Baseman.
There are also many tuneful songs and funny jokes and gags, including the "Pinocchio" parody in the film's opening.
The voice cast, which includes Nathan Lane, Kelsey Grammar, Mary Jo Rupp, and Jerry Stiller, does very good vocal talents here.Unfortunately, Disney treated this film like trash; they didn't give it a big ad campaign nor a good film release, which led this film to flop at the box office.
In the run-up to Christmas 2017 I started looking for an animated movie that I could send a family friend.
Making a note of actually getting hold of the movie,I decided that this Easter I would call out the teacher's pet.View on the film:Appearing to be inspired by the Cartoon Network shows of the late 90's/early 2000's, director Timothy Björklund draws the most un-Disney designs,with the animation having a rough & ready quality of thickly black drawn lined characters,and the colours having a drained appearance.
Playing as a feature film and as a final to the series, the screenplay by Bill Steinkellner & Cheri Steinkellner take Spot the Dog (who is nothing like the British carton dog of the same name) in an intriguingly grotesque direction,as Spot (voiced by a very good Nathan Lane) gets involved with a Dr. Frankenstein-style scientist (voiced in full Sideshow Bob-mode by Kelsey Grammer) to become a human,and then tries to get together with his owners mum.
When the movie aims for Disney slickness in the flat songs and Spot's friendship with owner Leonard plays out of tune with what the pet has been taught. |
tt0040745 | Romance on the High Seas | Elvira Kent (Janis Paige) and her husband Michael (Don DeFore) suspect each other of cheating. For their wedding anniversary, Elvira books an ocean cruise to Rio de Janeiro but her husband claims that unexpected business will prevent him from going. Seeing an opportunity, Elvira pretends to take the trip alone, but in fact sends singer Georgia Garrett (Doris Day), a woman she'd met at the travel agency, in her place and under her name. By secretly staying behind, Elvira hopes to find out if Michael is indeed sneaking around behind her back. Michael, however, is suspicious over Elvira's supposed willingness to go on the trip alone, and so hires private detective Peter Virgil (Jack Carson) to see if she is sneaking around behind his back.
Peter joins the cruise and, as part of his job, becomes acquainted with Georgia. Georgia, following the instructions of the real Elvira, keeps up the ruse by pretending to be Elvira to everyone, including Peter. Georgia and Peter are attracted to each other and gradually fall in love, which causes conflict for both of them.
During one of the cruise stops, Georgia's friend, Oscar Farrar (Oscar Levant), comes on board. Oscar is in love with Georgia despite Georgia's lack of interest in him, and when Peter spots them together, he thinks he has discovered the identity of Elvira's lover.
The film's third act is set in a Rio hotel, where all the principal characters converge and ride a merry-go-round of mistaken identities. Sorting out their true identities, resolving the crossed love plots, concludes the picture. | flashback | train | wikipedia | One of the delights of "Romance on the High Seas" is the remarkable debut of Doris Day.
Having replaced an indisposed Betty Hutton, Day stepped into this role with all the zest and zip that she brought to her total career.It's rather amazing to me how accomplished Day was in her initial screen effort: her comedic work, singing, and general enactment was like that of a seasoned professional.
Ably assisted by the multi-faceted Jack Carson, pretty other-woman Janis Paige, vulnerable foils Don DeFore and Oscar Levant, and top character actor S.
Fetching songs, a witty script, nice settings in Rio and Cuba, and a stylish specialty number by Avon Long keep things moving along right to the kaleidoscopic finale staged by Busby Berkeley.
"You sigh the song begins, You speak and I hear violins---It's Magic."Doris sure captured us all under her spell in her first role as Miss Georgia Garrett in Romance on the High Seas.
Mr. Kent (Don DeFore) meanwhile has hired a private detective, Peter Virgil (Jack Carson), to trail his wife on her cruise.
**A great cast-Doris Day, Jack Carson, Janis Paige, Don DeFore, and of course SZ Sakall **Terrific songs-"Put 'Em in a Box", "It's Magic", "It's You Or No One", "I'm in Love", "The Tourist Trade", and "Run, Run, Run" **Great dialogue This movie has it all!
Breezy, pleasant and loads of fun...Doris Day is a pro in her film debut!.
It's hard to believe 'Romance on the High Seas' is Doris Day's first flick.
When Day and Jack Carson aren't coming up with one-liners, she takes time to sing some nifty tunes--among them, 'Put 'Em in A Box', 'It's You Or No One' and, of course, 'It's Magic'.
Fortune certainly smiled on the talented Doris Day when she landed her first movie role in this typical late-Forties musical comedy confection.
She looks great, sounds terrific and acts with confidence, supported by the best that Warner Brothers could muster (except for the annoying Oscar Levant, an all-time UNfavorite of mine).
And, as always, the Warners music department and sound technicians provide a wonderfully lush treat for the ears.Turner Classic Movies, bless 'em, occasionally hauls this one out of their vaults and it's fun to see it uninterrupted and causing one's TV screen to glow with that particularly cool, yet warm at the same time, three-strip Technicolor that Warners seemed to specialize in before Warnercolor's less vibrant tones decorated the studio's color output.
Sailing Down To Rio. This one's a hoot!This film's male cast is a very good one, and they receive most of the cargo of really funny lines: Don De Fore, Cuddles Sakall, Oscar Levant, and Canada's own Jack Carson.
Oscar's misanthropic lines are usually acerbic enough, and self-referential enough, to sound as though he wrote them himself.I was a little wary since this video is part of the Warner Brothers "Doris Day Collection".
"It's Magic" is the showstopper.The cruise ship makes several stops as it's travelling south: Cuba, Trinidad, Rio. A song in the Hollywood version of the local style generally erupts spontaneously.
Jack Carson sings a calypso number in an unsteady Trini accent, but it's not too bad considering he was attempting it 50 years ago, mahn.Try booking a passage with this ship of fools the next time you're in need of a vacation..
I was surprised how well it had worn and was delighted to hear Doris Day, 23 years old at the making of this film, using the slang of the day, such as "Natch...Natch but def." Carson, Paige and DeFore were great as was the ever-insufferable curmudgeon, Oscar Levant alongside "Cuddles" Sakal, the perennial loveable Jewish uncle.
Watching Romance on the High Seas I could have sworn that the Brothers Warner hijacked one of the plots of an RKO Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers film.
It's got that kind of silliness in the plot, the usual case of mistaken identities and false suspicions that characterized the Astaire- Rogers films.Don DeFore and Janis Paige are a couple each of who swears the other is cheating.
Romance on the High Seas has all the ingredients of one of their films except the dance numbers.It doesn't lack for a good musical score though.
Jule Styne and Sammy Cahn came up with a good one where Day sings several songs, including the Academy Award nominated, It's Magic.
She's so radiant and sings so well, I can't believe she was a third choice for this film behind Judy Garland and Betty Hutton.If you hear violins coming from some unknown source it will be the magic when you're watching Romance on the High Seas..
Romance on the High Seas is not only my favorite Doris Day movie, but it's also one of my favorite old movies!
I've yet to see a man look at a woman in real life the way Jack Carson looks at Doris Day in Romance on the High Seas.
Everyone works beautifully off each other, and the natural but tight timing of the jokes is remarkable.It's hard to believe that Romance on the High Seas was Doris Day's first movie; she'd made a name for herself with her singing and Hollywood gave her a break by introducing her in a leading role.
Everyone has their favorites-Gone with the Wind, The King and I, and Atonement come to mind-and Doris Day's metallic blue gown designed by Milo Anderson in Romance on the High Seas is one of my all-time favorite film dresses.
Being a fan of Doris Day, particularly in 'Calamity Jane', her outings with Gordon McRae and her comedies and who considers Michael Curtiz a talented director with 'Casablanca' and 'The Adventures of Robin Hood' masterpieces, 'Romance on the High Seas' was met with high expectations.High expectations that were mostly met, even though all have done better.
"Run, Run, Run" leaves a bad taste in the mouth and "Cuban Rhapsody" feels really out of place.Doris Day however captivates in her first film role, that was initially intended for Betty Hutton.
The songs more than do her and her songs, especially "It's Magic", and they are beautifully staged.Jack Carson is a charming and witty leading man, while Janis Page steals every scene she's in.
Doris even manages to look enraptured opposite the slightly snarky Jack Carson, and sings "It's Magic" three times.
Doris, in her film debut, is assured and pleasant, and so is the movie, in a studio-manufactured kind of way..
So, Doris ended up singing with a band, and later, it was obvious that Kappelhoff was not the right name for a professional singer although later some sexy lady by the name of Lollibrigida would not fare so bad with an unpronounceable name, but anyway, she was asked what her favorite song was, so the story goes, and she said, "Day by Day" and that's how Doris Kapplehoff became Doris Day. Then later she would do some Hollywood Musical Shorts for the movies, but nothing happened until she was spotted for her singing talent because of her hit record "Sentimental Journey" with Les Brown and His Band of Renown, and then Warner Brothers made the call, and she said, "No!" She wanted nothing to do with Hollywood, but eventually with a little coaxing by Jack Carson telling her that they needed her and the picture was set to go, she finally said yes, but to only one picture, and that was to be that!
One of the finest Hollywood directors Hollywood would ever see, the very underrated Michael Curtiz guided her through the picture, and the greatest songs composed for a singers debut in the movies, and of course, the hit song, "It's Magic" became another hit for Doris Day on the record charts, although, I've always preferred "It's You Or No One For Me" to be the better of the two, and "Put It In a Box, Tie It With a Ribbon" coming second in my opinion!
Doris Day was a huge radio and recording star when she appeared in "Romance on the High Seas".
So they each come up with a plan...she pays Georgia (Doris Day) to pretend to be her and take a cruise while she stays home and secretly keeps an eye on him.
All in all, this is the sort of fun picture Warner Brothers could make best...and you can't help but enjoy it.By the way, while Defore and Paige receive higher billing, clearly Doris Day was the star or at least co-star of the film.
Day's feature film debut is in this Technicolor musical-comedy.
She plays a singer posing as a society girl on a South American Cruise, falling in love with the private detective (Carson) who was hired to follow her.
Story is certainly out of style now, but is enjoyable thanks to some funny moments with the cast and Day's singing, most memorably `It's Magic!'.
This film feels like a cornucopia--a real assemblage of small pleasures that add up to plenty of enjoyment.Filmed in Technicolor, "Romance on the High Seas", tells the simple story of a dysfunctional married couple--Janis Paige as Elvira and Don DeFore as Michael--who look for reasons to distrust one another.
Doris Day, in her film debut, plays a gum chewing club singer, the woman Elvira gets to take her place on the cruise.
All of the stars play their parts well, with Ms. Day practically jumping off the screen with enthusiasm and presence.Most of the songs by Styne and Cahn are enjoyable, if not remarkable.
Doris Day makes her screen-debut as a band singer who gets a free cruise to South America and Jack Carson is the private detective who tails her and naturally falls in love with her spunky charm.
The main part of the film is set aboard a cruise ship where Georgia (Doris Day) is pretending to be Mrs Kent (on Mrs Kent's instruction while the real Mrs Kent stays behind to spy on her husband) and detective Peter Virgil (Jack Carson) is hired to watch who he believes to be the real Mrs Kent by Mr Kent, who thinks that his wife is going on the cruise with someone else.
The 2 songs not sung by Doris Day are terrible, while the other songs span the musical spectrum from bad to sentimental codswallop.As for the cast, they are fine with the acting honours going to Janis Paige.
At times it is a Doris Day showcase, at others an anyone-can-joiner, with Jack Carson piping up for a calypso number, and then there is "Tourist Trade", sung by Avon Long and choreographed by Busby Berkely, which is a nice little addition but sits oddly with the rest of the production.This was the screen debut of Doris Day, in a role originally intended for Betty Hutton.
The standout performances come from the smaller roles, as we see Oscar Levant at his cynical best, or the brief but welcome appearance by 30s regular Eric Blore.The director is Michael Curtiz, not a man one would associate with musicals or comedies, and yet he got assigned a fair few of them around this point in his career.
He doesn't give enough time or pacing to the comedy scenes, and this is especially apparent at the finale in Rio where the characters all begin bumping into each other.In short Romance on the High Seas is bit of a mess, at least structurally.
Can we put Doris Day's films in a box and throw THEM in the deep blue sea?.
I guess I'll never understand Doris Day's popularity.Anyway, "Romance On The High Seas" has a tired mistaken-identity plot, with none of the charm you'll find in other movies that use this plot device (Astaire/Rogers films, for instance).
Ho hum.Oddly, Jack Carson actually plays the Desirable Romantic Lead in this film, which leaves Oscar Levant to play the wisecrackin' shmuck who doesn't get the girl.
Too bad Janis Paige didn't sing any of them, just to mix things up & give us a break from Doris (whose songs were sometimes only a few minutes apart!) Paige *could* sing, contrary to the claims made by her hubby in the film.
That movie was much better written than this one, (and Niven far more charming than Carson), but you still have to watch Doris bird-walk across the screen.
The movie is enjoyable for Day's entertaining debut, and some well-selected songs.
****** Romance on the High Seas (1948) Michael Curtiz ~ Doris Day, Jack Carson, Janis Paige.
The leads are all quite good, and Doris Day is a smash hit in her first ever movie and starring role.
Michael Curtiz directs a very good story for film, and Busby Berkeley directs a couple of nice dance numbers.
Peter Virgil (Jack Carson) and Oscar Farrar (Oscar Levant) have both been stood up by their girlfriends (the same person, Doris Day, playing Georgia Garrett and impersonating Elvira Kent).
Table seven."Elvira Kent (Janis Paige): "Won't you sit down?" Georgia: "Don't be surprised if I do." Elvira: "That's cute." Elvira, later: "Just remember that while its your lips that are being kissed, it's my reputation that will be suffering." Georgia: "Yeah, I'll make a note of that." Elvira: "Good!"Peter Virgil (Jack Carson): "Look, don't worry.
In Doris Day's film debut, she sings "It's Magic".
Co-produced and directed by Michael Curtiz, with a screenplay by Julius & Philip Epstein and additional dialogue from I.A.L. Diamond, this slightly above average musical comedy was Doris Day's first film.
A busy executive (Don DeFore) is worried about his wife (Janis Paige) straying on a cruise she's taking by herself such that he hires a private detective (Jack Carson) to keep tabs on her.
What he doesn't know is that his wife has hired a singer (Ms. Day) to pretend to be her on the cruise such that she can stay home to see if her husband is cheating on her with his secretary (Leslie Brooks).A recognizable supporting cast that includes Oscar Levant, S.
Z. Sakall, Eric Blore, Fortunio Bonanova, Franklin Pangborn, and even Grady Sutton (uncredited) makes this one fun to watch.Married three years and having yet to take a trip since their honeymoon, Mrs. Elvira Kent (Paige) is determined that the third time will be a charm.
Dated debut of Doris Day for the first time with Cuddles.
The name stars are Jack Carson, Janis Paige, Don deFore, Oscar Levant and Cuddles Szakall who acts for the first time with debut star Doris Day. There seems something stilted about the place as Doris shines yet seems unpolished.
There are just too many mix ups of Doris not really acting a great scene with Cuddles as she usually does as well as not liking Oscar Levant though people think she is running off with him.
It's certainly one of Doris Day's best, and it's remarkable to realize this was her very first feature film.
Her chemistry with Jack Carson is off the charts, and I think the chemistry between the co-leads, Janis Paige and Don DeFore is just as good.
Throw in some of Hollywood's finest and funniest character actors like S.Z. Sakall, Eric Blore and Franklin Pangborn, plus Oscar Levant, and you have one of the best motion pictures of 1948.
When Day assumes the identify of Paige's character and then falls in love with a detective played by Carson, who's been hired by DeFore, it leads to an on-going game of "who's on first" that only builds with rib-tickling intensity.
When you've got a song like "Put Em' in a Box, Tie it With a Ribbon, and Throw Him in the Deep Blue Sea" and have it sung by Doris Day, you know you've got a star in the making.
The story is a silly one; Society queen Janis Paige is so sure that her husband is cheating on her, she hires Doris to take her place on a cruise, not realizing that her own husband has hired a private investigator (Jack Carson) to follow her, believing she too is foolin' around.
Everybody ends up on the ship together later on to create more confusion, and Day worms her way into everybody's hearts not only with her plucky personality but by singing those two songs as well as the energetic "I'm in Love, I'm in Love..." Not only does Carson fall for her, so does Paige's cuddly uncle (S.Z. Sakall, in one of three movies he appeared with Doris in).
Despite getting third (or fourth, depending on which source you look into) billing, ROMANCE ON THE HIGH SEAS is Doris Day's show from the moment we get the first image of her -- or her back, as she stands pensively in front of the travel agency she is about to enter.
Paige's husband, also suspicious of his wife, sends a detective (Jack Carson) to do surveillance on her, unsuspecting that Day is impersonating Paige (rather badly, but what would he know?
We do, and it's a great, breezy delight to see Day and Carson, who from here on remain on screen, play against each other, neither aware of the other's identity.
It's no better and certainly no worse than any of them and Warners didn't stint on casting, throwing in a string of 'reliables' like Eric Blore, Franklin Pangborn, late of RKO and Paramount respectively and from their own roster Jack Carson, Oscar Levant and S.Z.
Day Is Magic In Film Debut.
In Romance On The High Seas, her film debut, Day plays a struggling singer who daydreams about world travel by milling around a travel agency weekly.
Paige makes a proposition with Day to impersonate her on a cruise, so Paige can spy on her husband played by Don Defore, who will think Paige is a long ways away.
Meanwhile, Defore hires a private detective, Jack Carson, to tail his wife impersonated by Day on the cruise.
Before the fadeout, Day has time to sing a few songs most notably of which is the Oscar-nominated "It's Magic". |
tt0088066 | Scream for Help | Christie, a teenage girl discovers that her stepfather Paul is trying to murder her and her mother Karen for her money, but when she tries to tell other people about it, no one will believe her. After a maintenance worker dies in the basement, Christie believes Paul set the trap for her mother after she saw him leave the basement the previous night. Christie begins following Paul everywhere and discovers he is having an affair with a young attractive woman named Brenda. She is caught by Brenda's brother Lacey but manages to run away. Paul convinces Karen that Brenda is a client of his and she believes him over her daughter.
Christie convinces Josh, her best friend Janey's boyfriend to accompany her to catch Paul, but the brakes to her mother's car have been tampered with almost killing them. Christie and Janey discover Paul and Brenda at a motel and run when Paul sees them, Janey tells Christie she is pregnant for Josh, but moments later is killed in a hit and run by an unseen driver. Christie tells the police that Paul killed Janey, intending to kill her, but she is not believed. Josh sticks up for Christie after she is bullied and blamed for Janey's death, later she loses her virginity to Josh, but they are interrupted by Paul, who orders Josh to leave, when Christie goes to the bathroom she notices gas, which Paul is aware of and now knows Paul is trying to kill her too as she would be entitled to her mother's inheritance before he would be. Karen also falls down the stairs after a trap Paul set for her and needs a wheelchair to get around. Christie takes a picture of Paul and Brenda having sex, but drops the picture and is seen by them, while retrieving the picture she overhears that Brenda and Lacey are in fact a married couple who plan to blackmail Paul after he kills Karen and Christie. She shows her mother the picture and Paul is ordered to leave.
At midnight, Paul, Brenda and Lacey invade the house and force Christie and Karen to the basement and reveal their plans to kill them both at 2 a.m. and blame it on a burglar. Christie tells Paul about the real relationship between Brenda and Lacey, which angers him. Christie tricks Brenda into letting her out to go to the bathroom, while Karen cuts the electricity to the house from the basement, giving Christie a chance to run and stab both Lacey and Paul. After Brenda attacks Karen and turns the lights back on Christie surrenders herself to Lacey and both victims are forced back to the basement where they devise another plan to escape by wetting the fuse box.
At 2 a.m. they are ordered upstairs, but are interrupted by Josh who knocks at the door, Lacey orders Christie to open the door and get rid of him. Josh is suspicious and informs the police. When the electricity goes off, both mother and daughter flee their attackers, Lacey orders Brenda to go to the basement and turn the lights back on, however the wet fuse box electrocutes Brenda. After almost catching Karen, Lacey runs to the basement after hearing Brenda's scream and finds her dead. Christie tricks Paul into believing she is in her bathroom, when Paul enters the gas filled bathroom with a lighter, it explodes and he is killed. Josh saves Christie from the burning house.
With their ordeal over, Christie and Karen reside at another house temporarily, when Josh comes over to kiss Christie, Lacey appears and hits Josh and plans to kill Christie for what she did to Brenda, Christie pulls out a knife and stabs Lacey through the stomach, killing him. | murder | train | wikipedia | Played with such over-the-top antics and foul-mouthed bombast by Rachael Kelly, this single performance makes this movie one of the sleaziest and most entertaining eighties bad movies I have ever seen.
Young Christie thinks that Paul Fox, who has recently married Chrisite's mother Karen, is a conniving philanderer who is only after their money and wants the both of them dead.
She's right of course but the problem is getting anyone to believe her since she's such an abrasive little bitch that nobody wishes to come near her let alone listen to her petty conspiracy theories.
Christie looks into the window to see Paul engaged in a little back door sex with a mysterious woman which she promptly takes a picture of.
This escalates the war between Paul and Christie with the dopey Karen caught in the middle trying to make nice with both of them.
From here on you might need a shower as the seediness pours through every scene as Christie and Paul try to out scum each other.
Along for the ride are Christie's acquaintances, I can't see her having any friends, the extremely large busted Janey (you'll know what I mean) and her boyfriend Josh.
When Janey is run down by Paul Christie grieves like any good friend would do by losing her virginity to her boyfriend.
This leads to one of the funniest lines when Josh comes over to see her only to be shot down when Christie says that she was looking for anyone to pop her cherry "even the garbage man".
A final showdown ensues as Karen and Christie become hostages in their mansion as Paul, his partner/double crosser Brenda and her husband Lacey battle wits with the vicious teen.
Every time Christie thinks she's got Paul dead to rights he manages to get away unscathed.
"Scream for Help" is the very definition of why a really good "bad movie" trumps the pretentious crap that poses for theatrical fare today.
Like most of Winner's work, it is loud, as subtle as a sledgehammer, full of nasty expletives and downright mean-spirited.
He's not afraid to alienate more sensitive viewers and he never goes for suggestion when a lurid close-up will do.The idea of showing everything from the perspective of a young girl is a good one and it's novel to watch little Rachael Kelly, as Christie Cromwell, riding around on her bike as she pokes her nose into her stepdaddy's sordid affairs.The film's final half hour is a rocket ride of sleaze, violence and brutality and testament to Winner's blazing talent for garish overstatement.You'll be a better human being if you miss this, but a lesser trash monger..
A teen girl suspects that her step dad is trying to off her mom so he can inherit her millions.
Beware though, the film is very graphic, both sexually and violently, but it's kept at a reasonable level (like two shots of Lorre topless, only one shot of Clark's gigantor boobs).
It is just like the director had a plot that would really need a three hour long movie to unfold naturally, but had to speed things up a little.The characters in this movie aren't really afraid of anything.
Under normal circumstances, a 16-year-old girl would be terrified most of the movie, and never know what to do.
I Liked It. i thought this was a pretty good movie for its time.
Its about a girl who knows her step father is trying to kill her and her mother for their money but no one will believe her and finally the step father holds them hostage in their house.
Its a pretty good movie the ending makes up for the slow beginning..
I like this movie a lot.
The young actress who stars in this film is quite effective, and I have to wonder why she didn't get a career boost, after this one.I'd like to purchase this film, if it is ever released on DVD..
All the warning signs pointed to Scream for Help being a bad film; it's practically unknown, directed by Michael Winner (who.
let's face it, doesn't have a track record for making the best films), it has a low IMDb rating and the plot is generic and largely unoriginal; but despite all of this, Scream for Help triumphs over adversity and can stand tall as one of the most fun trash flicks ever made!
The plot focuses on Christie Cromwell; a teenage girl with a problem.
She believes that her stepfather Paul Fox is trying to murder her and her mother so he can inherit a fortune; but no one will believe her!
Luckily for her, however, Paul is a bumbling buffoon when it comes to murder, and you can only fail to kill someone so many times before you get caught out...The way that Winner handles the film is terrible, but somehow great at the same time.
There's some horrendous use of music in this film, and the tone of the movie often changes in a heartbeat; but all this works well as Winner keeps the audience on their toes, and the film never tries to be anything other than a trash flick.
Winner inserts sex, nudity, blood and nasty death scenes into this film; and while it's extremely over the top and not really in-fitting with the plot, that's Winner's style and he certainly knows how to deliver an entertaining trashy movie.
The film plays out from her perspective, and her voice-overs again offset the rest of the film as its sort of like a little girl's diary, with sex, blood and a murder plot.
Overall, Scream for Help might not do much for a lot of people - but I had a great time with it, and therefore the film comes highly recommended!.
Sometimes you need a movie to riff on with your buddies like MST3K, and Scream for Help (which never received a proper release in the US) is there to help.
You will not believe how bad this movie is!.
This movie plays like a 70's horror flick crossed with a 70's ABC after school special.
Michael Winner again misses actual greatness by a light year, but achieves inadvertent greatness in trafficking crap with his slapdash approach to film-making.
The dopey plot involves a high school girl (Rachael Kelly) who believes her stepfather is trying to kill her mom.The dippy sub-Nancy Drew exploits are periodically interrupted by typical Winner sleaziness including completely gratuitous nudity.
As with most Winner movies, it's shot haphazardly and unimaginatively.
Most of Winner's movies are, for me.
Christie Cromwell is convinced that her new stepdad Paul Fox is trying to murder her mother for their money.But nobody believes 17-year old girl.First she proves that Paul is having an affair that Paul with a woman named Brenda Bohle played by sexy Lolita Lorre and stepfather is kicked out from the house.Soon he is back with Brenda and a thug named Lacey-ready to terrorize and kill...Sleazy and depraved home invasion thriller with plenty of nudity,sex and nasty violence.The main character of Christie is downright annoying.She loses her cherished virginity to her dead friend's boyfriend.The acting is solid and there are some suspenseful scenes,so if you are a fan of 80's horror watch "Scream for Help" as soon as possible.9 out of 10..
i mean , i like 80's movies but this one just has to go, me and my cousin watch it just for laughs.
Rachel Kelly stars as an Ami Dolenz look-alike who dresses like a Valley Girl who REALLY needs style counseling.
Only the young girl knows this and no one wants to believe it.
Despite thefact the girl can drive she decides to do alot of her investigating on a bicycle,which leads to some of the more outlandishly funny scenes of the movie,with hysterical music pounding away as she bicycles around with fear in heart.
if you do wanna see a cheesy minor-cult-status movie,by all means rent SCREAM FOR HELP.
I just finished watching it now, and yes, it has to be one of the worst movies of its year.
(As it turned out, Winner also edited the movie under the pseudonym "Arnold Crust")I must also add that the movie also has one of the WORST musical scores I have ever heard for a thriller in my life, being both strident and unsubtle.
I will admit that the climatic 20 or so minutes do have a little spark and suspense, but then what good will the movie managed to build in those 20 minutes is ruined with Winner's stupid concluding scene.
On the back of the video box, there is a quote from Winner stating, "SCREAM FOR HELP is one of the most terrifying scripts I've ever read".
"Scream for Help" is yet another fun 80's slasher movie, where a young girl believes that her stepfather is trying to kill her mother, and so in usual fashion the girl becomes all Nancy Drew and sets out to prove her theory right, which then unravels when him and his gang come after her and her mother and terrorizes them.Yes this movie is very cheesy which I love and very 80's which again I love, the central character of Christine who along with her friends start sleuthing was fun, and plus when she falls for the boy next door that was also hilarious in true 80's fashion.
The mix of teenage antics and slasher movie terrority both really work well together and even gels at an even pace and does create a decent amount of suspense especially during the final showdown.All in all "Scream for Help" is just a fun time waster..
Certainly not as bad as some make out, this 1984 Winner movie filmed in New York does take a while to really get going.
From the moment the movie begins, you know you're in for something special.
between the odd, out of place gore and the gratuitous sex scenes, it was hard to keep in mind the underlying struggle of finding out your stepdad wants to murder your mom.
Nobody believes Christy that her step dad is trying to kill her mom & her..
I saw this movie a lot in the 80's and just saw it again recently.If your looking for a suspenseful thriller don't look here.If you want to see some bad acting with some way over the top cheesy music that will make you laugh,look here.
Cute(but dumpy)Christy suspects her no good step dad is trying to hurt her mom & herself.Watch as she cuts three straight days of school to follow him in his car on her bike(very funny).Watch as she drags her best friend along which leads to her death(not funny,but not sad).Watch as DAYS later she loses her virginity with her best friend's boyfriend(hilarious).The end has a final confrontation that reminded me of the home alone movies,but this isn't suppose to be a comedy.I admit I was in hysterics the way the mom was flung around in her wheelchair.This is definitely a so bad its good type movie.I enjoyed it for all the wrong reasons.If your looking for something similar but better check out The Stepfather with Terry O'Quinn..
Admittedly Michael Winner will probably never win a lifetime-achievement honorary award for his career as a director, but damned did that man ever knew how to make entertaining & hugely exciting movies!
Apart from some of the films he shot with the legendary Charles Bronson (the "Death Wish"-series, "The Mechanic"), most of his work sadly ended up in oblivion rather quick, and this "Scream for Help" might even be the absolute most obscure and painfully forgotten movie Winner ever made.
Christie Cromwell is a hyperactive & stubborn teenager who's convinced that her handsome but vicious stepfather Paul Fox intends to kill her mother and run off with the family fortune.
Christie uncovers his affair with the sluttish Brenda and tries to warn her friends as well as the police about a variety of failed murder attempts, but no one believes her.
Even when she can finally prove the murder conspiracy with photographic evidence, the nightmare isn't over yet, as Paul and his psychopathic accomplices return to kill both the mother and Christie!
The main storyline of "Scream for Help" is pure gold already (at least, to exploitation/trash fanatics it is) but particularly the sub plots are almost too demented for words.
"Scream for Help" is stuffed with socially incorrect elements like this (there's also rape, misogynistic violence and the pushing of people in a wheelchair down the stairs), making it easily one of the most genuine cinematic trash-highlights I've ever beheld.
The teenage girl is more skilled in preparing booby traps than the entire A-Team all together, Lolita Lorre (as Brenda) is undoubtedly the hottest chick to have appeared in ONE film only and there's a terrifically absurd and implausible "he's-not-dead-yet" climax!
Several of the reviews and user-comments I encountered on "Scream for Help" complain that the music misfits the nature of the film and that the camera placements were horrible more than just occasionally.
Scream for Help opens like a made-for-TV Nancy Drew mystery, with plucky teenager Christie Cromwell (Rachael Kelly) investigating her stepfather Paul Fox (David Allen Brooks), who she believes is trying to murder her wealthy mother (Marie Masters).
It's not long, however, before director Michael 'Death Wish' Winner grows weary of this softly-softly approach, and adopts a more exploitative style, starting with gratuitous sex and ending with a violent 'home-invasion' set-up that ultimately makes his film more akin to a video nasty.Winner's handling of Tom Holland's risible script is amazingly ham-fisted throughout, and the acting is generally just as atrocious (it was only Kelly's second screen role but it would also be her last), but it is this technical ineptitude, along with all the nudity and violence, that makes this film such an unmissable treat for fans of trashy cinema.6/10 for being so entertaining despite being so bad, plus an extra point for the unforgettable Lolita Lorre in her one and only screen role as Brenda Bohle, Paul Fox's sexy partner in crime: not only does she go absolutely starkers for a surprisingly graphic sex scene, but she also has the best death, electrocuted in a trap prepared by the ever resourceful Christie..
the only reason to watch this movie.
2 words: Lolita Lorre If there was ever a poll of the 10 most beautiful, sexiest actresses to only be in one movie, she would make the list.Now if you find yourself watching a movie with bad acting, bad writing, bad music, and bad cinematography, you really can only hope for 2 things- lots of gore, or lots of nudity.
For those who care, I'll give a brief plot description(using actors names): Rachel Kelly, for little if any reason, comes to the suspect that her step-dad(David Brooks) is trying to kill her mother(Marie Masters).
She turns out to be right, of course, and she also discovers, while following her step-dad, that he is cheating on her mother with Lolita Lorre.
Scream for this movie to end..
I'm not adverse to a bad B-rate but please give us viewers credit for having a LITTLE intelligence.**Spoiler Alert** Storyline - Teenage girl has wants to expose her scheming stepfather's (Paul) plan to kill her wealthy mother.
But as bad film rules dictate, no one will believe her.
Over the top is Lacey's philosophy that its OK if his wife has sex with Paul, just as long as she doesn't enjoy it.Maybe this film is its down to a choice of this or burping all the tupperware..
The doctor just comes out and blatantly says - with not a hint of remorse in his words - "Your daughter is dead!" and walks the heck off.Another thing...the girl starts sleeping with her dead best friend's (who's dead, btw because of her and her spying) boyfriend.If you're looking for some cheesy, campy, cheap flick with a cliché for a plot then rent this.You won't be disappointed!.
Lousy thriller which frequently feels like it's intended as a bad joke at the audience's expense..
While watching Scream For Help, one can't help but wonder if the film is intentionally inept or just hopelessly inept.
The overbearing music, the ridiculous acting, the laughable plot developments, the risible dialogue
all these things surely point to some kind of bad joke at the audience's expense courtesy of director Michael Winner?
But then, if the film IS a deliberate exercise in bad taste and terrible film-making, one must wonder what is the point in it ever having been made at all?
Angry teen Christie Cromwell (Rachael Kelly) lives in a huge suburban house with her mother Karen (Marie Masters) and her new stepfather Paul (David Brooks).
Christie keeps a secret diary chronicling what is going on in her life, and her latest entries are dominated by suspicions that Paul is, in fact, plotting to murder her mum.
With everyone dismissing her theories as paranoid fantasy, Christie decides to gather more evidence so she starts following Paul everywhere he goes.
Soon she discovers that he is having a torrid affair with Brenda Bohle (Lolita Lorre), and the plot thickens when she overhears the pair of them discussing their plans to murder Karen and Christie.
Christie finally succeeds in convincing her mum that her life is in danger, but it looks like her warnings have been heeded too late when the three scheming villains besiege them in their house, locking them in the cellar and vowing to kill them before dawn.There's no reason why Scream For Help couldn't have been a decent little thriller.
Unfortunately, Winner doesn't handle anything in his film effectively at all.
There isn't a single believable moment in the entire movie – the bad guys are thuggish idiots who could barely plan a pool-party, let alone a murder; while Christie is an impossibly resourceful teenager who takes everything (including life-threatening danger and her own impending murder) coolly in her stride.
At least the film has a remarkably fitting title – Scream For Help, indeed! |
tt0164167 | Sidewalks of New York | Harmon (Keaton) is a wealthy landlord. When he goes to visit one of his tenements, he gets caught in the middle of a brawl between groups of kids, one of whom, Clipper Kelly (Phillips) starts to attack Harmon. When Harmon defends himself, he is seen by Clipper's sister, Margie (Page). Harmon falls in love at first sight and begins to woo her following his trial for attacking Clipper. In order to demonstrate that he is okay, Harmon opens a gymnasium for the street boys, but Clipper, who has fallen in with a small-time gangster, Butch (Rowan), wants nothing to do with Harmon and turns the other boys against him.
Harmon tries to win them over by staging a wrestling match with his friend Poggle (Edwards) and a rigged boxing match with Mulvaney (Saylor). In the meantime, Butch has gotten Clipper involved in a series of robberies with Clipper dressed as a woman. When Butch and Clipper believe Harmon has learned of their activities, Butch orders Clipper to kill Harmon during a stage play that is being performed at the gymnasium, but Clipper gets cold feet. Butch grabs Harmon, who is dressed in Clipper's drag costume, and heads up to Harmon's mansion to rob it. Butch's gang joins them and Clipper and the other boys come to Harmon's rescue. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | Obscure cast in surprisingly good film.. There must be at least a hundred boxing movies about the scrappy ethnic kid who hopes that prizefighting will be a ticket out of the slums. Here's the mixture as before ... except that this time the prizefighting kid is female.'Sidewalks of New York' (what an original title!) was a low-budget independent American production, apparently shot in New York City. I'm not aware that it was ever released in Europe. I managed to Steenbeck a print in the possession of a European collector: parts of the film had deteriorated, and some of the intertitles had been cut out ... apparently by someone intending to edit this movie for European audiences by inserting translated titles. Because of the print's condition, I can't be certain of the names of all the characters (these were often changed when silent films were translated), nor the names of all the actors in the cast. Here goes.Rosa (played by Manilla Martan) is the motherless daughter of an elderly tailor (Bernard Siegel) on Manhattan's lower East Side. The tailor is a pacifist with an utter abhorrence of violence. (So why does he live in New York City?) He wants Rosa to marry Sylvester, a nice young man just off the boat from Italy. But Rosa's not having any: she's secretly planning to punch her way out of poverty and pauperdom by donning boxing gloves and becoming a prizefighter. We see actress Martan stripped down to boxing togs: she's healthy enough but clearly no athlete. Not remotely like Hilary Swank as a toned and buff she-boxer in 'Million Dollar Baby'.Abovestairs to the tailor's shop is a gym run by a villainous chap with the wonderful name Spike Muggins (played by an actor with the vastly less wonderful name Templar Saxe, who has no Saxe appeal). Muggins by name but no muggins by nature, he has a little daughter Mary whom he beats, mistreats and nearly works to death in a subplot right out of Dickens. Mary Muggins is played by a child actress cried Hanna Lee, who looks about ten years old here. Rosa is training in Spike's gym for the championship bout against a visiting boxer from England. The champ is a woman, too.When the tailor learns that his daughter is (gasp!) a pugilist, he throws her out into the street! This is utterly ridiculous. Considering the other livelihoods available to a young woman in the slums, why is prizefighting so shameful?SPOILERS AHEAD. The climax, of course, is the boxing match. Rosa and the English boxer (I didn't get her name) square off in the ring, wearing no discernible chest protection apart from singlets and (apparently) brassieres. They don't seem to be wearing mouth protectors, either. They trade punches in boxing gloves, but seem to be avoiding direct booms to each other's bazooms. Rosa, of course, wins by a knockout. The referee has an annoying little moustache; I was hoping Rosa would punch him in the upper lip..All ends happily, with Rosa finding love ... no, not with Sylvester, nor with the Englishwoman. (Despite both of them being female athletes.) Oh, and little Mary's subplot becomes even more Dickensian when she's reunited with her real parents, from whom Spike Muggins abducted her in infancy. Mary's parents are, of course, wealthy. Did someone mention a million-dollar baby?Despite the low budget and some other problems, this is actually an enjoyable movie ... but there's a major implausibility at its centre. Were there actually female boxing matches in 1923? And did they pay the boxers well enough to justify Rosa's aspirations of getting out of the slum? In 1923, only four years after American women got the vote, and when many women were still wearing corsets, the fair sex were considered such delicate creatures that I have great difficulty believing that a distaff boxing match could be openly staged as a lawful sporting event.Still, maybe the female boxers in this movie are the reason why a prizefighter's booty is called a 'purse'. Speaking of booties: Manilla Martan's booty is reasonably attractive in boxing strip.There are the further implausibilities of the tailor's reaction to his daughter's vocation (of course he welcomes her back once she wins a lot of money) and the downright Victorian subplot concerning wee Mary. Everyone here tries hard, though, on both sides of the camera.On its merits, and despite its unimaginative title, I'll give 'Sidewalks of New York' 5 out of 10, and one point extra for that great character name Spike Muggins! Total: 6 in 10. |
tt3554418 | Khoobsurat | Dr. Mrinalini 'Mili' Chakravarti (Sonam Kapoor) is a physiotherapist who works for the IPL. Her mother Manju (Kirron Kher) hopes that she will find a man someday, stating that it will be even better if he belongs to royalty. As fate would have it, her services are called for by a royal family whose king's legs are failing him.
Mili travels to the Sambhalgarh palace and meets the rigid queen, Nirmala Devi Rathore (Ratna Pathak), who is not amused by Mili's enthusiasm and clumsiness. Mili finds that her casual way of living does not appeal to the royal family whose strict disciplinary rules demand otherwise. She meets Yuvraj Vikram Singh Rathore (Fawad Khan), the prince, whose distant personality makes him similar to his parents. Mili also discovers that Divya, the youngest child of the family, has an interest in acting and is planning to run away from home. Mili befriends Divya and tries to convince her to not run away.
The king keeps avoiding his exercise and this troubles Mili because she is determined to cure him, so she turns to Vikram for help. He gives Mili the same answer that the queen gave her, "if she cannot handle the job, she may leave". Mili gets furious and accuses the royal family of being stubborn, rigid and self-centered. Vikram reconsiders, but the king refuses. Just when Mili is deciding to leave, she learns the reason for the king's unwillingness to be cured from the royal servant Ram Sevak. Ten years ago, Ambar, the family's eldest son, died in a car crash. The king had gifted a sports convertible to him and the two went for a ride. Ambar lost control of the car due to over-speeding and died, and the King's legs became disabled and he went into a coma for six months. Since then, the queen changed. The Palace used to be fun and everyone would throw parties and laugh but after the accident, everybody changed.
Mili shames the king into getting over his guilt and forces him to perform his exercises. Mili tries to befriend the king by making him tell her about wine and play video games; she speaks to the king about the 10 year old accident with Ambar and persuades him to exercise. Once the king persuades the prince to take Mili with him to Surajgarh Palace. After that, the prince leaves Mili in the market and goes to a meeting. Mili gets kidnapped, and when Vikram saves her, they both kiss.
The next day, they both decide to forget about it but the two start falling for each other. Mili confesses her love for him but Vikram refuses to acknowledge it, saying that they come from two different stocks. He is also engaged to a lady of his status Kiara (Aditi Rao Hydari). Divya runs away to try out for auditions in Jaipur. Mili informs the queen that she knew about Divya's plans. The queen becomes furious and Mili is ordered to leave. Divya returns and tells Nirmala that she came back because of Mili. The king surprises Nirmala by standing up from his wheelchair and admits that he saw Divya run away. He tells her that this is what Mili has been trying to teach them; to love life as it is. Mili, however, is heartbroken due to Vikram's refusal. Vikram breaks off his engagement with Kiara and confesses his love for Mili and the royal couple gives him their blessings, telling him to go find her in Delhi. Vikram finds her house and finds out that Mili is gone for therapy. He goes to the place where she is being treated. Vikram is shocked to see the place. It is actually a paintball arena. Mili agrees to his proposal. She does shoot paintballs on Vikram. Vikram wins Mili's mother's approval by proposing to Mili in her style, and hence, as the wife of Vikram Singh Rathore, Mili is given the title of The Royal Misfit. | humor | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0164082 | Last Rites | Father Michael is a New York priest with close ties to the Mafia crime syndicate — his father is a don. The priest's brother-in-law Gino, a mafia boss, is murdered while having sex with Angela, a mistress. She narrowly escapes by hiding in a bathroom and locking the door.
Pursued by hitmen, the mistress comes to the priest for confession. She is afraid to go to the police so Father Mike agrees to meet her at her choice of location. A cab driver transports him to a loft apartment, telling him a sorrowful tale of how Angela has helped him and his wife with the grief over losing a young son. Father Mike confronts her about knowing his relationship to Gino. She denies knowing the connection. When the two encounter the hitmen, the priest is wounded and one of the hitmen recognizes Father Mike.
Angela hides in his church. She tells him it was Gino's wife who shot him. Gino is buried, and Father Mike glares across the casket at his sister Zena, having seen her with the hitmen when he was shot. He speaks to his father, who says he expects to lose at his racketeering trial and be sent to prison. The Don tells the priest that his sister wants to run the business, but he has said no since she's a woman. As they leave the cemetery, the hitman tells the Don and Zena that he recognized Michael.
Zena comes to confession and tells Father Mike that she knows of him helping the girl. The priest begins to fall in love with Angela. He meets best friend Nuzo, a detective and godson of his father. Nuzo tells him not to trust her. He tells Mike that Gino gave evidence to a rival crime syndicate, which sealed the Don's fate, in return for 5 million dollars. Nuzo tells him to sit tight while he makes an arrest, but Nuzo is gunned down, dying in Mike's arms.
Father Mike and Angela flee to Mexico, heading for her village. For the first time the priest violates his vows and they have sex. In the morning she is gone. Meanwhile, the Don finds out they are in Mexico and sends Zena to kill the girl. Father Mike races to catch up to Angela, thwarting another hitman along the way. He arrives in the village in time for a festival.
Angela is a fraud who set Gino up and took the money. She is also married to the "cabbie" she sent to pick him up. Now she instructs her husband to kill him. He stops at the festival and Michael spots him. He witnesses the cabbie drive away in the rental car Angela took.
Michael goes to the hotel and finds a surprised Angela. He lies that he loves her and they have sex again. She awakens to see Michael sitting in a chair, staring at her. He stands, walks to the door and leaves her, saying "via con Dios" as he goes. She is stunned to see Zena step through the door. Zena shoots her as Michael continues down the steps past the body of the "cabbie." He gets into a limo and waits for Zena. She sits next to him and says "thank you, brother." He takes her hand and kisses it as they drive away. | paranormal, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0087225 | The Ewok Adventure | The galaxy is in the midst of a civil war. Spies for the Rebel Alliance have stolen plans to the Galactic Empire's Death Star, a heavily armed space station capable of destroying an entire planet. Rebel leader Princess Leia has the plans, but her ship is captured by Imperial forces under the command of the evil Darth Vader. Before she is captured, Leia hides the plans in the memory of an astromech droid, R2-D2, along with a holographic recording. R2-D2 flees to the surface of the desert planet Tatooine with C-3PO, a protocol droid.
The droids are captured by Jawa traders, who sell them to moisture farmers Owen and Beru Lars and their nephew Luke Skywalker. While cleaning R2-D2, Luke accidentally triggers part of Leia's message, in which she requests help from Obi-Wan Kenobi. The next morning, Luke finds R2-D2 searching for Obi-Wan, and meets Ben Kenobi, an old hermit who lives in the hills and reveals himself to be Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan tells Luke of his days as one of the Jedi Knights, former Galactic Republic peacekeepers with supernatural powers derived from an energy called The Force, who were all but wiped out by the Empire. Contrary to his uncle's statements, Luke learns that his father, Anakin, fought alongside Obi-Wan as a Jedi Knight. Obi-Wan tells Luke that Vader was his former pupil who turned to the dark side of the Force and killed Anakin. Obi-Wan then presents to Luke his father's weapon – a lightsaber.
Obi-Wan views Leia's complete message, in which she begs him to take the Death Star plans to her home planet of Alderaan and give them to her father for analysis. Obi-Wan invites Luke to accompany him to Alderaan and learn the ways of the Force. Luke declines, but changes his mind after discovering that Imperial stormtroopers searching for C-3PO and R2-D2 have destroyed his home and killed his aunt and uncle. Obi-Wan and Luke hire smuggler Han Solo and his Wookiee first mate Chewbacca to transport them to Alderaan on Han's ship, the Millennium Falcon.
Upon the Falcon's arrival at the location of Alderaan, the group discover that the planet has been destroyed by order of the Death Star's commanding officer, Grand Moff Tarkin, as a show of power. The Falcon is captured by the Death Star's tractor beam and brought into its hangar bay. While Obi-Wan goes to disable the tractor beam, Luke discovers that Leia is imprisoned aboard, and with the help of Han and Chewbacca, rescues her. After several escapes, the group makes its way back to the Falcon. Obi-Wan disables the tractor beam, and on the way back to the Falcon, he engages in a lightsaber duel with Vader. Once he is sure the others can escape, Obi-Wan allows himself to be killed. The Falcon escapes from the Death Star, unknowingly carrying a tracking beacon, which the Empire follows to the Rebels' hidden base on Yavin IV.
The Rebels analyze the Death Star's plans and identify a vulnerable exhaust port that connects to the station's main reactor. Luke joins the Rebel assault squadron, while Han collects his payment for the transport and intends to leave, despite Luke's request that he stay and help. In the ensuing battle, the Rebels suffer heavy losses after several unsuccessful attack runs, leaving Luke as one of the few surviving pilots. Vader leads a squadron of TIE fighters and prepares to attack Luke's X-wing fighter, but Han returns and fires on the Imperials, sending Vader spiraling away. Helped by guidance from Obi-Wan's spirit, Luke uses the Force and successfully destroys the Death Star seconds before it can fire on the Rebel base. Back on Yavin IV, Leia awards Luke and Han with medals for their heroism. | good versus evil, cult, tragedy | train | wikipedia | All right I know, Star Wars is very much enjoyable for adults.
This movie isn't.Everything is about the Ewoks here, those fuzzy little furballs from The Return of the Jedi.
They talk the same way they did there, by operating with such words as 'gunda' (good) or 'feech' (what seems to be an Ewokian cuss-word).Of course there are also humans in the movie, 2 children, who are lost and are looking for their parents in the vast forests of the moon of Endor.
The storyline covers the journey of a little girl and her brother to the hideout of a giant, who apparently holds their parents hostage, with the local Ewoks helping the children throughout their quest.
And I mean tedious even to adults who are otherwise Star Wars fans/addicts.
It's important to note that George Lucas wrote the story, so it's actually the creation of the father of the Star Wars universe and it's got a bit darker, grimmer sequel named The Battle for Endor..
Although many people think this is just a cheap movie made to capitalize on the popularity of the Star Wars films, I see this film and it's sequel as an interesting way to look at the Star Wars Universe when Luke and company aren't around.
I even joked with a young couple at the check-out counter, (who remembered the movies), about how we all liked it as kids.
What I didn't expect was that the movie would hold up after all these years, and mind you, I haven't seen this since the mid or late 80s.A lot of movies we liked as kids age badly due to the fact that we all grow up.
But I found The Ewok Adventure, now called Caravan of Courage, to be just as exciting, fun and charming at 29 as I found the film when I first saw it 20 or so years ago when it debut.
I think that's a compliment given to only the very best of films.There is some, (not all), stop-motion animation special effects that have aged to be sure, but that is to be expected of a made-for-TV movie with a decidedly less expensive budget than the actual Star Wars films.
Most of the time, I was impressed that the Star Wars magic extended beyond the big screen and onto a TV movie.When Return of the Jedi came out, I was like a lot of other hardcore Star Wars fans: I didn't like the seemingly overused furry creatures.
I've lightened up on the little guys, but I don't think hardcore Star Wars fans have anything to fear though.
I found the Ewoks to be even more endearing, brave and charming in their own adventures, which play off as a kind of Goonies: Star Wars style.
Above all, I recommend this movie to anyone because it's one of those special films, (like the original Star Wars movies themselves), that entertain adults and kids.
The film has great characters, has a very fast pace, has a good story and is nicely acted.
Caravan of Courage, the first of two Ewok films is a nice adventure film for kids, but too slow for adults to enjoy.
The film captures the essential elements of what an Ewok film should be like but fails in certain other areas.Firstly the film looks rather messy in comparison to other LucasFilm productions and particularly when compared to its immediate sequel.
The narrator is also more distracting than anything and would sound more appropriate in a nature documentary rather than a children's fantasy adventure film.On the other hand, the film sets itself apart from the bigger SW films quite nicely, feeling more like a fantasy than a science fiction film and having some fairly good special-effects and interesting creatures.
I know it may seem a little goofy to those of you who are big sci-fi buffs and are looking for in-depth high caliber writing, but for those of you who are looking for light hearted fun, this is the movie!
These furry little bears known as "Ewoks" had been related to the STAR WARS legend, but this made-for-TV concoction (and the one following this) has nothing to do with the legendary movies.
It is, of course, an expansion of the STAR WARS universe that reaches into the realms of mystical adventures, while still holding on to the familiar science fiction theme that George Lucas once created.THE EWOK ADVENTURE isn't going to win any awards for its basic storyline, plot, and acting routines, and it may remind some of us about the silly live-action Filmation programs that once dominated Saturday mornings in the 70s.
I loved every minute of this movie as a kid and I just watched the trailer on this website and now I want to rush out and buy the movie on DVD!
I want my kids to fall in love with it like I did!
Even as a "Star Wars" fanatic it is a bitter pill to swallow with the "Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure" movie.
Sure it had ewoks, but the "Star Wars" atmosphere was not present in this 1984 movie.And while it is a children's movie, it just wasn't particularly entertaining and seemed more like a series of random events rather than a continuous storyline.The ewoks were the same as in "Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi", and as such that was a good thing.
However, the other creatures, aside from the gorax, were abysmal to look at; fake and poorly animated.For the two main roles they could have cast two children with at least a bit more talent; Eric Walker (playing Mace) and Aubree Miller (playing Cindel) were not really delivering on their roles.The children will most likely find more enjoyment in the animated additions to the "Star Wars" franchise, such as "Clone Wars" or "Rebels".All in all, no wonder this came without a fanfare and faded into oblivion as quickly as it had arrived.
This movie, a made for TV-movie intended for children/family-viewing, serves a completely different purpose.The story is simple and easy to follow, two lost children searches for their parents with help from the Ewoks.
I must admit that the story did very little for me, and especially Walker's character were at times especially annoying (mostly to create smaller scenes of conflict).The highlight of the movie is the stop motion, the costumes, the matte paintings and sets and the special effects.
It's obviously far from perfect, but very charming.In keeping with the Star Wars Holiday special, it does not subtitle the alien characters, or dub them.
The human characters do at some points seem a bit unfamiliar with the fact that the Star Wars universe is filled of all sorts of unknown creatures - but it's hard to say exactly what their background is.At its best, the movie is the like other 80s fantasy/adventure classics about children, like the Time Bandits, Labyrinth and the Goonies.
If you are interested in Star Wars-lore, special effects, popular culture or film making, you might enjoy this movie quite a bit..
In this case, Lucas tried to do the same thing with the prequels (though Episode 3 was great, don't hate me) and failed horribly and Ewok Adventure is another example albeit from a much less commercialized era.
well I could say its cute in a "Star Wars geek" kinda way but then I'll be lying to myself if I do.
That's just about it.You could do a lot worse and I MEAN A LOT WORSE seeing this vomit-inducing piece on Lucas's now-corporate-minded part or if you want a more "humane" solution you could check yourself into a mental health facility where you're most likely stay for several years if you can't erase those horribly disturbing haunting images from your ever so delicate psyche.
The sky is falling in this Orwellian age of psychotic pop stars, weak US dollar, Tom Cruise's fax paux religion, and other bizarre things happening in the world today, one can only hope that a resistance movement is formed to combat and defeat the evil forces of commercialism to ensure the rest of humanity that crap like this NEVER is made to be seen AGAIN.
The first of two EWOK ADVENTURES, known as "CARAVAN OF COURAGE," does not hold a candle to the original STAR WARS trilogy in terms of story-telling, effects, or production design, but it is an interesting little footnote for anybody who wants to explore the SW universe a little further.
The first and third act are kind of exciting and cool, but the middle drags, and if you didn't like them in ROTJ, you're certainly going to find the Ewoks awfully annoying here.
even Direct to TV movies).It is very slowly paced, which only degrades the storytelling because it is a good story once you RETELL it in another medium, this slow pacing makes the movie seem to have almost no noticeable conflict in objectives and obstacles, it has vague character definition and you barely get involved with the characters, acting is as bad as it can get: When Cindel faints in a scene it seems like she just turned her head down so the director could yell cut; in another scene, Mace yells at some of the Ewoks, he screams at them, but the camera keeps rolling for seconds with the ewoks standing there doing nothing, which made him look less menacing (also badly paced).The casting was surely to blame for the bad acting performances.
The story is good (it would make a great kid's book), but the magic of film editing didn't do it's magic here..
The grandparents wandered in to say "hi" and ended up staying to watch.Be forewarned- if you're a parent that wants their kid watching too-adult-for-them trash--- you're not going to like this, and neither will they.
We got to see the movie "The Ewok Adventure" as a "reward" for being such a good class.
The effects are pretty lame, and the evil monster looks stupid.If you like to make fun of movies, though, this is a GREAT one to watch.
I love the Ewoks but this film doesn't do them justice.
Star Wars Magic before the dark times...Before CG.
Both Ewoks films have the Star Wars magic which is missing from Episode I and II, AND PROBABLY III.
The creatures, places, and ships look real, the lasers are great, the music is wonderful and the story is both exciting and fun.
It's a shame the new Star Wars films couldn't even come close to the old stuff.
It would be great to get the Ewok films on DVD (But then I guess George Lucas would want to go back and computer animate the ewoks or put Jar Jar or Jabba-The Hut in it and reveal that the ewoks are all clones)See this film for good old Star Wars goodness!.
A wonderful fantasy movie....if you like star wars, i can make sure you that you will love The Ewok Adventure.
Actually, im not a star wars fan, but this one is different.
As soon as the kids, a little older, a little wiser, realise they have found their parents they realise a hard-earnt truth.People think you're complete nerds if you hang out with your Teddy Bears after a certain age.Lucas tells it like it is, and that's why kids and adults love him so..
definitely not for Star Wars fans.
I thought a real Star Wars fan would have to see the Ewok movies, too.
The special effects look like they came from the 60s, the story has uncountable flaws, and the characters are extremely weak.
I do not recommend this film for Star Wars fans ...well, to be honest: I don't recommend it to anybody..
George Lucas made a shrewd marketing move in the early eighties; changing the creatures to feature in 1983's Return of the Jedi from forest-dwelling Wookies, to small, cute and furry Ewoks.
Ewoks were the cross-gender Star Wars 'commodity'.
So, Lucas pens "An Ewok Adventure" (story only), and cheaply produces a TV-movie.Mace (Eric Walker), a mini-Skywalker, and his little sister Cindel (Aubree Miller), a sickening Curly-f*****g-Sue, are stranded on the forest moon of Endor after their space cruiser crashed.
In 1985, both the "sequel" TV movie Ewoks: The Battle for Endor, and Ewoks: The Animated Series were produced, further exacerbating the kids "nag factor" element of toy marketing.Oh, how times have changed!
It could well have just been Chewbacca shitting in a basket (or even The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978)), but I would have loved it anyway.
I used to watch "The Ewok Adventure" on VHS when I was younger and was a huge fan - I'd view it frequently (probably even before I saw all the original "Star Wars" films) and, although I recognized it was cheesy even as a child, I still enjoyed it.Today, it simply doesn't hold up.
It comes across as a desperate and silly cash-in on "Star Wars: Episode IV: Return of the Jedi." The "lovable" Ewoks of that film return here to wreak more havoc - they find a boy and his younger sister after they crash land on the planet.
The boy and sister have lost their parents, whom were apparently grabbed out of the space ship by some scary alien creature.The alien creature's special F/X are absolutely terrible which explains why his full frontal view is saved until the ending - which is ludicrous and way over-the-top.If you're a "Star Wars" fan you'll need to own this simply because it's got the Lucas "stamp of approval" - but to any casual viewer it comes across as a desperate and pathetic franchise cash-in..
Maybe simply because of the adventure cinema alone, but I don't think so.Wicket and Kneesa have been good friends for years of my life, and how many tears have I shed for the woodcutter who gave his life to make the escape of the others possible...Maybe this movie is no masterpiece, but it will always keep it's place in my heart!.
I know people say that the ewoks movies were a stupid waste of time and money, but I totally disagree.
I think that if you are a child at heart, and still know how to use your imagination, then you would love these movies.
This is one of the great movies of the 80s in MY collection that I think about all the time.
Back in the early 80s there were two good movies about the the Ewoks from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi.
Both films are sad in a way but they are never boring and both have good special effects and the whole nine.
The Ewok Adventure is a good film and it has a giant monster and other creatures.
Fans of Star Wars is gotta check this out!.
By far the best Ewoks movie.
You'd be lucky if it worked and luckily our Ewoks tape worked a lot during its course.Anyway the movie starts off giving us a hint of what happened to our protagonist's parents.
Cindel is a very cute and friendly kid, whereas her older brother Mace is protective and seemingly narrow-minded.Throughout the movie you'll probably develop a distaste for Mace, and deep fondness for Cindel and the Ewoks.A great family movie, they re-mastered this on DVD and I got it as soon as I could.
Not a great film but I prefer this movie then any of the prequels or any of the Disney version.
The real Star Wars ended in 1983 but this tv production made kids believe it was a little alive until we woke up in this horrible prequels.Two kids Cindel and Mace crashes to an unknown planet with their parents.
To their help are the ewoks the cute teddy bears tribe of Endor.Before the prequels this movie was doll and understandable due to the low quality of ewoks suites and tv standard but after the prequels well this is near Star Wars we could get and the two kids here are better actors than the entire cast of the prequels and recently SW movies (with the exception of the returning cast).
When it came out I was a kid and it was a good movie.
But the story is great and a fun adventure.
I found it interesting to find that apparently Lucas made this for his daughter who loved the Ewoks.
But let that simple, irrelevant fact spoil my enjoyment of films I LOVED as a kid?
It's got a great setting, a rolling little adventure for the kids, a cute-ness factor that is through the roof thanks to the little fuzzball Ewoks and little Cindel.
It's actually kinda strange to think that out of all the characters in the Star Wars films that could have been given their own spin-off films, it happened to be the ewoks.
The characters in this story....well they aren't bad, but aside from the ewoks none of them are memorable by any.
Now the special effects in this film are well done, I think.
The Ewoks befriend and come to the aid of human children Mace (likeable Eric Walker) and Cindel (adorable Aubree Miller), who have to rescue their parents from a ferocious behemoth monster known as the Gorax.Director John Korty relates the simple and engrossing tale of love, loyalty, strength, and courage at a steady pace, maintains a warm and pleasant tone throughout, and presents a neat array of gnarly creatures.
The Ewoks are cute and children like them.
The Ewok Adventure is fun for the whole family.
The Care Rank Ki look like Yoda from the Star Wars Saga if you think that I am making this up.
Check out the other Ewok movie as well..
The Ewoks aren't annoying as they are in Return of the Jedi.
The plot does meander but there are cool moments, like a creepy monster spider in the climactic battle.The only thing that keeps this movie from rating a respectable seven out of ten with me are the kid actors. |
tt0063032 | Il grande silenzio | Henry Pollicut, a corrupt Utahn banker and justice of the peace, has a man named Gordon and his wife murdered by two bounty killers. To prevent Gordon's son giving them away, one of the killers slices the boy's throat, rendering him permanently mute. Years later, the son, armed with a Mauser C96, exacts his revenge by assassinating the bounty killer and shooting Pollicut's right-hand thumb.
Sometime later, in 1898, a severe blizzard has swept the frontier, bringing privation to the town of Snow Hill. As a result, much of the community is forced to steal in order to survive. Pollicut, seeking to make a profit, places prices on the thieves' heads, attracting the attention of a bounty killer gang led by "Loco". As they prey on the outlaws, Gordon's son, now going by the moniker "Silence", works with the bandits and their allies to fight against the killers. Silence operates on a principle whereby he provokes his enemies into drawing their weapons first so he can kill them in self-defense.
One of the outlaws, a black man named James Middleton, leaves the safety of the group to be with his wife, Pauline. James is subsequently killed by Loco when he takes Pauline hostage. Vengeful, Pauline writes to Silence, requesting him to kill Loco. Meanwhile, the newly-elected Governor, hoping to have order maintained before declaring an amnesty regarding the outlaws, assigns the righteous but unlucky soldier Gideon Burnett as the sheriff of Snow Hill. On his way, Burnett encounters the outlaws, who steal his horse for food. After getting lost in the snow, he finds a stagecoach travelling to Snow Hill, on which he meets Silence, and later, Loco. Upon arrival, Silence meets Pauline, who promises to raise his reward.
Pauline attempts to sell her house to Pollicut, who demands that she becomes his mistress – his reason for putting a bounty on her husband. Pauline bitterly refuses. Silence leaves for the town saloon, and attempts to provoke Loco into drawing. Instead, Loco severely beats him before Silence fights back. Angered, Loco attempts to shoot him, but he is stopped by Burnett, who arrests him for attempted murder and prepares to take him to a prison in Tonopah. Before leaving, Burnett requests that the townspeople provide food for the outlaws. Meanwhile, Pauline becomes romantically and sexually involved with Silence while tending his wounds.
Burnett and Loco stop by a frozen lake to allow Loco to relieve himself, but he springs a trap, shooting the ice surrounding Burnett and leaving him to die in the freezing water. Loco rides to his hideout and convinces the rest of his gang to confront Silence. Determined to take Pauline by force, Pollicut attempts to rape her as his henchman, Martin, tortures Silence by burning his right hand. Silence overpowers Martin and kills Pollicut. Loco and his gang arrive to look for Silence, just as the outlaws appear at the edge of town to collect the provisions, having been previously advised to do so by Burnett. Deciding to use them to draw out Silence, the gang herds the bandits into the saloon and captures Pauline. Loco tells Pauline to have Silence duel with him – if Silence wins, the outlaws will be set free; if he wins, they will be killed.
Despite Pauline's pleas that the duel is a trap, Silence stands outside the saloon. A killer shoots his left hand, greatly impairing his speed and marksmanship. Loco then stands in the doorway, ready to face the weakened Silence. As Silence begins reaching for his Mauser, Loco reaches for his Colt Single Action Army – but as Silence draws, another wounding shot is fired. Loco fires at Silence's head, killing him. Distraught, Pauline attempts to shoot Loco herself, but swiftly dies as well. The bounty killers turn their guns on the outlaws, massacring the entire group. As Loco and his men prepare to collect their bounties, he takes Silence's Mauser from Pauline's hands. The killers ride out of Snow Hill into the morning sun. A title card explains that Loco's actions resulted in public condemnation of bounty killing, and a memorial was erected in Snow Hill to honor those who died by his greed.
=== Alternative ending ===
Due to the bleak nature of the original finale, Corbucci was forced to shoot an alternative "happy" ending to the film for the North African market, where Spaghetti Westerns were popular, but had to have an upbeat conclusion. Some of the footage shot for this ending appeared in the film's Italian trailer, despite it not appearing in that release of the film. Because it was believed that no audio elements for this ending had survived, early DVD releases of the film, such as the US release from Fantoma Films, feature it without sound. However, a version with synchronised audio has since been discovered and restored.
In this ending, Loco draws his gun without waiting to be prompted by Silence. Suddenly, Burnett, having survived falling into the frozen lake, rides into town on horseback and shoots Loco in the head, allowing Silence to kill the remaining bounty killers. Burnett frees the outlaws as Pauline takes the bandages on Silence's burnt right hand off, revealing a gauntlet that he used for protection, before applying bandages to his wounded left hand. As Burnett takes the thieves to the local jail to await their amnesty, he asks Silence to become his deputy, which he accepts with a smile. | depressing, realism, western, bleak, cult, violence, atmospheric, flashback, revenge | train | wikipedia | "That western in the snow" - was my brother's response when he heard that I'd finally tracked down a copy of THE GREAT SILENCE, a.k.a. THE BIG SILENCE (I first saw it 10 years ago on BBC2's 'Moviedrome').If you like Sergio Leone's films (such as THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY and A FISTFUL OF DOLLARS) then you'll probably enjoy this film by Sergio Corbucci.
Violence, shooting, cussing, strange costumes, haunting music, trademark camera angles and the Italian style go to make up one of the best (lost)westerns I've ever seen.These films aren't to everyone's taste, but THE GREAT SILENCE is worth watching just to hear the main theme tune which is a fantastic work of latterday composition - it sounds daft but I nearly cry when I hear it sometimes.
This is my favourite piece of Ennio Morricone's music.As I said before the main reference points for this film are those of Sergio Leone, except for the snow-laden setting and the distinct lack of humour( THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY still makes me laugh, despite countless watching).
the director went to great lengths to preserve his radical finale (particularly unpopular with the producer) - there is a version of the film with a cop-out ending.In short then, this is a great movie despite all the shortcomings of the particular genre( I'm not saying anything)- I once read that the term "Spaghetti Western" was a derisory one used by American film critics - but I can't think of any American westerns as enjoyable as some of these Italian films..
It can and it will shock it's viewer, with it's unforgiving nature, and themes.Set around the snowy landscapes of Utah, "The Great Silence" stars Jean-Louis Trintignant as Silence, a mute gunfighter assisting a group outlaws for and a woman trying to avenge her dead husband.
They are faced against a group of bounty hunters, led by Loco (Klaus Kinsky) a ruthless and merciless man who values only the money he gains from the killing.Corbucci utilizes the snow-filled landscape to the maximum, creating a hauntingly chilling atmosphere that sticks with you from the beginning to the end and most likely, long after you've watched the film.
Trintignant and Kinsky make the biggest impression though, adding layers of depth to their respective characters without even uttering a word, just their facial expressions, the way the move, the confidence with which they act it is simply brilliant.Commenting on the final scene would be a downright shame to those who haven't seen the movie just yet.
This score is, haunting and sad, like the movie itself it has an emotional effect on the viewer."The Great Silence" is as every bit as good as any of Leone's films.
the chaos is as present in the general mood as it is in Corbucci's wild and messy camera-work (from beautiful panoramas to crash zooms and close ups that accentuate the villains' ugliness).The story is straight and simple but allows for great characters as the mute bounty hunter Silence (Trintignant, conveying impossible emotion with nothing but his haunting eyes) travels to a snowy town to bring down the killer of his client's husband and coincidentally fulfill a more personal vengeance.
Unlike Corbucci's earlier masterpiece "Django" from 1966, a violent Spaghetti Western, but also full of dark humor, "The Great Silence" is a sad and utterly serious movie from the beginning to the end, a brutal tale about misery, greed and selfishness, about injustice and the desire for revenge.
In their calamity, desperate relatives of the head hunters' victims hire a mute gunman called Silence, in order to avenge their loved ones and end the killings.The acting in this movie is brilliant.
Nobody could be as diabolical as Klaus Kinski in the role of Loco, Jean-Louis Trintignant performance as Silence is just great, and Vonetta McGee is amazing as Pauline, a beautiful black woman, who falls in love with Silence after losing her husband to the bountykillers.
"The Great Silence is", after "Django", Sergio Corbucci's second film that could be described as one of the most important Westerns of all-time.
The film is plenty of dark fatalism and features to Silence (Jean Louis Trintignant in his first and unique Western , he had agreed to do the film in order to help out the producer, who was a friend of his), a mute gunslinger with a 7,63 mm Mauser Broomhandle gun , helping a group of desperado outlaws and an African- American woman named Pauline (Voneta McGee) attempting to revenge death her husband against the bounty hunters led by the ruthless Loco (Klaus Kinski) and payed by Pollicut (Luigi Pistilli) .
Furthermore, an upright sheriff (Frank Wolff) appears trying peace and order.This widely deemed picture , unlike most conventional Spaghetti Western , contains exceptional setting , colorful images with a sensational cinematography by Silvano Ippoliti and features a sensitive musical score by the classic Ennio Morricone .
It also deals with the brief and doomed relationship between Silence and the outlaw's widow with great compassion, amidst the bloodbath that we come to expect from Corbucci.All in all, a classic film - and the best non-Leone Spaghetti Western..
Like Corbucci's mudbound gem "Django", the snowbound "The Great Silence" is an imaginative spaghetti western *not* set in a dusty desert.
The Great Silence further proves this perceived notion.Director Sergio Corbucci (known for his hyper-violent, but somewhat communitarian motifs) incorporates both American and European cinema values, as well as the themes generally condoned along with the western genre.
The story boils down to vendettas and paybacks and paydays between scorned bounty hunters and duped sheriffs, plus the title character- named as such because of a mute demeanor and because actor Trintignant didn't want to learn any lines- leading Silence and Loco (albeit this isn't even one of Kinski's craziest performances by far) into a final showdown.The circumstances leading up to this showdown should, in a more conventional western, be pretty clean-cut.
If it isn't altogether successful it's attributable to flaws scattered around: random 'soft-lighting' in the last act that is very distracting, a couple of plot points not totally clear even by the end, and Kinski looking sometimes like a pretty boy as much as a sadistic bounty hunter, plus Corbucci's tendencies to favor close-ups for more formulaic means as opposed to drawing out deeper emotions through a more keen system.But even with Corbucci not being a 'great' director, he has a keen eye for Utah (if it is Utah, which it probably isn't), and the vast vistas of snow and fields in a plain sight that contrasts the sort of void sucking the characters in with the hopeless center of bounty hunters without the strongest opponent.
The late, great Italian film maker Sergio Corbucci (Django, Companeros) directed and co-wrote this incredible western, Il Grande Silenzio (aka The Great Silence) in 1968.
It is as visually impressive and powerful in its silence as the greatest work of another Sergio, Leone, but what makes Corbucci's piece stand out is its total pessimism, honesty and possibly the darkest and saddest ending ever filmed.
These powerful images are fantastic themselves, but when it all is given the magic touch of Ennio Morricone's music, it becomes clear this is perhaps the greatest of all the spaghetti westerns made in Italy.Extremely great and also handsome actor Jean-Louis Trintignant is a killer named Silence.
At this point I'll point out that I'm definitely not talking about the alternative (and very bad) "happy ending" Corbucci was forced to shoot for some foreign audiences like the Far East and North Africa, as the producers thought they would have probably disliked the film too much in its original form and finale, THE original finale I'm talking about.
The theme of violence, greediness and overall decadence of man has never been this strong in the Italian western genre and naturally the ending broke all the conventions and rules of the genre, because this film just wants to be and is so much more.The imagery is stunning in the wintery mountains and white heaven in hell.
The Great Silence is far more precise and open, making a damning condemnation of the ruthless amorality of the typical spaghetti anti-hero by casting the outlaws as persecuted innocents and showing up the bounty hunters for the opportunistic killers they are.
Memorable images to this effect include a bounty hunter gorging messily on a roast chicken (in extreme close-up!), starving outlaws falling upon the carcass of a horse, and a black-hooded woman with a scythe recalling the look of the grim reaper.As I've noted in other comments, Corbucci had a serious handicap when it came to making westerns, in that had no eye for location shots, often wasting the Mediterranean landscapes the Sergio Leone made such good use of.
The fantastic scenery in snow, Morricone's incredibly melancholic soundtrack which ranks among his best works, and of course the charismatic actors: All this make THE GREAT SILENCE not only one of the best, but also one of the saddest westerns of all time.Of course, as with many Italian productions of the time, there are bits of odd dialogue, some rough editing, and scenes were the lower budget shines through, but the brilliant ending more than makes up for it.
Superior to DJANGO (1966), Corbucci's most popular work, this would probably be his best film; of the director's more renowned Spaghetti Western efforts, I've also watched COMPANEROS (1970) and would most like to catch up with A PROFESSIONAL GUN (1968).The script is denser than your average Western, if not nearly as ambitious as the contemporaneous Sergio Leone films; it's also interesting to note the dual meaning of the title: Jean-Louis Trintignant's character has been nicknamed Silence (since he's a mute) but it also refers to his unfailing skill as a gunslinger - bringing silence, i.e. death, wherever he passes.
The main actors all deliver terrific performances - Trintignant is one of the most interesting heroes in the entire "Spaghetti Western" subgenre (apparently, Marcello Mastroianni was the original choice!), Klaus Kinski (ditto where villains are concerned; his foppish bounty hunter here is surely the most significant of the actor's many forays in the field), Vonetta McGee (unusual for any type of Western to feature a black woman in the lead, and the same goes for her interracial love scene with Trintignant!), Frank Wolff and Luigi Pistilli (whose character is tied with Trintignant's backstory, Leone-style, though this element isn't revealed gradually here - which perhaps weakens its impact in the long run!).Ennio Morricone's score didn't seem all that impressive while I was watching the film, being subtler than usual for the maestro, but emerges as undeniably haunting in retrospect.
I have now seen this movie on three different occasions and each time I am struck by the power of the final scene.The Great Silence is the story of a snowbound Utah town plagued by bounty killers.
The bounty killers are now the prey of this mute death machine known as Silence.Loco (as played by Klaus Kinski) is one of the meanest, most vile characters to ever appear in film.
Enter the mute gunfighter known as Silence, who has a deep rooted hatred of bounty hunters...Something of a cult classic and massively popular in Spaghetti Western fan's circles, The Great Silence is as perpetually cold as the snowy landscapes that surround this tale.
Kinski gets the plum part, with the clever lines; the actor who plays the sheriff also does well; cinematography is excellent under such strenuous conditions; dialogue is good enough to keep you riveted; and the motivations of all those human living on the brink of animaldom -- especially the group of "outlaws" who prowl outside of town and keep attacking people for food -- almost turn THE GREAT SILENCE into a Western version of MAD MAX.
It is filmed in typical spaghetti western fashion, fans of the genre will instantly recognize the camera work and use of music (which is Morricone so it is of course excellent.)The film has a good story, great cinematography, and Klaus Kinski is perfect as the villain.
Great Silence, The (1968) **** (out of 4) Extremely brutal and at times shocking Spaghetti Western takes place during the great blizzard of 1898 and follows a mute gunfighter (Jean-Louis Trintignant) who wants to take down a sadistic bounty hunter (Klaus Kinski).
I can't really say why is it that I liked this movie so much since I'm not a big fan of westerns, but it has a good story, the acting isn't bad and the characters themselves were interesting(specially Silence).
What more can you ask for than a desolate snow-covered wasteland, a mute ghost-like avenger, and a villain that looks and acts like the human personification of a snake?A truly atmospheric production and one of director Sergio Corbucci's best, The Great Silence delivers thrills and shocks in equal doses, with lots of jaw-dropping moments, including probably the most unexpected ending in the history of westerns.Here, Klaus Kinski does what he does best, providing some truly inspired villainy.
"The Great Silence" (1968), directed by Sergio Corbucci, is definitely the best non-Sergio Leone Spaghetti Western ever made.
The cast, including the brilliant Klaus Kinski, play to perfection, especially Jean-Louis Trintignant, who stars as "Silence", who, as a child, had his throat cut, thus making him unable to speak, is a awesome piece of acting.
Towards the end of the film is a remarkable shot of Klaus Kinski's bounty hunter standing, at night, in the doorway of an old saloon (which looks very like a village inn from old pre-WWII Europe), largely back-lit with his eyes fixed on his next victim.
The narrative held me with it easily but I must confess that I was a bit turned by the idea that the law is a restrictive force and that vigalintism or bounty hunters are the only way to keep the peace, if it the conclusion of this idea was an impressively bleak and memorable ending.Although I saw a dubbed version the performances were mostly pretty good even if many of the support cast had the presence of cattle, filling out the scenes.
When asked what my favorite Spaghetti Western is I usually place Corbucci's Django at the top of my list but truth be told The Great Silence is far superior; it's a mesmerizing masterpiece overflowing with Roman violence and French nihilism.
The film's locations combined with the snow (actually shaving cream) and fog created a sense of isolation and an atmosphere of dread-inducing stillness.French actor Jean-Louis Trintignant (Questi's Death Laid an Egg) is perfect as the infamous Silence, a character that mocks the "silent anti-hero" stereotype of Spaghetti Westerns by being mute!
Originally released in 1968, Sergio Corbucci's The Great Silence (Il Grande Silenzio) is widely considered the greatest spaghetti western not made by Sergio Leone.
Unlike most non-leone Spaghetti Westerns, it actually tries to be something other than Sergio Leone, and with the mute hero, snowcapped landscapes, interracial sex (the first on film) and shocking ending, it succeeds.
It definitely is a peculiar movie, far better than most Spaghetti Westerns: scenes are at moments truly magnificent, (such as the coach ride with the haunting Morricone score, the starting titles scene, where Trintignant rides his horse through the snow, the love scene, etc.); music is very appropriate and nice; actors are almost all good (exceptions are the old woman who loses her son, and Mr. Wolff, the sceriff, who seems to me an American Renzo Montagnari (Italian actor in erotic comedies of 60ies...).
My feeling is that it isn't in that the idea of the western hero and villain are still there, the black and white morality of most John Wayne movies permeates this one, but in The Great Silence the bad beat the good because they are inherently more powerful..
But this isn't your normal western, and just like in real life, the good guy's don't always win.The Great Silence is still something to marvel at, even to the modern film-goer.
Yes. But The Great Silence is not just a deep contemplation of violence it is also simply a very entertaining spaghetti western, thus it never feels dull and is always engaging.The whole cast is excellent, but the highlight is the incredibly talented Klaus Kinski, who is electrifying in the role of the ice-cold bounty hunter Loco.
And it is also worth noting that Ennio Morricone scores the film, and he does it expertly.But the big allure of The Great Silence is its complete reversal of the western genre.
It doesn't feel cheap or gimmicky, like it very easily could have.It is, in fact, so devastating that Corbucci was actually forced to shoot an alternate "happy" ending for certain markets, in which, just in the nick of time, the (dead) sheriff miraculously reappears and kills Loco, allowing Silence to finish off the rest of the bounty hunters.
The west was a harsh place in time where the good guys didn't always win, and Corbucci did an excellent job conveying that.The Great Silence is a fascinating film that turns the western genre completely on its head.
It's well worth adding to any Spaghetti western soundtrack collection and rates right up there with DEATH RIDES A HORSE (1968) and THE BIG GUNDOWN (1967)The movie itself involves a hired killer named "Silence" (Jean-Louis Trintignant in a non-speaking role) who helps protect Mormons (who have a bounty on their heads and are forced to live out in the mountains) from the likes of Loco (Klaus Kinski) and his gang of fellow bounty hunters.
"The Great Silence" is really a fairly standard revenge film of the type often seen in the spaghetti western canon.
There is no doubt that this is an excellent movie, but I must disagree with the many reviewers who call this the best non-Leone spaghetti western.Klaus Kinski is great in this movie, as always, and one can not say enough about Ennio Morricone's score. |
tt0116407 | Ghatak: Lethal | Kashi (Sunny Deol) is a kind-hearted wrestler and the dutiful son of Shambhu Nath (Amrish Puri) living in Banaras. Shambhu Nath who was a freedom fighter awarded with Tambra Patra, is an honourable and respectable man in town. Kashi comes to Mumbai with his father for his medical treatment for his throat and stays with his brother Shiv Nath (K. K. Raina). Kashi meets Gauri (Meenakshi Seshadri) and starts liking her. He learns that the colony is being terrorized by a tyrannical gangster named Katya (Danny Denzongpa) along with his other six brothers. Before Kashi's arrival, a resident named Sachdev (Om Puri) tries to initiate revolt against Katya but gets ruthlessly killed by him, thereby making Malti (Ila Arun), wife of Sachdev, go mad. Katya and his brothers become enemy with Kashi when he beats up their goons when they were beating up Malti. Shambhu Nath is later diagnosed with throat cancer and has only a few days to live.
When Kashi refuses to be a member of Katya's gang, Katya become ferocious and makes Shambhu Nath a dog in front of the entire society. After a series of dramatic events, Shiv Nath is murdered by Jeena (Mukesh Rishi), one of Katya's brother. Kashi then kills Antya (Deep Dhillon) and gets arrested. Meanwhile, Shambhu Nath dies of cancer. When Kashi was going to disperse his father's ashes in the Ghat with the police, the police van gets attacked by Katya's brothers and goons. Kashi kills all of them including Katya's three brothers and reaches Katya's home. There he kills Jeena, thereby causing only two brothers to survive, including Katya. As Katya made Kashi's father dog, he made Kashi as Ox and takes him to the colony to re-establish his supremacy. But Kashi stands up and Katya's entire gang is then attacked by the residents. Sixth brother (Tinu Verma) is then killed by the mob. Kashi makes Katya dog and asks him to bark. Katya having no choice barks on Kashi's instructions. Kashi then kills Katya and the colony gets freedom from his tyranny. | good versus evil, violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Ghatak is one of my all time favorite movies and easily my best Sunny Deol movie .The dialogues of Ghaatak are excellent because they are very very realistic.One can watch this movie only to hear brilliant dialogues.The songs are very good especially Nigahon Ne cheraa hai and Koi Jaaye to le aaye by Alka Yagnik.This movie is a must watch for every person who want to understand what is the true meaning of one's right in life.Only Sunny Deol could do full justification to the role of a macho,manly,honest and tough person like Kaashi's character in this movie.Amrish Puri has also acted brilliantly in this movie.Ghaatak is definitely a must watch movie for any Bollywood fan.You will never repent after watching this movie completely if you believe in meaningful cinema..
The best thing with the movie is that no action scene will seems indigestible or impossible to you.
Sunny has performed all the scenes is the best possible way and I think it is impossible to improve perfection.
You can feel yourself as a part of movie; Sunny did his job with not even a 1% flaw.
A superb movie, excellent acting and directing, relentless action..
This is one of the better action films to come out of Bollywood.
After 'Ghayal' and 'Damini', the Santoshi-Sunny team has done it again.
The idea for the movie came from a quote of Mahatma Gandhi in which he says that if he had to choose between cowardice and violence, he would have chosen violence.Beginning with Om Puri's character getting killed by the henchmen of Katia(Danny Denzongpa) in Bombay, we go to Banaras, where Kashi(Sunny Deol) is a wrestler and dutiful son.
His father(Amrish Puri) has a throat problem so they go to Bombay to treat it.
Kashi is amazed at the people's apathic attitude.Due to circumstances, Kashi ignites the enmity of Katia and his six brothers.The action in the movie is fast paced and relentless.
Performances are superb, the direction is tight (although it took 5 years to complete this movie).Sunny Deol has given one of the more powerful performances of his life in this movie.
Amrish Puri has given a great performance, comedic for the first half-hour of the film.
The songs are good and are mercifully few in number.All in all, it is a great action movie.Enjoy!.
Sunny Deol has been my hero for a very long time, and I consider Ghatak to be the film in which he plays his most intense and endearing role.Plot: Shambu Nath (played the late Amrish Puri) lives in Banaras.
Shambu Nath has been coughing up blood for some time, so his adopted son Kashi Nath (Sunny Deol), wants him to go and visit his son Shiv Nath (K.K Raina) who has married and moved (without his father's consent) to the outskirts of a big city and has setup a small business of a bookstore there.They arrive, and are welcomed by Shiv.
This sparks off a raging war between the leader of the thugs called Katya played by (Danny Denzongpa).Will Shambu be cured?
See the film to find out.The film is directed by Shree Rajkumar Santoshi who has directed such blockbuster hits like Damini (1993), Ghayal (1990), Pukar (2000), Andaz Apna Apna(1994) and China Gate(1998).
Other notable stars in the film are Om Puri, Meenakshi Sheshadri, Tinnu Annand, Mukesh Rishi, Rohini Hattangadi, and Viju Khote..
The best action movie of Sunny Deol.
After the grand success of Ghayal and Damini, This was another blockbuster entertainer from Raj Kumar Santoshi, Sunny Deol and Meenakshi.
This is one of the best action movies and probably the best action movie of Sunny Deol.
The movie begins with Om Puri raising his voice in favour of shopkeepers in his area against illegal occupancy of their land by Katia played by Danny.
Sunny comes to know the problems of shopkeepers over there and stands with them in getting their land freed from Danny.
Nobody can match charisma of Sunny Deol when it comes to action scenes.
He is one of the best action actors ever in the history of Indian cinema.
The fighting scenes of Sunny Deol are excellent in the movie.
Only Sunny Deol can do justice to such kind of roles.Amrish Puri has played positive role, father of Sunny Deol, in this movie.
The chemistry between Sunny and Amrish is the best.
I believe this is the best emotional scene in the movie.
Danny is always best when it comes to negative roles.
There could be room to accommodate one more song.This movie is the must watch for action movie buffs specially Sunny Deol fans..
Best Indian action movie to date.
The action and fight scenes are very well done and realistic which shows that considerable effort went into making them just right.
Nothing looked fakey in Ghattak which enhanced the overall effect and proved that Bollywood can make decent action flics after all.
Ghattak was also not marred by feeble comedy attempts and the songs blended well with the action so that nothing slowed the pace of the film..
The best of Sunny Deol.
I wonder why didn't Sunny Deol get National Award for this movie for best actor.
This is the best movie of all time..
Rajkumar Santoshi is one director who has done some very good films, my favourite being Damini, Lajja and The Legend of Bhagat Singh, but this one is a mixed bag.
The movie has good and bad points, but it is quite uneven and works mostly in parts.
It started off very well, and looked rather promising especially because of the father-son relationship, which was beautifully portrayed.
Sunny Deol is the devoted son, Amrish Puri is the kind, idealistic and caring father who suffers from cancer and yet never lets the nearing death deter him.
One of the best scenes in the film is the one in which Sunny is told of his father's state and lack of chances to survive.
But then we also get a typical Hindi film villain in the form of Danny Denzongpa, and what initially looked like a touching drama about family struggle gradually transforms into a messy, painfully loud and over-the-top action flick.
Too bad the story took such a drastic turn because rarely do we get to see films about relationships in families, and while it is according to me one of the best things about this film, it is totally sidelined by the end of the show.
There was one particular scene when the villain humiliates the father but unfortunately it looks embarrassing and unintentionally funny.
The movie does try to bring about some substance, like the moment when the father convinces the son to use his brain rather than his strength.
I cannot think of a more clichéd and banal way to ruin a film.The film's acting wavers between good, average and bad, and the problem is that so do the performances.
Sunny Deol does really well in some scenes, particularly those showing his deep care for his father and his huge grief upon finding out about the latter's health conditions.
Meenakshi Shshadri gets little scope and although Santoshi tries to emphasise her role by giving it a story of its own, one would expect to see a better role to complete her career.
The only one who is consistently great is Amrish Puri who steals the show with his excellent performance.
I still give Ghatak some credit for some of its high-points, Amrish Puri's performance, and Sunny Deol's one to an extent..
Rajkumar Santoshi's Ghatak makes its point loud and clear.
This was the third film with the hit trio of Rajkumar Santoshi, Sunny Deol and Amrish Puri.
Not to forget, the movie has a handful of hard-hitting scenes.
-Sunny's first scene with Danny -Danny torturing Sunny and Amrish -Sunny's revenge -ClimaxHowever, the best scenes involve Sunny Deol and Amrish Puri together.
The scene when Sunny breaks down in front of his dying father is heart-breaking.
Rajkumar Santoshi's direction is excellent and there's no doubt on how good of a director he is when he has the right script.
Meenakshi is also first rate.However, the 3 performances that make Ghatak special are of Sunny Deol, Amrish Puri and Danny.
Sunny Deol is perfect for the role of the fearless man trying to live a decent life.
Danny is a strong villain, and to go up against a strong hero such as Sunny, one needs a villain strong as Danny.Overall, a great story about the underdog's fight against a very scared society.
Campy as it is, with the same old story of one man fighting against an evil gang of seven brothers, with themes of injustice revenge, revenge and revenge thrown in, 'Ghatak' can be a fun watch up until a certain point when it just becomes repetitive.
Thank goodness such tripe are long obsolete today.Since Sunny Deol is the lead one can expect the hero to singlehandedly kill all the bad guys.
Pretty much everything about 'Ghatak' is loud, except for most of the scenes that feature Meenakshi Sheshadri which are unfortunately very limited.
I had expected to see some awesome dance by Sheshadri but she has only one dance number where her face is loaded with excessive makeup (she still looks good though) and her costumes are abysmal.Performance-wise Sunny Deol, Danny Denzongpa and Amrish Puri are...loud.
Anyway, Meenakshi Sheshadri is good with what she's given but the role is nothing of a challenge and I wish she had come back to do better films instead of signing off this one as her last Hindi film.
Ila Arun plays the crazy woman (the crazy woman characters were also a common ingredient in Sunny Deol films).Overall, 'Ghatak' is just another loud campy film of the 90s.
Many slick action movies have been made since Ghatak , but this still beats them,man,grandpa was right,old really is gold .
Usually I don't like old stuff,well not just me,most youngsters feel so(although,they don't confess in front of their parents),this was different,I simply loved it .Yeah many action movies with better editing and effects have been made but with crap plot lines .
This is not an action movie,it cannot be called just that,it is much more than that,it is a movie which tells us about love,about a father - son's relationship,it gives a wonderful message and it tells us what a good film really is .OK,after that lecture stuff,you might be expecting me to tell something about the plot but sorry(pulling my ears),I won't,after all,I don't want to spoil the party for you .
Sunny is brilliant as the innocent small-town boy and again brilliant as the man out to kill,the intensity in his acting is superb .
I always felt that Sunny is good for only hard-hitting,action roles,but this movie proves his overall versatility as an actor .
Amrish Puri excels in his shot-tempered yet caring father's role .
Other than them,Ilarun,Om Puri,Kashi's brother,etc,etc,all are superb,hell,even the side actors excel in their roles,one can watch the movie just for the acting .Rajkumar Santoshi has done a very good job here and I'm willing to see Sunny - Santoshi's other two popular works .
The action scenes in this movie should also be credited because keeping in view the action of that time,this doesn't seem all that fakey .
Also the dialogues are good as well .There's so much more to write about Ghatak but I don't think you'd like to read anymore(cheers if you've really read thus far,big achievement indeed).Also,this my first try at a review,so pardon me if I've written rubbish .Anyways,go watch this movie ..
Ghatak is one of Sunny Deol's best performances and best action movies ever!
This film is also about a father and son relationship (baap-beta ka rishtaa).
Amrish Puri is the father, and Sunny Deol is the son, who takes care of him and tries to get him treatment for cancer.
This was a totally different side of Amrish Puri, apart from his normal villain act, but he did great in a positive role (a bit humorous early in the movie).
In his last scene with Sunny Deol, he advises him on how to avenge the hurt.
Sunny breaking down and crying when he finds out that there is no treatment is memorable and the scene before the revenge theme against the baddies after they spoil his father will truly touch your heart.
Even Sunny's anger against the main baddie (Danny Denzongpa) after killing him stays in your mind for a long time.
(The only things that I did NOT like in this movie was the manner in which Om Puri's character was killed at start.) The best action scene was the cage fight after intermission, and how Sunny tells off the baddies is brilliant!!
This is an action-packed revenge drama like Ghayal, but this is also a great action movie to watch.
Ghatak was Sunny Deol's reunion with legendary director Rajkumar Santoshi who gave him 2 national award winning characters from the films Ghayal(1990) and Damini(1993).
Ghatak was supposed to release in 1991 right after Ghayal but it got delayed and finally released in 1996 when the heroine, Meenaxi, had quit films.
Ghatak is the story of Kashi who comes to Bombay to treat his father's tuberculosis.
They come to Bombay and live with Kashi's elder brother.
As Kashi's father, Shambhunath's illness continues to grow, the local people in Bombay in the area Kashi lives in are being threatened by the goon Katya and his 7 brothers.
The action drama gets way more serious when Kashi's father passes away and his brother gets killed by Jeena, one of the brothers of Katya.
Instead of driving Katya out using non violence, Kashi starts murdering his brothers.
Watch the climax to see how Kashi avenges his brothers death and father's humiliation by murdering the sadistic Katya.
He handles every emotional scene with perfection; he beautifully captures the relationship between Kashi and his father.
Kashi breaking down with tears in the hospital, the light scenes before when the film starts and several other light and emotional scenes are brilliantly handled.
The film looses it's status of excellence when it goes over the top and tries to become a typical action film with loads of shouting.
The film is still good but the typical elements and cringe worthy shouting in parts annoys and the film isn't any longer the excellent emotional film.
However, the action scenes are realistic and are a delight.
If the child of Kashi's brother didn't come to stop Kashi from hitting Katya after he died, I would've stopped watching the movie because it was too over the top and the action was no longer bearable at that point.
Sunny Deol does a brilliant job as Kashi and he is excellent in the emotional scenes.
he is superb as usual but it is the emotional scenes that make him stand out more than his usual outstanding action.
Amrish Puri as Sunny's father, Shambhunath, is superb and he won the Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actor for this fantastic performance.
Unlike Puri's usual typical villain act, he is superb here.
Her dancing is good and her acting is superb especially in the frustration scenes.
Danny Denzongpa repeats his villain act and does a damn good job.
Om Puri has a very small role and he does good.
Deep Dhillion and Mukesh Rishi do good as Danny's 2 brothers.
The other 4 brothers do a good job.
On the whole, Ghatak works as an action entertainer and its emotional aspect as well as the father son relationship is the biggest plus point.
However, the film does not live up to RKS's last blockbusters and despite being a big hit, Ghatak pales in front of Ghayal and Damini..
Could've been a great father-son film but ends up being a mishmash.
Sunny Deol and RKS together gave 2 back to back hits GHAYAL and DAMINI.
The film starts with Om Puri's murder and then Sunny makes an entry in a village where people respect his father Amrish Puri, then Sunny comes to Mumbai for treatment of Amrish Puri, their relationship is treated very well, The scene when Sunny breaks down in Amrish Puri's arms is treated beautifully.
The film also tries to be a Sunny Deol type actionner and this time they are 7 brothers of Danny whom Sunny has to finish one by one, going by Sunny's action hero image.
Just like GHAYAL this time too the film boasts of several hardhitting dialogues and action packed scenes but the drama between father and son is just the wallpaper.
The film would be better as a father and son film alone but RKS thought to pack everything in the film not to disappoint Sunny fans.
Must say several scenes are well handled like the interval point, Sunny confronting his brother, Sunny confronting Tinnu Anand and of course Amrish Puri-Sunny Deol scenes But the film does get too lengthy in second half and at times too over-dramaticDirection by RKS is good but he could've focused more on the emotional aspect Music by RD Burman, Anu Malik is great, Koi Jaahe to Le Aaye was a big hit, Nigaon ne cheda hai is superb too(perhaps Burman composed it) Sunny Deol sports various hairstyles in the film(as the film was in making for 5 years) but does a great job, as always in RKS films he gives his best especially in dramatic scenes, even in emotional scenes he is terrific Meenakshi Sheshadri doesn't get a lengthy role like DAMINI but does well in her role especially during the preclimax when she shouts Yahaan Koi Mard Nahin Amrish Puri is outstanding in his role and he won the best supporting actor award that year.
Danny Danzongpa is good as the villain, Mukesh Rishi is decent, Tinnu Anand is loud while Deep Dhillon is adequate Harish Patel is typecast Om Puri is terrific in a short role, Tinnu Anand, Rohini Hattangady,Anjan Shrivastav and all rest lend able support |
tt0089110 | Ewoks: The Battle for Endor | While the Towani family (Jeremitt, Catrine, Mace, and Cindel) are preparing to leave the forest moon of Endor, the Ewok village is attacked by a group of Marauders (originally crash landed from Sanyassa) led by Terak and his witch-like sorceress Charal. Many Ewoks are killed. Cindel escapes, but is forced to leave Jeremitt, Catrine, and Mace to their doom, both parents having already been hit by enemy fire; her mother and brother killed when a Marauder blaster-cannon destroys a hut in which they had taken refuge from the battle.
While running away from the carnage, Cindel and Wicket meet Teek, a small, fast native of Endor. Teek takes them to the home of Noa Briqualon, a human man who is angered by their uninvited presence, and throws them out. Eventually he proves himself to be a kindhearted man, letting Teek steal food for them, and inviting the two in when they attempt to build a fire for warmth.
At the Marauders' castle, Charal is ordered by Terak to find Cindel, assuming she knows how to use "the power" in the energy-cell stolen from Jeremitt's star cruiser. Meanwhile, Noa, Cindel, and Wicket are becoming friends. It is revealed that Noa is rebuilding his own broken star cruiser, only missing the energy-cell.
Cindel is awakened one morning by a song her mother used to sing to her. She follows the voice to find a beautiful woman singing. The woman transforms into Charal, who takes her to Terak. He orders her to activate "the power." When she cannot, she and Charal are both imprisoned with the Ewoks. Outside, Noa, Wicket, and Teek sneak into the castle, making their way to the cellblock, where they free Cindel and the other Ewoks. They escape with the energy-cell.
Terak, Charal, and the Marauders pursue them back to the ship, where Wicket leads the Ewoks in defense of the cruiser, and Noa installs the energy-cell in his ship. The Ewoks put up a valiant effort, and are nearly beaten by the time Noa powers up the ship and uses its formidable laser cannons to fend off the Marauders. When Cindel goes to save Wicket, she is captured by Terak, even as the other Marauders retreat. Terak and Noa face off, with Wicket finally coming to the rescue, killing Terak and simultaneously leaving Charal trapped in bird form for eternity.
Shortly thereafter, goodbyes are said, as Noa and Cindel leave the forest moon of Endor aboard Noa's starship. | dark, murder, violence, cult, good versus evil, romantic | train | wikipedia | First things first, both this movie and the "Ewok Adventure" were made for TV-movies.
Therefore, to compare them to Star Wars is unfair due to the differences in budgets and people on board.
Both The Battle For Endor and The Ewok Adventure were childhood favorites of mine.
I recommend watching this movie with the whole family, and if you're into the Star Wars Universe like myself, you'll certainly get a kick out it.Despite some reviews, I think both the Battle For Endor and the Ewok Adventure are fun and well done (for TV) movies..
I know that many Star Wars fans resent the Ewoks for adding cuteness and comic relief to Return of the Jedi.
I did not think that the Ewoks served the same purpose as Jar-Jar. I did not like Jar-Jar in Episode I.
The humour was juvenile because Episode I was aimed toward a new generation of Star Wars fans: children.
The Battle for Endor and its prequel, Caravan of Courage, are spinoffs from Star Wars using the fuzzy little creatures that helped out the Rebels on the forest moon of Endor in that galaxy far, far away.
When I was very, very little, the Ewok movies were my very favourite.
My mother gave me a present when I had successfully been potty-trained: a Wicket stuffed animal (just to let you know HOW young I was when I watched these movies).
I remember years later seeing Return of the Jedi for the first time, when it premiered on television.
That movie enthralled me as well, but at the end, I was surprised and excited to see my little friends, the Ewoks, getting in on the action as well.
I don't think the Ewoks spoiled anything in Return of the Jedi--they are not unlike other Lucas creatures.
This movie is surprisingly dark at times, and for no clear reason.
I don't mind a movie like this having dark sides (see what I did there?), but if you don't explore them or put them to use, they serve no purpose, and is only in the way of the story.But fair enough, lets look away from that.
The movie follows Cindel and Wicket - both feeling more like sidekicks than they do protagonists.
They end up in trouble a couple of times, and after a while meet Teek and Neo. These are more like side characters, the good helpers the hero meets on his way.
I think the movie wants Wicket to be the main hero of this movie.
It's hard to have clumsy and heroic characters at the same time, but it is possible.The story is not really that interesting, and some of the plot elements in the movie feels a bit out of place, especially the ring and the witch-like Charal-character.
It all builds up to the final battle for Endor, which is an obvious attempt to capture the magic from Star Wars episode VI.
The battle is alright, but because neither the heroes nor the villains are particularly interesting, the big battle itself doesn't really grab a hold of you.Like in the previous Ewok film, the most interesting part are the visuals.
Some of the scenes with him running are great fun.While I appreciate what they tried to do here: give the story some gravitas, create an ensemble of interesting characters on a quest, risking everything for each other, etc.
This story of an orphaned girl and the lovable teddy bear ewoks is no masterpiece by far, but still is a great family movie.
I loved the ewok movies as a child, and I believe that generations of children will love it in the future.
This is one of the great movies of the 80s in MY collection that I think about all the time.
Back in the early 80s there were two good movies about the the Ewoks from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi.
Both film have the spirit of the Star Wars film in MY opinion and especialy ROTJ.
Both films are sad in a way but they are never boring and both have good special effects and the whole nine.
Fans of Brimley and Star Wars should see this!.
Almost as good as Star Wars.
The Battle for Endor makes a number of improvements that luckily make it over-all a better film than the previous "Caravan of Courage".
The film's mood is decisively darker and more serious, its cinematography is cleaner and for this it almost manages to capture the flavour of "The Return of the Jedi" and other bigger Star Wars films.Moreover, the film does away with the dreadful narrator of the first film by allowing Wicket to speak and simultaneously giving him more character.
Additionally the aliens, the Marauders, add a nice sinister element which makes the film all the more dramatic.The only points of criticism for the film are undoubtedly its kid-friendly story and the character of Noa who delivers a number of unconvincing lines throughout the picture.None the less, The Battle for Endor is just exciting enough so that it wont traumatize the kids and will make the film fun for the adults as well..
I agree the first Ewok movie sucked...it was so bad that I didn't even want to try the Battle of Endor until the kids demanded to see it and watched it twenty or thirty times laughing their heads off with their friends (the girls are 8-11).
all the cute teddy bear creatures and super fast Tweek or Tweet or whatever his name is and the guy that looks like Santa Claus are all cute and cuddly for little Cindel and our kids who watch her and imagine to be her.When I first saw this I thought Cindel, played by Aubree Miller, was either Drew Barrymore at six, or Shirley Temple...she is a dumpling of a curly blonde, rather not the best actress around...
if you want to see girls this age who can act I suggest Hayflower and Quiltshoe (A Finnish Movie).I think when you review a movie that is for kids that we should see them through their eyes and not be so picky about cardboard rocket ships that would be impossible to fly.
Thus, I give this a 10 star rating because my kids and their friends loved it..
Even though the stop-motion effects look out of date, the visual quality is an improvement over the previous Ewok adventure.
What it lacks for the continuous thrills and excitement of the last one greatly gains in the characters including "Cindel", "Noa", and the stellar cast of Ewoks.
Both movie adventures aren't too shabby when it comes to George Lucas' imaginable sensations, but does this mean they're an absolute must-have for every STAR WARS collector?
Star Wars is space battles, this movie has none.
Star Wars is the Force, this movie only has a retarded witch with a magic ring.
Star Wars is lightsaber battles, this movie hasn't got any battle worth mentioning.
Star Wars is humor, this movie isn't.
Star Wars is a galaxy far, far away, this movie has HORSES in it!!!
Do you like Star Wars?
Don't bother to look any connection to Star Wars.
Bad guys wear very stiff and lifeless rubber masksMost disgusting thing in this movie was still main character.
Great Kids Movie, Pretty good for adult Star Wars fans.
Kids between the ages of 5 and 11 you should find this movie, entertaining and funny and just plain Enjoyable like I did.
Of course the main stream Star Wars characters like Luke.
Han, and Vader are great, this movie also has some characters that you may find entertaining..
This time Wicket has learned a little of Cindel's language so narration isn't necessary.
At first I thought it may appeal to children, due to the cuddly Ewoks, the fury little people from Stars Wars.
Return of the Jedi was a great movie but the worst thing about it was the Ewoks.
The Star Wars trilogy ruled the earth and the new one looksincredible, but a movie about ewoks is a shockingly bad idea.The funniest parts of Return of the Jedi were parts with ewoks getting hurt (even toasted) so this is just a waste of time..
We see here where Lucas lost touch with what made the original Star Wars films great and began to descend into the plot less tripe that ruined episodes 1-3.
This film is more like one of those cheesy low-budget 80s swords and sorcerer films than anything worthy of being associated with the Star Wars saga.
This movies has balls, after the first film who kept itself in a kid friendly tune, this one put itself a little higher note and weren't afraid to push their limits to full, actually when I first saw this I thought of it as a new Star Wars movie, which I never felt when the prequels started.Cindel is back but this time she is all alone, her parents got killed by an army of marauders and their witch.
Cindel is saved by her ewok friend Wicket.
They run away from the marauders and run into a hermit named Noa. At first Noa don't want any of them near his house but after a while he start to sympathize for Cindel and together they find a way to the planet once and for all.Yes it's a tv production, but it's a good one, it takes more serious, has respect for Star Wars , and the little girl who play Cindel is likable again unlike the entire cast of the prequels and the recent Star Wars movies.
This movie is a little painful to watch now days, but I remember really loving it as a kid.
You can make a bad Star Wars film and that's fine, but when you destroy the characters I grew up with and loved and change the story so that it no longer makes sense with the original, that's when we have a major problem Ryan Johnson..
Both Ewoks films have the Star Wars magic which is missing from Episode I and II, AND PROBABLY III.
The creatures, places, and ships look real, the lasers are great, the music is wonderful and the story is both exciting and fun.
It's a shame the new Star Wars films couldn't even come close to the old stuff.
It would be great to get the Ewok films on DVD (But then I guess George Lucas would want to go back and computer animate the ewoks or put Jar Jar or Jabba-The Hut in it and reveal that the ewoks are all clones)See this film for good old Star Wars goodness!.
Since my first Star Wars experience was Return Of the Jedi I have always had a soft spot for those furry fellas.
I know a lot of older fans consider them the weak point of the first trilogy, but I think they're great, especially the song at the end of Jedi!I had seen the first spin off, Caravan of Courage, a long time ago on video.
So when I got the Caravan of Courage/Battle for Endor double bill, despite this being the second film, I watched this film first.Was I in for a surprise.
I have to admit to to having a smile on my face through most of the comedy middle part of the film and even chuckling a few times.Also |all the Ewoks seem to be be able to speak English with no problem at all!
It may not be that great a film, but anyone like me with a soft spot for the Ewoks will probably get something from this..
As bad as it is, it is the best of Star Wars TV offerings.
If you don't count behind the scenes programs and internet films like Dark Redemption featuring Myra Jade, this is the best of the Star Wars television offerings.
Yes it is rough in some places, but it is an improvement over The Ewok Adventure and I give this one extra points for having the balls to kill that annoying older brother Eric Walker right at the top.
The ewoks were the Jar-Jars of Return of the Jedi, a dramatic buffer between incidents in which we already had an emotional investment.
This movie might have been better if he'd went to the bad guys and said "If I have to come in here again, I'm crackin' skulls." It would have been even better if one of the Ewoks was played by Judd Nelson, who mouthed his words as he said this.Also, that speedy little creature is pretty badass.
In the year 1983, George Lucas cashed in a large sum of money after retrieving the funds of the biggest, sadly most popular star wars movie.
This movie had a comic relief clan, like Jar Jar Binks in episode one.
Lucas decided, for some stupid reason that why Jedi's success was so large, was this pitiful band of fuzzy, cute, and annoying Ewoks.
Big Mistake!In 1985 Lucas wanted another large sum of money, hmmm, he thought, why not exploit our fans even more?
That is why I hate the Ewoks: Battle of Endor made-for-tv movie.
This sequel to 1984's The Ewok Adventure is as good as the original.
If you love Star Wars, you need to see these Ewok movies.
This movie is so much fun to watch.
The Ewok movies are not that bad as people say.
Every SW fan should see these movies because it really is a SW spin-off and it gives a nice view of Endor's Moon..
If you don't hate ewoks, it's a great movie.
This follow up to "The Ewok Adventure" is a wonderful expansion to the Star Wars universe.
It's a little darker than its predecessor and better written as well.It's great if you're hungry for Star Wars fantasy.--Wonderful cinemetography.
Has same Star Wars feel, of that "galaxy far, far away"..
The first Ewoks movie is stupid but that is not the case with Ewoks: Battle for Endor.
Another great character is the superfast moving animal called Teek.
I liked this movie...I wish I could find it somewhere.
It was neat to see the Ewoks in roles that were more main character oriented.
This is far from a Star Wars movie, but its ok for a nice story that has Ewoks..
The ewoks are so adorable and it's a great movie for young kids or older adults!
Otherwise Wilford aka the greatest actor to ever live gives a great performance and i highly recommending finding this movie and watching about 30-40 times.
If you see this movie for one reason alone, see it for Wilford Brimley, one of the great thespians of our time..
I didn't think the first ewok movie was terrible like someone said, (both movies were unique in their own way) but I think Battle for Endor is a little better because the story is darker than the first one.
I used to watch the ewok movies growing up, and I loved it.
I don't know why, but for some reason, every time I watch an ewok movie, I end up watching the whole thing.In both Ewok movies, I like the simplicity and irony of the characters and the creative way the characters solve problems (at one point wicket builds a glider to escape when he and cindel were stuck on a cliff).
There were some interesting characters in Battle for Endor, like that little creature that runs really fast.Even though the effects aren't as good as the new star wars movies, I think anyone can enjoy watching these because the stories are so simple and very touching.
You really care for the characters and it's too bad George Lucas's new Star Wars movies aren't like that!.
Enjoyable enough, but is it Star Wars?.
As a kid I really enjoyed the first Ewok TV-movie, so I jumped at the chance to watch that and this sequel again when it was released on DVD.
It may be the nostalgia, but I still really enjoyed 'Ewoks: The Caravan of Courage, despite it's flaws.However, I found Battle for Endor a little harder to like, mainly due to the baffling inclusion of a medieval army that seem to have come right out of 'Willow' (which is kind of ironic, considering who's involved with this movie).I just...
Given that Wicket speaks English in this movie I can only assume that Battle for Endor takes place after Return of the Jedi.
If so, how come we never hear of the Empire (or the rebels) deal with this race of vicious monsters who live in a castle not too far from where Wicket's Ewok tribe live?
Any attempt to explain this stretches credibility, unless this film is set far before ROTJ, the Ewoks are immortal, and Wicket simply refused to speak English when Leia, Luke and the others showed up.As a stand alone film however, it's a fairly enjoyable adventure, despite ticking every cliché in the book.
If you really have to see an Ewok movie, stick with 'Caravan of Courage.' (Oh, and Return of the Jedi.
I expected to either be bored or have a good laugh while watching the made for television Ewok films.
While there are indeed dumb moments and bad acting in some spots, these Ewok films are actually watchable and have an almost Grimms Brothers fairy tale like darkness about them.
Out of the two, The Battle for Endor (1985) is much stronger.The movie is dark from the start: the little girl from the first sees her entire family die in an ambush and has to rely on Wicket, a weird monkey with supersonic speed, and an old man named Noah who's been stranded on Endor for decades.
The lot of them are menaced by a warlike clan of monsters and their sorceress accomplice.Really the whole thing feels more like your typical 1980s fantasy movie than a Star Wars flick, but it's a solid work in its own right.
You actually care about the Ewoks and hope they make it through their adventure. |
tt1287468 | Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore | In Germany, a bloodhound named Rex discovers a Cocker Spaniel puppy stealing secret codes before revealing itself as Kitty Galore, a hairless Sphynx cat. Rex reports this incident to D.O.G. HQ. At a car dealership in San Francisco, the mascot Crazy Carlito plans to destroy the dealership building. The police arrive, and officer Shane Larson and his police dog Diggs arrive to stop Carlito. Diggs takes the remote detonator from Carlito but bites it in the process, blowing up the building. Butch and Lou, now a fully grown Beagle and the head of D.O.G. HQ, watch Diggs blowing up the car dealership. Lou wants to recruit Diggs as an agent, and Butch reluctantly agrees.
Diggs gets locked up in the police kennels to prevent him from causing any more incidents. When Shane leaves, Butch comes in through the floor, recruits him, and takes him to D.O.G. HQ. After tracking down a pigeon named Seamus with valuable information, Diggs and Butch meet a M.E.O.W.S. (Mousers Enforcing Our World's Safety) agent named Catherine who was after Seamus for the same reason the dogs were. Catherine reveals to Diggs that Kitty Galore was a former M.E.O.W.S. agent named Ivana Clawyu who, while on a mission at a cosmetics factory, was chased by a guard dog and fell into a vat of hair removal gel, causing her to lose all her fur. Unrecognized and humiliated by her fellow agents and humans, Kitty left M.E.O.W.S. and vowed to exact revenge on humans and dogs.
Lou forms an alliance with Tab Lazenby, the head of M.E.O.W.S, to take down Kitty Galore. At a cat lady's home, the team discover that Calico, the middle-cat who was Mr. Tinkles' former aid, has been sending parts of stolen technology to Kitty using pigeons that work for her. Diggs tries to attack Calico, who then attempts to drown the team in cat litter; due to some quick thinking they eventually manage to escape. Afterwards, they interrogate Calico as to Kitty's whereabouts, but he claims that he doesn't know where she is because the pigeon couriers are flying the stolen technology to a secret location.
The group travels to Alcatraz where Mr. Tinkles is currently a mental patient. They try to get him to tell him Kitty Galore's whereabouts, but he only gives them one clue: A cat's eye reveals everything. When Kitty Galore learns about the cats and dogs working together, she hires two mercenaries named Angus and Duncan MacDougall to attempt to assassinate Seamus on the boat returning from the prison. Diggs subdues Angus and accidentally throws him overboard. Fed up with Diggs ruining the mission, Butch votes him off the team and leaves with Seamus to find clues.
Catherine takes Diggs to her home. She learns that the reason why Diggs never follows orders is because his past experiences have caused him to believe that he cannot trust anyone except himself, which led to him spending the majority of his life in kennels. She tells Diggs if he continues to think in this way, no one will able to help him. Diggs realizes how stupid he has been. Catherine takes Diggs to M.E.O.W.S. HQ, where they learn that Kitty is hiding at a fairground with her new master, an amateur magician named Chuck the Magnificent.
Not long after arriving, Diggs and Catherine are captured by Kitty Galore and her henchcat, Paws. Kitty reveals to Diggs and Catherine that she plots to transmit "The Call of the Wild" via an orbiting satellite which only dogs can hear through televisions, radios and cell phones to cause them to act hostile towards their humans. They will then be left alone and unwanted in kennels. Diggs and Catherine escape and meet up with Butch and Seamus. Kitty uses the roof of the fairground's flying swings ride for a satellite dish. Diggs, Butch, Catherine and Seamus arrive. Seamus presses a red button, thinking it is a shutdown button, but it instead loads the "Call of the Wild" signal. Dogs around the world start acting insane in their homes. Paws battles them, revealing he is a robot in the process. Diggs tricks Paws into biting the wires, destroying the satellite. Kitty's pet mouse, Scrumptious, fed up with Kitty's abuse towards him, fires her away. Kitty gets covered in cotton candy and lands in the magician's hat with the humans thinking it was a stunt.
After the mission, Diggs goes to live with Shane before returning to H.Q. to learn that Mr. Tinkles has escaped from prison with Calico. | revenge | train | wikipedia | After seeing such a low score, I didn't expect it to be that great, but I found myself enjoying the film after a very short time.The movie was actually pretty funny, and I don't normally find kids movies very funny, but this was actually good as a sequel.
I've seen much worse kids movies get higher ratings than this.You need to approach it with an open mind and remember that it is a kids movie and you will enjoy this, especially if you love animals or have a younger friend who loves animals to watch it with.I have been waiting for years for a sequel to the original, and while this one wasn't as great as I remember the original being, it was still an enjoyable movie with many laughs, and familiar characters.The special effects were definitely not the best I've seen, but there isn't anything wrong with that, the movie wasn't trying to be mind blowing, but the effects got the job done.
Its a good sequel full of laughs and fun for the family to enjoy.If you can approach this movie with an open mind, and remember its not an adult's film, but fun for the family, you will find plenty of enjoyment and laughs for everyone in the family..
I loved the part where it was announced to congratulate a dog on his son, son, daughter, daughter, son, daughter.....just one of those clever parts that you have to pay attention to catch.I loved the opening credits and Shirley Bassey theme, straight from James Bond and very clever.Sometimes we need a change from the movies we watch.
And the idea of adapting the world of James Bond to the world of cats and dogs isn't silly at all, but very funny for the kids, nicely done for the adults who understand some funny allusions and certainly better than most of the boring super agent comedy movie in the key of Austin Powers and other boring stuff.A part of that, the movie is well animated and has a perfect length.
People who really like cats or especially dogs might even give a few stars more, for example for the funny and cute video clips in the end of the movie.Of course, this movie is just a sequel, it shows nothing innovating and the story is predictable and of course there are no twists in the movie, but you can't expect that from any animation movie a part of the amazing "Wall-E".
Some people here say that you should put the children into the cinema to watch this movie and head yourself for the - in my opinion - heavily overrated "Inception" - I mean, you just can't compare those movies and if you take this point as a judgement, it is certain that you may be disappointed.So, don't listen to some of those really ordinary and exaggerated hate comments and spend some ninety minutes with your kids or younger sister or girlfriend or cat/dog fetish, switch your brain off and enjoy the nice jokes and this very entertaining movie.5,5 to 6 stars out of 10!.
I asked my kids whether they had preferred Toy Story 3 (which has a much higher rating on IMDb) or Cats & Dogs, and they said they had liked both just the same.
Then I smiled at the Dangerous Kitty doing the Silence of the Lambs sendup.And the rest of the time, I just sat back and enjoyed a rambunctious, Tom & Jerry style action romp simply because I wanted to be entertained by something lighthearted.And the Pigeon was a Hoot!Simply put: A good clean Movie for Little Kids that won't put the adult to sleep.
The highlight of sequel should have been "more really cute dogs and cats." But they decided to put an average (full grown) German Shepherd in the lead (instead of the cute puppy from the first movie), and focused too much on the pigeon (who, admittedly, did get most of the good lines).
All in all, my advice would be to ignore the mostly negative reviews and rent Dogs and Cats: The Revenge of Kitty Galore; it is a very cute and thoroughly entertaining movie suitable for all ages..
There's free-flowing action that will entertain the younglings and the animals themselves are cute and/or funny enough to please all audience members, though the plot has more than its fair share of eye-rolling moments and the CGI is poorer than it should be considering the movie's $85m budget.The gags are hit or miss, however the few that stick are quite amusing.
I am always interested in seeing well done special effects...even if it is in deplorable movies, such as G-Force or Transformers.In the case of Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, the special effects are competent, and they are complemented with the wonderful practical creations of Romaire Studios.Oh, and by the way, I also have a special affection for dogs.However, nothing of that helped me to enjoy this atrocious and deeply tedious film.The original Cats & Dogs was not a gem of modern cinema, but it made me laugh with its ingenious parody of the spy cinema, not to mention I could also recognize the attitudes from cats and dogs I have met during my life in the characters (of course I am not talking about the gadgets and the action scenes, but about the brief moments where the authentic nature from those animals was perceived).Now, as it usually happens, the obligatory sequel looses the slight charm from the original movie and increases the level of coarse humor, and the result is another family movie where the story is replaced by noise and visual excesses.Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore is composed by tired routines of a stupid humor which do not provoke even one smile, and the apparatus action sequences are very boring as well as irrelevant, and they only work as a distraction on the slow way to the ending.It is a mistake to expect too much from a film like this, but I always have the slight hope of finding filmmakers who do not take the family cinema as an excuse for reducing the intelligence from the screenplays to the minimum, or ignoring the most basic precepts of cinematographic narrative.Bad luck; I will keep searching.As I said on the beginning of the commentary, the good special effects are not enough to recommend Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore, because the movie is authentically horrible and hateful.I think that the animals from this film should have also been behind the cameras; I am sure they would have made a much better job..
Well, the official website for "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" has a paw for a mouse pointer, the movie uses most every lazy pun possible about pets, and a reviewer has already claimed the movie marks the end of civilization as we know it.
With such prospects, a film about talking cats and dogs coming together to fight off Kitty Galore (voiced by Bette Midler) doesn't eye well for adults.
Any mathematicians in the theater can better spend their time tracking the noticeable upward curve of boredom and silliness the longer the movie runs (the pet gags during the end credits don't count).Aren't kids movies like this supposed to be funny despite their absurdity?
It took 9 years to bring this sequel of "Cats & Dogs" to the theaters, which gave it plenty of time to spread a wide umbrella for big name voices.
Nick Nolte's deep scratchy voice took to the end credits to figure out, but it stands out in his role as a scrappy mentor dog, Butch, the muscle of a secret agency run by semi-intelligent talking dogs.We learn that dogs have an underground spy organization where no human has ever entered, appropriately outfitted with hi-tech gadgets in the Bond tradition and specially tailored for dog clichés.
The first pet puns are quirky and tone setting, but after the third or fourth - and when combined with lame cultural references (including Hannibal Lecter and who knows what else) - it becomes torture.The main character is a German shepherd police dog named Diggs (James Marsden), who joins a band of unlikely heroes to try to protect humans against Kitty Galore.
Cats & Dogs [2]: The Revenge of Kitty Galore (1:22, PG-13, 3-D) — other: talking animals; 3rd string; sequelI created the "talking animals" subcategory after years of frustration trying to figure out whether to slot things like this under SF, fantasy, or elsewhere.
They know that kids, and their parents, will be willing to pay and suffer through almost anything if it has a cute wise-cracking dog or cat character.This movie sets a new standard for the worst of a genre, however.
I like how this spoofs James Bond movies right down to the opening credits and the name Kitty Galore.
When I saw a trailer for this movie I wanted to go and see it despite its bad reviews.In all the reviews I read people said that the movie sucked.What I don't understand is why does everyone always judge sequel's so badly?Not all sequels are bad,and that's a true fact.Have you ever watched Toy Story 3?That is a sequel and that movie was even better than the first.Now about Cats and Dogs 2.I liked this one better than the first and I really don't care what others may think about that.Yes its a kids movie so of course its not going to please adults.But that doesn't mean little kids are the only ones who will like it.I'm sure some teenagers like it as well.I know that's true because I'm 15 and I enjoy this movie.
All this make for a bad and especially annoying film but you can't blame the kids--after all, most children are not movie reviewers and don't mind all this silliness!
It's a shame, as the first film, "Cats & Dogs" was pretty good and had some appeal for all ages--whereas "Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore" would only appeal to someone over age 10 if they have very, very, very low standards...or a traumatic brain injury.My verdict: dumb and tedious but also fun for young kids.
(I like cats, too hahaha :D).The movie brings back original characters; Lou the beagle (Neil Patrick Harris), Butch the Anatolian Shepherd Dog (Nick Nolte), Shep the Old English Sheepdog (Michael Clark Duncan), Peek the Chinese Crested (can't remember his voice actor), and even a cameo of Mr.Tinkles the Persian cat!
Diggs (James Mardsen) the German Shepherd/Alsatian, is a great character, and does bring colour and humour to the film, as well as a level of humanity; what I mean is, it shows the dog having problems, which the audience can relate to, much like Butch in the original.
The whole cats and dogs working together is a good message for kids, showing you should overlook your differences etc in the face of adversity, to help one other out and build a bond.The humour, no matter how over done, is funny, especially the cats on 'nip!
The human actors are just a distraction to the spy like efforts of the cats and dogs, and there are no characters as funny as some of the cats in the original.
Cats & Dogs: Revenge of Kitty galore, better than the original.
It was entertaining, the special effects were quite good, I liked the characterizations of the animals and I believe that the actors voices were well paired with their character animals.I think the movie could have gone a little more in depth with character development and also some of the 'exactly how did this cat do this'?
information, but all in all I think this sequel at least equal to if not better than the original movie.There are fewer humans in this one, and I don't think it was laugh out loud funny, but it was good, and my little girl really liked it too.
"Cats & Dogs": the idea of the original movie (which I haven't still seen, but I will) didn't appeal me 10 years ago.
It's not a very smart movie and the dialog is quite simple (OK, the dove character and some of the supporting cast is plain boring), but it worked great as a family movie: the kids (specially the 4 years one, who loved "Toy Story 3") liked the plot and followed it quite all the time without need of much explaining, and the parents liked the sometimes blatant, sometimes more silently reference to movies and sagas, from Bond's (it's really Shirley Bassey at the opening credits!) to "Die Hard", "Lethal Weapon", "Men in Black" or even Burton's "Batman".
The middle part was a bit slow (both in the CGI an plot advancement departments) and the main character development was scarce, by any means; much more interesting was his kitty companion and the misadventures of both the villain and his mouse.All in all, recommended as a light family film or as a cop & spy spoof (if you want the spoof not to be as offensive to the original material as the Scary/Date/Disaster/Superhero Movie sagas..
I saw the prequel to this, Cats & Dogs (2001), a few years ago and, although I didn't agree with the sentiments expressed in the film, I kind of liked the way it was done.
The voices of the main characters were provided by; James Marsden as Diggs, Nick Nolte as Butch, Christina Applegate as Catherine, Katt Williams as Seamus, Bette Midler as Kitty Galore and Roger Moore as Tab Lazenby.
For a children's film, 'Cats & Dogs: The Revenge of Kitty Galore' is pretty much the usual generic flick.
The voice casting (that includes stars like James Marsden, Christina Applegate, Bette Midler, Nick Nolte, Sean Hayes and more) is good too.
I think this movie is good enough to be watched by the whole family.Its funny as hell, i like the introduction of twinkles, using the psychology Hannibal Lecter uses to pick peoples buttons, and also the introduction of the pigeon.
Too bad they tried to use some clichés and jokes from other spy movies giving them this "pet way of talking", as in other animated movies, they add a funny character -remember Leo Getz in Lethal Weapon?- which wasn't totally necessary, but makes the movie bearable.I don't know if it's some bad acting by some of the actors, and a story that was too predictable -I know it's a children movie, but surprise is always good, and if we look back into the first movie, nobody would've expected Mr. Tinkles to take over his owner's company, and then leaving his sidekick behind, talk about twist of a bolt-.
Butch, yes one of the returning heroes from Cats And Dogs 1 but voiced this time by Nick Nolte (guess Alec Baldwin wanted nothing to do with the sequel) gets advised by returning hero #2 Lou (also voiced by another actor) that he wants Diggs to join up with them to fight the new feline threat to canine and human kind Kitty Galore (voiced by Bette Midler).
Cats and dogs this time around have to join forces to remove the world of Kitty Galore the feline threat.
From the absurd amount of cat and dog puns that are more forced than the drama on American Idol, to the just not funny jokes coming either from the main dog (who I am certain is probably missing his brain) to the pigeon that supposedly works for the big "bad" of this movie (and no, I do not really care why a bird works for a cat, but it is really stupid, that is for sure.) I wish I could say maybe the CGI is good, but no, it looks like the same half-hearted attempts they use in Asylum films, and worst of all it couldn't be less convincing that the animals are talking unless you just made them ALL CGI, instead of using real cats and dogs.
Sure, I know people try and use the stupid excuse, "But its for kids, can't you let it just be that?" No, I can't, because while there are still being great, incredible kid films being made and released (just think Lion King or How to Train Your Dragon) that not only are really, really enjoyable for children, but just so for adults, then I cannot stand while crap like this is being made.
The movie is based on the cats and dogs joining together and trying to beat Kitty Galore.
This live action/CGI feature is a sequel to 2001's Cats And Dogs, a film which I am pretty sure I saw but which I can remember nothing about.
Waste of Good talent Like Katt Williams who is really funny in the parody movies I watch is the mind blowing annoying pigeon who never shuts up.
Nothing can beat this film's awfulness.Cats And Dogs 2 is not a movie, It is a cliché.
Actually, you had it right the first time."I think the reason some folks didn't like this movie is because it delivers the clever dialog and the great action at such a fast pace that some of the good stuff goes whipping past the audience before they know it.
The end credit sequence shows cats and dogs playing and righting, like something out of "Animals Do The Funniest Things"Whilst it will keep you smiling all the away through, there are only a few places that are really funny.All in all, its good - but I'm not sure its better than the first one..
If you are a dog person, and have an open mind about kids movies, you'll probably like this sequel.
I would probably recommend CATS & DOGS: THE REVENGE OF KITTY GALORE!!!.
This movie is nowhere nere as good as the first cats and dogs but it is funny and entertaining. |
tt0489237 | The Nanny Diaries | 21-year-old Annie Braddock (Scarlett Johansson), has just graduated from Montclair State University. She has no idea what or who she wants to be. One day, while sitting in the park, Annie sees a young boy about to be hit by a vehicle. Annie saves him and meets the boy's mother, who we meet as Mrs. X (Laura Linney). When she introduces herself as "Annie", Mrs. X mistakes her words for "Nanny" and hires her to look after Grayer (Nicholas Art), the boy she saved (Mrs. X also continues to call her "Nanny" instead of "Annie" throughout the film). Annie lies to her mother about taking a job at a bank and, in reality, moves in with the X's to be the nanny for Grayer.
Life with the incredibly privileged X's is not what she thought it would be, and her life is complicated further when she falls for "Harvard Hottie" (Chris Evans), who lives in the building. Interspersed with her life as the X's nanny are her interactions with "Harvard Hottie" as well as her longtime friend Lynette (Alicia Keys). She also continues to keep her mother in the dark about her real job, giving her regular but false progress reports about her job. Further complications arise when her Mom decides to visit her, forcing Annie to pretend Lynette and her roommate are a couple and that their apartment is Annie's apartment. Her mother finds out the truth when Annie desperately calls her for help during a scary moment when Grayer becomes severely ill.
After a rough start, Annie eventually bonds with Grayer and discovers that he is actually a sweet and loving child who is neglected by both his parents. Parallel to this, Annie begins to also notice that Grayer is not the only one being neglected: Mrs. X is as well, with Mr. X (Paul Giamatti) constantly being cruel to her and committing subtly obvious adultery. Mrs. X makes numerous attempts to make her husband love her, including telling him she is pregnant with their second child. Annie soon realizes that Mrs. X's own cruel treatment of her is due to Mrs. X's growing frustrations from her dysfunctional marriage.
Things take a turn for the worse during a family trip with the X's to Nantucket. She overhears Mrs. X telling a friend during a party that she has installed a 'nanny cam' at their home in the city and plans to fire Annie after viewing footage showing Annie lovingly tending to Grayer (with Mrs. X grossly exaggerating her findings from the 'nanny cam'), Mr. X attempts to seduce Annie by inappropriately grabbing her just as Mrs. X enters the kitchen, resulting in Annie getting fired and sent back to the city with her final payment ... of just $40 (along with a puppy Mr. X had given Grayer when they arrived in the Hamptons but foisted off on her as she was leaving). Flying into a rage, she looks for and finds the 'nanny cam' in the X's house and records her feelings toward the X's. Mrs. X brings the tape to the school meeting for the Upper East Side mothers. Thinking that the tape will show Annie feeding Grayer peanut butter and jelly, she requests the coordinator to play it for everyone to see. All other parents in the room hear as Annie reveals the real relationship between the X's, in the process making Mrs. X come to terms with her own reality and false happiness.
Annie continues to date "Harvard Hottie", whose real name is revealed to be Hayden. She is temporarily living with Lynette and her roommate, and pursuing her growing interest in anthropology, much of which she learned through her time as the X's nanny.
A few months later, Hayden hands her a letter from Mrs. X. Written in the letter is an apology and news about how Mrs. X left Mr. X (and that her second pregnancy was a false one that Mrs. X invented to keep Mr. X interested in her), is raising Grayer alone and making stronger attempts to bond with him (and successfully doing so), and Grayer's overall improvement. She expresses her gratitude to Annie for waking her up and changing her life. Also in the letter, Mrs. X addresses Annie for the first time by her real name (instead of Nanny), and signs the letter with her own first name, Alexandra (instead of Mrs. X). | satire, flashback | train | wikipedia | "The Nanny Diaries" did not get very good reviews but I liked the previews so I decided to see it instead of another movie that got much better reviews and I'm glad I did."The Nanny Diaries" is entertaining the entire time.
It might not have you rolling in the aisles like "Superbad," but it is not that kind of movie.The main reason to see this film is because of Scarlett Johansson.
Not only is her acting phenomenal, she is the world's most beautiful nanny.A lot of the professional reviews seem to have been disappointed by "The Nanny Diaries" because it was written and directed by the same people who did "American Splendor." They were expecting something more like that film.
I thought it was better than "The Devil Wears Prada," which it often gets compared to."The Nanny Diaries" is absolutely mandatory viewing for Scarlett Johansson fans.
"The Nanny Diaries" certainly has to be a feel good summer movie, it's entertaining and sweet and a coming of age story as told thru one characters point of view.
The rest of the movie follows her on her adventure as she learns what it takes to be a nanny in NY, and also learns what it takes to survive life.-The film-making technique is not necessarily an original one in which the main character narrates the whole story but what helps in this one is that its quite an entertaining narration and she doesn't narrate the whole movie so it does help.
The odd visual style is also nicely done with some unique effects and one really weird scene in which we see Annie flying through New York all Mary Poppins style.-Scarlett Johansson is building quite an impressive resume with this brilliant movie.
Yeah she seems like z shrewd cold hearted woman when we first meet her, but after getting to know her husband Mr. X played the great Paul Giamatti, we begin to understand why she does certain things that she does.
Though the directors cast of some of today's well-known stars like Scarlet Johanssen, Paul Giamatti, Laura Linley, Donna Murphy, and Chris Evans, the movie was bland and lacked a primary theme.The movie begins with Annie Braddock (Johanssen) a college graduate who is unsure what to do with her life now.
Laura Linley does a decent job as bitchy self-centered Mrs. X, and Paul Giamatti does a fantastic job playing the workaholic father with maybe two lines total.The only reason to see this movie would be to compare it to the novel, but be forewarned that it will be an outrageous disappointment.
Throw in a grating voice-over and cardboard characters and I am definitely OUT.Somehow a film written and directed by the "American Splendor" team of Robert Pulcini and Shari Springer Berman, starring Scarlett Johansson, Laura Linney and Paul Giamatti comes across as shallow, poorly written and, at times, laughably unwatchable.The stereotypes are flowing big time with rich, snobby, out of touch, self-absorbed "upper east siders" on display at every turn.
Throw in the "Harvard Hottie" (played by the human torch, Chris Evans) who has the dead mom, boarding school childhood misery going for him, a few misplaced "Mary Poppins" tributes, and the brilliant but poor Anthropology major (Scarlett) who just wants to find herself working as a nanny, and you have the makings of a cheap Oxygen channel comdram.
They made the Nanny character (now Annie) a poor New Jersey girl, raised by a single mother, who has no idea what she wants to do with her life.
Such a pity, because the book is brilliant, and part of what makes it so good is Nanny's apt social commentary, not her shock of being thrown into the deep end of nice, normal, Jersey girl vs rich, stupid, Manhatanities.
As this personal drama unfolds, Grayer becomes attached to Annie, and she responds in kind, which of course, can only lead to complications.As much as I like Scarlett Johansson, she is not a natural at this type of character-driven comedy (unless you count the skits she does on "Saturday Night Live" where she plays Lexie, the glammed-up Jersey girl pointing repeatedly to chandeliers and marble columns).
Broadway great Donna Murphy shows up effectively as Annie's working-nurse mother, Julie White has a few funny moments as an unctuous training seminar leader, and pop singer Alicia Keys plays the requisite best pal role with bohemian spunk.
The film seems to mainly focus on Annie's view of the upper class (as she works as a nanny for such a family) and therein lies a danger, where she pretty much (as we are shown), in her own assessment generalizes her conclusion from one experience and in the other cases, with one encounter.Now regarding the family she works for, Mr.X is a complete caricature of the businessman jerk who constantly cheats on his wife by shagging anything wearing short skirts or hotpants and he is bitter towards his family (including wife, son and even own mother).
For this wonderful act she is swiftly offered a job as his nanny, a task which turns out to be impossibly demanding.The child's mom, and Annie's boss, is a rich-bitch socialite played by Laura Linney.
Like a good anthropology student, Annie protects her employer's name in the film, so everyone calls mommy Mrs X - though if this is meant to give an air of authentic Diary-narration I remained less than convinced.
Mrs X supplies the crosses in this star-crossed romance, and you don't need a Ph.D to guess the ending.Underlying Nanny Diaries is some biting satirical comment showing the divide between rich and poor and suggesting marrying a loaded husband is another form of sell-out, in spite of all those pressures to 'succeed.' Unfortunately any such depth is quickly washed out with bland chick-flick super-rinse and you'll be left scratching your head if you expected a point.
But I was astounded to find the alternative tempting her is not a decent career but a 'Harvard Hottie.' The best Nanny Diaries achieves is exposing the horrible world of New York nannying; but it this takes serious subject matter and then treats the audience as if they have an IQ of room temperature.Dialogue fizzles with such standards as, "Money can't buy you love." Although the reply, "But mummy pays you money and I love you," is probably one of the better lines (and as good as it gets).
Nanny Diaries isn't even bad enough to be good.Annie says, "My desire to be an observer of life was actually keeping me from having one." There are pointed references to Mary Poppins, The Sound of Music, and even The Devil Wears Prada.
Edith Wharton wrote about this kind of woman really well, and it's no accident that Laura Linney was a superbly cruel, lovely and convincing Bertha Dorsett in an otherwise forgettable film of THE HOUSE OF MIRTH.So don't watch THE NANNY DIARIES.
What it is though is a decent enough comedy, with some nice laughs along the way.It's a surprise to see that Johansson is so good at comedy and is well supported by Laura Linney in her role.If you're looking for an easy going comedy then this one has a lot going for it..
Johansson plays 'Annie', a recent college grad who takes a job as a live in nanny for the very wealthy X's, looking after their troubled son -who I suppose was meant to be cute and precocious but for the most part I just found bratty and annoying.The story itself was okay, it didn't blow me away or anything, but it was enjoyable enough.
Recent college grad Annie Braddock (Scarlett Johansson) is all set for a career in business when she quite literally falls into a position as nanny for the four-year-old son (Nicholas Art) of a snooty, self-absorbed Upper East Side socialite named Alexandra X, played by a sadly miscast Laura Linney (among many of the movie's wearisomely cutesy touches is not giving a surname to the family that hires her).Based on the novel by Emma McLaughlin and Nicola Kraus, "The Nanny Diaries" is, unfortunately, every bit as predictable and trite as its simpleminded premise would lead one to expect.
Beyond trafficking in just about every stereotype and cliché imaginable - the heartless, neurotic, slave-driving elitists; the sensitive knight-in-shining armor love interest (Chris Evans); the nagging, free-living best friend; the lecherous, nanny-chasing husband (Paul Giamatti) - the movie is woefully unsuccessful even at treading that fine line between cleverness and cuteness that can make or break a film of this type.
But that air of fanciful creativity is quickly squelched in favor of formulaic storytelling and cookie cutter characterizations.Interestingly, the filmmakers, for all their championing of the women employed as nannies, seem to have almost as low an opinion of the profession itself as do the elite snobs who appear on screen.All told, Johansson is really the only decent thing about "The Nanny Diaries" (well, little Nicholas Art is pretty cool too), but even her staunchest admirers would be well advised to look the other way when it comes to this film..
Scarlett Johansson plays a college graduate who after finishing his years of studying, and not having luck to find a job in the field she desired ends up working as a nanny to the spoiled and annoying kid (Nicholas Art) of a rich but heartless family, a couple played by Laura Linney and Paul Giamatti.
To make things a little lighter to the nanny she has the company of a great and wise friend (Alicia Keys) and the Harvard Hottie Hayden (Chris Evans, who is amazing playing a Prince Charming kind of guy) a neighbor of the X family as she calls them during the movie.I have not read the book in which this film was based, and I'm not sure if I want it to, so this review won't be focused in telling if the film is faithful to the written work.
Once again, a film said to us that rich people are heartless and mean persons who throw their kids to the nanny, instead of taking care of them because they need to make more money, go to shopping all day long, because in that way everybody gets happy.
Well, I can't say more about Antropology and the way of societies conducing things but as for the money not making things easier I'll say this: The money makes things easier but you've gotta throw your heart and emotions in the garbage, just like the parents in this film and as many influential rich people around the world playing with other people's emotions believing that they're always sad and unhappy when actually they're not or they shouldn't be.The happy ending worked but not that much, it come too late to get my attention.
This comments might seem cruel or angrier but I can't help having watched as previous film a shocking reality presented in "Ken Park" where less fortunate teenagers have awkward life experiences and most of the time their parents are there and even worse they are part of traumatic moments of their kids lives and that movie didn't make me get out of the chair despite its crude, its twisted and its bizarre moments while this other nanny film made me think on other things that has noting to do with it.
I know "Ken Park" is not a ordinary film that everybody can watch just like "The Nanny Diaries" but at least it said something more to me and my life than this poor work; I felt sorry for the kids in "Ken Park" but for the little boy in "The Nanny Diaries" I just couldn't care at all.
Scarlett plays an endearing college grad named Annie who gets a large helping of reality when she becomes a nanny to a young boy named Grayer.
The film stars Scarlett Johansson as Annie Braddock (Why are female movie characters always named Annie, not Ann?
The film stars Scarlett Johansson as Annie Braddock (Why are female movie characters always named Annie, not Ann?
I've never known an Ann in my life who likes to be called Annie), a recent college graduate who stumbles into a job as a Nanny for the child of an unhappy, upwardly mobile couple residing on Manhattan's lower east side.
I've never known an Ann in my life who likes to be called Annie), a recent college graduate who stumbles into a job as a Nanny for the child of an unhappy, upwardly mobile couple residing on Manhattan's lower east side.
I think the poor reviews for The Nanny Diaries can be attributed to expectations- I do agree that the book has a much different tone from the movie.
I think what makes this movie work are the really strong performances by Laura Linney and Donna Murphy, the funny jokes, and the overall serious tone..
While it also gave the actor a payday, his part in the story only robbed more time from the relationship between the two best friends, Scarlett and Alicia.The movie goer only needs to focus on the most principal characters in the story otherwise it detracts when the viewer is trying to identify with a character who is on screen for only 10 second scenes and trying to guess how they fit into the rest of the story.But, overall, the story was unique in its concept and takes its place as "yet another of the pretentious New York stories" where the residents think that the world rises and sets on their beloved city.
Scarlett Johansson doesn't rip my heart out with emotion in this film like she did in 'A Love Song for Bobby Long', or 'Girl with a Pearl Earring', but it's not that kind of movie.
The writers have compiled believable characters from actual experience as New York City Nannies, and formulated them and themselves into an interesting and amusing drama.This may not be the Funniest Comedy or the most Emotional Drama that I have seen of Scarlett Johansson, but it was entertaining while intellectually stimulating.
Laura Linney as Mrs. X the employer was brilliant and I also loved Alicia Keyes as the best friend and Donna Murphy as Annies Mom. All-in-all a good movie for when you want to be entertained but don't want to have to think too much..
In Singapore, this phenomenon continues to grow, and in New York, it becomes a fictional social study, where you have a best selling novel turned into a movie (what else?).In many ways, The Nanny Diaries is similar to The Devil Wears Prada.
Unlike the book, which leaves things pretty unresolved, maybe that gives it a touch or realism, this film gives us the perfect happy ending, were the bad guys are reformed and our heroine has found what she was looking for.I didn't hate the movie, it's fine, it just drags a little.
It was sharp and gossipy, amusing in a clear-eyed, first-hand-knowledge sort of way (both authors worked as nannies in NYC before writing the book).None of that makes it to the film, which changes the plot & characters so completely that it might as well be a different story with an entirely different title.
She is also appalled to learn of Annie's waste-of-time job raising a child.So, what I gathered from the movie is that it is only OK to leave your child for hours on end if you are a nurse from New Jersey who is trying to give your child an opportunity to one day work his/her way up to a life of luxury (which will, in turn, presumably make said child evil and heartless).
This the movie makers have not achieved.The Upper East End parents are so stereotyped that the movie makers don't even bother giving them names, but just call them Mr and Mrs X (Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney).
What kind of life the little kid goes through needs no elaboration and his transformation from a hostile brat to a longing and loving child in his relationship with the new nanny (Johansson, of course) is predictability itself.And I don't agree with what some critic say that this movie is comparable to The devil wears Prada, just because both have a dominating middle-aged woman and an unsophisticated lassie.
Annie (changed from Nanny in the book since movie audiences are stupider than book readers) is played by Scarlet Johansson whose career is starting to show cracks, especially when she has the unenviable task of acting next to Paul Giamatti(as Mr. X) thus exposing her talent as the fraud that it is.
The Nanny Diaries (2007): Dir: Shari Springer Berman / Cast: Scarlett Johansson, Laura Linney, Paul Giamatti, Chris Evans, Alicia Keys: Recycled story about progression and accomplishment.
Scarlett Johansson teams up with her Avengers Assemble co star Chris Evans in this underrated drama about a college graduate named Annie(Johanson)who has to mind a little boy who's parents go by Mrs & Mr X(played by Paul Giamatti from The Amazing Spiderman 2 and Laura Linney)who are sorta uptight and Annie finds it hard to keep up with Mrs X's terms,while Mrs' X's husband is cheating on her with a much more younger woman.
Also starring Tangled star Donna Murphy as Scarlett Johansson's mother, and Alicia Keys as Annie's friend,its not a bad film but its not that great either.The story has been done to death before,parts of it reminded me of Raising Helen meets The Devil Wears Prada but having said that if you like the actors in this film than check it out.C- 5/10The ending was sorta off for me but the rest of the film is OK..
After blowing an interview for a high-corp business, Annie finds herself being offered the role of a nanny for Mrs. X (played by Laura Linney).
Scarlett Johansson playing Annie Braddock makes the film worth seeing.Annie takes a job as a nanny and she struggles with the miserable life her employers bestow upon her. |
tt0092048 | Tampopo | A pair of truck drivers, the experienced Gorō and a younger sidekick named Gun, stop at a decrepit roadside ramen noodle shop. Outside, Gorō rescues a boy who is being beaten up by three schoolmates. The boy, Tabo, turns out to be the son of Tampopo, the widowed owner of the struggling business, Lai Lai. When a customer called Pisken harasses Tampopo, Gorō invites him and his men to step outside. Gorō puts up a good fight, but outnumbered by Pisken and his men, he is knocked out and wakes up the next morning in Tampopo's home.
When Tampopo asks their opinion of her noodles, Gorō and Gun tell her they are "sincere, but lack character." After Gorō gives her some advice, she asks him to become her teacher. They decide to turn her establishment into a paragon of the "art of noodle soup making". Gorō takes her around and points out the strengths and weaknesses of her competitors. She still cannot get the broth just right, so Gorō brings in the "old master" and his superlative expertise. When they rescue a wealthy elderly man from choking on his food, he lends her his chauffeur Shohei, who has a masterful way with noodles. Also, through clever trickery they pry ramen secrets from their competitors. During the transition, the group agrees to change the restaurant's name from "Lai Lai" to "Tampopo".
Pisken feels bad for being too drunk to tell his men to stay out of the fight, so he offers Gorō another chance one-on-one. After the rematch ends in a draw, Pisken reveals he is a contractor and offers to make over the shop's interior. Tampopo's latest effort still comes up short, so Pisken teaches her his own secret recipe. When the five men consume her latest creation down to the last drop, Tampopo knows she has won. (Tabo also triumphs, beating all three of his tormentors). As customers fill her newly redecorated shop, the men file out one by one.
The main narrative is interspersed with stories involving food on several levels. Satirical vignettes involve a lowly worker who upstages his superiors by displaying his vast culinary knowledge while ordering at a gourmet French restaurant; a housewife who rises from her deathbed to cook one last meal for her family; and a women's etiquette class on how to eat spaghetti properly. Another subplot involves a corner store clerk who has to deal with an older woman obsessed with squeezing food. The clerk's scene segues into a restaurant involving an investment scam and the intended victim, who turns out to be a conman himself.
The primary subplot involves a young man in a white suit – an elegant gangster – and his lover, who explore erotic ways to use food. In the end, the man is shot several times by an unknown assailant, to his lover's horror, but uses his last words to convey his secret recipe for sausages.
Throughout, the film puns off stereotypical American movie themes, characters, music and camera set-ups and shots. | psychedelic, humor, satire | train | wikipedia | If you are interested in Japanese culture and you appreciate food in the least, you owe it to yourself to track a copy of this down and watch it, especially if you like a good bowl of ramen!
Even though he also takes dead aim at spaghetti westerns and the Japanese love affair with food, especially their predilection for fast food noodle soup, at no time is there any rancor or ugliness in his treatment.If you've seen any Itami film you will be familiar with his star, his widow, Nobuko Miyamoto, she of the very expressive face, who is perhaps best known for her role as the spirited tax collector in Itami's The Taxing Woman (1987) and The Taxing Woman Returns (1988).
Along the way Itami makes fun of stuffy bureaucrats, macho Japanese males, heroic death scenes, Japanese princesses attempting to acquire a European eating style, movie fight scenes, and God knows what else.The comedy is bizarre at times.
(Do they?)The final credits roll (after some further misdirections and some further burlesque) over a most endearing and ultimately touching shot of a young mother with a beautiful and contented infant feeding at her breast.Perhaps this was Itami's best film.(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!).
I am completely in awe each time I see this movie, and it never fails to make me stop and watch as Goro is instructing Tampopo on why the customer must, MUST, be observed upon entering the shop while Gun complains that the pork slices are too thin.
Above all, the pacing is some of the best seen in any comedy.Tampopo has all the qualities of good story telling: a hero, a disciple, a quest.
Ending the bicycle workout scene (with Goro and Tampopo) with the business party walking into the restaurant where the "How to eat Italian food" lesson took place, which, upon conclusion found the camera following a waiter BACK to the business party all occurred seamlessly and left a grin on my face no one else in the room understood.
Be aware you'll never look at your bowl of noodles the same way after watching this movie!!
Like so many other Japanese films before it, Tampopo may not entirely appeal to the western public, but it is by far the most accessible movie I've seen in years.
Simply the best film about food I've ever seen; peppered with homages and nods to great westerns, this lovely comedy is just a pure joy to watch.
(If you have ever had the opportunity/misfortune to try to eat mochi, this movie contains a scene that will have you rolling on the floor!) It is an excellent example of the ability of the Japanese to laugh at themselves, at those things that are peculiarly Japanese, and at their love affair with western (and particularly American) culture.The Japanese have long had a tremendous admiration for the nerve and individuality of the Americans.
Their love affair with the American Western film genre is on display in the main story line in which the lone good-hearted cowboy rides into town to save the damsel in distress.
The main narrative follows two truck drivers, Gun (Yamazaki Tsutomu) and Goro (Watanabe Ken) who stumble upon a run down, unpopular ramen noodle shop.
The film not only focuses on this narrative, but is interspersed with brilliantly transitioned scenes of people's interaction with food: a white-suited yakuza (Yakusho Koji) and his mistress perform erotic acts with food, a group of homeless turn out to be master chefs, a young corporate subordinate upstages all of his superiors with his knowledge of French cuisine at an expensive dinner, an old lady sneaks around in a supermarket just to feel the food, among others.Never missing a step, Yamazaki Tsutomu fully embodies the character of Gun. His tough assertiveness, along with the willingness to fight and instigate others, gives him many of the characteristics that John Wayne's famous cowboy persona's had.
The camera decides to follow the businessmen to their destination, a French restaurant, to watch them order their food, then follows the waiter out into the main seating area where it stops to observe a group of women receiving a lesson on proper Western dining etiquette (eating without slurping
although a Western man in the restaurant is slurping his noodles loudly, much to the chagrin of the teacher).
You can't help but enjoy the way this all works–the transitions make for a creative and ultimately successful approach to telling a story with multiple plot lines and random happenings.Itami created a masterpiece here, one that should be seen and loved by everyone.
With bifurcating stories about food as the bond in all human relations, from birth to death, to sex and back again, the men in the film finally get it right.
Free structure, all kinds of vignettes about food, the art of cooking (Itami, I believe, was a chef), closed with a loving image that tells all about us humans' urge to eat.
Best images are those beautiful erotic shots that illustrate the story of a handsome cinéphile gangster dressed in white (the scenes featuring an egg and a shrimp, are topped by the one with an oyster and a very young female fisher), but you will surely enjoy several comedy vignettes, that freely disrupt the central story, including the bureaucrats' lunch, the etiquette lady who is teaching young women how to eat spaghetti, the old master teaching his young pupil how to approach a bowl of ramen soup, the character with a tooth ache, the dying woman who prepares meal for her family
But of course, the main story (taken from «Shane», of the stranger that helps a family) is very good, about how Tampopo, the owner of a cheap road café, is taught how to make good soup by a truck driver and several other characters, with industrial spying included.
The movie follows a spaghetti-Westernish story of a woman learning to become a master noodle chef in a world where it seems people think about little else but noodles, interwoven with various quirky episodes portraying food obsession.
On the other hand, some episodes seem dumb or pointless to me and the director is a little too willing to commit to a long shot of something not especially interesting, like people eating noodles in real time.While I didn't like it as much this time around, it is a fascinating portrayal of Japanese cultural via food.
The story centers around recent widow, Tampopo, and her desire to turn her noodle/ramen shop into something great.
Two guys happen upon a woman named Tampopo ("Dandelion") trying to manage a run-down noodle shop and they decide to help her turn the place into an economic and gastronomic four-diamond establishment.
.. Japanese people with a sense of humour, philosophical insights in the preparation and consumption of noodles, sizzling scenes with food..
And all this cast into a captivating adventure modelled after classic western stories.Compared to 9 1/2 weeks (which of course was only ever interesting because of the scenes with sex and food), this film makes so much more of the theme, and is far subtler in exposing the mixture of food, sex, and power.Tampopo is one of my all-time favourites, a film that really explores reality and gives you something worthwhile to chew on..
In this case the references I'm talking tone and style here, not story and character include as many Asian (mostly Japanese) references as western.We have the standard American film stereotypes.
The main story of a woman struggling to become a master noodle-chef is told in between self-contained ~5-10 minute long vignettes on birth, death, sex, etc., all relating to food in some way.
One of the best examples that sticks out afterward was the scene where the 5 men at the bar are trying Tampopo's noodles at the same time.
Each man makes similar movements in the scene while eating the bowl of noodles, so your attention is drawn to them, meanwhile Tampopo is in the foreground of the shot behind the bar still moving around and watching the men.
The film will make you hungry, so be prepared (although I was not sufficiently inspired to order pot-noodle from the in-flight catering) – this would be a great movie to watch with friends while slurping noodles and drinking sake..
It shows that in Japan, there is only one way to do things: the samurai way!But i liked especially the scenes that had nothing to do with the main story in the film.
1st watched 11/15/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Juzo Itami): Funny, perverted yet touching movie about a group of food critics that help a woman become a master noodle cook and start a restaurant.
The movie is really about food and the way that the Japanese culture views it.
They throw in mini-stories that revolve around food obsessions including a couple that begin the movie talking to us(the audience) and are shown at various times using food in their sexual encounters and their other normal activities of life and death.
The main storyline starts with a couple of truck-driving noodle soup enthusiasts visiting a restaurant then helping the woman named Tampopo and becoming her coach.
The movie is funny and fun to watch for the most part and gives you a good idea of how the Japanese like their Ramen!!
Some of the mini stories don't make a lot of sense except they revolve around food --- so overall this feel good movie is very enjoyable despite it's imperfections..
Perhaps its a testament to the artistic value of the film that so many people enjoyed and appreciated the Tampopo on a certain level without really fully understanding what it was about.Food and sex are related?--ok, but secondary.
It not about the food but about the traditional woman and in not in a belittling but in an extoling sense.BTW, I too enjoyed the film while missing this commonality of all of the scenes after watching it.
The use of food to connect everybody in this movie is extremely unique and is not like any other film out there, even until today.
One could also describe it as an anthology film because the main plot is interrupted by numeros anecdotic side stories about the relation between humans and food.
The movie has a positive message as it shows what human beings can accomplish when they support one another.The main story is already quite quirky as the cool truck driver with a cowboy hat who seems to come straight out of an American western of the fifties finds numerous people who help him improving Tampopo's ramen shop.
If you like creative filmmaking, food and Japanese culture, Tampopo is what you have always been looking for but didn't know existed.
After having watched this movie, I felt like going to a restaurant and have an excellent meal and this is precisely the film's entire purpose..
It also includes several odd, yet intriguing, short story scenes involving other characters love for other food...
when I say love, yeah, I mean literally too - there is a pornographic scene where they show this guy just having sexual encounters with a girl involving food basically every time...
Overall this is a good, arty movie, that doesn't really want to teach you anything, but the love to food and life.
the story telling, both main story and several side-tracks are all memorable; the integration of the excellent music (including Mahler and Liszt) is superb; for any foodie, this movie gives the sense of joy and disappointment possible with good and bad food (like good and bad people); the possibility of a romance that does not develop; the sense of pride and achievement; a view of the quirkiness of a facet of another culture.
All in all, Tampopo is a tedious movie that you might be drawn into watching because -again and again- people put it onto "Classics" lists.
You can accurately judge the whole film by the credits scene, which is a 2 minute close up of a woman's nipple as she feeds her baby.The film documents the rather Japanese obsession with food and the "correct" way to eat, prepare, or order it.
(There is no kissing or sex between any of the characters in the two main love stories, unless food is in their mouths.)The main story of a woman seeking to become the best noodle chef is supplemented by several short scenes of random strangers that are loosely based on the food theme as well, but otherwise have nothing to do with the main narrative.
Japanese films may be best known for their tragedies and depressing stories, but happily this is not one of them!This is the story of a widow and her quest to become a successful Ramen "chef" in order to take over the noodle shop formerly run by her husband where all the best sources of gastronomic genius and knowledge are the least likely characters (according to society): a truck driver, a lowely business man, a old homeless guy, a gangster, etc..This spaghetti western satire is interspersed with odd & bizarre vignettes which add to this a very enjoyable and amusing movie.
There is one very short & obvious fetish/erotic scene and others that are not so obvious (especially if you are not Asian or a psych student)- so be warned if that makes you squeamish, or if you are watching with those that might be...It is crazy & fun experience, but it will make you long for food!
Sporting a potpourri of vignettes overstating the relevance and importance of food in relationship to life, death, love, duty and sensuality, Tampopo runs the plot like a thin ribbon through them all, creating a charming, and sometime disturbing comedy of unique character.Some have called this no longer available film the "first Japanese Noodle Western", although that may be debatable.
One of my all-time favourites and the movie that even got my mother deeply involved with noodle-soup.
Food, sex and having a great time are the main themes of the movie, in which I had thoroughly enjoyed.
However, there is REAL animal cruelty involved in this film and therefore, makes the movie worthless.It begins with live shrimps that are used as a sexual object.
(And check out an early Ken Watanabe performance.) Numerous mini-stories weave through the central story, sad or funny or alarming, all of which ponder entertainingly on the love of food in some way, tying it to life, death, birth, love, crime, and which combine to give this film its own unique feel and 'taste'.
Etc: read the other comments for more.What I want to add is that Tampopo, alone in movie history, is precisely like a wonderful dinner.
The main story involving a cowboy type who helps a young widow perfect her technique of making noodle dishes that will create long lines at her resturant was funny enough.
Tampopo and her masters' quest to create the perfect ramen experience was comic and possibly a little bit over the top even for Japanese people.
One thing (among many) that I love about Tampopo is the way the story keeps peeling off from the central plot into crazy blind alleys like the man with toothache and the downtrodden salaryman who knows more about food than his stuffy bosses.
You may never look at food the same again.The main story is that of Tampopo, a noodlemaker at Lai Lai. One night a visitor, Goro, stops in her restaurant and gives her advice about the quality of her soup.
Asian cultures may look at this differently, and find it funny because of things the characters say (like the dentists who remove a man's absess in his tooth and have to run to the window because it smelled so bad), knowing that they too, hold food in the same value.
They, like Tampopo, talk of food with wide eyes and sly smiles, and are completely and utterly earnest.We see the same in the little vignettes sprinkled throughout the main story, and it creates an outrageous and absurd humour.
The main story is about a rather run down noodle shop owned by a lady named Tampopo.
In a way, it has the same sensibility as My Uncle...there's not a mean-spirited action or person in the movie, and we wind up liking the people we meet in the film.
a "noodle" western making fun of "spaghetti" westerns that is also a look into the importance of food in Japanese culture.
So, in the spirit of Shane, Goro decides (with the help of some friends) to help Tampopo make the perfect noodle soup.This is the main thread of the story, but weaved in amongst it are a succession of vignettes that show the role of food in Japanese society.
In fact the film as a whole tells us a lot about the Japanese character, not just how it connects with food.The ending is probably predictable: Tampopo's reinvigorated shop becomes a resounding success, but in all honesty, just like life itself, the journey to that point is the most important and interesting thing.
A very funny film doubly so if you are a Japanese noodle enthusiast!
I saw this movie years ago, and here it is 2011, and I still think of it and recommend it to friends whenever the subject of Japanese films--or food movies--comes up.
Just recommended it again today to a friend as we ate noodles in a Japanese restaurant--I must rent this movie and watch it again soon!
Also the dramatic death scene of the Americanized gangster as his distraught girl-friend holds him in her arms.The main narrative is a humorous noodles love story that is beautifully played by all the cast.This is really wonderful film that shows how great writing, direction and acting are all that is needed to produced a classic movie.. |
tt0070531 | Phase IV | Due to an unknown cosmic event, listed in "phases", ants have undergone rapid evolution and developed a hive mind. A scientific team begins investigating strange towers and geometrically perfect designs that ants have built in the desert. Except for one family, the local human population flees the strangely acting ants. Scientists James Lesko and Ernest Hubbs set up a computerized lab in a sealed dome located in an area of significant ant activity in Arizona. The ant colony and the scientific team, along with the holdout family, fight each other though the ants are the more effective aggressors.
The narrative uses the scientific team as the main protagonists, but there are also ant protagonists going about their duties in the colony. The ants immunize themselves to the humans' chemical weapons and soon infiltrate their lab. Teams of ants penetrate the computers of the lab and short them out. After Lesko decodes an ant message, Kendra Eldrige, (a young woman who had taken refuge with the scientists) becomes convinced that her actions have enraged the ants. Seeking to save the two scientists, she abandons the lab and apparently sacrifices herself.
Hubbs and Lesko begin to have different plans for dealing with the ants. While Lesko thinks he can communicate with the ants using messages written in mathematics, Hubbs plans to wipe out a hill he believes to be the ants' central hive. Delirious from a venomous ant sting, Hubbs can barely get his boots on but is determined to attack the hive and kill the ant queen. Instead, Hubbs literally falls into a trap – a deep pit that the ants fill with earth. Helpless to save Hubbs, and concluding that the ants will soon move into desert areas where their growth will exceed man's ability to control them, Lesko chooses to follow Hubbs's plan. He sets out to the hive with a canister of poison. Descending into the hive, Lesko hunts for the queen, but instead finds Kendra. The two embrace, and Lesko realizes that far from destroying the human race, the ants' plan is to change them and make them a part of the ants' world. In voice-over, Lesko states that he does not know what plans the ants have, but he is awaiting instruction. There is also an alternative ending with an elaborate Saul Bass-type montage of weird images. | tragedy, cult, murder | train | wikipedia | But even as a youngster wanting something more un-subtle and action-oriented, I was not turned off by PHASE IV's slow art-film qualities.It is a shame Saul Bass never directed again because this was a valiant effort to do something a little different.
The beauty of these kinds of movies, is that they are not so much plot-driven as well 'atmosphere-driven' (by lack of a better word), so you can watch several times without getting bored.
There's something totally raw about the way these ants act and are shot alongside the inexorable, almost plodding pace of the piece that makes Phase IV seem amazingly, terrifyingly real.
30 years ago I fell asleep on the couch and woke up half-way through a movie about ants forming a collective and attacking people in the desert.
Unfortunately, I did not have a TV guide at the time and so never new the name of this movie.It bothered me for years that I didn't know the name of the movie and every now and again I would try various Google searches (when Google was invented) but initially found no matching entries and later on there were too many entries about movies with ants - so I would give up.I recently posted this question "What's the name of this movie with ants?" on a forum and miraculously someone provided the name and a link to this website - if they hadn't I could have lived a full life and died without knowing the name.That's how striking this movie is.My next mission is find a copy so I can watch the whole thing..
Phases of Horror and Psychedelic Art. When one hears of a sci-fi film about the massing of hyper-intelligent ants one immediately constructs a mental imagine of something akin to Them!
While being fully aware of the genre's motifs its cinematic approach is that of the art-house – a 70s psychedelic sci-fi trip shrouded in hordes of ants directed by the famous Academy Award winning graphic designer, Saul Bass.
It's the only feature film directed by Bass and it's almost completely forgotten and certainly isn't readily available for viewing.The story is fairly simple: some undefined cosmic event occurs and augments ant evolution.
This particular desert colony ascends to an intelligent collective consciousness making the ants capable of communication and great terror.
Straight away at the start of the film we are presented some truly striking images of the ant intelligence movement for several minutes – no dialog, no humans, just cinematic language.In short one could say, If you're the type of person annoyed by a Space Odyssey or even Blade Runner, then you're the type of person that shouldn't watch Phase IV.
Many would also find this film boring because of the lack of "action" sequences until the end, pretty much summed up when the nutter scientist is consumed in a pit of ants.
Phase IV is an incredible full length feature film by Saul Bass who is most acclaimed as a graphic designer who's work can be seen as the opening credits from The Seven Year Itch, Vertigo, West Side Story to Alien, Broadcast News and Casino.
The emotion that the girl shows in the film is clearly meant to be shock and not bad acting - only in over the top Hollywood acting do women get completely taken over by hysteria for the majority of the film.This is not a standard horror or action film and the tension builds as the nature of the film changes from observance of a scientific study, to the observance of several disasters, to a chilling conclusion.Those who want a cerebral, plot and dialogue based, tense and suspense-filled thriller will probably love this film.
While it's true that "Phase IV" is rather slow moving in spots, and that the human characters are ciphers with no real depth to speak of, "Phase IV" is a nice sally at an experimental science fiction film that emphasizes mood and dread over action and character development.I had the good fortune to watch this on a really large flat screen TV, and the amazing insect photography (major kudos to the editor who managed to integrate it so completely into the story!) and dissonant synthesizer laden sound track come through nicely with good viewing equipment - they add the proper utterly alien and inhuman feel to the movie and turn something pretty good into something really creep and spooky.Although the characters are admittedly pretty flat, that's undoubtedly on purpose.
Even so, Nigel Davenport brings the good stuff to his role as the biologist trying to contain the ants, and you both know everything you need to know and everything you'll ever know about in the first five minutes...without ever knowing him at all.An ambiguous and otherworldly/mystical ending might not sit well with a lot of viewers who like their science fiction movies to wrap things up by the end.
And, OK, the goofy little montage at the end with the mathematician and the gamin doesn't really match the quality of the hallucinatory insect footage that preceded it.Still, Saul Bass knew how to present an otherworldly, truly alien experience, but he was probably just too far ahead of his time.A classic of sorts..
Thought-provoking, and beautifully shot for a low budget film, Phase IV generates real suspense and heightened drama through good performances, a well-crafted story, and excellent editing of the extreme close-up shots of the ants.
Michael Murphy and Nigel Davenport play two scientists studying the recent peculiar behavior of ants after a strange outer space phenomenon has occurred.
Seems the(normal) sized ants have evolved into a collective intelligence, and are studying them as well, in the next step of mutual evolution...Weird(to say the least)film is nonetheless quite original and intelligent; seems to be partially inspired by "2001: A Space Odyssey", and though not a masterpiece, still contains some quite striking visual imagination and ambition(courtesy of director Saul Bass) and a mind-bending ending that gives much to ponder.
One of the spate of "environmental" sci-fi movies that came out in the wake of 2001, SILENT RUNNING comes to mind as well as the superficially similar (to PHASE IV) THE HELLSTROM CHRONICLE, this movie has the benefit of some good macro photography of various ants (and, if I remember my days in California, a blue-black wasp with orange feelers and wings known as a "tarantula hawk").
Included was the "long lost" alternate ending which was influenced (obviously) by 2001 and some other obscure films like THE MASK (Julian Roffman's 1961 3-D extravaganza) and William Cameron Menzie's, also a noted designer, THE MAZE.The movie is a bit dated and clearly "hooie" although I remember it as being a bit more convincing when I saw it in a theater in 1974.
Super intelligent ants are a theme not explored enough in today's cinema- at least we have films like Phase IV to look back upon since these themes seem to be too difficult for the modern cinema.
The "human footage" is shot in a way that makes it look and feel similar to the macro photography footage, the people and the ants are treated equally to such an extent that the boundaries between the "two worlds" become blurry while one is succumbed to the experience that is 'Phase IV'.
This and the excellent blending of human footage and insect footage gives the whole film an otherworldly atmosphere.I was reminded of 'Andromeda Strain' in its ignoring of plot conventions to make a scientifically fascinating movie but whereas 'Andromeda Strain' might be a great Sci-Fi movie it isn't a great experience, 'Phase IV" on the other hand, while also being an intelligent movie, is less concerned about scientific accuracy than about creating a unique experience and touching a few intriguing themes on the way.
Famed title designer Saul Bass made his feature length directing debut with this offbeat film that offers a fresh alternative to the giant insect pictures of the atomic age.
It's short on action and long on dialogue and atmosphere; it's definitely an animal attack film for the thinking person, but is fascinating in a surreal, mind bending way.
Adding to their problems is the appearance of local farm girl Kendra Eldridge (played by the beautiful, appealing Lynne Frederick), whose family was besieged by the ant aggressors.Bass dares to have this story take its time, but offers the viewer an interesting tale (written by Mayo Simon) with far reaching possibilities.
If you are afraid of ants then stay away.The film with its set design wants to reflect the symbolism of 2001: A Space Odyssey with its giant towers and action inside a dome like laboratory somewhere in the Arizona desert.A colony of ants have somehow gained heightened intelligence and are manipulating events so local people leave the area.
However the ants are using their collective intelligence to torment and play mind games on the people.I can see that this film has a cultish following.
It wants to be enigmatic and perplexing, it suddenly ends leaving you puzzled.I found the whole thing dull, poorly acted with Nigel Davenport and Michael Murphy desperately trying to rescue this mess of a film..
In this film, he plays a scientist out to study ants in the Arizona desert.
It's the ants.This film has a lot to offer and is deeply rewarding when watched again and again over the years.
since i saw a horror movie about ants with 8years i am a bit afraid about them - even i don't like them.
but phase IV is not a horror sci-fi about ants or so, it's a film about the mankind and the social systems we live in or could live in.
In "Phase IV", the ants maintain their normal proportions, they're probably always filmed with a microscope attached to the camera, and that's what makes the horror so much more realistic.
The ants transcend the boundaries of human intellect, and toy mercilessly with the researchers, herding them to a frightening prospect, but it has to be said, one that unfolds much too rapidly in the film's closing sequences.Sharp photography accentuates bleeding colour tones that saturate the dust-bowl landscape and Bass does an impressive job with experimental angles and visual effects.
You know what though> even though I just said that, I can see why some people would get upset about it being "just another silly sci-fi flick", and the reason being, is that when it first starts out, even though you see some ants, you still could imagine it being, more or less a true life story.
I watched it with my fiancé and she told me, "That was strange..." I then referenced a Family Guy episode that talked about one of those old 70's science fiction films with the ambiguous endings and said, "This is a near perfect example of one of those and the music is just like one of those!" Yes, this film is a bit ambiguous, a bit vague and it is also very unique.
No, here the ants are becoming more intelligent and the changes subtle at first as the first five or so minutes of the film almost play out like a nature documentary.
What makes this film such a classic is the stunning camera work, especially of the ants and other creatures, the use of very vivid colour and a very effective soundtrack.
i know that in the end of the movie it makes sense as she's easier too capture by a group of ants smaller than herself attacking her vulnerable naked feet with convenience still unknown too what they use too turn her into their queen???.
Other than that it's all fairly confusing stuff with the whole ant community work exceedingly interesting yet the actual idea very boringly filmed.
This odd little Sci-Fi film takes the common 'when animals attack' horror theme, but instead of making them giant or an animal that usually attacks humans, this time it's just ants that are the focus.
Of course, the idea of ants attacking humans had already been done two decades earlier with the classic monster movie 'Them!' back in 1954.
However, the ants aren't happy about being studied, and begin to use their collective powers to torment the three people inside the lab.I respect the fact that the filmmakers obviously had a lot of ideas for this film, but most of them aren't well executed, making it; to me at least, a film full of missed opportunity.
Director Saul Bass seems to care more about close-up photography than character development or plot, as he delights in capturing magnified shots of the ants, but forgets to almost everything else.
This is not because they want to, but because they have to.The movie opens with a narrator cryptically explaining that some cosmic event has come over the earth, and that a fellow scientist has been working on the effect this disturbance has on the ant population.
Basically this film is about what happens when ants gain a collective intelligence and declare war on man.The talkiness (which, at least for me wasn't fatally boring) is offset by incredible micro-photography of real ants and a good overall sense of creepiness of the encroaching insects.Saul Bass will be forever known as the one who did innovative title sequences for films (especially Hitchcock films)and his claims to have actually directed the shower sequence in Psycho.Here, the directing and the titles are pretty straight forward and there is some good cinematography.
An underrated, little-seen Thriller with its Elegant Cinematography and Great Insect Footage remains a Thought-Provoking and wholly engaging Film.Directed by Famous and Award Winning Graphic Title Designer Saul Bass, combining stunning scenery and SFX with an Ominous Musical Score, the Movie is an Unnerving Unraveling of an event puzzling Scientists and could be a Foreboding of Things to Come.It's well Acted, save the Girl, and the Tension at times is unbearable.
that lesser films resort to.At the beginning of the movie the narrator mentions something about some celestial event that was briefly in the news, then forgotten, but it had some profound effect on the ant population of the world.
The scientists counter-attack, to which the ants develop counter-counter measures, etc.All in all, not a bad sci-fi movie, I enjoyed it.
Still, the approach works, as two scientists match wits with mutating super-intelligent ants who seem to know more than they do.The movie builds suspense and interest, if slowly, but then blows it all on the oblique ending that leaves you sitting there thinking, "That's it?"I find it hard to recommend this movie..
I mean, they had an interesting story, clearly a talented director to make it all look and feel as it should, the least they could do is get their facts straight.The way the movie is made presents some stunning visuals and a captivating atmosphere.
Saul Bass, the director, directed only five obscure movies, but ended up being a title designer for a lot of known ones.
I saw this Mystery Science Theater episode recently and was bored beyond human capability due to this incredibly "complex" and scientific film called PHASE IV.
Saul Bass's "Phase IV" lies within the interstices of science fiction and horror, and adds an unexpected element: that of sheer awe and mystery.As a partial inspiration for his film, Bass likely had the 1971 faux documentary "The Hellstrom Chronicle" in mind.
The film's end leaves little doubt as to man's future, and eerily implies that the ants have a plan for a new "Adam and Eve" that is rather different from that of humanity's supposed "creator".
The ant colony photography is beautiful, majestic, and scary.Most of the film is 'Phase II': the attempts of the scientists to communicate with the ants and contain them, and of the ants' attacks on humans and the research dome.
But it's rarely been done so effectively and fascinatingly as in this 1974 effort directed by famed production/title sequence designer Saul Bass in which the insect threat isn't predicated on ridiculous atomic-irradiated mutated giants, but on a strange rapidly developing intelligence in the hive-mind of an ant population in the American desert southwest.The film begins with narration by British scientist Hubbs (Nigel Davenport) sent to an area that has experienced odd troubles with ant colonies; he is accompanied by American statistical theoretician Lesko (the seriously under-appreciated Michael Murphy) and the two start their studies of the odd insect populations inside a self-contained geodesic dome.
It's clear the ants in the area have mutated, developed some kind of superanimal intelligence and the two ill-matched (of course) scientists spend most of the film studying and trying to communicate with, or defeat the potential threat of the insects.
Much of the middle part of the film is quite exciting, and most of this is provided by the exquisite insect photography (cinematography is by Dick Bush, don't know who else to credit for special close-up microscopic photography) and the eerie music (Brian Gascoigne) which goes from typical 70s electronic stuff to British neoromanticism and areas in between - you really feel that these ants are intelligent and purposeful, and in fact they're more worth rooting for than the humans, which brings up the major problem.
And on Psycho, Bass was integrally involved in that films shower murder sequence, going so far to create the boards and test footage that convinced Hitchcock how the scene should be shot.This leads us to the only movie that Bass would direct on his own, 1974's Phase IV.
He decides that the ants don't want to destroy the human race, but instead make their two worlds work together.Originally, Bass filmed a four-minute long montage sequence that ended the film, showing what life on new Earth would be like and how evolution would change Lesko and Kendra.
Though primarily an animator and designer of title sequences ("Psycho", "Vertigo", "Spartacus" etc), Saul Bass also directed "Phase IV", his first and only feature length film.The plot? |
tt0025546 | The Mystery of Mr. X | London police constables are being killed by a man calling himself "Mr. X" (Leonard Mudie). By chance, one of the murders occurs around the same time and place as a diamond robbery, leading Police Commissioner Sir Herbert Frensham (Henry Stephenson) to suspect the same man is responsible for both, much to the annoyance of the thief, Nicholas "Nick" Revel (Robert Montgomery), and his confederates, taxi driver Joseph "Joe" Palmer (Forrester Harvey) and insurance clerk Hutchinson (Ivan F. Simpson).
After another slaying, Sir Christopher Marche is arrested as a suspect, as he had drunkenly quarreled with the latest victim shortly before his death. However, Nick provides him with an alibi. As a result, he becomes acquainted with Marche's grateful fiancée (and the commissioner's daughter), Jane Frensham (Elizabeth Allan). The two are attracted to each other.
Meanwhile, Sir Herbert becomes convinced that Nick is Mr. X and puts him under constant surveillance. When the commissioner learns that his daughter has gone alone to Nick's flat, he sends Marche a message supposedly from Nick urgently requesting that they meet. When Marche finds the couple alone together, though they are not doing anything untoward, he breaks off his engagement with Jane.
Nick decides to give up his life of crime for Jane. He mails back the jewel. However, when Joe warns him that Hutchinson has been picked up for questioning, he realizes that it is only a matter of time before his associate gives him up. Nick discovers that the locations of the murders form an X, which provides him with the site of the next crime. He disguises himself as a policeman and flushes the real killer out. After a struggle, Mr. X is fatally injured, but before he dies, he boasts to Sir Herbert how he close he came to fulfilling his goal of one murder for each of the 15 years he spent in prison. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | This is Robert Montgomery's film all the way.
This fine American Actor/Director is at his best and obviously has a lot of fun as he plays a second story man who just happens to steal a valuable diamond at the same time a policeman is murdered by a deranged killer.
The killing takes place on the sidewalk just below where Montgomery has made his heist and, as the film unfolds, Scotland Yard comes to the erroneous conclusion that the theft and the murder have been committed by the same person.
This leaves Montgomery in a precarious position and he realizes that to keep from being blamed for the murder he will have to bring the killer to justice by his own wiles.
He is working on all of this while, at the same time, romancing the daughter of the head of Scotland Yard.
There is plenty of good old fashioned suspense in this film to satisfy any mystery fan.
There are also several light moments as we watch the romance between the jewel thief and the daughter of the Scotland Yard chief unfold.
Lewis Stone, perhaps remembered best as Judge Hardy in that venerable series does a great job as another high Scotland Yard official who is suspicious of Montgomery from the start and plays a bit of a cat and mouse game with the thief.
A Policeman's Lot Is Not a Happy One. Well-done mystery/thriller with Robert Montgomery playing a jewel thief suspected of being a police serial killer.
The plot adapted by Philip MacDonald from one of his own novels is tightly woven and executed very nicely by director Edgar Selwyn.
Selwyn, for a 1934 film, uses lots of flair and style in creating a suspenseful pace and good atmosphere.
I particularly liked the way he used his cast - all of whom do excellent jobs.
Montgomery is in top form as the "hero" out to find the killer in order to exonerate himself of the heinous killing spree.
Aiding him is a love interest played by Elizabeth Allan, a truly lovely actress as the police commissioner's daughter.
Lewis Stone also rounds out the cast playing a police superintendent convinced Montgomery is guilty of the crime of stealing a valuable diamond and killing the bobbies.
He has marvelous comic timing in a more subtle way than just being a buffoon as so typically used in films like this.
But it is Montgomery's portrayal that really gives the film its steam and he is as charming as ever.
This is one of those rare diamonds one comes across every now and then from the Golden Age of film-making.
This is a first-rate mystery with excellent direction, good performances, and an interesting,convincing script..
This is one.Set in London, it is a romantic, mystery thriller (with comedy elements).
Robert Montgomery is most charming as a gentleman thief.
(Yum!) Also, Forrester Harvey, as Montgomery's Cockney cab driver stooge, does an excellent turn as comedy relief.What really sets this movie apart from others, however, is the absolutely amazing chemistry and timing between Montgomery and Allan.
One of the murders happens at a time when cracksman Robert Montgomery has stolen a very valuable diamond and Scotland Yard links the two crimes mistakenly.
Montgomery realizes he can't fence that valuable jewel with the heat on so he tries by subterfuge to aid Scotland Yard.
Of course this tangles him up with Elizabeth Allan who is Henry Stephenson's daughter in the film and Mrs. Robert Montgomery in real life.Robert Montgomery is poaching a bit on Ronald Colman's territory, but he does a fine job as the thief.
Henry Stephenson as always is THE quintessential English gentleman and Lewis Stone is a hard and driven inspector trying to catch the maniac.The police do make mistakes here, but the mistakes are completely understandable and really the fault of both Forbes and Montgomery who step into it themselves.
By the way you know that this picture is before the Code because it is by no means clear that Montgomery will ever give up a life of crime..
Good vehicle for Robert Montgomery.
Robert Montgomery, always the class act, gets to do more here than MGM normally let him in the very early years of his career when they too often typecast him as a wealthy playboy.
Someone is going about killing London policemen with a long sword in the absence of any other crime.
Enter Robert Montgomery as the unlucky cracksman Nicholas Revel.
He is unlucky because he steals a beautiful diamond at virtually the same time and place that one of the policemen is killed.
The police unfortunately deduce that the cop killer, "Mr. X", is also the diamond thief and figure when they find the diamond and its thief they'll find Mr. X.In yet another plot thread the daughter of police commissioner Fresham is engaged to a young man, Sir Christopher 'Chris' Marche, who is prone to nocturnal drunken adventures.
With the young man's scarf clutched in the dead policeman's hands, Sir Christopher is instantly a suspect.These threads intersect when Revel, a man with a profound conscience for a jewel thief and apparently better investigative instincts than the police, decides he cannot let Sir Christopher be blamed for a crime that he believes he did not commit.
He has a theory on how to catch the real cop killer - and thus get himself off the hook too - but he needs to talk to police commissioner Fresham and tell him his theory.
Lewis Stone as police superintendent Conner is also excellent here as usual, as he wages a passive-aggressive battle of wits with Revel.
The film has a very satisfying precode ending, but not the kind you would normally think of when you mention precode.Also, let me correct one common mistake.
The leading lady here is Elizabeth Allan, a fine British film actress, not Elizabeth Allen the stage actress and wife of Robert Montgomery at the time this film was made..
This was an excellent pre-code mystery which cried out for a series starring the dapper, cosmopolitan Robert Montgomery.
A sentence or two about the plot; Someone is killing bobbies in and around London, much to the chagrin of Scotland Yard.
As another cop murder is taking place on the street, RM is stealing a precious diamond in an adjacent mansion.
For the rest of the picture he tries to extricate himself from the murder while hanging on to the stolen diamond.Things go somewhat awry towards the end - apparently, the screenwriter was stuck for an ending and opted for one of convenience and unbelievability, but the picture was so good up to that point I decided to go with it and suspend disbelief.
Robert Montgomery is a gentleman jewel thief and in the films of the 1930s this would make him the hero...of sorts.
You see, X has been killing and taunting police for some time and when one of Montgomery's burglaries happens to occur at the same place a copper is killed by X, the police now suspect that X and the gentleman thief are one in the same--which clearly are not.
So, it's up to Montgomery to do what he can to help the police capture X--then, and only then, can they possibly sell the huge diamond.
Things get complicated when the daughter of the police inspector on the case falls for Montgomery.
By the end of the film, it's a life and death struggle between X and Montgomery--and guess who wins!
In many ways, this film plays a lot like a Saint or Falcon outing, though with a higher quality budget.
The overall product is enjoyable light entertainment--the sort they really haven't made in over 60 years.By the way, couldn't you also see William Powell in the role Montgomery played?
Modern directors who don't know how to make a movie in less than two hours could take a lesson from this fast-paced 84 minute thriller, shot in 1934.
The tale centers on a killer who uses a cane-sword to skewer policemen, warning Scotland Yard of each murder before it occurs.
Unfortunately, jewel thief Robert Montgomery happens to be heisting a diamond just as another bobby is slain -- and becomes the principal suspect.
The only way he can clear his name is to catch the maniac, pausing from time to time to dally with Elizabeth Allan as the police commissioner's fetching daughter.
As the mystery moves crisply along, there are no long tracking shots, lingering looks at people's faces or endless glimpses of scenery.
Instead, Montgomery's bonhomie, Allan's saucy appeal, a clever, amusing script and tight editing make Mr. X a pleasure to watch..
One of the many Robert Montgomery B movies that are fun to watch.
My enjoyment may have as much or more to do with nostalgia as good movie making, but give it a try.
Robert Montgomery as a diamond thief.
Robert Montgomery stars with Elizabeth Allen and Lewis Stone in "The Mysterious Mr. X" from 1934.A serial killer is going around London killing policemen.
Unfortunately for Nick Revel and his band of merry men, a taxi driver named Joe and an insurance clerk named Hutch, the killer struck outside a home where the famous Drayton Diamond was stolen.
The police think the robber is the killer.Nick and his cronies know that they can't return the diamond for the insurance reward or pawn it until the serial killer is caught.
He has an idea as to how the police can catch the killer.
He figures if he testifies on behalf of March, he will be able to present his plan to the police.March turns out to be the fiancé of Jane, the daughter of the police commissioner, and Revel and Jane are attracted to one another.
Meanwhile, her father is suspicious of Revel.Pleasant mystery, with a charming performance by Montgomery.
The end is quite exciting, with a very dynamic either set or location.Good movie..
Movie Director Edgar Selwyn At His Peak.
"The Mystery Of Mr. X" is the last movie directed by Edgar Selwyn, who had a career in theater and movies that could never be duplicated again.
At the end, when the news photographers want to take a picture of Revel (Robert Montgomery) with Miss Frensham, he hesitates getting next to her and she pulls him closer.
I hate you." The earlier part of the story shows that Connor justifies that low opinion, searching Revel's apartment without a search warrant, lying to Sir Christopher Marche and trying to solve the policeman murders by assuming the Drayton diamond thief is also the murderer.
Throughout the movie, the dialog between Revel and Miss Frensham is literate and delineates the characters in an amusing and cheerful way.Of course, there is no way this movie could ever be a stage play, since much of the action involves taxi rides, walking down foggy streets and other outdoors activities.
This movie must have been a tough shoot, between the constant dialog (1,830 numbered subtitle segments in the closed captions) and the tracking shots for the studio lot scenes.
The showdown in the warehouse building set at the end of the movie must have been really hard to stage and film, but Selwyn and company do a fine job at it.I saw this movie on TCM and the print shown was worn, had frame damage in parts and looked like a 16MM dupe print.
Not the best way to watch a movie that has many scenes shot in shadowed settings.
Director Selwyn, in New York already, did not want to re-shoot the ending.
I am guessing that Selwyn had his fill of working so hard to make this movie a great example of the MGM studio system at work.
So Selwyn bows out as a movie director on the top, with a movie that should have been better known but got lost in the shuffle when the 1934 Production Code went into full force.The Warner Archive should find a way to get "The Mystery Of Mr. X" out as a Blu-ray release using better print material that is given a makeover by the LOC Packard Campus..
Smug Actor Robert Montgomery Stars in this Jammed Packed Little Thriller that is Highlighted by a Number of Nighttime Killings and a Serial Killer that Announces His Crimes Beforehand to the Press.There are Some Neat Side Characters and Our Hero is a Thief, but is Willing to Give Up a Life of Crime as Soon as the Boring Talkathon Begins with a Female.
A Female, by the way, that Throws Her Finace Out as Soon as the Debonair Montgomery Shows Her Any Attention.
Bad Boys are So Much More Fun.This is a Worth a Watch if You Can Take the Gooey Banter Between Him and Her, that Becomes Almost Unbearable in the Kitchen Scene, Because the Movie Outside the Romance is Pretty Good Pulp..
It is reminiscent of "Raffles", in that the hero is a gentleman thief who gets involved with a mystery......in this case, a murder, of which he is the chief suspect.
Robert Montgomery is quite suave in the lead, and Elizabeth Allen (his wife at the time) is very appealing as the daughter of the Scotland Yard director.
Their word play is saucy and leads you to believe that Ms. Allen probably wouldn't blink an eye at his vocation as a jewel thief.
The supporting cast is strong, especially Lewis Stone as the Yard Inspector who is hot on Montgomery's trail.
The unveiling of the real murderer is unusual since he is never introduced into the story......he's just a guy with a grudge that we don't know anything about.
A neat little movie which is well worth watching..
Great looking film with a game cast.
Someone is killing police officers in London.
When one of the murders occurs outside a house being burglarized the police think the two crimes are linked.
This also puts him on the radar of the police who realize he knows too much.
Complications ensue when the thief begins to fall in love with the police inspectors daughter.Neat little murder mystery is a breezy but often tense affair.
If the film works it's due in large part to the cast that is headed by Robert Montgomery and if filled out by great character stalwarts including Lewis Stone.Also helping things is the great look of the film.
The story has a bit of the Lone Wolf flair to it, but in this case, the film's principal, Nick Revel (Robert Montgomery) is still a jewel thief until he's implicated in a murder that coincides with his latest heist of the Drayton diamond.
For a 1930's mystery, this is a pretty good one that doesn't resort to the usual tricks like 'lights-out' scenes or revolving bookcases.
It does involve Scotland Yard though, a rather standard element of films set in and around London.So here's something I had to stop and think about.
At one point, Inspector Connor (Lewis Stone) tells his good friend and Scotland Yard chief Sir Herbert Frensham (Henry Stephenson) that the police murders are being committed by someone using an eighteen inch blade.
In fact, close-up scenes of a couple of the murders in progress revealed the killer using a bladed instrument like a sword that was considerably longer.
So the eighteen inch murder weapon business was completely irrelevant.Anyway, there's a bit of a romance story that goes with the territory here, as Revel has to convince the authorities that his diamond theft had no bearing on a murder committed at the same time in the same neighborhood.
In the process, he falls for the daughter of the Scotland Yard inspector, replacing her fiancé of long standing.
I liked Jane Frensham's (Elizabeth Allan) rationale - "I think you're the straightest man I ever met".
If she only knew.To lend some significance to the picture's title, Revel figures out that the locations of the bobby murders form an 'X' on a map of the city, and reasons that the next one will take place at Gates End Road.
Lucky guess, as the murderer with eight bodies to his credit was going for a total of fifteen, one for each year he spent in prison courtesy of Inspector Connor.
As for the Drayton diamond, that's how Nick Revel turns good guy; he sent it back to Scotland Yard!
Product placement in movies goes back a long way!.
84 minutes.SYNOPSIS: A high-class jewel thief accidentally becomes the chief suspect in a Scotland Yard murder hunt.NOTES: Re-made as Hour of 13.COMMENT: All of Philip MacDonald's novels rate as highly recommended.
Not only does the author come up with the most ingeniously gripping plots, but he manages to create colorfully realistic characters that are both involving yet off-beat; whilst a talent for conjuring a heartily suspenseful atmosphere abets his fast pacing and intelligent dialogue.
There's actually not much mystery about Mr X - we're actually told who he is in the credits - and the subsequent unravelling of the plot bears little resemblance to its Hour of 13 re-make.
The accent in fact is not so much on the comeuppance of Mr X but on the ingenuity of that charmingly resourceful thief, Mr Revel.As played with suitable panache and style by Robert Montgomery, Mr Revel comes across as a fascinating anti-hero.
This seemingly tailor-made role fits so snugly on Montgomery's adroit shoulders it really impresses us as the part Robert was born to play.
Nobly assisted by Forrester Harvey (making the most of an uncustomarily large slice of the action in his customary role as a taxi-driver), Charles Irwin, and even Lewis Stone (who proves surprisingly able, particularly in his early scenes with our hero) - and most other members of the highly competent cast - Montgomery is only let down by his co-star, Elizabeth Allan.
True, her acting is well above board, but her performance is undermined by harshly unflattering photography and her ridiculously unattractive Adrian-designed gowns.It would be true to say that this movie doesn't look like a Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer picture. |
tt0099260 | China O'Brien | Police Officer China O'Brien (Cynthia Rothrock) is a good cop who teaches martial arts class to her fellow officers. After an altercation with a gang that leads to the accidental death of a young boy, China resigns from the force, and returns to her hometown of Beaver Creek, Utah. Her father, John O'Brien (David Blackwell), is the sheriff and is very pleased to see her. China discovers that John is gradually losing control of the town to local crime boss Edwin Sommers (Steven Kerby), who controls corrupt deputy Marty Lickner (Patrick Adamson) and corrupt local judge Harry Godar (Wil Hazlett). When John and honest deputy Ross Tyler (Chad Walker) are killed by car bombs that were planted by Sommers's henchmen, there is an emergency election to elect a new sheriff.
After seeing that nothing is being done to find her father and friends killer, China runs for sheriff against Lickner to see who take John's place while, at the same time, she starts cleaning up the town with the help of her former high school sweetheart Matt Conroy (Richard Norton). They get extra help from a Native American biker named Dakota (Keith Cooke), whose mother (Judy Kotok) was murdered by Sommers. China wins the election, and then Maria (Gae Cowley), who had been her father's housekeeper up until his death, is murdered by Sommers's men in a drive-by shooting during the victory celebration. Having won the election, China ends up having to force Godar to swear her in as the new sheriff. China deputizes Matt and Dakota, and they set out to free Beaver Creek from Sommers's stranglehold.
During the altercation at the Beaver Creek Inn, Dakota stops Lickner and confronts him about his mother. Lickner admits Sommers was responsible for his mother's death and Dakota gets on his motorcycle to Sommers's home. China and Matt continue to take on Sommers' men and head to Sommers' house after they defeat all of the goons. When Dakota finds Sommers at the stables, he points a gun at him. However, he restrains himself and when China and Matt show up, Matt handcuffs himself to Sommers. However, en route to the police car, a woman Sommers had imprisoned fires a gun, killing Sommers and knocking Matt down with him. The next day, China asks Dakota what he will do next. Dakota says he will stay for the trial and China tells him she could use a man like him. Dakota laughs off being a cop to which Matt replies that they can talk it over a beer. | violence | train | wikipedia | This film and its sequel remain among the best Western showcases for Cynthia Rothrock's martial ability.
Lori 'China' O'Brien (Rothrock) plays a cop who also teaches martial arts.
Another thing that works in the film's favour is the chemistry between Rothrock and co-star Richard Norton (Australian Karate exponent).
I suppose this was an early attempt to fuse Hollywood with eastern martial arts films, thoroughly flaunting the fact that Robert Clouse, the director of Enter The Dragon was at the helm.Unfortunately, Robert Clouse was no great shakes as a director and this time there is no Bruce Lee.Bad acting, cheesy story and a TV quality feel, but none of that matters because the fight scenes are fantastic!!!!!This is where the film comes into it's own with a partial eastern production behind it.
There is a bit too much 'acting' between the fights but not overly so.Keith Cooke really steals the show with his amazing kicking techniques while Richard Norton opts for a more wrist lock and throw style which is cool beyond belief leaving Rothrock as a good all rounder.
The main antagonist is an ageing man with zero fight capability and It was just really wave after wave of goons for the heroes to dispose of, which is no bad thing but it would have been better with a really threatening figurehead and a great end fight between China and a Boss.The film was in many ways far ahead of it's time and ticks a lot of boxes with regards to the feminist movement.
The China O' Brian character is the superior authority in the film with all the lawmen working beneath her, Rothrock gets top billing in both opening and Closing credits and she is not sexualised in any scene and never wears anything lewd or revealing.
For 1988 that was pretty much unheard of even in Hollywood let alone a low budget martial arts film.A great one to watch with mates or even a girlfriend.
True, I did get a mediocre film overall, but as a form of reimbursement, I received a bunch of quality martial-arts sequences.Yes, the plot is amazingly uncomplicated - the most unexpected thing (and also the dumbest) is when not just one, but TWO car bombs explode within two days of each other.
But besides the improbability of a Utah native growing up with an Australian accent (can we assume he picked that up in the "Special Forces"?), at least it's not too unrealistic.But this movie was basically created to showcase Rothrock's abilities, and they are readily apparent.
Someone mentioned that this film was meant as a vehicle for Jackie Chan; this is also easy to see based on the beautifully choreographed fight scenes that make good use of the available props (the scene in the high school's weight room is particularly fun).Overall score: With regards to the filmmaking process, this one gets a low rating thanks to bad sound effects, cheap production and minimal writing talent.
China O'Brien (1990) was an attempt to make Cynthia Rothrock a star in the United States.
The only reason to watch this movie is to see the fighting skills of Ms. Rothrock and Richard Norton.
If this movie was directed by Corey Yuen or Hoi Meng it could have been an action classic instead of a cheesy straight-to-video action flick.China O'Brien returns home to help out her dad.
But will they be enough to topple Mister Big and his evil cronies?If you're a big Cynthia Rothrock fan then this movie's catered for you.
Average story which should be expected out of a martial arts movie.
The major reason to watch this movie is to Cynthia Rothrock kick the villains butts.
Originally was written as a project for Jackie Chan before the story was changed around as a film the Cynthia Rothrock.
Martial arts supremo Cynthia Rothrock (think: the American equivalent of Michelle Yeoh) heads the cast in this engaging straight-to-video effort that packs more punch than a dozen similar offerings, thanks to the surehand direction of Robert Clouse (down on his luck, but occasionally recalling his ENTER THE DRAGON glory days) and a ton of scintillating action scenes that never let up.
The film has an almost Jackie Chan-style atmosphere going on in the various battles, as our three heroes use all manner of scenery and props to battle and bruise the gangs of bad guy henchmen that pop up at every opportunity to do some damage.
Fridge doors flip into faces, dumbbells smack the faces of the unwary, bodies smash into mirrors and there's almost as smashing glass as in the finale of POLICE STORY (well, not quite).After a decent run of Chinese films in the late '80s, Rothrock was billed as the next martial arts sensation a la Jean-Claude Van Damme, Steven Seagal et al.
Well, that never happened, and Rothrock has never risen from the straight-to-video genre, but that's the general population's problem, not the B-movie fan's.
Whether kicking some Chinese guy's head in slow-motion across the room, breaking a bad guy's neck or punching a hulking brute of a man out with one hit, Rothrock lights up the screen with a martial arts energy possessed by only a few.
The final member of the heroic trio is the unknown Keith Cooke, whose body seems possessed with the spirit of Bruce Lee in his great fights.The plot is a highly predictable one that reminded me of WALKING TALL.
The only other distinguished person in the cast is Patrick Adamson, who makes his corrupt cop loathsome without even really seeming to act much – I guess that means kudos is deserved for this man.So, in all, CHINA O'BRIEN is a B-movie martial arts flick that covers old ground but covers it in such an exciting, well-directed way that you'll end up loving it.
The three good guys returned for CHINA O'BRIEN II; and I'll sure as hell be checking that one out as well!.
China O'Brien stars Cynthia Rothrock as a big city gendarme who returns to her itty bitty home town when her father decides to retire as the local sheriff.
Of course, the bad guys give him a dose of the ol' Lead Pension plan and before you can say Hackneyed Plot Point China is running for sheriff so she can bring in the desperados who gunned her Daddy down!
She joins forces with that same Australian karate guy thats shows up in most of her movies(like Tiger Claws) and a one handed, motor cycle riding Indian kid who had a hand chopped off by the same guys what iced Daddy O'Brien.(These evil dudes are busy.
Cute Petite Gal. Cynthia Rothrock,(China O'Brien),"Manhattan Chase",2000, made this film enjoyable to watch and of course,e this cute petite gal burned up the screen with her artistic abilities and hot sexy body.
China O'Brien gets upset as a police officer and decides to call it quits and go back home to her hometown and get back to her roots and her dad, who is the local sheriff.
Well, you almost can guess what happens, and you are right, China O'Brien fights back after great tragedy strikes her life.
Bad acting through out the picture, but Cynthia Rothrock brings this film to a wonderful conclusion..
Obviously the only people whom would actually watch this film are Cynthia Rothrock fans.
The story works perfectly.The plot: This is obviously a rehash of 'Walking Tall' except Cynthia Rothrock is a lot more eye pleasing than Joe Don Baker!
Isn't that a requirement of being a cop in the first place?Whatever, it gives China an excuse to "never hold a gun again" and move back to her small home town where her father's the sheriff.But just like 'Walking Tall' Norman Rockwell's small town as become crime ridden and too corrupt to stop by legal means.Richard Norton is also along for the ride (a requirement of all great Rothrock films) as an Australian who left the US special forces to become a small town school teacher.
Meaning it's up to China herself to run for sheriff.There are obviously many mob tactics to destroy China's campaign, giving us plenty of scenes for Rothrock to beat the living crap out of people.
LOTS of groin kicks, and Rothrock's patented over her head back kick.So this organized crime syndicate is affective enough to just let criminals walk free from jail and bold enough to car bomb the entire police force?
It's the classic story of a lone sheriff taking on a crime ridden town, Rothrock looking cute as always, Richard Norton, and most importantly Rothrock beating the living crap out of everyone for 90 minutes!
This could be a very good TV series for Rothrock and her ensemble cast of Keith Cooks and Richard Norton.
Walker Texas Ranger was some what of a spin from Norris's "Lone Wolf McQuade" film where he played the infamous Texas ranger JJ McQuade.In this feature film we see Rothrock succeeding her father (who was murdered by a local corrupt business tycoon) as the town sheriff.
Her supporting cast of Norton and Cooks were second to none in terms of their chemistry with Rothrock as well their excellent fighting abilities.Yes, budget constrains was a factor in regards to the overall quality of the film.
But what really shines are the fight scenes (and that's what you wanted to see the film for, anyway -- right?) They're very well choreographed, and the actors very obviously know what they're doing.
And of course, Cynthia Rothrock is a total babe (and that's *really* what you wanted to see the film for -- right?
No wonder it looks all American.Australian actor Richard Norton who appears in many Hong Kong movies also shows up in this film, making it a truly international production.Cynthia Rothrock was the only female American actor who's good enough to play the lead in a martial arts movie.
This is a good movie that fills the need of for us who wants to see good looking actor kick her way through the bad guys.The movie looks low budget, and they could have worked on this a little bit more.
This guy from Australia shows up to help China O'Brien, like a third a way into the movie, he has a weird looking neck.
If you're a bad movie fan like I am, this is great material.
If, however, you are looking for any sort of meaningful plot, acting ability, or movie-making skill, this is best avoided.
As this is a Robert Clouse film, don't expect an intelligent or unique plot (daughter of a murdered town sheriff takes her revenge !!).
However with Cynthia Rothrock, Richard Norton (who should be as big, if not bigger than J.C.Van Damme), and Keith Cooke (whose kicks rival Bruce Lees), there are some excellent martial art fight scenes staged.
Whilst this can't save the film from being anything more than average, a decent budget and director would benfit the stars on show (who are no less talented in the acting stakes than the likes of Schwarzenegger, Norris, or Van Damme).
I got both the China O'Brien and Rage & Honor movies on video recently, and I must say that Cynthia Rothrock is great at both martial arts and acting.The first China O'Brien film is very enjoyable.
The main one for the most part is Deputy Lickner, who manages to be loathsome, but the bad guy leader doesn't do much at all.Richard Norton makes a great partner for Ms. Rothrock, as does Keith Cooke as the mysterious Dakota.
China O'Brien is a great movie.
China O'Brien (Rothrock) is a tough cop in the big city, who also happens to be a karate instructor.
Luckily, the three of them have plenty of martial arts skill and they take on an army of goons, because the only way for Beaver Creek to be untainted with corruption is to punch and kick everyone in sight.As has been noted elsewhere, one of the major flaws in China O'Brien is the lack of a powerful bad guy - at least one that can do martial arts.
Because the "bad guy" here is the nebulous notion of "corruption", and the man who has his fingers in all the interests of the town looks more like he should be doing daytime TV commercials complaining about his "diabetis", the film's end could be described as an anti-climax.
But the star of the show is obviously Rothrock, and she does a great job as the crusading O'Brien.
In that sense it's appropriate, but fans may be puzzled by it.The best way to describe this movie is "Americana with punching" - wouldn't you love to see a Norman Rockwell painting of Cynthia Rothrock and Richard Norton pummeling the baddies into submission?
China O'brien, city police woman and martial arts trainer, is forced to hand in her badge and head home to the small town where she grew up.
When her father, who also happens to be the town sheriff, is killed, China decides to run for his position and clean up the town.
So it wasn't uncommon for films called 'king Of The Kickboxers', 'Martial Law', and 'Tiger Claws' to be really popular movies.But, as I've said already, I was young, and seeing the movie over twenty years ago, hasn't done me any favours in the nostalgia department.The main problem is, is that the film just isn't any good, and seeing and reviewing thousands of films,you realise that it was just a rehash of several other films, to get a prolific martial artist a movie deal.Van Damme, Seagal, and even Billy Blanks had an air of panache of them, but Rothrock looks like the P.E teacher from school you fancied, because you know you wouldn't stand a chance with the fit one.Fight scenes are poor, and the acting is also pretty bad.Nevermind, at least I'll never make mistake of recommending this film to anyone, like I did when I was thirteen..
Bad '80's B-movie" all the way.
The influx of "talent" (a term sometimes loosely used, since some of the women were picked more for their looks and willingness to do nudity, rather than their acting skills or martial arts ability) coming into Hong Kong -- who were often willing to work for much less money than Rothrock -- caused Cynthia's own roles to dwindle in visibility.
Madam), her roles were becoming more of glorified cameos than anything else.With this situation in mind, Rothrock decided to head back to America, where martial arts films were gaining popularity after the success of films by stars such as Jean-Claude Van Damme and Steven Seagal.
After Clouse's collaboration with Jackie Chan (the horrible The Big Brawl) failed, Clouse found himself directing B-movie action junk like the kung fu/gymnastics combo Gymkata.
Cynthia plays a big-city cop named China O'Brien who leaves the force after shooting a teenager during a fight.
Along the way, she meets up with her old boyfriend (Richard Norton) and a mysterious Native American named Dakota (groan -- anyway, he's played by Keith Cooke), who, even though he goes around wearing a really bad-looking Evil Dead 2-type fake stump hand, manages to kick a lot of ass on the local rednecks.
For instance, Dakota like to ride a dirtbike around, and there are several times where you can see that his stump has magically changed into a hand (it's not like the electrical tape wrapped around his hand was convincing anyway), and apparently, this town's police station consists of one room, which also happens to be one of the bad guy's offices, after some "creative" re-arrangment of the props.Despite it's inherent problems, China O'Brien is still a pretty fun movie to watch -- it falls into that "so bad it's good category." If you enjoy nitpicking or ripping on movies, you will have a field day with this one; it's most definitely "Mystery Science Theatre" material.
Besides that, the action is surprisingly good for a US B-movie.
Both Rothrock and Norton, if not the greatest actors in the world, are excellent martial artists and this movie showcases their talents in a good light.
Of particular note is a fight where the two take on a gang of thugs in a gym, where seemingly every piece of equipment that isn't nailed down is used as a weapon in some fashion.Some notes about the fate of the principal people involved on the film: Cynthia Rothrock never became a star in the States (US audiences weren't as receptive to female action stars as their Asian counterparts), but continued to work steadily in low-budget action movies (as well as TV shows like the Hong Kong film-inspired Hercules) and has earned the title of "the queen of B-grade action movies" from her fans.
She never returned to Hong Kong, though footage from some of her films, through cut-and-paste director Godfrey Ho has been put into a few Hong Kong movies (the most blatant case being the horrid Angel the Kickboxer, which is a "remix" of Rothrock's Honor and Glory) and some of her western direct-to-video releases have been put into theatres in Asia.Keith Cooke, who was heavily promoted as one of the "hot" new action stars (there is a sizable segment in the documentary The Deadliest Art -- perhaps not coincidentally produced by Fred Weintraub -- dedicated to him) never found much success in films, though he still finds work from time to time.
His most notable roles have been in films involving Hong Kong B-movie actor Robin Shou, such as playing some of the ninjas in the movies based on the popular "Mortal Kombat" video game.Richard Norton has had a bit more success than the rest.
Norton, like Rothrock, also became a staple of cheap US B-movies, as well as sometimes working in Hong Kong, with major roles in Jackie Chan's City Hunter and Mr. Nice Guy. He also served on producer for a few movies, and is currently working in Australia and Europe on various movies and TV shows." |
tt0390511 | The St. Valentine's Day Massacre | An organized crime war breaks out between two rival gangs in Chicago during the Roaring Twenties. The leader of the Southside Mob is the notorious Al Capone, who resents his nemesis George "Bugs" Moran's activity in the city. Moran, too, wants control of the town's bootlegging and gambling operations. His lieutenants Peter and Frank Gusenberg use threats and intimidation to make tavern owners do business with them in exchange for "protection." Peter Gusenberg also argues and fights with his moll, particularly over her extravagant spending of his money.
Moran gives the order to have a crony of Capone's eliminated as the Chicago body count escalates. Inclusive are flashbacks to a lunchtime attack on Capone at a restaurant outside of Chicago by Hymie Weiss and Moran in September 1926 and the murders of Weiss in October 1926 and Dion O'Banion in November 1924 by Capone's gang.
In a bid to get rid of Moran once and for all, Capone goes to his winter home in Miami, Florida to establish an alibi while his henchmen, some dressed as cops, ambush and execute seven members of Moran's gang, including Peter Gusenberg, in a northside garage on February 14, 1929. Also at the garage - and caught in the attack - were Johnny May (Bruce Dern), a mechanic, and Reinhardt Schwimmer, an optician who enjoyed being around gangsters. Of the victims, only Frank Gusenberg, Peter's brother survives and is taken to a hospital. Despite knowing that he will soon die, Frank refuses to tell the police anything. Ironically, Moran himself, the apparent focus of the attack, was not in garage, and escaped certain death.
Each character is given a verbal voiceover biography as they are introduced, and in some video releases, the biographies of Rheinhard Schwimmer and Adam Heyer, two of the massacre victims, are removed from the soundtrack, possibly due to protest from surviving family members.
In the aftermath, Al Capone is shown dispatching those responsible for carrying out the attack. Moran dies in prison. No one is ever charged for the murders of St. Valentine's Day of 1929. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0194624 | Strangers with Candy | The series' main character, Geraldine Antonia "Jerri" Blank (played by Amy Sedaris), was a "junkie whore"/runaway returning to high school as a freshman at age 46 at the fictional Flatpoint High School (home of the Concrete Donkeys) in the town of Flatpoint.
Created and written by Amy Sedaris, Paul Dinello, Stephen Colbert, and Mitch Rouse, the show was a spoof of the after school specials of the 1970s and 1980s and was also inspired, at least in part, by a 1970 public service film, The Trip Back, that featured a reformed drug addict named Florrie Fisher (see "Origin" below). Sedaris, Colbert, Dinello, and Rouse were cast members of the short-lived Comedy Central series Exit 57; they, along with Greg Hollimon and many other stars of the series, were also alumni of Chicago's Second City comedy troupe.
According to the show's animated introduction, Jerri ran away from home and became "a boozer, a user, and a loser" after dropping out of high school as a teenager, supporting her drug habits through prostitution, stripping, and larceny. She has been to prison several times, the last time because she, in her words, "stole the TV."
Every episode featured a theme or moral lesson, although the lessons were often amoral or warped; in an episode about eating disorders, Jerri learns that it is acceptable to become bulimic because it will get people to pay attention to you. When Jerri's father passes away in the episode "The Goodbye Guy," Jerri learns the valuable lesson, "You never really 'lose' your parents. Unless of course they die. Then they're gone forever. And nothing will bring them back." In another episode, "Bully", Jerri learned that "violence really isn't the only way to resolve a conflict, but it's the only way to win it."
Each episode ends with the cast and other featured actors from the episode dancing. | comedy, satire | train | wikipedia | You need to see it to believe it and even then you'll be scratching your head in disbelief (while laughing your ass off of course).The premise is that of a sick and twisted after school special from hell where all of the wrong lessons are learned.
With so much garbage on television these days, it's refreshing to see a show so original and well-written as Strangers With Candy.
The writing is some of the best I've ever seen on television, every sentence uttered by every character is funny.
In one episode, she and a classmate become secret lovers, but he's so ashamed of being with her that she hides in dumpsters, air ducts, etc.; it's a howlingly funny sight gag to see her head poking up out of the garbage as she waits for her lover.
Having been a fan of the show since its debut, I knew from the start it would be a love or hate series for many people.It's a great show not for its intellectual qualities (or on the surface, lack thereof), but its originality.
Amy Sederis is brilliant as Jerri Blank amid a cast of other excellent comic writer/actors, including Paul Dinello and "The Daily Show's" Stephen Colbert.
It had me consistently on the floor with it's inventiveness, audacity and vicious wit (i.e., the prayer at the Families of Alcoholics meeting: "Dear God, please give me the strength to blame those who did this to me, to accuse those who didn't, and the wisdom to know the difference.") It's long since disappeared from Comedy Central, but DVDs of Seasons One and Two are out, and a movie version by the same team is on its way for 2005.
In some respects it was like a very warped after school special but mixed in were themes of older adults trying to attend 'school', to compete against youngsters, and re-live a hey-day they never had in the first place.Jeri is a character that is trying to get her life back ontrack, and at her age, she went right back to the beginning, the high school she dropped out of.
This series was funny, bittersweet, and yes, more like a warped after school special but the question "Strangers With Candy" asked that we all should be asking is: "Do I set my work aspirations higher or do I chose to work at the plastic flower plant plant like everyone else?".
"Hobo camp," a term 46-year-old Jerri Blank uses after spelling V-I-C-T-O-R-Y during a cheerleader try-out, revealing her lifelong illiteracy and causing Coach Wolf to postpone the rest of the try-outs until "we can all recover
from Jerri's shame."It took me about three months to actually muster the energy to watch Strangers With Candy in late 1999, and I did it only because it was advertised so heavily on Comedy Central, right alongside the Upright Citizens' Brigade.
It took only one episode.I got friends into the show, and we'd throw out the oddest of lines to each other just on the off-chance that we'd all "get it." We'd say things with no relevance like "massage each other's ...
No one was spared the branding iron here.From David Sedaris' sometimes crazy little sister Amy and a cast of Second City alums emerged a truly unique and gut-busting but, at the same time, subtly humorous opus to the After-School Special.
It was hard not to pay attention to every minute of this show.Of course it's a shame that Comedy Central canceled the show after only two seasons, but at least the show went out with a bang (literally Flatpoint High was blown up).What made the show most memorable for me was that, no matter how well-written and acted each of the offbeat characters was, none could add up to the unbelievably insane Jerri Blank.
In this case, Sedaris held her own with a kind of aplomb that only a seasoned professional can do.Whether she was being threatened by her brother Derick ("dick lick"), overlooked by her step-mother (the brilliant Deborah Rush), pleaded with for restraint by her hapless pal Orlando, happily ignored by her art teacher Mr. Jellineck (longtime co-conspirator Paul Dinello), forced into community service by the Hitlerish Principal Onyx Blackman, or harassed unnecessarily by the ultimately selfish and tight-fisted Mr. Noblet (writing the word "me" on the board when instructing his students to "tell me..."), Jerri somehow survived countless challenges and came out learning the absolute wrong thing.My favorite lesson: "The poor are a filthy, thieving people." You have to see the episode to understand it..
Amy Sedaris is outrageously funny as Jerry Blank, a 47 year old reprehensible ex-convict trying to graduate Flashpoint High "right where she left off." Her catatonic senior citizen father and alcoholic and abusive step-mother are both superb!Jerry always struggles to do the right thing.
many people fail to see the brilliance in strangers with candy.it is an extremely funny show.there are also a lot of subtle jokes or references that may go above the viewers head but if gotten, are hilarious.there could'nt be a better cast for SWC.
they are all talented,funny individuals who also come up with some of the script and often improvise certain lines that turn out as if planned.the show requires an open sense of humor.
all in all, i believe strangers with candy is one of the best shows thats been aired..
Amy Sedaris is incredible as the strange (and really ugly) Jerri Blank.
I watched a few episodes of this show when it originally aired and now Comedy Central has it in reruns.
It had no laugh track and an uber-ridiculous concept that provokes a ton of laughs because the main character, Geri, is so old, nasty looking (thanks to great makeup on an otherwise cute-as-hell Amy Sedaris) and more experienced than her other schoolmates.
What makes it even funnier than seeing Geri go through the motions in high school as an old woman is the parody of the cheesy afterschool specials that each episode takes the form of.This show is just damn great, and I think that it would be killer if they renewed the series and put it on before Reno 911.
I was originally annoyed, being a fan of British and subversive humor, but the first time I actually sat an watched an episode all the way through I was hooked.
stars: Amy Sedaris as Jerri Blank, Stephen Colbert as Mr. Chuck Nobblets, Paul Dinello as Mr. Goffrey Jellynacks, Gregory Holliman as Principal Onix Blackman.Reccurring stars-Orlando Pintaban as Orlando, Maria Thayer as Tamilla.Hilarious!
I watched these episodes when they first aired on Comedy Central, and I thought they were hilarious.
I never saw Strangers With Candy, when it was on Comedy Central.
So I thought I'd check this one out.Amy Sedaris (David Sedaris' sister), stars as Gerri Blank, a 46-year-old high school student.
"Strangers With Candy" is the clever show from the comedy team of "Exit 57." Jeri Blank is 46 and just got out of prison.
The show is filled with one liners, characters are hilariously funny, situations are turned upside down, and each end credits segment has a unique dance sequence!
No laugh track is necessary, as you'll surely know where the giggles come in.I watched this show with extreme caution at my first viewing.
The story lines while containing some very adult humor, were non the less quite cognitive.The characters of-course where more or less caricatures of people we find in after school specials.
But, these guys were funny, and really played well together in providing much hilarity.It is hard to understand why Comedy Central canceled Strangers With Candy.
Although Comedy Central shows it currently at 3am during the week I know it will be off the air soon.
"Scary Jerri So Hairy Down Therey" One of the most original lines in strangers with candy.
What more could one ask for, except maybe a fantasy sequence where Jeri turns into the incredibly cute Amy Sedaris while she's making love to a classmate, male or female or both at once.
The only recent show that has made me laugh this much was the first 2 episodes of "Action," a Fox show about a scummy Hollywood exec with Ileanna Douglas and Jay Mohr, but that show tanked early, then got canned.SWC was so funny that Comedy Central cancelled it after just 2 seasons.
I don't dislike John Waters, but nothing he has ever done has made me laugh as hard as Strangers with Candy..
I think it's brilliant- the detail is amazing, and the show is full of little secrets if you watch it closely (watch stephen colbert's hands while he "adds up her grades" in the first few minutes of the first episode).
If you like things like the Mr. Show, John Waters and disturbing dark humor, watch a few episodes.
I can see a lot of david sedaris' humor in his sister amy's writing- maybe all those stories were a little more real than I had imagined-.
Of course, it's done in such an absurd way, that the only people who would be offended by this are probably people who didn't stay up late enough to actually watch the show.This is the show that has lines like, "Having a girlfriend is so...
This was one of Comedy Central's best original series, better than Crank Yankers and better than South Park.
it was written to be funny and shocking, and in that the writers were very successful.they broke every rule they could find, offended as many people as possible, and made it as obvious as they could so they couldn't be accused of being "supremists".if nothing else, laugh at how many ways they can come up with to offend people in one episode.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN!?"The show only lasted 30 episodes and I had half on tape before Comedy Central decided to cut it short again in reruns at 3:30 AM a year ago, so I gave up.
And it's just a good thing they're not the usual $40 like some other shows with short seasons are.
What can I say about "Strangers with Candy" other than this is quite possibly the greatest television comedy ever.
Well, maybe The Simpsons in it heyday or possibly a show like Family Guy might win out, but SWC is definately one of my favorite TV shows of all time.
Amy Sedaris, Paul Dinello, and Stephen Colbert are freaking brilliant!
It's like an old ABC "After-school Special", only on PCP, acid, and crack.SWC is absolutely chock full of incredibly funny one-liners, like "I like the hole and the pole", or "I'm sure you think that I hate you but I want you to know that I hate you" or "How many of you wanna wake up in a public bathroom, lying in a pool of what you HOPE is your own filth?" or even "I'm handling this the same way I dealt with my own drug and alcohol problem...
The premise was so great and they could've done so much more with it (they barely scratched the surface with themes).Some of my favorite episodes include "Who Wants Cake" where the teachers and principal use a trip to "Good Time Island" as blackmail to get her to admit that her lockermate is "retarded""The Trip Back" where Jerri gets back in with a crowd of stoners which is killing her (amazing for her) D- average that she needs to pass freshman yearOther great episodes include the episode with the n-word on the wall (Tim Meadows with a hilarious guest role) and the episode where Jerri reclaims her virginity.This show never ran out of steam and ended with a bang, the last episode was a classic and finished the show out properly, although i'd love to see it come back, the humor and running gags were excellent and the show was just so original and ahead of it's time (well, time will tell on that one, but trust me, there will be imitators in the years ahead)Luckily most of the episodes are readily available on Kazaa but i'd still love a DVD set with the entire series (I think there's only about 30 episodes, how hard would that be Comedy Central?).
Definitely unique and does not cater to people that find the "humor" in Friends and 'Everybody Loves Raymond' funny.
This is a twisted, very funny satire on After-School Specials brought to you by a bunch of Second City vets: Amy Sedaris, Stephen Colbert, Mitch Rouse, Paul Dinello, and Greg Hollimon.
Sedaris, Colbert, Dinello, and Rouse (along w/ Jodi Lennon) had previously created the short-lived, underrated, Cable Ace Award winning "Exit 57" for Comedy Central, which was equally brilliant.
This is the best half hour comedy to come to television in a long, long time.
As Jerri Blank, the lead character, Amy Sedaris is absolutely brilliant.
The first time I saw this show (the first episode) I didn't like it...
The humor can be gross, but it's often obscure, causing a delayed reaction when the meaning sinks in.Strangers with Candy is so weird that I think you have to watch at least two episodes just to understand what's going on.
The first time I saw it (after cleaning up the vomit from looking at Jerri Blank for 2 seconds) I turned the tv.
While the amount of viewers was microscopic, and even though most people never heard of the show, Amy Sedaris & Paul Dinello's take on the bland "After School Special" genre is one of the funniest and most original shows on TV today.
The show was very original and Amy Sedaris was great as Jeri Blank.
I would buy the entire series if it were released on video but Comedy Central has no intention to release it on VHS or DVD.
One of the best, funniest TV shows of all time, this premiered alongside the equally brilliant Upright Citizen's Brigade on Comedy Central and both shows shared the same brief life span, cancelled in favor of hideously unfunny dreck like Strip Mall.
I absolutely love(d) this show -- the extraordinarily inappropriate, I-can't-believe-they-just-said humor, the running gags, the way illogical actions by the characters worked in the logic of the world's skewed universe, the sheer hilariousnoscity and repulsiveness of Sedaris' Jerri Blank.
Did Comedy Central take this completely original and extraordinarily entertaining show off the air?
I don't know about that Comedy Central, just when you think they are the best channel ever they have to go and make a stupid move like that..
This show is definitely not for those that have no sense of humor; and like watching those mundain sitcoms on the "big three" channels that prompt you into laughing at things that are not funny with there stupid laugh tracks.
I have relied on comedy central since then for SNL reruns and Southpark, or renting something funny just so I can get my daily dose of humor.
Then comedy central brings this new show to us that just blows you away with its off the wall humor, cracks, jokes that some people may not catch if they are not quick enough.
I think I like it so much because I live this kind of humor, no matter what I am doing I often throw a warped view on things that makes people laugh.
If you haven't watched this show, hopefully the reruns will air on Comedy Central when it's gone.This show is truly one of the comedy classics of all time.
Strangers With Candy is a very funny original show on Comedy Central.
It stars Amy Sedaris as "Jerri Blank," a 46 year old dropout returning to high school to finally graduate.
So if you haven't watched this yet and like to laugh, then check it out..
Amy Sedaris (sister of author David) is hilarious as Jerri Blank a 46 year old back in High School to start over.
Take a break and watch Strangers With Candy: if anything, it's not heartwarming.
One can't help pitying poor unloved Jerri, but it's somehow devilishly delightful knowing that she never will find happiness.This show has a goofy, original, premise that's a laugh-fest in itself, with hilarious off-the-wall writing, reminiscent of British comedy.
This is the kind of show that would never last on network television in the U.S.A.; thankfully, Comedy Central has given it a good home.
It's a real tribute, both to the show and to the times, that this show has succeeded in a territory where such big names as David Lynch ("On The Air"), Buck Henry ("Quark"), and the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker team ("Police Squad") have failed: Creating a bizarre sitcom with its own logic and no laugh track, and managing to sneak it by the network suits for more than a season (the afforementioned shows only lasted about 6 or 7 episodes each).
I can watch the episodes over and over and see things I have never seen before.
Amy Sedaris's comic creation, Jerri Blank, is comic genius.
Strangers with candy is, well, THE BEST COMEDY EVER.
Jerri Blank is hilarious as the 46 year old freshman.
i like strangers with candy i think it is very funny ,and somewhat raunchy but besides that i think its pretty halarious!unique and original concept ,simalar to billy madison but not anyways i think its great check it out..
Strangers With Candy is funny beyond belief.
it's a shame that comedy central chooses to rerun crap like 'sportsnite' and the same 5 episodes of 'the critic' rather than the handful of excellent shows they could be showing..
"Strangers With Candy" is by far the most original program on television at this time.
Everyone (in Flatpoint, but in real life as well) seems to have their own quirks and foibles.I've recorded the episodes and watch them over and over, laughing just as hard (or harder) each time.
Now comes Comedy Central, polluting the airwaves once again with a butt-ugly 46 year-old high school freshman.
But watch one episode of the show and you'll see what I mean. |
tt0188518 | Complicity | Yoshioka, an experienced detective, investigates the murder of an unknown woman in a red dress. She was drowned on the Tokyo waterfront, but an autopsy reveals that her stomach is full of seawater. Moreover, all the clues he finds relate to himself: A button found at the murder scene matches one that is missing from his own coat, and fingerprints found match his own. Yoshioka realizes that the only viable suspect is himself; but he doesn't remember a thing.
A ghost in a red dress soon starts appearing to him. As these apparitions become more intense and bizarre, similar murders occur with people killing loved ones for small infractions. All the perpetrators are found by Yoshioka as he searches for clues about the original murder. Eventually the drowned woman is identified. Yoshioka visits her parents, only to find she had a boyfriend who was extorting her parents, who happens to visit the house at the same time. He quickly confesses to the crime.
Yoshioka is visited by the ghost again who reveals that she is not the murdered woman, but a ghost of a woman whom he saw in the window of an asylum fifteen years ago who has died. All of the murderers took the ferry past the same asylum. Yoshioka sends his girlfriend away, afraid of what he might do to her. He goes to the asylum, where the woman in red agrees to forgive him for not helping her 15 years ago. He goes home, only to discover that he murdered his girlfriend 6 months ago. Going insane, he tries to forget. He collects the bones, and goes to the asylum to pick up the ghost's bones. His partner arrives at his apartment like the bowl of water, which was used to commit the murder, empty as the ghost menaces him in the background. An earthquake occurs as the bowl is refilled. The ghost suddenly appears and drags him into the bowl. The film ends with Yoshioka walking in the street holding a bag containing his girlfriend's and the ghost's bones, with the ghost repeatedly saying: "I am dead. So please, I want everyone to die too". | murder | train | wikipedia | very enjoyable, but too fast paced.
sometimes, a film can suffer greatly from just one drawback, even if everything else is top notch.
unfortunately, this is the case here.this film, based on iain banks' novel, is an impressive production, with excellent actors, breathtaking scottish settings, believable and very enjoyable character quirks, truly shocking murders, suspense and even some steamy sex.however, "complicity" doesn't quite succeed, and i can only trace it back to one thing: it's much too compressed.
i haven't read the original novel, but it's obvious a great deal of it made it to the screen; unfortunately, the film's 93 minute running time just doesn't suffice for this epic tale: cameron colley's journalistic investigation into several seemingly unrelated murders, egged on by a mysterious anonymous source, which causes him to clash with his disapproving bosses; his relationships with his old friends, and the many secrets they share; his affair with yvonne; the various grisly murders as seen by the killer; flashbacks to cameron's childhood and teenage years; and the psychologically jarring moments after cameron becomes the police's prime suspect.of course, this film offers many funny, thrilling, surprising and shocking moments, but they're all a bit rushed.
a longer format would have benefitted this film greatly.
banks' exceedingly clever and profound story manages to come over very well, but the film is so densely packed that i'd recommend you take small breaks so as to take everything in; make a cup of coffee or something and come back, as you would to a good novel (of course you could go straight to the source, but me, i'd rather watch the movie.)the fabulous bbc production of banks' "the crow road" shows the extent to which a longer format is more suitable to his multifaceted stories..
It is a good film.
First I read the book, which is highly recommendable, and I have it as one of my top books ever.
Later on I watched the film, and I found it good.
I think the characters are casted very well, except perhaps William, but, on the other hand, Keely Hawes plays Yvonne very well.I think the film misses out some important information on the book that give sense to the story.
The film changes a couple of things here and there and does not fully respect the final, which I find a bad error.
I think if the film had been 30 minutes longer it would have been a world success.My review seems negative but only because the book is superb.
Of course the plot is good, the actors are good and the story flows well.
I do wonder, however, if I have been able to follow the whole plot because I know the book inside out or because it is well told.
I had the feeling a couple of times that the story was told in chunks.Do watch the film, but read the book first.
Disappointing.
Brave yet flawed adaption of Iain Banks' dark novel.
The characters appear flat as they wade through some bland dialogue.
Jonny Lee Miller goes through the remarkable events as if he were buying socks.
The shocks and surprises fail to shock or surprise.
A more full on darker thrust would have prevented this from resembling a poor episode of Taggart.
Well done for having a go and well done for keeping it in Scotland rather than moving it to another locale..
Very good adaptation of excellent novel.
We were rather suspicious of this movie when we first sat down to watch it.
My husband and I had both read the book and liked it very much, and since we hadn't heard of the adaptation before we suspected that it probably wouldn't be much good.Boy, were we ever wrong.The movie is slightly too gory at times for my personal taste, but then, so is the book.
And it's hard not to be, in a story about the hunt for a mad but incredibly clever serial killer.
The setting is just right, and the casting as well, and the story unfolds at a pace that just allows you to understand what's going on before the next twist to the plot.Very highly recommended..
Vile, violent, but intelligent thriller about a writer for an expose newspaper shocked to discover that everybody he was going to ruin in the press is turning up dead and all the clues point to him as the killer.The premise may not sound like much, but just give this film a chance and watch it.
You'll be surprised.
It goes in directions that you would never expect, yet they are all credible.
It also doesn't go for the easy answers in trying to wrap up it's little mystery.
As good as the whole film was I never expected them to create a good ending for it, but yet again the script surprised me there too.
A very good film.Rated R; Graphic Violence, Profanity, Drug Use, Adult Themes, Sexuality..
Slightly disappointing Iain Banks novel turned into a movie.
"Complicity" is the second Iain Banks novel turned into a film, but while it is made for the big screen, it does not live up to the standards set by BBC's mini series "The Crow Road".
While it is an entertaining and gripping thriller set in Edinburgh and the Highlands, it ultimately fails to convey the spirit of the book.
The cast are good, though, and the story is excellent.It looks like a TV film, and while it is not exactly a wasted opportunity to bring Iain Banks to the cinema, it is slightly disappointing, although still worth watching..
Great film, low budget, scary scary!!.
Its a shame that people get annoyed at low budget films and dont watch them to the end as there is some mighty fine moments in this film that must be seen to be enjoyed.
It was a massive task trying to take Ian Banks novel and putting it on the big screen anyway and this film was possibly only about a tenth of as good as the book.
Which still makes it very good although you can never truly realise how sick the killer really is, i mean they talk about what the killer has done and in some instances you actually see it but........its a low budget movie....it doesnt want to depend on gore .....it wants to make you think about what is hapening and more importantly WHY it is happening.
Ever read a newspaper report about a daft judge giving stupid sentence and the criminal getting away with it...well this film is about that and what would happen if one man lost the rails and decided to go up against people that deserved the attention that they should have shown to others....or lack thereof.
Great!!.
overlooked thriller satisfies on a number of levels.
In Japan, this film is given the title Psycho 2001.
The cover of the DVD shows a writhing figure in a bloody bathtub, apparently boiling in a stew of guts and organs after ritual disembowelment.No such scene exists in the film.
This title and cover seem to be one more chapter in the harsh treatment this film has suffered at the hands of distributors.And it is undeserved treatment.
This is a classy thriller, Johnny Lee Millar giving his trademark performance in moral ambiguity as a clapped-out journalist looking to break a huge scoop on government conspiracy.
As he digs deeper, he finds the story becoming less about the wicked ways of the world, and more about the murky secrets of his own past.The Highland locations are well used in sweeping helicopter shots, the pacing swift as journo Cameron moves through a sea of bodies, a mysterious Deep Throat figure keeping him one step behind the bad guy(s).
Brian Cox is as solid as ever, rehearsing his bad-ass law enforcer routine before Bourne.
Millar stands up to a demanding role, especially in the final third when all his chickens come home to roost, and regret, anguish, atonement, cynicism and hope are all required to be shown.Complicity appears to have been overlooked by most theatres, distributors, award-givers and reviewers.
A shame really, much worse British films have travelled abroad in recent years.
Complicity is fraught, character-driven, quirky, kinky and pays off at the end.
Well worth checking out..
Read the book instead!.
A film based on the Iain Banks novel with the same name.
As a major Iain Banks fan I decided to read the book before I watched the film, I'm sure glad I did.
The book is very good (like all Banks's novels), unnerving, exciting and very well written.
However, in the film the director have managed to exclude the good things about the book, resulting in a depressing, unthrilling thriller without bite.
Only watch this if you're bored, actually don't, read the book instead!.
faithful adaption of an excellent book - worth watching.
i'm a big fan of the book - not necessarily Iain Bank's best, but definitely top 5.
this film manages to keep all of the important parts of the story, cramming it into 100 minutes without giving the ending away until...
well the end.
very enjoyable, more so because i'd read the book, but couldn't remember the ending till i saw it.
well acted by a stunning cast and the script kept what i'd call the Banks'iness of the book.
well worth watching, whether you've read the book or not.
the only downside is that the dvd could do with more extras..
The film, while viewable, did not bring the novel's atmosphere.
I am a great Banks' fan, and was awaiting this film eagerly.
I am quite disappointed, though the film would presumably, if taken at face value and not compared to the novel, be OK.[Further text might constitute mild spoilers to some readers]The first thing one notices is that most material from the book is somehow stuffed into the film (with notable exception of Cameron's cancer and Basra Road episode - sorry for referring to the novel).
The result is rapid succession of events that get barely touched, not leaving room for atmosphere or, paradoxically, even decent suspense to develop.
There isn't a trace of suffocating mood of the novel.
Events follow each other at the pace that does not allow them to evolve and to give viewer chance to absorb them.
I think that Millar and Elsley would have done much better job if given (the superb BBC TV mini-series, also after Banks) The Crow Road format.Otherwise, the film is technically good.
Casting and acting is very good, with one crucial exception: IMHO, Cameron is too young, far too cheerful and devoid of air of impeding doom around him.And BTW, DVD producers should have included, under excuse of doing that for the benefit of hearing impaired, English subtitles (Scottish accent is quite difficult for non-native speakers).
I plan to watch the film one or two times more to see whether my opinion will improve by simply catching more of what was said :).
A mixed bag.
I'm not really sure what to make of this film.
The first 45 or 50 minutes are fairly unsatisfying.
With good story telling you become part of the story; here I found myself watching from the outside.
I found it difficult to feel empathy for anyone.
No character was really particularly interesting or likable.
Then there was such too much of everything happening too fast: too many murders, too many sex scenes etc.
Keeley Hawes' sex scenes are very, very erotic but I can't help wondering why they are in the film.
After about 50 minutes, the suspense starts kicking in and the film becomes quite interesting and well paced.
Unfortunately, you also can be pretty sure who the killer really is.
Suspenseful as the second half of the film may be, it's also a rather banal storyline.
Ex-soldier starts killing bad people taking revenge for everything that has happened in his life or in his world.
The killings are gruesome but then again it's nothing we have not seen before.
One victim is displayed in a butcher's window: I saw that in an EC comic from the early 50s.
The moral question at the end of the day is then how justified these murders are and that the law can never catch the real culprits.
That is hardly an original thought or motive in crime films. |
tt0290028 | Platinum Blonde | Stewart "Stew" Smith (Robert Williams), ace reporter for the Post, is assigned to get the story about the latest escapade of playboy Michael Schuyler (Donald Dillaway), a breach of promise suit by chorus girl Gloria Golden, who has been paid to drop it. Unlike rival Daily Tribune reporter Bingy Baker (Walter Catlett), he turns down a $50 bribe from Dexter Grayson (Reginald Owen), the Schuylers' lawyer, to not write anything. He does pretend to be swayed by the pleas of Anne (Jean Harlow), Michael's sister, but then brazenly calls his editor with the scoop, appalling the Schuylers.
Stew returns to the house to return a copy of Conrad he had taken from the Schuylers' library. The butler, Smythe (Halliwell Hobbes), tries to make him leave, but Anne sees him. Stew surprises Anne by presenting her with Michael's love letters to Gloria, who had intended to use them to extort more money from the Schuylers. Anne offers Stew a $5,000 check, which he refuses. She asks why he reported the suit, but not the love notes. Stew explains that one was news, the other, blackmail. He later tells her he is writing a play. Intrigued, Anne wonders if she can turn him into a gentleman. She invites him to a party at the house.
They fall in love and soon elope, horrifying Anne's widowed mother, Mrs. Schuyler (Louise Closser Hale), an imperious dowager who looks down on Stew's lower-class background. Michael takes it in stride, telling Stew he's not as bad as everyone thinks. The wedding is scooped by the rival Daily Tribune, enraging his editor, Conroy (Edmund Breese). Even more upset is Stew's best friend Gallagher (Loretta Young), a "sob sister" columnist secretly pining for him. Conroy taunts Stew as "a bird in a gilded cage." Despite his bravado, Stew is upset by the implication he is no longer his own man, vowing not to live on Anne's money. However, she cajoles him into moving into the mansion and starts to make him over, buying him garters (despite his objections) and hiring a valet, Dawson (Claud Allister).
When the Schuylers hold a reception for the Spanish ambassador, Gallagher substitutes for the society reporter and chats with Stew. Anne is surprised to learn that her husband's best friend (whom she had assumed was a man) is actually a lovely young woman and treats Gallagher icily. Then, Bingy tells Stew the Tribune will give him a column if he signs it "Anne Schuyler's husband." Insulted, Stew punches Bingy when he calls him Cinderella Man. The next morning, Mrs. Schuyler is aghast to find Stew's brawl has made the front page.
Wrestling with his play, Stew invites Gallagher and another friend, Hank (Eddy Chandler) from Joe's. They arrive with Joe and several bar patrons in tow and even Bingy shows up to apologize. A raucous party ensues. Meanwhile, Stew and Gallagher ponder the play, deciding to base it on Stew's marriage. Anne, Mrs. Schuyler, and Grayson return as the party is in full swing. Stew apologizes for letting the party get out of control, but protests that he can invite friends to "my house." Anne replies, "Your house?"
Stew returns with Gallagher to his own apartment. Along the way, he gives a homeless man his expensive garters. Grayson stops by to say Anne will pay him alimony, whereupon Stew punches him (earlier, Stew had warned Grayson that his twentieth insult would earn him a "sock to the nose"). Stew tells Gallagher the play could end with the protagonist divorcing his rich wife and marrying the woman whom he had always loved without ever realizing it. Overwhelmed, Gallagher hugs him. | pornographic | train | wikipedia | Absolute junk.
How anyone can find this piece of garbage remotely erotic is beyond me.
The women are almost weighed down with excess silicone as much as by the nonsenical 'story' and daft 'script.' It also has one of the most lacklustre girl on girl shower scenes ever put on celluloid.
The Director seems to have instructed the 'actresses' not to let any kiss last longer than 2 seconds and make the scene completely devoid of eroticism.
He not only succeeds wonderfully in this respect but with all the other scenes as well.
Is it only the Europeans who can make Erotica and the Americans Porn and soft porn rubbish?
I think I know the answer after sitting through this absolute junk..
Shauna's not that bad....but the movie's not that good either..
It's so amazing that Surrender Cinema continues to make such slipshod movies, even after they should have learned from their latest disasters.
"Platinum Blonde" could have been made much better than it was; as it is, there are only three reasons to watch this movie.
1) Shauna O'Brien in the first segment shows off her newly built boobs -- and contrary to others' opinions on this board, I find them quite lovely myself.
I personally liked her performance here; maybe not quite as committed in her sex scenes as some would like it (but I chalk that up to overexposure; she was just about her 7th film in 12 months), but generally adequate.
2) Holly Sampson as the lead role as Angela is very nice, especially when she breaks out the vibrator in the first segment.
3) Shannan Leigh in the third segment gave what I thought to be the best performance of the movie as the secretary seeking her inner slut.
Otherwise.....a typical dull Surrender product..
Plenty of sex and Angela's funny dialogue snag this film a B+..
This is a film I've wanted to see for a long time.
When it finally came on earlier tonight, I just couldn't miss it....and I'm glad I didn't.
"Platinum Blonde" has a non-linear storyline, but it has a common theme, which saved it from certain failure in my "Story" category.Through the opening credits, we see a hot-looking blonde stripping.
Not unusual for a softcore flick, right?
This blonde, however, is a Cupid.
Yes, a Cupid.
"Most people think of us as chubby little babies with bows and arrows who come around on Valentine's Day," Angela the Cupid (played by Holly Sampson) says in the opening scene, "but cupids come in different shapes and sizes." Well, this cupid seems to have taken the right form--at least for a softcore sex film.
She'll be our host for this film, taking us through three different scenarios and the challenges she faces in order to get the right people together.The first story is about a lonely film editor who has the hots for Tawny (played by Shauna O'Brien), an actress in the film he's currently working on.
She has an overprotective, jealous type of boyfriend who's also the editor's boss, I think.
In comes Angela to work the poor guy into a frenzy.
In one scene, the guy walks in on Tawny and her boyfriend having sex in the bathtub.
Angela pops in with a funny quote.
"They make a cute couple, but I get the feeling they're just going through the motions," Angela says.
But after watching them have at it for a bit, she says, "But, I have to say.....those are some pretty good motions." It seems that the editor doesn't know what to do with a woman, so Angela helps him, if you know what I mean.
After a good sex session with Angela, the editor has gathered up the strength to give Tawny a script he's been working on.
From there, it's a cakewalk.
She likes the script, she wants him to direct, they have sex to culminate things and the story ends.
(Story Grade: B+)Our second adventure features two brothers, one of whom is getting married to a woman named Mia (played by Mia; the writers sure weren't innovative with the character names, eh?).
Mia's fiance is a womanizer who sleeps with many different women behind her back, including Mia's maid-of-honor; his brother is an upstanding type who is in love with Mia, but doesn't want to betray his brother.
Angela comes to save the day.
Disguised as a wedding planner, she convinces the good brother to muster up enough courage to tell his brother off before he marries Mia. The night before the wedding, he and Mia have a revelation--they love each other.
The next day, the good brother tells his womanizing sibling off and he and Mia live happily ever after.
(Story Grade: B-)The third story is shorter, but much hotter.
Busty brunette Shannan Leigh is hidden behind glasses and frumpy clothes and plays Stella Crenshaw, a frustrated office worker who has a crush on her boss.
Angela pays her a visit, masquerading as a mailroom worker.
She encourages Stella to dress sexier and let her "inner seductress" out.
Angela uses her cupid magic to show Stella what she could be like if she used what she has to get what she wants in a not-too-shabby pool table scene.
We all know Shannan is gorgeous (see her performance in "Andromina: The Pleasure Planet", it's fantastic) and eventually she lets loose on a guy coming to her apartment to return her stray dog.
She let's down her hair and looks much, much better when she meets with her boss this time.
Her request for a transfer has been granted, and now she can do what she always wanted to do....sleep with her now-former boss.
Stella's "inner seductress" has been let out and now she wants to have sex with just about every guy she sees.
Great little story here.
(Story Grade: A)This film was not quite what I expected, but it was good nonetheless.
Shauna O'Brien, Mia and Shannan Leigh provided the babe-power this film needs to get a high "Women" grade, the sex was above average and the story as a whole was decent.
Angela had some funny quips during the film, which helps out the "Story" grade some.
This one was tapeworthy, if only for Shannan's part of the film.Women: A- (Shauna, Mia and Shannan were the principals involved here, and Holly Sampson wasn't bad either.
I liked Shannan Leigh in this film more than I did in Andromina.)Sex: B+ (Plenty of sex scenes, with Shauna's and Shannan's taking the cake.
Mia's sex scenes were decent, but not her best work.
Holly's lone sex scene was a winner with me.)Story: B+ (This is a composite of all three parts of the film.
Angela's funny dialogue throughout the film solidified the grade, but the non-linearity of the film made it tough for me to give it an A in this category.)Overall: B+ (A very good softcore flick.
However, it's debatable whether it's tapeworthy or not.
The overall grade was straddling the line between A- and B+, but Mia's segment of the film wasn't all that great, so I went with the lower of the two grades.).
June 14th, 2018.
My best Softcore scenes is Shauna O'Brien and Stella Porter doing their Lesbian Shower Scene.
Plus Shauna does her Sex scene with her doing Missionary Position on the bed making an orgasm, and Shannan Leigh doing her exotic dance showing her big implant boobs..
NOT TOO SHABBY.
The Ava Lake and Shannon Leigh segments are very good but first you have to sit through a listless Shauna O'Brien with her malformed boobs.By the way, HollySampson has done some hardcore under the name of Nicholette.
Who would have thunk! |
tt0384833 | Frankenfish | Medical examiner Sam Rivers and biologist Mary Callahan travel into the bayou to investigate the mysterious death of a fisherman. Having grown up in the area, Sam is comfortable in his surroundings while Mary is not. They find Elmer noodling for catfish in the swamp canals. With Elmer, Sam and Mary travel up river to the fishing community. They meet Gloria, the wife of the deceased fisherman. Gloria's daughter Eliza and her semi-boyfriend Dan also live in the house. Gloria explains that a boat washed up river a few months ago and strange things have happened since.
Sam and Mary find the boat along the bank of a canal. They explore the interior while Elmer waits in the canoe outside. They discover the remains of the crew in the hold. Upset, Mary clumsily knocks Elmer from the canoe and something drags him down. Sam and Mary flee in the canoe, unaware that they have triggered a homing signal on the ship. On the mainland a team relays the information to their employer a wealthy bounty hunter.
One of the villagers heard noises while on his porch. He leans over the edge and a frankenfish leaps up and decapitates him. His girlfriend attempts to escape the houseboat on a canoe but the fish flips her out and kills her. Frightened, the group tries to flee in boats but the fish destroys them. On a neighboring stilt house, Ricardo baits a large hook using an entire catfish and manages to land one of the frankenfish. Nearly as big as a full-grown man, the fish can breathe air and hops forward biting at Ricardo's legs. Ricardo manages to kill it with a shotgun blast to the head. In vengeance he tears out its heart and barbecues it. As he takes his first bite a second frankenfish leaps from the water and devours him.
While everyone panics, Mary declares she has an idea on how to get off the boathouse. Before she can explain, she is shot by the house. A fire propels a propane tank into the boathouse causing an explosion that sends Eliza into the water. Sam dives in and rescues her at the same time a frankenfish leaps from the water and bites off Gloria's legs. The fish have begun attacking the boathouses, punching holes in them to make them sink.
The bounty hunter and his crew arrive and the fish attack them too. Knocked out of the boat, they swim quickly to the safety of the sinking stilt houses. The hunter explains that the fish are genetically engineered snakeheads. Sam, Eliza and Dan have no choice but to join the hunter in pursuing the fish.
The crew follows a trail of blood back to the fish's den. The hunter forces Sam at gunpoint to enter first. Sam flees the den as behind him a frankenfish kills two hunters. Dan, Sam and Eliza quickly leave on the fan boat, chased by the frankenfish. Dan falls from the boat during the chase but scrambles up a mudbank. Realizing they cannot outrace the monster, Sam drives the fanboat up a stand of tree stumps and knocks off the protective lining of the fan. Unable to slow its momentum, the frankenfish launches into the whirling blades to its death. Sam and Eliza kiss and go back the way they came to get Dan. However, Dan is trapped in the mud as dozens of baby frankenfish attack him. | suspenseful, violence | train | wikipedia | You know you have a great film when there are giant, mutant fish beasts, naked people, house boat tailer parks, turtle soup, biologists, lesbians, Chinese Mofia, bloody gore, propeller boats, shotguns, and lines like, "I'm gonna git you, you dumb motherf*cker!" At a breezy 80 minutes in length, this film will have you crying for the must anticipated sequel.
There were several of them, pretty good-sized and pretty tough to stop.This also was like those sci-fi films of the '50s with the genetically-altered spiders or ants or whatever, making something many times larger and deadly.
Fun low budget creature-in-the-water flick with lots of kills, some good gore, and nudity....
As I've already mentioned, Frankenfish has lots of kills and some good gore peppered throughout the quick 84 minute feature, as well as nudity (I never mind seeing pretty naked ladies with my B movies).
That's pretty much the plot, but the script is fun and the movie speeds along, I never checked my watch, err- cell phone once.If you are reading this review looking for a fun creature feature with bodies being bitten in half and heads being bitten off by giant carnivorous fish in a swamp...then Frankenfish is for you!!!.
I'm not even going to write "they're going to need a bigger boat".) Despite this film being incredibly cheesy (and this cheesiness leading to my lower rating), it was also really fun in the sense of a 1950s b-movie where things always had to be bigger.
You'd be deranged, too, if your idea of a good time was staying up all night watching "Frankenfish" and "The XXXorcist".I also wanted to say that this film stood out in my mind as a film with a strong black lead.
(It's actually sad I feel the need to point such things as this out, but horror films are one of the last genres to enter the modern world.) Anyway, you're going to find cheesy effects and cheesy acting if you watch this movie.
The action is quick, however, and that's good so there's never an extreme lull.Some of the characters seem to die just for shock value, which works, but beware not to invest value in too many or develop a favorite...it's anyone's food for fish in this TV movie.I watched this on a Saturday night when I had nothing to do and it was definitely entertaining.
If you're looking for a good popcorn movie to watch with friends and enjoy some decent CG, Frankenfish just might be the right movie for you.Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the...swamp?
Decent Fun. Frankenfish (2004) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Mildly entertaining horror film takes place in the swamps of Louisiana where dead bodies are beginning to pile up.
The low budget nature of the film is actually a good thing as it makes the settings feel all the more real and it also builds up some nice atmosphere.
The CGI fish is pretty fake looking but it's not too bad and it's certainly far from the worst thing I've seen in these types of movies.
This has got to be one of the five worst movies I've seen this year, and I've seen about 100 already.I only watched this film because it had Richard Edson, Raoul Trujillo and Mark Boone Jr. in it, and they all had very small roles, which mostly were all wasted, except Trujillo, who I thought was the best character in the whole damn movie.
There is enough suspense and tense fun to make up for the ridiculousness of the story, the fish although not great in design(though I have seen far worse) are menacing and great to watch and while the lead is uncharismatic the acting is reasonably good.
Initially thought to be either a rogue alligator or bull shark, it soon emerges that something even more ravenous is feeding on the local inhabitants of the bayou community, leaving a trail of assorted body parts and carnage in its wake.Fast-paced with realistic set design and a high, graphic attrition rate, "Frankenfish" is somewhat better than the unfortunate choice of title might mislead.
With all the mystery developed to that point, the explanation is weak and unconvincing, and introduces a number of one-dimensional characters who contribute little to maintaining the picture's standard.Ultimately, what promised much, briskly capitulates to a disappointing conclusion in which the bad guys force the beleaguered survivors to help hunt down the rabid fish, with predictable results for all concerned.
It is very very poor movie.Badly written,amateur acting,badly directed,with poor CGI,but with some funny jokes.IT has some funny end entertaining moments.The actors are unknown and they aren't good at all.Some people like this trashy C movies and i would recommend this movie to them.I like horror movies,but THIS IS NOT a horror movie.It is is SCI-FI/ACTION/comedy movie.I haven't seen a funny film like this for a long,long time.It was not a complete waste of time because it was funny and occasionally entertainment.But if you are looking for a good movie don't watch this at any cost,because this is a very bad movie with very bad actors and a small budget.
If one takes it for what it really is, one gets a hour and a half of very decent entertainment.So instead of stating the obvious (cheesy script, second-rate acting, low budget sfx, etc), I'll try to summarize what made this flick worth watching IMHO:a bunch of picturesque bayou weirdos (especially the white rasta crack-head and shell-shocked viet vet) pretty good creature design and animation a couple of imaginative death scenes amusing means of getting rid of the nasty critters as it has been already pointed out, black heroes a pace that (barely, but still) allows the action to stay ahead of plot inconsistencies decent comic relief character good lighting and general image qualityAll in all, a very decent B movie..
You know, I'm all for a monster movie like "Eight Legged Freaks", "AVP", or "Godzilla" but it needs to be a good one.As you suspected, the monster wasn't shown as clear since it moves in a fast pace or that the lighting is dark.
Okay, there is also one other good thing I would like to point out in this film: One scene in this film isn't clichéd and will surprise you a lot but one the bad side of that, you don't even care what just happened in that scene.So, you want a good monster movie?
B movie horror fun.My only real complaint would be some of the characters weren't as developed as I would've liked them to be.
These big fish creature made Sifi a big hit for the most imaginative place that genetically creatures turn bigger and creepier like Frankenfish.All of this movie was perfect,lots of blood,disgusting figures to see,and more terror on my break.I just watched it and boy only two words,Very Good,I loved this film of another great picture they did in 44.People watch this movie and own it right now and don't let anyone stop you from buying it.Many people died in horrible ways they didn't thought for this horror movie.Everyone did a good job in making the movie and big thanks to the director who made it possible for all to see.This is suck a wonderful horror movie and put it with fishing so we can be scared and was I.I hope they make the sequel to Frankenfish,it's fun for the whole family to see and vomit..
When the scaly terrors attack the boats and scupper the floating houses, the survivors think they are fish food; but help is at hand when the hunters arrive, armed to the teeth and hoping to bag a trophy or two...Had the makers of Frankenfish planted their tongues much further into their cheeks and not taken proceedings quite so seriously, this movie may have been a fantastic addition to the monster genre; unfortunately, they refuse to accept the complete preposterousness of the premise and deliver an average movie when the result should have been so much more fun.
Loads of nifty gore and a few tasty babes (China Chow and K.D. Aubert provide the main eye candy for the blokes) help to compensate somewhat, but Frankenfish ultimately fails to match the genius of its wonderfully camp title.I give this film 5 out of 10, plus a bonus point for the impressive amount of blood and guts on display..
The film is about genetically enhanced Snakeheads who attack houseboats in a swamp in Louisiana, and its up to medical investigator Sam Rivers and the residents to kill these creatures before they become fish food.
It's simply another terrible failed Sci-fi Channel attempt to make an actual, "movie" yet they failed, making a terrible b-flick like this which aired on TV and then straight to VIDEO, which everyone knows, sucks.
With a title like "Frankenfish" and a striking DVD-cover that proudly shows a monstrous cross-breeding between a catfish and a piranha, the least I expected was a more over-the-top and completely absurd homage to old B-movies and/or low budget creature features.
The problem is that in an effort to avoid being as bad as humanly possible, the movie never lets itself achieve the level of cheese it could and should have.For example, when I hear the term "Frankenfish" I want a fish that's been pieced together from several different species.
Just check out some of this stellar dialogue:"I should've never dated swamp girl." "His head is missing!" "So I guess we're having filet-of-swamp monster." "You look good for a girl covered in fish brains." My guess is they visited local elementary schools and let 5th graders submit lines they thought would be cool to use in a "stupid fish movie."Basically, this is another "creature feature" with production values resembling that of a home video, hot chicks as scientists (I'm not complaining), characters acting nonchalant over other characters being killed, and characters just generally acting stupid.For example, these morons are stuck on a houseboat.
After all the Frankenfish are killed (oh, I'm sorry, I hope I didn't spoil the movie for you), they decide to go check on their friend who fell off the boat during the totally unexciting chase scene where the fish was hunting them.
THE GISTFrankenfish is one of those movies that can only be recommended to people who like to get together with friends and watch really bad, low-budget films just so they can make fun of them.
Many people will avoid this based on that alone, which is isn't at all fair as this is actually a very competent, if uninspired, monster movie.A body turns up in the bayou and a medical examiner is sent to investigate.
The special effects in this movie are not bad at all, the fish look believable and the gore looks real enough.This movie is far from being a classic but if you like horror movies and don't expect to much of it you should have a good time watching it.
Frankenfish, that was meant to be taken seriously.The plot of course is your standard "something in the swamp, people have to kill it." type thing while also hunters are going around trying to hunt whatever is in the water.
So all this build-up is for nothing other than time filler.The only thing I kind of liked in this movie is the odd funny attack/death scenes.
So if you want to see a movie with a title as stupid as Frankenfish for a laugh then this probably isn't for you but if you just have 80 minutes to pass over with this as your only DVD option, then this could be worth a look..
So I wasn't hoping for a great movie just something that would be a schlocky horror film and a bit of fun.
As Dan says during the film, it is "ridiculous" and the plot is just a twist on the usual monster movie idea of one small group being picked off one at a time.
It does a bit of both but never excels at either even if it gets it more or less right for genre fans scouring the sci-fi channel for something they like.The effects are generally reasonably prosthetics or poor CGI again par for the genre course but the film is best when the fish is kept out of sight as the tension plays better than the delivery.
You can't go into a movie called 'Frankenfish' and expect a good film, but even so; I really thought that this would be (albeit slightly) better.
The plot was very predictable, and you know from the beginning who's going to be killed and who will survive.I had some expectations that the movie would be bad, but still a nice monster-flick.
Even if this is not a Box Office movie you could say it makes a great impact and it should have been more than just TV & VHS.MAybe there were scenes inappropriate in here but as a whole this movie makes great fun and makes you wonder at each turn..how will it be..on the next turn..and of course...little to nothing it has a great ending..making it more likable.I haven't seen a B movie so good in a long time..and i've watched a lot of them just to find out a gem like this one.I do hope it will have a sequel because i liked the main actors too..specially K.D. Aubert..very exotic and appealing girl.Watch this without thinking.."oh..who is this and who is that.." it will have a great impact.
They have either scared off or eaten all the 'gators in the area and the few people living up-river in their shanty boats are scared to stay and scared to try and leave.Into this scary situation come a medical examiner (Tory Kittles) and a biologist (China Chow) but they soon find out they are way out of their depth (pun intended) when the fish start chowing down on people right in front of them.
The fish monster is on the box and in the movie."Frankenfish" also gives us the return of China Chow.
For the most part though, Frankenfish is Tremors on the bayou with big, smart, genetically engineered man-eating Snakehead fish in place of the Graboids and with people trapped on backwater houseboats instead of creaky homes out in the desert.
It doesn't quite succeed to that degree; but as far as low budget, made-for-video monster movies that are forced to premiere on a channel that seems hell bent on giving its namesake as bad a reputation as humanly possible, this one is surprisingly fun.This isn't to say that the film is a complete success.
'Frankenfish' is one of the Sci-Fi Channel's better killer-monster movies, along with 'The Snakehead Terror' and 'Dinocroc.'**SPOILERS**Bayou police are baffled at a series of murders done in the local waters.
From its first-rate exploitation title (although it could have used an hysterical exclamation mark) through to cookie-cutter characters, copious gore and gratuitous flashes of nudity, Frankenfish is a consummate B-movie.Director Mark Dippé's still no better at telling a story than he was in 1997's dire Spawn but here in the cultural bargain basement that's more of a strength.Down in the bayou, something big, mean and toothy is wolfing down fishermen and 'gators alike and the small party sent to investigate soon finds itself and a handful of oddball locals on the menu of a shoal of mutant amphibious mudskippers.Like any good B-movie, it's awash in corny dialogue, thieves most of its ideas from better movies, has an unlikely serious subtext (genetic engineering's bad, m'kay?) and a cast of unknowns meaning anyone can (and does) get chomped.It's also hilarious (both intentionally and not), has good creature effects and jams enough gung-ho popcorn entertainment into its lean 81 minutes to bear comparison with Joe Dante's 1978 Piranha..
Frankenfish is probably one of syfy's worst movies to date.There is absolutely no plot what so ever, except for the "mutant fish killing people" if that can be considered a plot.
Hmmm well yes i thought Frankenfish was a fascinating film in which many mutated fish eat people.
There they talk with Crankton's wife Gloria (Donna Biscoe) who says that a curse is destroying the swamp however Sam & Mary quickly discover that giant, genetically created mutant Snakehead fish have been killing & eating anything that moves & our heroes find themselves on the menu...This made-for-TV creature feature was directed by Mark Dippe & having heard pretty good things about it I expected a decent monster flick & it's certainly good but it's not great.
It moves along at a nice enough pace although the first half does drag a little at times, there are some silly moments with various character's doing stupid things but if you just take Frankenfish for what it is, a fun creature feature, then I think it will keep you entertained for 80 odd minutes if not much else.Director Dippe does alright here, despite what was probably a low budget & being made-for-TV Frankenfish is surprisingly well made & looks like a proper theatrical release.
Even the fish look like they are enjoying themselves.There is the odd witty line, some great low-key action sequences and the Frankenfish themselves are great - chewing up most of the cast with great gusto and not without some excellent black humour.There are some genuine surprises and a couple of unexpected deaths amid the usual B-Movie clichés.
Even the fish look like they are enjoying themselves.There is the odd witty line, some great low-key action sequences and the Frankenfish themselves are great - chewing up most of the cast with great gusto and not without some excellent black humour.There are some genuine surprises and a couple of unexpected deaths amid the usual B-Movie clichés.
The most hilarious worst line ever delivered in a film goes to this movie and I quote..."You look great for a girl covered in giant fish brains." UGH!! |
tt0218058 | Born to Love You | The film centers around Joey Liwanag (Angeline Quinto), a poor girl who works as a part-time tourist guide for Koreans and likes joining amateur singing contests with her two younger siblings to help her family cope with financial problems. Despite the hardship and low probability, Joey works hard to save up money in order to go to Korea, and meet her real father who has abandoned her when she was very young.
Rex Manrique (Coco Martin) is a frustrated, very arrogant and hot-tempered photographer who is out to prove to the world that he can stand on his own feet and succeed in life independently. However, the ladder of success seems to be impossible for him as he faces different complications and rejections in life, as well as his career.
The moment Rex and Joey encountered each other in a Korean wedding, these two grew a big misunderstanding and hatred towards each other, making it hard for the two of them to get along in the first place. Things get more out of hand when Rex was hired in an advertising company where Joey was also working for—this time, as a translator. As they got to know each other, they found solace and comfort in each other's company. But the security that they found in each other soon starts to shake when life takes another course and drives them into a complicated situation. Joey finally meets her biological father, while Rex struggles finding acceptance and forgiveness for her Mother who abandoned her for another man when he was still a young boy. Although Rex cuts off their relationship, Joey tries everything that she could to help him go through his own challenges and promises Rex that she will never leave him. But when Rex finally figures out the answers to his questions and his purpose in life, he and Joey get into a car accident making Rex decide to leave Joey and his family behind and start a new life.
After a couple of years of investigation, Joey finally finds Rex in an island in Batangas and confronts him about their relationship which they broke off unofficially. At the same time, Joey finds out that Rex turned blind after saving her life in the accident and Rex himself found forgiveness in his heart. The movie ends during Rex and Joey's wedding celebration. | comedy, gothic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038348 | La belle et la bête | A widower merchant lives in a mansion with his six children, three sons and three daughters. All his daughters are very beautiful, but the youngest, Beauty, is the most lovely, as well as kind, well-read, and pure of heart; while the two elder sisters, in contrast, are wicked, selfish, vain, and spoiled. They secretly taunt Beauty and treat her more like a servant than a sister. The merchant eventually loses all of his wealth in a tempest at sea which sinks most of his merchant fleet. He and his children are consequently forced to live in a small farmhouse and work for their living.
Some years later, the merchant hears that one of the trade ships he had sent off has arrived back in port, having escaped the destruction of its compatriots. Before leaving, he asks his children if they wish for him to bring any gifts back for them. The sons ask for weaponry and horses to hunt with, whereas his oldest daughters ask for clothing, jewels, and the finest dresses possible as they think his wealth has returned. Beauty is satisfied with the promise of a rose as none grow in their part of the country. The merchant, to his dismay, finds that his ship's cargo has been seized to pay his debts, leaving him penniless and unable to buy his children's presents.
During his return, the merchant becomes lost during a storm. Seeking shelter, he enters a dazzling palace. A hidden figure opens the giant doors and silently invites him in. The merchant finds tables inside laden with food and drink, which seem to have been left for him by the palace's invisible owner. The merchant accepts this gift and spends the night there. The next morning, as the merchant is about to leave, he sees a rose garden and recalls that Beauty had desired a rose. Upon picking the loveliest rose he can find, the merchant is confronted by a hideous "Beast" which tells him that for taking his most precious possession after accepting his hospitality, the merchant must die. The merchant begs to be set free, arguing that he had only picked the rose as a gift for his youngest daughter. The Beast agrees to let him give the rose to Beauty, but only if the merchant or one of his daughters will return.
The merchant is upset but accepts this condition. The Beast sends him on his way, with wealth, jewels and fine clothes for his sons and daughters, and stresses that Beauty must never know about his deal. The merchant, upon arriving home, tries to hide the secret from Beauty, but she pries it from him. Her brothers say they will go to the castle and fight the Beast, but the merchant dissuades them, saying they will stand no chance against the monster. Beauty then agrees to go to the Beast's castle. The Beast receives her graciously and informs her that she is now mistress of the castle, and he is her servant. He gives her lavish clothing and food and carries on lengthy conversations with her. Every night, the Beast asks Beauty to marry him, only to be refused each time. After each refusal, Beauty dreams of a handsome prince who pleads with her to answer why she keeps refusing him, to which she replies that she cannot marry the Beast because she loves him only as a friend. Beauty does not make the connection between the handsome prince and the Beast and becomes convinced that the Beast is holding the prince captive somewhere in the castle. She searches and discovers multiple enchanted rooms, but never the prince from her dreams.
For several months, Beauty lives a life of luxury at the Beast's palace, having every whim catered to by invisible servants, with no end of riches to amuse her and an endless supply of exquisite finery to wear. Eventually, she becomes homesick and begs the Beast to allow her to go see her family. He allows it on the condition that she returns exactly a week later. Beauty agrees to this and sets off for home with an enchanted mirror and ring. The mirror allows her to see what is going on back at the Beast's castle, and the ring allows her to return to the castle in an instant when turned three times around her finger. Her older sisters are surprised to find her well fed and dressed in finery. Beauty tries to share the magnificent gowns and jewels the Beast gave her with her sisters, but they turn into rags at her sisters' touch, and are restored to their splendour when returned to Beauty, as the Beast meant them only for her. Her sisters are envious when they hear of her happy life at the castle, and, hearing that she must return to the Beast on a certain day, beg her to stay another day, even putting onion in their eyes to make it appear as though they are weeping. They hope that the Beast will be angry with Beauty for breaking her promise and eat her alive. Beauty's heart is moved by her sisters' false show of love, and she agrees to stay.
Beauty begins to feel guilty about breaking her promise to the Beast and uses the mirror to see him back at the castle. She is horrified to discover that the Beast is lying half-dead from heartbreak near the rose bushes from which her father plucked the rose, and she immediately uses the ring to return to the Beast.
Beauty weeps over the Beast, saying that she loves him. When her tears strike him, the Beast is transformed into the handsome prince from Beauty's dreams. The Prince informs her that long ago a fairy turned him into a hideous beast after he refused to let her in from the rain and that only by finding true love, despite his ugliness, could the curse be broken. He and Beauty are married and they live happily ever after together. | dark, fantasy, cult, atmospheric, psychedelic, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0295691 | Who Framed Roger Rabbit | In 1947, "toons" act out theatrical cartoon shorts as with live-action films; they regularly interact with real people and animals and reside in Toontown, an animated portion of Los Angeles. Private detective Eddie Valiant and his brother, Teddy, once worked closely with the toons on several famous cases, but after Teddy was killed by a toon, Eddie lapsed into alcoholism and vowed never to work for toons again. One day, R.K. Maroon, head of Maroon Cartoon Studios, is concerned about the recent poor acting performances of one of his biggest stars, Roger Rabbit. Maroon hires Valiant to investigate rumors about Roger's voluptuous toon wife Jessica being romantically involved with businessman and gadgets inventor, Marvin Acme, owner of both Acme Corporation and Toontown. After watching Jessica perform at the underground Ink & Paint Club, Valiant secretly takes photographs of her and Acme playing patty-cake in her dressing room, which he shows to Roger. Maroon suggests to Roger that he should leave Jessica, but a drunken Roger refuses and flees.
The next morning, Acme is discovered dead at his factory by the Los Angeles Police Department with a safe dropped on his head, and evidence points to Roger being responsible. While investigating, Valiant meets Judge Doom, Toontown's Superior Court judge, who has created a substance capable of killing a toon: a toxic "Dip" made of turpentine, acetone, and benzene. Valiant runs into Roger's toon co-star, Baby Herman, who believes Roger is innocent and that Acme's missing will, which will give the toons ownership of Toontown, may be the key to his murder. He then finds Roger hiding in his office, who begs him to help exonerate him. Valiant reluctantly hides Roger in a local bar where his ex-girlfriend, Dolores, works. Later, Jessica approaches Valiant and says that Maroon had forced her to pose for the photographs so that he could blackmail Acme.
Doom and his toon-weasel henchmen discover Roger, but he and Valiant escape with Benny, an anthropomorphic taxicab. They flee to a theater, where Valiant explains to Roger that a toon killed Teddy before he fled to Toontown. As they leave with Dolores, Valiant sees a newsreel detailing the sale of Maroon Cartoons to Cloverleaf, a mysterious corporation that bought the city's trolley network shortly before Acme's murder. Valiant goes to the studio to confront Maroon, leaving Roger to guard outside, but Jessica knocks him out and puts him in the trunk. Maroon tells Valiant that he blackmailed Acme into selling his company so that he could then sell the studio, but is killed before he can explain the consequences of the missing will. Valiant spots Jessica fleeing the scene and, assuming she is the culprit, follows her into Toontown. Jessica reveals that Doom killed Acme and Maroon and that the former had given her his will for safe-keeping, but she discovered that the will was blank. She and Valiant are soon captured by Doom and the weasels.
At the Acme factory, Doom reveals his plot to destroy Toontown with a giant machine loaded with dip to build a freeway, the only way past Toontown since Cloverleaf (which Doom owns) has bought out Los Angeles' tram system. Roger unsuccessfully attempts to save Jessica, and the couple is tied onto a hook in front of the machine's hose. Valiant then performs a comedic vaudeville act, causing the weasels to die of laughter; Valiant kicks their leader, Smart Ass, into the machine's Dip vat. Valiant then fights Doom, who is eventually flattened by a steamroller, but survives. Eddie is shocked when Doom reveals that he is a toon in disguise—the same toon who killed Teddy. Valiant uses a toon mallet with a spring-loaded boxing glove and fires it at a switch that causes the machine to empty its dip onto Doom, dissolving him and killing him. The empty machine crashes through the wall into Toontown, where it is destroyed by a train. Numerous toons run in to regard Doom's remains, and Roger discovers that he inadvertently wrote his love letter for Jessica on Acme's will, which was written in disappearing-reappearing ink. Roger then shocks Valiant with a joy buzzer, and Valiant gives him a kiss, having regained his sense of humor. Valiant happily enters Toontown with Dolores, and Roger with Jessica, followed by the other toons. | psychedelic, humor | train | wikipedia | Who made this game so pointless?. They had something with this game. You could go around to different areas and examine everything. They incorporated many of the elements of the movie into the game and they did a pretty good job with the graphics considering it was for the Nintendo. So what went wrong? They basically dropped the ball where the game play is concerned. In the end all the locations and all the items you collect end up being basically pointless. You could collect everything possible, or you could just get dynamite and go fight Doom, there is no mystery even though when you first start playing this game it makes it seem like it is going to be a cool game you have to solve to win. Instead you continuously go into the store until one item appears, enter cartoon land and finally fight Doom. The fighting consists of you holding a button and releasing to punch and it is fun at first hitting Roger and random people, but once again all the interactivity is undone by the fact you really do not have to do anything or collect anything to win the game. I had a ton of things I collected, and I threw it all at Doom. It did not seem to do anything to him so I just charged up the punch and ran in and hit him then backed up again. It was not a difficult fight, just a long one for which all the things collected during the game seem meaningless. You get to drive around in the taxi to different buildings as well in this one, but once again the entire game may as well just be you punching Doom as this part of the game renders the rest of the game meaningless.. Who Framed Roger Rabbit?. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? is one of the most different adventure video games! The characters, the action, and the sure thrill of adventure makes this game a fun non-stop playing time! Below is a brief look how I think the game is! Game Play: The game play is very good. There is really basic controls here and is easy to perform. Novice gamers should have a good time here! Graphics: The graphics are wonderful especially for the first Nintendo. The backgrounds are really beautiful! Difficulty: The game is easy but as it goes on you find out that it will become more difficult! Music: The music is great! Just fantastic catchy tunes through out the game! In My opinion its some of the best music ever in a video game! Sound: The sound is great. Nuff said! Overall: I have always loved Who Framed Roger Rabbit! If you like excellent adventure games that has Roger, the Weasels, many other characters from the film and more then I strongly recommend you play this game! To purchase this video game check out Amazon.com! |
tt0313634 | The Scream Team | Two children, Ian and Clare, move into a town where their grandfather has just died. Ian thinks his grandfather's spirit is trying to tell them something, finding some library news clippings about a man named Zachariah Kull, who was accused of burning his home with his wife in it. Later, Ian and Clare capture a ghost named Jumper (a dead skydiver) who ends up freed by his partner, Coffin Ed (a revolutionary soldier). They follow them and other ghostly wisps of air into the forest, where they find an abandoned building. Entering, they find arriving ghosts entering a mirror, which leads to the afterlife. Ed and Jumper's boss, Mariah (a dead bride) isn't too pleased with this. Ian and Clare learn that they look for souls that don't want to cross over, and are dubbed the "Soul Patrol" by Jumper; they ended up with these jobs while waiting for their turn to cross over.
In exchange for letting their grandfather complete anything he wants finished before moving on, the children discover that Zachariah has kidnapped him to increase his powers. The children join forces with the Soul Patrol, to destroy Zachariah and release all the captured souls. They confront Zachariah at an abandoned mine, where Mariah is able to parry his fireballs, but finds he's gained new powers; Jumper ends up captured, further increasing Zachariah's strength. In the end they discover Zachariah was really a misunderstood inventor experimenting with natural gas, and one of his inventions accidentally burned his wife to death. When he was killed, Zachariah told his wife to wait for him, knowing he wouldn't be able to cross over due to desiring revenge against his injustice. At the festival that honors the villain everyone thinks him to be, Zachariah emerges from a burning effigy. However, Clare and Ian reveal the truth, reminding Zachariah that his wife is still waiting for him to cross over. Zachariah releases all of the trapped spirits and finally moves on.
The children and their father return home to find the grandfather's spirit waiting for them; the Soul Patrol kept their promise to let him take care of his unfinished business. He reveals how proud he is of his son, something he never did in life; when asked if he has to leave right away, the grandfather explains "eternity can wait awhile" and spends time catching up with his son before moving on. The family decides to stay in town, which is changing from bashing the formerly evil ghost to telling the truth about him.
During the day, Ian and Clare visit the Soul Patrol, finding only Jumper and Ed, who explain that Mariah is talking to their bosses in the next world. Mariah returns, explaining that the little spectacle they caused to put an end to Zachariah's terror exposed the fact there is an afterlife; she is left anguished by this as she was almost done working for them, and the punishment is the extension of Mariah, Jumper and Coffin Ed's jobs. Ed visits them while they carve pumpkins with an invention of their grandfather's, avoiding getting hit debris thanks to being a ghost – "There are some advantages to being dead." | horror | train | wikipedia | One of the Best Disney Halloween Movies.
Okay let me start out by saying that this isn't THE best Disney original Halloween movie (Halloweentown I has my vote), but it comes awfully close.
The elements that really bring it together are the three main ghosts: Kathy Najimy, Eric Idle, and Tommy Davidson.
They are way too funny!
I loved Eric Idle's little jokes ("Oh and where is that, down Sewage Lane?").
The scary part was every time we saw Zachariah Kull.
Now he was freaky.
Especially in the beginning when the father was telling his kids about him and he looked directly at the camera.
All in all, this was a really good Disney original movie.
It certainly has the humour, just enough spookiness, and great actors..
Cast of star actors.
I think this was a great All Hallows Eve Movie.
I originally turned it on because a friend of the family had a main role in it, but I absolutely LOVED the story line.
I also loved seeing Kathy Najimy, Tommy Davidson and Eric Idle as the three main ghosts, they make an outstanding team!The scariest part of the movie was probably at the beginning when Zachariah Kull is first introduced.
This movie is all a round funny, but every time Zachariah comes on I get shivers even after seeing the movie a few times.Kim Coates did an amazing job of keep you scared, and let me tell you he is anything but scary.I definitely recommend this movie, but beware little children will get scared easily..
Good for kids and Eric Idle fans.
This movie is good for what it is- a kid's Halloween film.
The child actors are acceptable and the adults seem to be having fun with their roles.
As always, Eric Idle (Coffin Ed) is a joy to watch, and he gets all the good lines.
The CGI isn't too impressive but the kids won't mind.
It's not terribly scary but I wouldn't let the under six set watch by themselves.
Fortunately, it's a movie that won't have adults tearing their hair out waiting for it to be over.
Is it memorable?
No, but it's a good ninety minutes of diversion.
Grown-up fans of the adult actors might enjoy it more..
It's a decent movie for the 7 -11 crowd.
Though not as good as the Halloweentown movies this was a decent shot at a Disney Halloween movie for the under 12 crowd.
Granted the special effects were not big budget it was just creepy enough and funny enough to keep a child entertained for an hour and a half and hey, when you are a tired parent that is really all you want.
I happen to like the girl who played Claire by the way..
Not that bad...good for the kids..
My kids, ages 6 and 3, found this movie to be very amusing and just a little bit on the scary side.
I found it witty and Kathy Najimi was really pretty cute in this part.
And Jumper was a hoot!
I do wish that Disney was still airing it during the year, especially in October at Halloween time, since the movie is set at Halloween.
I had taped it when it was on at one time, but the tape is pretty much worn out now.
It would be nice to find a DVD or VCR tape to purchase or rent for the kids.
It would make a great Halloween family video for those that don't go out Trick or Treating.
All in all, I found it worth the watch and so did my boys..
"You should watch it!" say my kids!.
The following reviews are from my kids, Christopher (9), Kathleen (7) and Nora (4):"You should watch Scream Team!
I liked the four ghosts and all the characters and how they try to help each other.
If it ever comes out on video you should get it.
I thought it was funny." -Christopher"It was a little scary, but I liked it!
It was funny and I liked the end.
There was a ghost who threw fireballs, his name was Zachariah.
Scream Team was a good movie.""It's really kind of scary and this guy throws fire.
I liked it." -NoraOkay, maybe I should worry about Nora and the fire thing.
But the movie was very good, very well written and a cut above most tv fare.
And I agree with Mary-Kate, having Melissa Hart's company behind it obviously helped propel it to a much higher standard.
This movie quickly became a Halloween favorite with our family.
Way to go, Disney, and the 'team' behinnd the 'scream'!
Hopefully, the DVD is forthcoming....
Excellent Family Fare.
This is an excellent family movie it is well worth your time.
Unless you are looking for lots of blood, guts, gore and scantily clad teeny boppers then you'll hate it.
Kat Dennings is great as Claire, in spite of the hair and costume, and Mark Rendall is just as good as her brother Ian.
Gather the kids pop the corn sit back and be entertained..
This was a great family film.
This was a great family film.
My whole family just loved it.
It is on a lighter side and that is what makes it good.
Just shows we don't need blood, nudity, and profanity to make a good film.
Disney could of easily made a follow-up film to this one.
It could of went on with the kids growing up in the town, dad getting remarried.
Also the kids could help the ghost track down some ghost that are missing, this could bring in some really funny twist to the movie with various well know actors as the other ghost.
this might change peoples mind to the movie, I mean the ones that didn't really like the movie.
I wonder if Disney will ever bring this movie out on DVD.
We have been trying to find it, so far without luck..
Supernaturally good.
Not many movies get my attention but this was one.
The Scream Team delivers the goods on the afterlife.
The cast and crew did a wonderful job the pace was fast but you were still able to follow along.
Eric Idle is a gifted and talented man, Tommy and Kathy are fantastic as well.
tell everyone they have to see this movie.
Disney movies are great family fun and for a long time they weren't good at all.
Movies like the Tower of Terror, and the Haunted Mansion.
Most critics although they have journalism degrees and such just don't know what people like and will always try to get us to agree with them.
So for a good time watch the Scream Team, and laugh your head off.
Because I know what's funny and this is funny..
Probably the best Disney movie they could make.
I may be the only Eric Idle fan who says this but he was fantastic in this movie!
It's one of those movies when you really think....about ghosts I mean.
Probably the best Disney movie they can make...I mean COME ON PEOPLE!
ERIC IDLE'S IN THIS MOVIE!
^_^ And it is fabulous!.
^_^ And it is fabulous!.
One of My Favorite Movies Ever.
I love this movie, I think that it is fun and lighthearted and perfect for the Halloween Season.
I LOVE every single Actor that they chose for the parts.
It's very funny and I love the plot line.
Usually I think TV movies can be badly acted but this one was great, everyone seemed real, true to life.
Over all I highly recommend it if you like fun family comedies, and Halloween movies that don't rely on blood and gore to keep you interested.
I love the way the family is portrayed in this movie, and the actors playing Clare, Ian and the Father really seemed to click.
You could tell that everyone who made this movie had fun doing it.
I think people who like Hocus Pocus will like this movie, it seems to run in the same vein...for me anyway..
One of Disney's best and scariest movies..yet!.
Okay so Disney's movies aren't exactly "scary", but this movie is probably the scariest...being compared to both Halloweentown 1, and 2...its great!
The cast if funny, and play the parts well.
Apparently, they knew what they were doing when they teamed up with Hartbreak Productions (yes, ran by the teenage witch herself, Melissa Joan Hart and mother, Paula Hart.
Well thats my 411 on this movie, check it out if ya want.
I know I am going to check it out all month.
After, all this is October!.
Very Cute Family Movie.
My kids loved the movie, although I felt it moved a bit slow.
If I put This movie and Halloweentown head to head, Halloweentown wins easily, but it is still worth watching during the Halloween season.
No gore, no sex, so everyone can watch..
Appropriate and entertaining kiddie horror.
In a small-town to bury their grandfather, a pair of kids find the town's celebration haunted by a dangerous local spirit and must band together with several ghosts helping spirits in the afterlife to stop him.This one turned out to be quite an entertaining and enjoyable children's style horror film.
One of the better aspects here is the fact that it tries to ditch the comedy in favor of more traditional horror-related themes and manages to get pretty good at incorporating them.
The scenes of the ghost in the underground pit, the first chase through the woods and the encounter in the burnt remains of the former house are all quite exciting encounters that are based around the spirit itself being something to be feared.
He's treated seriously by everyone and there's no jokes or gags built up around him, so it allows him to be a serious threat, judging from his actions is well-deserved and gives him a serious aura that's deserving in a horror film.
The few injections of comedy are handled by the bumbling ghosts and a few wise-cracks from the kids, which aren't terrible surprisingly and actually add a little bit to the movie's opening when they discover the secret world and how it all works out, and by mixed together with the strong plot that's pretty chilling and could serve as the basis for a more adult-themed effort by removing the ghostly helpers but still save everything else is a strong suit, and really all that's really wrong here is the story's hectic nature, containing a lot of ideas but not really allowing them to each get fleshed out so it feels all-over-the-place, but overall this one isn't that bad.Rated Unrated/PG: Mild Violence and children-in-jeopardy..
Umm...
You mean "The Scream Team"?.
Well, it wasn't too bad.
It could have been better, yeah, but Eric Idle, Kathy Najimy and Tommy Davidson keep it from being unbearable...
All in all, an okay Disney Original.
Maybe not quite as good as some of the others, but indefinitly better than a few...
I won't mention any names....
A Piece Of Paper You Crumble Up - You Shoot For The Basket & Miss.
Pass it up - this movie isnt as good as it looks in the trailer - wait it doesnt look good in the trailer.
My dad's friend, who's an editor of the film, showed me the film on a real, and it was horrible.
I normally looove disney movies, not to mention disney originals, but this one is uh, do i dare say, stupid?
Disney was uncreative and couldnt think of a script nor story for the deadline date.
Cast was horrible, and they should have got someone else to play Claire.
The movie is called The Scream Team by the way. |
tt0314734 | Sucker Punch | In the 1960s, a young woman nicknamed Babydoll (Emily Browning) is institutionalized by her abusive widowed stepfather (Gerard Plunkett) at the fictional Lennox House for the Mentally Insane in Brattleboro, Vermont, after she is blamed for her younger sister's death. The stepfather bribes Blue Jones (Oscar Isaac), an asylum orderly, into forging the signature of the asylum's psychiatrist, Dr. Vera Gorski (Carla Gugino), to have Babydoll lobotomized so she cannot inform the authorities of the true circumstances leading to her sister's death. During her admission to the institution, Babydoll takes note of four items that she would need to attempt an escape.
Babydoll slips into a fantasy world in which she is newly arrived in a brothel owned by Blue, whom she envisions as a mobster, where she and the other patients are sex slaves. In this realm, she befriends four other dancers – Amber (Jamie Chung), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens), Rocket (Jena Malone), and Rocket's sister and "star of the show", Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish). Dr. Gorski is envisioned as the girls' dance instructor. Blue informs Babydoll that her virginity will be sold to a client known as the High Roller (Jon Hamm), who is actually the doctor scheduled to perform the lobotomy. Gorski encourages Babydoll to perform an erotic dance, during which Babydoll further fantasizes she is in feudal Japan, meeting the Wise Man (Scott Glenn). After she expresses her desire to "escape", the Wise Man presents Babydoll with weapons and tells her that she would need to collect five items: a map, fire, a knife, a key, and a fifth, unrevealed item that would require "a deep sacrifice" but bring a "perfect victory". She then fights three samurai giants. As her fantasy ends, she finds herself back in the brothel, her dance having impressed Blue and other onlookers.
Babydoll convinces the four girls to join her in preparing an escape. She plans to use her dances as a distraction while the other girls obtain the necessary tools. During her dances, she imagines fantastic adventures that mirror the escape efforts. These adventures include infiltrating a bunker protected by steampunk-inspired World War I German soldiers to gain a map (mirrored by Sweet Pea copying a map of the brothel/institution from Blue's office); storming an Orc-infested castle to retrieve two fire-producing crystals from inside a baby dragon (mirrored by Amber stealing a lighter from the mayor's pocket); and boarding a train and fighting robotic guards to disarm a bomb (mirrored by Sweet Pea stealing a kitchen knife from the Cook's belt). During the last fantasy, Rocket sacrifices herself to save Sweet Pea and is killed when the bomb detonates, which is paralleled by the Cook fatally stabbing Rocket while she tries to protect her sister.
Blue overhears Blondie relaying Babydoll's plan to Gorski, confirming his suspicions that something is amiss. He has Sweet Pea locked in a utility closet and confronts the other girls backstage. He shoots Amber and Blondie and attempts to rape Babydoll, but she stabs him with the kitchen knife and steals his master key. Babydoll frees Sweet Pea and starts a fire to keep the orderlies occupied while they look for an exit. They escape into the courtyard, where they find a throng of men blocking their way. Babydoll deduces that the fifth item needed for the escape is in fact her own sacrifice. She concludes that this is actually Sweet Pea's story. Despite Sweet Pea's protests, she insists on revealing herself to the visitors, thus distracting them long enough to allow her friend to slip away unnoticed.
Back in the asylum, the surgeon has just performed Babydoll's lobotomy. Gorski notes earlier that the girl, during her short stay, stabbed an orderly, started a fire, and helped another girl escape the asylum. The surgeon is baffled by Babydoll's expression, and asks Gorski why she authorized the procedure. Gorski realizes that Blue has forged her signature and summons the police, who apprehend Blue as he attempts to sexually assault a lobotomized Babydoll. While being led away, Blue also incriminates the stepfather. Babydoll is shown smiling serenely, having apparently found freedom within her own inner "Paradise".
At a bus station, Sweet Pea is stopped by police as she tries to get on a bus to Fort Wayne, but she is rescued by the bus driver (the Wise Man), who misleads the police and allows her to board. Sweet Pea thanks the Driver, who tells her they have "a very long way to go".
During the end credits, Dr. Gorski and Blue perform "Love Is the Drug" in a glitzy musical sequence that includes all five female leads. | dark, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | A lot of obvious fake reviews for this movie.
No it's not the worst hood-movie made but it's hardly a good one and I don't believe that anyone who looked at this objectively could ever give it over a 6 tops, even at that I question your judgment.
Anyways.The lead guy in the first 15 minutes is the biggest piece of crap existed on the screen more or less, he drugs and kidnaps young runaway girls and sells them to a big time pimp.
That's his job, so when he get shot it's what any decent person would want to happen to him.However he doesn't die but instead he wakes up and finds God, which could have made a decent idea for a movie I guess if it was made by people who knew what they were doing which they don't.More or less every character in the movie are just plain horrible people that you only sit and wait and hope will happen something really bad to.I'm not gonna spoil anything but yeah despite having occasional moments where it appears to be going the right way it ends of being a very jumbled mess of a movie.Plot is slightly reminiscent of BLOODY STREETZ aka BLOODY CRISIS but that movie is a masterpiece in comparison with this, and that movie is not a masterpiece however a far better choice to watch than this..
AWFUL AWFUL MOVIE!.
It's just a bad film.Not as bad as R.I.C.C.O. but bad.It got me hooked at the beginging then totally lost me after that.The acting was way off then on then going way way way off.Do not see this movie at all costs,TRUST ME WITH ALL MY HEART!!!!The directors who are brothers are not the next HUGHES BROTHERS,who made really great films like DEAD PRESIDENTS,FROM HELL,AMERICAN PIMP,and MENACE II SOCIETY.The only person who made me watch this was the acting of Paris Campbell,who will be a great actor one day if he makes better films than this.Christina Caparoula also did a nice job for what she got.I hope THE FITTEST is 10 times better than this piece of crap!.
Raw, Brutal, & Hilarious.
For a "gansta" genre film, this was so much more enjoyable than the usual empty fare.
This movie is alternately shocking and goofy, the almost cartoony humor setting you up again and again for a jab to the nose of brutality.
The characters aren't quite realistic and not quite archetypal, either, giving the film the feeling of a fable.
The story of Mike's attempt to redeem himself from a life of depravity was compelling, to me, and although the dialog was at times pretty rough around the edges, Paris Campbell deftly handles the material.
His performance carries the film, to be sure, with touches of subtlety that make him sympathetic and human.
The Christ imagery was inventive, and suggested to me that perhaps the whole film was actually an analogy for his inner struggle.
The use of color really added to the sense of watching a graphic novel or comic book, and the Beatnuts' soundtrack was electric, driving the energy of the film forward from scene to scene and accenting both the fun and the sharp edges of the movie.
All in all, I was impressed by Sucker Punch, even if it is rough around the edges in several places..
Real and Spiritual.
I loved this movie.
The cover image makes it look like a mediocre gangster film, but it's really great.
Here's what I like about it: First of all, the acting was really good.
Paris Campbell, who plays the main character (Mike Sullivan), is a really really great actor.
I have no idea why he isn't famous yet.
And he portrays a complex character who is tortured by his own past sins, and is trying to do the right thing.
He is caught up in a world where there are no good guys, and he is trying to save a prostitute who has no interest in his good will.
Mike is definitely a Christ figure in the film, and the religious metaphor is subtle but clear.
I like the fact that in the end, good intentions do not necessarily mean a happy ending, and sometimes there are no good choices.
This is a dark film, so if you're looking for a cookie cutter, predictable action film, this isn't the movie for you.
But if you want to see an interesting, real film that has a spiritual side, you should check out Sucker Punch..
THE PASSION OF MIKE.
J.McGee completely missed the boat on SUCKERPUNCH.
Maybe the point would have been clearly to him if it were spoon fed to him by having Mike crucified on a cross at the end.
I've seen tons of Urban films over the years that touch on the plight of the people that live in the inner city but very few have a soul or characters that I care about.
This is one of the few films like MENACE TO SOCIETY that has as its lead a very bad and despicable character trying to seek redemption for the sins he has committed in life.
SUCKERPUNCH's Mike Sullivan doesn't try to physically run from the horrors of the inner city, he instead goes back into it hoping to cleans it...and he ends up making the ultimate sacrifice for it, just as Jesus did two thousand years ago.
I highly recommend this film to anyone interested in seeing a very talented group of actors and filmmakers delivers a film that takes you on a harsh journey without ap.
Ghetto action and a story of hopeless effort to escape.
This movie has a lot of terrible characters, the story is dark and the comedy even darker.
The setting is urban ghetto NYC and the music is awesome.
Really cool songs.
The story is pretty disturbing...the main character is a very bad thug, but then is inspired to get out of his situation, which leads to a series of things happening to him.
He is a great actor.
And the Russian thug is a terrifying actor.
The story makes you question what you can do about your situation in life.
I liked it-didn't love it-but am amazed that this is an independent movie and not made by a studio, considering how intense and action-packed it is..
Not That Bad. I thought it was a pretty decent low budget crime flick.
The filmmakers did some things not normally seen in movies with the characters.
There are a lot worse movies out there.
Paris Campbell was the highlight.
This movie prompted my interest to see other projects he has been in.
His performance in Ghetto Dawg 2 (very stupid name) was outstanding.
It was a better film.
Will Sierra, the pimp, also showed a lot of talent.
Considering the crap that mainstream Hollywood is making these days, I have found myself more and more interested in watching lower budget indy films.
And if you are a hiphop fan, some classic artists played supporting roles - Greg nice, The Beatnuts & Leaders Of The New School..
Wicked movie!!.
I thought this movie was amazing!
It's dark because it's real.
The acting is phenomenal, along with the direction.
I have to comment on the religious junk everyone else seems to know so much about..
it's art.
It's not for you to tell everyone what the undertones or meaning of the Christianity portion meant, that is for the viewer to determine.
If you see Mike's character as a Jesus like savior then that's what you see.
I saw something much different, along with several others I've shown.
In fact, the religious fallout, in my opinion, is what makes this a comedy/drama.
And that is what makes this a must watch for anyone who appreciates the plight of poverty in our American ghettos. |
tt0363908 | Pride | It is 1974 and life is not easy for a black male to find employment, even college-educated Jim Ellis (Terrence Howard). While struggling to find anything better, Jim, a former competitive swimmer, is working on the decrepit Marcus Foster Recreation Center operated by the Philadelphia Department of Recreation. The center includes a dilapidated swimming pool, which Ellis rehabilitates. Ellis's presence and activities cause friction with a bitter, overprotective janitor named Elston (Bernie Mac). One day, Jim invites a group of black teens who have just been thrown off the basketball court in the Center's yard in for a swim. Andre (Kevin Phillips), Hakim (Nate Parker), Reggie (Evan Ross), Puddin’ Head (Brandon Fobbs), and Walt (Alphonso McAuley) prove to be fairly capable swimmers and with a few pointers, could become great swimmers. With some help from Elston, Jim decides to try to save the swimming pool by starting the city's first all African-American swim team, the P.D.R. team (Pride, Determination, Resilience). When the team acquires Willie (Regine Nehy), a female swimmer more talented than any of the boys, the prospects of competing against much more experienced white teams begin to improve. Jim also develops a romantic interest in a beautiful city councilor (Kimberly Elise), Hakim's sister and guardian. Throughout their struggles in and out of the swimming pool, Jim and Elston encourage and mentor the kids, helping them not only to become successful at swimming but also in their struggles against prejudice, crime, and poverty. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The DVD 'making of' extra is even better than the movie!.
'Pride' is a small, innocuous movie that tells a story much like animated 'The Lion King', but using real lions and computer animation of animal faces to make it appear that they really are talking.
We see lots of shots of lion cubs romping and running through the grass, and exquisite close-ups of mature lions eating or reposing, and many times staring just a few inches away from the lens of the camera.
The DVD extras tell a very interesting story, a story I found more interesting than the one told in the movie.
However, I suspect that most children will really enjoy a movie where the animals appear to be really speaking.STOP reading if you want to discover it fresh for yourself, but the following comments only address how the movie was filmed, NOT the actual story.
Lions from two sources were used.
First, tame lions in a preserve were filmed for many stock shots of running, jumping, crossing water on a fallen tree, things like that.
Enticed with large pieces of meat at the end of a pole, the lions were very cooperative.More inventive was the use of a 'boulder cam', a radio-controlled camera inside an enclosure shaped like a boulder, but on wheels.
Controlled from a nearby truck, it could, and did, follow the lions into hunting and feeding sessions, into the midst of their den, even climbing large rock formations, for a total of 300 days.
After initial curiosity, the lions accepted this 'boulder on wheels' as a part of their environment.The extras also showed how computer techniques were used to make the lions change expressions and appear to speak..
Funny, exciting, charming plus much more!.
This is a really good film.
It has a cast of Kate Winslet as Suki (one of the cubs) Rupert Graves as Linus (another cub), Martin Freeman as Fleck (the last cub, who's handsome but annoying), Helen Mirren as Macheeba (Linus'es and Suki's mum) plus more!
This film's setting is really beautiful and the real lions - were they tame or not tame?
I expect they were made tame for the picture, or else they were just machinery, which I don't think is true.This film has a good plot and storyline.
It has the first half of the film as Linus, Suki and Fleck cubs and the second half of them as grown-ups.The jokes are absolutely TOP.
My favourite joke (Don't worry, no spoilers) is when Macheeba goes "We're like the stars." Linus says, "What we come out at night?" "We're pretty but don't do anything?" asks Suki.
"No," goes Fleck.
"Everyone points at us."So watch this lovely film!!
Enjoy!
:) ;) :()P.S Everyone who doesn't like this film must have been very grumpy when they watched it and I think they should watch it again..
An addition to your family library...
with "Pride".
Not since "Born Free" has a movie given such breadth, such tension and hope.We are privileged to following the breathless perils of Suki and Linus, a precocious pair of lion cubs as they continually get in trouble with every conceivable danger surrounding them- they encounter enough adventures to fuel a series!
As Suki grows, children learn to understand the process of their own development and the courage and curse of their own individuality.Seamless digital compositing provides a fascinating portrayal that is fun and engaging for adults, and yet compelling and educational for children.Boasting the vocal talents of Britain's finest personalities coupled with the majestic sweep of the African savanna, "Pride" will easily become a classic that parents will want to use to introduce their children to the beauty and drama of the wilder side of nature..
a lion named Suki refuses to hunt because she abhors killing.
First off, this movie has a fantastic voice cast, including John Hurt, Kate Winslet, and Robbie Coltrane.
And the actors, all real lions (with some facial expressions added via computer graphics) are excellent.
The story is also a good one.
Suki (voiced by Kate Winslet) is shunned out of her pride for refusing to contribute to their food supply by hunting.
She is disgusted by killing.
Other subplots include fighting between the pride and "the wanderers," the "bad guys" of the film who refuse to live with the pride, and instead reside in a barren area of the savanna.
I am most impressed with the acting of the lions, especially the cubs.
I would imagine that getting lions to behave as desired is not an easy task.I liked that this animal film wasn't all cuteness and light like some others, it had it's edgy moments, with the lions displaying their inate fierceness.Overall, an enjoyable experience, and one I highly recommend..
Well it wasn't bad but it wasn't extremely well either.
Well I can't deny I like the big cats.
That's one of the things that attracted me in this movie.
The talking animals aren't annoying in the way of "Damn that is so fake".
It looks somewhat natural in someway, it is very well computer edited.
Still there are some flaws in the way they move and some scenes that did look pretty fake.
Still it isn't annoying.
It's a pretty good story and it's pretty realistic in the way how lions live in the real world.
The biggest ledge for most people will be the talking lions part.
If you accept that and accept the minor flaws: you will probably like this story.It's family compatible so round up your kids and have good time..
'Pride' Deserves to Be Watched and Owned.
I think 'Pride' should be part of everyone' DVD collections because the interaction between the cocky Suki (Kate Winslet), her less adventurous brother Linus (Rupert Graves), and the orphaned Fleck (Martin Freeman) when they fight over who gets nursed by Macheeba (Helen Mirren) first is hilarious.
Not so hilarious is the disapproval over Suki's infatuation with Dark (Sean Bean), the patriarch of the scrublands pride, as Dark and Harry (John Hurt) think they can take what James (Robbie Coltrane) and Eddie (Jim Broadbent) want to keep.
I like that Dark is not completely cold-hearted, as he admits that Harry is a hell of a hunting partner.
The deal is, Dark ends up with all the scrublands lionesses, not Harry, and he also literally makes every scene he's in his own.
Suki's tantrum before she elopes with Dark minor spoiler) underscores that she has to experience life on her own to fully appreciate her family.
Fleck came across as a big sissy, though, which makes Linus look more macho.
Lush (Kwame Kwei-Armah) didn't really seem to fit in so easily, and Kwei-Armah's voice delivery sounded last-minute as well.
Big one-ups to the older actors for some amazing screen chemistry..
It could have been perfect!.
But what was with the lazy visual effects?
It was so sad to see in this day and age, the people in charge of CGI and visuals or whatever use such painful cut and paste methods that would have even been shameful to see in a film from 50 years ago!
Nevertheless the all star cast including; Kate Winslet, Sean Bean, Jim Broadbent, Rupert Graves and Helen Mirren lend their talents in voice-work to this wonderful storytelling of the lives of lions and the animals they hunt/and are hunted by in the animal kingdom.
Suki (Winslet) and Linus (Graves) are both sibling cubs living in the Pride under the careful watch of their mother Macheba (Mirren), one day while playing, the cubs decide to venture out to a part of the Pride that is forbidden and there Suki spots a wild lion called Dark (Bean), whom she instantly falls in love with.
The trouble is, he's not a part of their Pride nor does anybody know anything about these wild pack of lions other than the fact that they are dangerous and to be avoided.
This does nothing to deter Suki though and her love turns her into a full fledged rebellious vegetarian (yes, you heard right "VEGETARIAN") lioness.
Years pass by and she grows into a beautiful teen lioness, she rejects all her potential suitors and ventures out of the Pride one her own after a fight with her mother.
While in the wild, she crosses paths with the now much older but still suave Dark once more, still in love with him, they mate and she bears his cubs only to find out, that Dark is just like the animal version of the typical human male.
LOL!
He deserts her and she is left to care for her cubs alone.
You can only imagine what happens to her and her cubs in the wild.
Use your imagination.
That said, there are a lot of sub-plots and plot twists which makes for a quite interesting animated film.
It was a two-part mini series when I saw it on telly and I have since bought the DVD.
It's worth a watch!
Kate Winslet continues to dazzle us with her rare vocal talents!
She breaks your heart, even in animation. |
tt0023374 | Rasputin and the Empress | The highly fictionalized story takes place in the Russian Empire during the last years of the reign of Czar Nicholas II (Ralph Morgan) and the Czarina Alexandra (Ethel Barrymore). Reform-minded Prince Paul (John Barrymore) has long been concerned about the plight of the common people and knows a revolution is brewing. Prince Alexei, heir to the throne, is loved by the people but has hemophilia, and a slight fall turns out to be life-threatening. When royal physician Dr. Remezov (Edward Arnold) is powerless to stop the boy's bleeding, Princess Natasha (Diana Wynyard), Alexandra's lady-in-waiting and Paul's fiancee, recommends Rasputin (Lionel Barrymore) as a healer. He convinces the frantic Empress that he has been sent by God to cure the child. Left alone with Alexei, he hypnotizes the boy and relieves his agony but also gradually makes Alexei a slave to his will.
With the influence he now wields over the relieved parents, Rasputin begins replacing those loyal to them with his own men. He is greatly aided when the head of the secret police (Henry Kolker), fearful of losing his job over his failure to prevent the assassination of a nobleman close to the Czar, turns to him for help. With police dossiers at his disposal, Rasputin is able to use blackmail to increase his power even further.
Prince Paul fears that Rasputin's actions will bring about the downfall of the empire. However, even Natasha believes in Rasputin. She warns him that Paul is going to try to kill him. Paul shoots him, but Rasputin is unharmed: he has taken the precaution of wearing a hidden metal breastplate. Nicholas forces Paul to resign his position when he admits he tried to assassinate the man.
When Germany issues an ultimatum demanding that Russia cease mobilizing its army over the crisis between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, Nicholas and his advisers are divided. Rasputin convinces him to reject the ultimatum, leading to World War I.
Finally, Rasputin begins to make subtle advances on Grand Duchess Maria (Jean Parker), Alexandra's daughter. When Natasha finds out, she becomes furious and shouts that she will go to the Empress. Rasputin overpowers her and puts her in a deep trance. The Empress fortuitously enters the room at that moment, enabling Natasha to recover her wits and tell what she saw. When he is unable to shake Alexandra's faith in Natasha, Rasputin boasts of how he is now effectively Czar. In despair, the Empress sends for Paul. He assures her that he knows what to do.
At a big party where Rasputin is guest of honor, he recognizes the servant who has been bringing him his favorite traditional Tobolsk cakes all night; he used to work for Paul. Immediately suspicious, Rasputin has the house searched. They find Paul and Dr. Remezov. Rasputin is eager to dispatch his most implacable enemy himself; he takes Paul into the cellar at gunpoint. Once they are alone, Paul taunts Rasputin, telling him the cakes were filled with poison. He then leaps at Rasputin and beats him into unconsciousness. However, Rasputin refuses to die. Covered with blood, he rises and walks toward Paul, shouting that if he dies, Russia will die. Paul finally drags him out into the snow and throws him into the river to drown.
Immediately, Alexei is freed from his hypnotic trance and hugs his mother. Nicholas is forced to exile Paul, as Rasputin's minions are still in power. However, the old charlatan's last prophecy comes true, as the Czar is overthrown and shot with his entire family by the Bolsheviks. | murder | train | wikipedia | Names have been changed (and that didn't prevent MGM from law suits) and a lot of the information we now know about this period of Russian history - was not known in 1932.As other people have commented about this being the only film that Ethel, John, and Lionel Barrymore appeared together, this movie doesn't show why the Barrymores have the reputation that they have.
Lionel Barrymore, wearing one of the phoniest fake beards, tries to capture the charisma and sense of control that Rasputin had over Czarina Alexandra and the Czarevitch.
When her only son seems to be close to possible death, she doesn't seem all that bothered.C. Henry Gordon is a great Grand Duke Igor, Ralph Morgan is a convincing Czar Nicholas II, but they don't appear that frequently.
Barrymore's portrayal of Rasputin plays this up, plus making claims that he will be Russia.
He seems almost like Charles Manson at times in the way he can make someone, especially the Czarevitch, behave like they are totally different people compared to the way they acted before meeting Rasputin.It is best to watch this movie as just that - a fictional representation of various accounts of what happened in the royal court of Russia in its final days.
The writers included Charles MacArthur, Ben Hecht, Robert Sherwood, Mercedes de Acosta, and Lenore Coffee - some of the best writers of the period.It's worth a view - don't expect historical accuracy, but it is an interesting film that tries to show a much different world than what Americans would have known..
John is fine and properly earnest as Prince Chegodieff, although his performance does seem a bit old-fashioned next to Lionel's.
Later, there is a medley of martial music, accompanied by historical footage, as Russia mobilizes for The Great War. Here we hear "God Save the Tsar", a tune which Mikhail Glinka featured in his opera, "A Life for the Tsar", but which was routinely banned during Soviet performances.
This film is completely inaccurate in its portrayal of actual events in Russian history.
There is Ethel Barrymore looking every inch the empress and giving a convincing portrayal of a woman concerned for the welfare of her very ill son - and I would expect that.
What I didn't expect is how weird it would be to watch a film in which John Barrymore is the shining hero and Lionel Barrymore is a truly diabolical villain, and each are spectacularly convincing in their portrayals.
However, none can explain what happened at the end of his life - how he was poisoned, bludgeoned, shot, and finally thrown into an icy river and still managed to cling to life for awhile.Although Tsar Nicholas is accurately portrayed as a rather weak willed man and the Romanov marriage is also accurately portrayed as one of the few royal arranged marriages that also turned out to be a love match, there is a mischaracterization of the Tsar as being progressive and wanting a Duma only to have Rasputin defeat that plan.
This sets up one of the great ironic struggles in the film - that of aristocrat Prince Paul Chegodieff (John Barrymore) wanting more for the peasants in the way of both bread and democracy, and that of peasant mystic Rasputin (Lionel Barrymore) saying that it was God's will that the peasants were poor and powerless.
Paul wants to save Russia, Rasputin wants to rule it.Another piece of fiction shown in the movie for dramatic measure are the public proclamations about the illness of Tsaravich Alexai, the heir to the Russian throne.
In fact one of the things that turned the Russian people against the royal family - besides the fact that they were starving during WWI - was that the people assumed that Rasputin's hold over the empress was because they were lovers.
Ironically hiding the truth and leaving Rasputin's relationship to the empress unexplained also led to exactly that.Watch this one for the high production values and compelling performances by the members of Hollywood's royal family during its golden age, but as for a Russian history lesson, look elsewhere..
The only film with all three Barrymores together and it's a good film, however, the direction is very poorly done, especially the ending scene.Other than that, Lionel Barrymore portrays an excellent Rasputin and Ethel Barrymore is wonderful as the Empress Alexandra Fyodorovna.
John Barrymore is great as Prince Paul, the assassin of Rasputin (in real life, it was Prince Yussupov who assassinated Rasputin).This is a good film, but if you want a better interpretation of Rasputin's "reign," rent the 1996 HBO version with Alan Rickman or the 1971 movie, "Nicholas and Alexandra.".
The Three Bs. The only film featuring all three Barrymores preserves an acting style that was once considered top-line and now looks rather over-emphatic.
While this film may be of interest to film purists because of the three Barrymores together for the only time, the movie is lousy history.
Rasputin and the Empress (1932) *** (out of 4) Lionel, John and Ethel Barrymore star in this film, which was the only one that all three legends appeared in together.
After her son is near death, Czarina Alexandria (Ethel) lets the monk Rasputin (Lionel) pray with her son who eventually heals and the monk gives credit to God. Saving her son, the monk soon finds himself gaining power inside the government but this doesn't sit well with Prince Chegodieff (John) who will stop at nothing to prove the monk is mad.
Apparently MGM was sued due to how inaccurate the story is here so if you want a history lesson you should go read a book but if you want to see all three Barrymore's together then this is the only film out there that will suit you.
Lionel actually goes way over the top, which is something you'd expect from John but he actually manages to be quite calm and cool throughout the film.
John certainly gives the best performance but it's Lionel who steals the film with his fake beard and over the top antics.
Chiefly of interest because it's the only film that Ethel, John and Lionel Barrymore made together.
This is a reasonably decent movie, well acted (particularly by Lionel, who practically chews the scenery as Rasputin) and the sets and costumes are fairly nice.
But the main selling point is that this is the only time the three Barrymores -Ethel, John and Lionel did a movie together.
A prince plots to kill the "mad monk" Rasputin for the good of the czar, the czarina and Russia.In something of a minor epic, this film tells of the rise and fall of Rasputin, the "mad monk".
If you are vaguely familiar with the story of Rasputin, this film should feel like you've seen it before (in a good way).Everything about the film is quite good, from the acting to the costumes and beyond.
Plot in a Nutshell: Russian Prince Chegodieff (John Barrymore) tries to stop the evil Rasputin (Lionel Barrymore) from exerting his influence over Czarina Alexandra (Ethel Barrymore).Why I rated it a '7': That's a lot of Barrymore!
This is an interesting tale, showing how an unknown/outsider was able to insert himself into the lives of the Russian royal family and influence them in ways one wouldn't think possible.
Some reviewers have complained that "Rasputin" is not always true to history (in some ways, it's not), but what this tells me is that Hollywood apparently has been making historically inaccurate films for perhaps longer than anyone thought.
Wow - a chance to see the three Barrymores together.Kind of underwhelming."Rasputin and the Empress" is the amazingly inaccurate story of Rasputin and his influence on the royal family.
Lionel is the man himself, John is the man who wants him dead, Prince Chegodieff, and Ethel is the Empress.This film cost MGM a lot of money in lawsuits even though the names were changed to protect the guilty.
The Yusupov family made quite a bit of money thanks to their portrayal in this film, as Prince Chegodieff and Natasha.The movie doesn't hold up for reasons beyond its plot.
Ethel, who was very good as a character actress in films, here does the sort of acting popular in the day, melodramatic and with a quivering voice.
She just may not have been used to film acting, I don't know.Lionel played Rasputin and he was good, except that his Rasputin is apparently a rapist as well as a madman.
He really should have played Rasputin, and this film would have gone up a level or two.At any rate, seeing the three Barrymores together was a big bust.
The first family of theatre the Barrymores get together in this historically inaccurate depiction of the Romanovs in free fall and the man that help facilitate the end of an empire, Rasputin.
It is the only time the three siblings appear in a film together and all three performances appear to be wanting.The son and heir to Czar Nicholas of Russia is afflicted with a disease (hemophilia) that confounds the royal physicians.
The marquee value of John, Lionel and Ethel Barrymore may well put people inside the theater but unfortunately it is their performances that will move them just as fast to the exit.
Cinematographer William Daniels and set director Cedric Gibbons and crew give the film a regal look of pomp and ceremony but the family Barrymore en masse remains lost if luckier than the Romanovs.
The Royal Family of Broadway - John Barrymore, Ethel Barrymore, and Lionel Barrymore - come together at MGM, for their one and only feature film together.
Having them play out the epoch final years of the Russian Royal Family (The House of Romanov) seems an appropriately lofty assignment.
It's hardly worth watching for the hysterics, and certainly isn't for the history.Taking moustache-twirling to a new low, Lionel takes advantage of brother John's dissipated state and sister Ethel being new to sound films, to steal the picture.
William Daniels photographs the sets nicely.**** Rasputin and the Empress (12/23/32) Richard Boleslawski ~ Lionel Barrymore, Ethel Barrymore, John Barrymore, Diana Wynyard.
In Margot Peters excellent book The House of Barrymore she characterized what MGM had to deal with in the only time the three Barrymore siblings were in a film together, John on drink, Lionel on drugs, and Ethel on her high horse.
For Ethel however this was her first venture into sound films and she was one who took the title of First Lady of the American Theater quite seriously with all the royal prerogatives of same.Somehow this retelling of the last days of the Romanovs did get made and in it Lionel Barrymore who had the most colorful part of the film, takes the acting honors.
Ethel is properly regal and John is the noble prince who eventually does something about the curse over the Romanovs, though too late.Rasputin was bad enough in history though here the writers went a bit overboard.
There's no accusation against him of having designs on the royal princesses, yet we see Lionel casting a lascivious eye on the Princess Anastasia.Though the name was changed for the film, the real assassin of Rasputin, Prince Felix Yousapov did sue MGM and collect a bundle from them.
Personally I think he robbed the lion studio because if anything John Barrymore's portrayal was far more noble than Yousapov was in real life.
To add insult to injury though another guy with the name of Chegodieff which was John's name in the film also sued MGM and claimed he was defamed and won.The biggest historical error I find though was the fact that Rasputin was urging Tsar Nicholas to enter World War I.
Speaking of the Tsar, he's played here as the nebbish he was in real life by Ralph Morgan.For reasons I don't understand the film did not end with Rasputin's demise.
There is some mention of revolution in the air, but nothing in the story suggests what will take place.Rasputin and the Empress is bad history and mediocre drama.
However, it strays far from actual events and abridges the period between the outbreak of the Great War and the killing of the royal family.The three Barrymores -- Lionel, Ethel and John -- are fine as Rasputin, the Empress and Prince Paul, a fictional character who assassinates Rasputin (the real assassin was Prince Feliks Yusupov, who was distressed by the damage that Rasputin was doing to the public image of the royal family).The film correctly shows how Rasputin was interfering with the government and the execution of the Great War. But we don't actually see any sign of the February and October revolutions and the abdication of the czar.
All of these events happen so suddenly in the film that a casual viewer would lose sense of the chronology.Moreover, the direction is poor and many scenes last too long, making the movie drag..
Lionel Barrymore was a very good actor, but for reasons I will explain his performance was way overwrought and overdone.
Even so the actual facts of the death of Rasputin were known and to my mind the truth was far more dramatic than the way this movie portrayed Rasputin's killing.
Even then they knew that The Empress never did figure out what a scoundrel Rasputin was, whereas in the movie she finally sees through him and calls on John Barrymore to save the throne by getting rid of him.
I guess MGM wanted Ethel and John Barrymore to seem heroic.
Knowing what we know now just makes Lionel's performance of Rasputin seem completely off the mark and throws the whole movie out of whack..
As previously noted in other reviews, this movie has plenty of historical errors (Nicholas II wanted a Duma, Rasputin favored Russia's entry into World War I, the Tsarevich's family nickname and on and on).
As Robert Wuhl says, remember that movies are often "based on a true story." However, the value of the film is that is a good example of acting, directing and writing in the 1930s.
"Rasputin and the Empress" belongs in any good collection of movies for three reasons.
First, it is the only movie with all three siblings of the great stage and screen family of Barrymore.
Second, it is a reasonable portrayal, with facts and fiction, of the last years of the Russian czars and the infamous Rasputin.
Ethel Barrymore plays the Czarina Alexandra, wife of Czar Nicholas II, ruler of Russia.
John Barrymore plays a fictitious character, Prince Chegodleff.
He plays the diabolical Grigori Rasputin, the "mad monk" who mesmerized the Romanov family their last three years.
The detailed history of the time and events covered by this film makes fascinating reading.
The film follows closely the events of the Romanovs and Rasputin from 1914 to1918.
She was a niece of Czar Nicholas, and the wife of Prince Felix Yusupov, who is the person who killed Rasputin.
But the princess still took issue with the fictitious character that John Barrymore plays.
But in the end it shows Barrymore's character dragging Rasputin's body to the river and pushing him under the ice.
The film covers less than four years in time, and mostly focuses on the Romanov family and Rasputin.
I have never seen a Barrymore silent film (When everyone says he was at his best), but I have seen most of his talkies, and he is always good.
Lionel's Rasputin is way over the top and Ethel, even though it was supposed to be history, essentially plays the same kind of character we saw in "Kind Lady", and the "Portrait of Jenny".
The ceremony is interrupted by news of Prince Paul Chegodieff (John Barrymore) that Sergei, the czar's uncle and brother of Grand Duke Igor (C.
Enter Grigory Rasputin (Lionel Barrymore), not a priest but a hypnotist and mystic.
The film is inaccurate here, as Rasputin in real life urged Nicholas not to go to war in 1914.
In the movie, Rasputin loses the favor of the czarina during the war, a situation that never happened as she backed him to the end.
In the film Rasputin has maintained his favor with Czar Nicholas, who eventually dismisses his rival Chegodieff from his military rank.
Although the film is fairly accurate about the monk's demise, note that Rasputin's actual death also came as a result of several gunshot wounds.
In the beginning film credits, the cast listing claims that Chegodieff, Natasha, Grand Duke Igor, and Doctor Remezov are fictional characters, but historians will recognize Chegodieff as Prince Feliks Yusupov (one of Rasputin's assassins), Natasha as Princess Irina (Yusupov's wife), and Grand Duke Igor as Grand Duke Nicholas (not the same man as the czar).
"Rasputin and the Empress" is the only film that features together the three Barrymores: Lionel, Ethyl, and John.
Lionel, although a decade older than Rasputin when the mystic flourished, captures the coarseness of the infamous and enigmatic character, and his impact in Russia's royal court.
As far as how accurate it is, I really wonder if Rasputin is really the person Lionel Barrymore plays.
There is no doubt Lionel is the meaty role here and this might be his best role.The film does present the fact accurately that Rasputin is considered dangerous at the end so he is poisoned.Kind of surprised to hear the Russian President advocating a British or American style of government for Russia.
Watch 1971's "Nicholas and Alexandra", watch the cable TV movie with Alan Rickman as Rasputin, watch the silent film about the last Czar--Don't watch this clunker.
Nicholas, the most watchable actor of all in this atrocity, is hardly seen on screen.Gross, gross re-write of history on several key points and by the film's end I wanted to burn all the copies of this film because of "Prince Paul" and his gal pal....OH, the horror, the horror.The death scenes both of Rasputin and Nicholas and his family is beyond bad..
Too many scenes of the monk (Lionel Barrymore) hypnotizing everyone and everything in sight. |
tt0102250 | L.A. Story | Harris K. Telemacher (Steve Martin) is a TV meteorologist living in Los Angeles. He is in a dead-end relationship with his social-climbing girlfriend Trudi (Marilu Henner). He wants to find some meaning and magic in his life, having grown increasingly weary of what he sees as the rather shallow and superficial city of LA.
At a luncheon with a group of friends, he meets Sara (Victoria Tennant), a journalist from London, with whom he immediately becomes infatuated.
Driving home that night, his car breaks down on the freeway. He notices that a freeway traffic condition sign seems to be displaying messages intended solely for him. It offers him cryptic advice on his love life throughout the movie.
He begins to fall for Sara, but she is conflicted because she has pledged to reconcile with her ex-husband, Roland (Richard E. Grant). Feeling that a relationship with Sara is unlikely, Harris begins dating SanDeE* (Sarah Jessica Parker), a ditzy aspiring spokesmodel, whom he meets at a clothing store. After his first date with her, Harris discovers that Trudi has been cheating on him for three years with his agent. The discovery leads him to pursue his romantic interest in Sara. This is complicated by his new relationship with SanDeE* and by Sara's feeling of obligation to Roland.
By the conclusion, he has successfully wooed Sara – with some encouragement and advice from the sign. | psychedelic, magical realism, satire, romantic | train | wikipedia | LA STORY is one of those films that leaves you feeling like maybe you shouldn't have enjoyed the movie as much as you did.
Yet I don't think there is anyone out there that wouldn't ultimately enjoy this fantasy.Steve Martin is in top form (maybe the last decent film he did before BOWFINGER), and the wacky charm throughout makes the comedy fresh and exciting.
This is a movie for Steve Martin fans, because his unique, sensitive, accessible brand of humor and (more importantly) of life is apparent throughout..
The script is fabulous, and the soundtrack featuring the music of Enya is the perfect counterpoint to this wonderfully wicked lampoon of Southern California culture.The humor is much more intelligent than early Steve Martin features such as "The Jerk", but it isn't snobbish.
Whether it's watching Martin roller-skate through a museum of Old Masters, seeing a restaurant full of jaded Californians casually ride out a minor earthquake as their tables gracefully vibrate across the room, or the absurdity of a freeway sign giving out cryptic personal messages that change the course of the principal character's lives, the movie simply works.Steve Martin is at his best here, equal to his wonderful performance in "Roxanne".
I've read that this movie was Steve Martin's homage to a city he loves.
The whole movie has been crafted with the utmost care and delight - a feeling that is conveyed so well to the viewer.I've watched this film many many times and as yet have been utterly unable to find a single mistake, wrongly placed moment, person or prop anywhere.
This film is in many ways the best work Steve Martin has ever done.
Telemacher, a funny weatherman who's in a relationship with Trudi (Marilu Henner) but falls for a British journalist Sara McDowel (Victoria Tennant).He also meets an energetic young woman SanDeE (Sarah Jessica Parker) on the way.He gets some important messages from a freeway sign like that the weather will change his life in two ways.L.A. Story (1991) is a great romantic fantasy comedy from Mick Jackson.It's written by Steve Martin, who also gives an amazing performance in the lead.This 59 year old comedian has made us laughed in many hilarious movies in the past.Hopefully he still will do so in the future.Let's see how he can fill the shoes of Peter Sellers in the upcoming Pink Panther movie.Other actors do a great job as well.Sarah Jessica Parker can be seen there before she was a huge star.This year she stopped working in Sex and the City after six years.You can also see, more or less, people like Richard E.
Grant, Iman, Rick Moranis, Chevy Chase, Kevin Pollak, Patrick Stewart and Woody Harrelson.L.A. Story is a declaration of love to Los Angeles like Woody Allen has made many to New York.This movie is full of extremely funny scenes.I found myself laughing many times watching this movie.Isn't that what makes a good comedy?.
He has a wasted relationship with his obnoxious girlfriend Trudi (Marilu Henner) and he feel that he lives a boring life.When Harris meets the Londoner journalist Sara McDowell (Victoria Tennant), who has come to LA to write en article for the London Times, in a brunch party with her ex-husband Roland Mackey (Richard E.
However a freeway signpost helps Harry to woo Sara."L.A. Story" is a romantic comedy that is still delightful and witty after so many years from the release.
Steve Martin stands for comedy, and this movie is filled with jokes; some very funny others pretty stupid.
All of the movie's funniest gags are L.A. in-jokes (they're just surreal to outsiders): the angst-ridden 4-way stop, the smog, shrugging off earthquakes, the vapid lifestyles - these help the otherwise absurd freeway shootout and socially acceptable muggings work as comedy.The movie functions pretty well as a romantic comedy/fantasy between Steve Martin and Vitoria Tennant, but it works a lot better when Martin see free-spirited (and charming as all get out) Sarah Jessica Parker).But it works best as Martin's snide valentine to the culture.7/10.
"L.A. Story" also contains some brilliant performances from it's cast, and for me Sarah Jessica Parker steals the movie as the adorable SaNdEe*.
Seeing it now, in 2002, a more adult me enjoys the upbeat comedic editorial on life and romance in Los Angeles that stands as a novel tribute to Woody Allen and his New York.If you don't watch closely, much of the fun will be missed.
Steve Martin employs a masterful understanding of language, storytelling, and magic in this modern fairy tale that follows a confused weather man through several romantic relationships and finally into true love.
You can thank Steve Martin for writing one of the most beautiful, intelligent and hilarious films ever.
Steve Martin proved that he is not only a "jerk" but can play in funny romantic movies as well.
Maybe it is I went to the film back in the early 90s with a "love" of myself but every time I see this movie with the Music of Enya I get chilles all over.
Some of the skits are amusing, some dated and some fall flat, but at all times it is clear that while LA is far from perfect Steve Martin has embraced everything about it.Martin is Harris K Telemacher, a "wacky TV weatherman" who pre-tapes his segments days in advance as "it's always sunny in LA".Harris hangs out with a similarly fake crowd of so-called friends and acquaintances, going to fake places where your income and status are badges of honour – and in the case of one restaurant determine whether you are even able to get a reservation.Over a busy couple of days Harris meets two women, a British journalist named Sarah who is honest, charming and genuine, and SanDeE (her spelling not mine) who is fake, superficial
and willing to bonk him.When Harris finds out that his current bitch of a girlfriend is cheating on him he must make a choice – did I mention one of the women is willing to bonk him???
Guess who he ends up with.A young Sarah Jessica Parker plays SanDeE is ditzy, vibrant and energetic, it might
no "IS" the only role I have ever seen her in where she was even vaguely likable, and thanks to some bike pants momentarily hot
That might be L.A. Story's main achievement right there, they should market it: "Sarah Jessica Parker as you've never seen her – sort of hot".Anyway Harris and Sarah keep bumping into each other and their mutual attraction grows, Harris is told by an automated freeway sign that his life will be changed soon (you heard me) and from there the film almost follows a more standard rom-com formula to the conclusion.Richard E.
Grant plays Sarah's ex-husband in a far more low key manner than his scenery chewing turn in Hudson Hawk, in between the skits and sightgags Martin proves once again that he can act, I've already mentioned SJP's moment in the sun and there are too many minor cameos and bit parts played by famous people to count.L.A. Story is part love letter, part hate mail to Los Angeles, it covers fashionable lateness, casual crime and shows just how uncaring and unthinking the average citizen of the city can be, but to contrast it seems to suggest that LA has an element of mystery and magic, and that anything can happen there.Like most of Steve Martin's movies I want to like this film more than I actually do, ultimately though this proves an unfocused vanity project, an at times hilarious but mostly just amusing jab at Steve's adopted hometown.Final Rating – 7.5 / 10.
In the course of the film he meets and falls in love with a UK news reporter (Tennant - his wife at the time) and has a fling with a delightfully air-headed shop girl (Sarah Jessica Parker).Most of the humor arises from a light hearted look at the California life style.
The script is both funny and charming, the soundtrack is absolutely stunning, there are some truly lovely comic set pieces, the direction is fine, the pacing is brisk and the story is never dull and like the film is warm-hearted.
At the end, that song gives me goose bumps...I think this is the best one Steve has ever made.I wish I could tell it to him some day.There is just something about this movie that you just can not grasp.......it's sheer magic!.
Continuing my quest through LA (which began with "LA Confidential" and continues with "LA Takedown" and "LA Without a Map"), Martin's film was a welcomed trip into the honesty of comedy, the ability to create smart jokes for audiences, and finally, be able to pull emotion from a story which involves a riddled electronic billboard.
With characters centered in depth, comedy that sparks from the absurd and transforms into chaotic, and finally that underlying sense of fantasy Martin proves again (beginning with "Roxanne") that he is more than just a zany comic, but an endearing member of Hollywood with true talent hidden behind the "Pink Panther" façade.Why does "LA Story" work and remain an unsung hero within the era of 90s cinema?
This is a film about falling in love and it works.As I write this review, I cannot wait to watch this movie again.
For some reason, while browsing among Steve Martins movie, I felt like commenting on this little wonderful film.
Normally this uneven blending of two very different genres would never work, but give the guy credit for making it work splendidly well.In "L.A. Story," Martin plays Wacky Weatherman Harris K.
Every time you think that "L.A. Story" is settling down to go into the typical romantic comedy cliches, such as the slow-motion shower scene with the beautiful woman splashing her wet hair over the camera, something happens.
One knob says "Slow Motion," he turns it, and suddenly he's splashing over his hair and the camera in slow motion.)The movie features cameos ranging from Rick Moranis (who has starred in four films with Martin), Patrick Stewart, Woody Harrelson and even Chevy Chase.
And Steve Martin has hit gold with "L.A. Story." Fans and non-fans alike will love this movie.
A bit odd and devoid of humor at times but the always-enjoyable Steve Martin makes this a sweet comedy with a heart.3.5/5 stars -John Ulmer.
The film is full of joy and unexpected moments, touching, funny, and all completely smile inducing.In 2003, certainly a little dated -- but that's part of its charm as a comedy/romance.
There are also a number of cameos to keep an eye out for, such as: Patrick Stewart, Rick Moranis, Chevy Chase, and Woody Harrelson.If you are a fan of Steve Martin's other excellent films, then you ought to give this one a shot, I think you'll like it.
Steve Martin has made a few gems in his life, but this might be he best movie.
(Tennant later left Martin, so apparently the love ode was not good enough) Despite the real life sad ending to this tale, the movie itself holds up incredibly well as a look at superficiality and finding what is most important in life.
This is top comedy courtesy of genius Steve Martin, and although there is a sweet romance somewhere in the screenplay, the film's raison d'etre is the hilarious depiction of life in LA.
Telemacher, a wacky TV weatherman in the wackiest of places on earth, Los Angeles.It's marked as comedy, but despite some hilarious comic moments (and dead-on social commentary), it does have a serious love story at its heart, melding the comedy and romance perfectly toward the end...
The tragedy of course is that this is basically a true story, and that real life couple Martin and Tennant broke up shortly after this movie was completed..
Steve Martin, always funny, gives a wonderful performance and there are just some scenes that are hard to forget.
When he has a chance encounter with a billboard that seemingly has a mind like Dr. Phil, he realizes there is fish in the sea for him, and in particular one fish from England who is visiting L.A and trying to find sense in this weird world.Steve Martin was very good in the film.
I also liked the young Sarah Jessica Parker who played a "love" interest of Harris.Overall, L.A Story is a truly wonderful film that is funny, seemingly original, well-written, and quite romantic.
It's one of Sarah Jessica Parker's best and most-liked roles and she's just so cute, infectiously fun and quirky in it, and it's one of my favourite Steve Martin roles too.
He's typical Steve Martin; obsessive, anxious and rather crazy whilst following the clues set by the road sign in this metaphysical search for true love where a newly divorced whacky weather man tries to win the heart of lovely English newspaper reporter.There are so many famous face cameo roles to look out for in this giggle-fest, Shakespeare reference, bagpipes, colonic irrigation gags and one-liner's a-plenty.
It's a great story with some funny scenes, Steve Martin is his goofy self, which works well in his role.
A long-time fan of Steve Martin, I fell in love with this ode to a city that is at turns, crazy, violent and confusing, but at the same time, imbued with a underlying aura of magic and wonderment.
I've got three favorite movies, all of which are equally adored, but one takes the lead over the other two based on what kind of mood I'm in.LA Story is technically a romance, although it's not something that would hurt someone who's having difficult times romantically.
Loosely based on Shakespeare's "A Midsummers' Night Dream" This film is an excellent display of Steve Martin's wit, charm, and humor that has made him one of the most established comedic actors of the 20th Century.I highly recommend that anyone who has any intention of being in a romantic relationship watch this movie.Some of the one-liners are classic and worth remembering..
Next to his screenplay for Roxanne, Steve Martin's best mature work to date is L.A. Story.Like all great movies, L.A. Story is a layered movie.
It has some of Martin's trademark surreality (rollerskating through art museums and Shakespeare in the cemetery), but it lacks the nutty antics he displayed in The Jerk and All of Me.All in all, it is a wonderful love story, a quiet comedy, and a great tribute to L.A...
The fact that Steve Martin wrote this as well as starred in it shows just how talented he is, this is much better than his newer films such as 'The Man With Two Brains' or 'House sitter'.The story is interesting and flows smoothly, it's likely that you'll be interested until the end.
Why hasn't Steve Martin, as gifted a comedian as anyone in the last thirty odd years (and one of the few who is very good at playing both smart and dumb) made a lot of "great" movies?
Which makes this mutated film a delightful and funny look at life in Los Angeles from the point of view of Martin's character, a wacky weatherman who is more concerned about his personal life then his celebrity status on TV (or anything else).Plenty of Shakespeare references, both dramatic and comedic, lots of great cameos as expected in this town, plus a few soundtrack songs by Enya sets the mood for the whole movie.Martin's character paraphrases "Life is a tale, told by an idiot.
Steve Martin as a wacky weatherman in LA that falls in love with a British reporter.Driving one evening on the freeway, Harry Telemacher gets a flat tyre and pulls over by a signpost.
This is one movie that will not only make you further appreciate Steve Martin's comic genius, but will also make you truly admire Los Angeles (I think).
Bathed in early 90s sunlight, which when exposed to the film stock of that time created an atmosphere without even trying LA Story is Steve Martin at his best.
Bathed in early 90s sunlight, which when exposed to the film stock of that time created an atmosphere without even trying LA Story is Steve Martin at his best.
But this is Steve Martin's movie and he is excellent as the straight faced funnyman trying to make sense of his career and the city he lives in.
But this is Steve Martin's movie and he is excellent as the straight faced funnyman trying to make sense of his career and the city he lives in.
'L.A. Story' is a yet another film, that showcases the astounding talent of Steve Martin.
[The film is a celebration of Love made more poignant by the real-life dissolution of the relationship between Martin & Tennant.].
A second one is helpful to catch all the clever background lines.If you liked this film, you will love Martin's 1999 critical success, 'Bowfinger.'All in all a fun movie.'LA Story' ***(7) 10'Bowfinger' (8) 10***1/2.
L.A. Story was next on my list, and while it is a cute movie, I felt that it was a little too cheesy and not up to par with Steve Martin's humor, or at least not the kind of humor that I know he can perform.Harris, played by Martin, is a weatherman in L.A., he's in a pretty dysfunctional relationship with a very fake and shallow woman.
These characters, along with great filming, unbelievably beautiful music and Steve Martin's acting (and writing) make this a movie I will continue to watch (and enjoy) over and over again.
L.A. Story is like The Jerk, another Steve Martin movie, in the sense that it tries so hard to assure the audience that it is a great movie, a fabulous fantasy, that one simply wants to run for cover.
By and starring Steve Martin, 'L.A. Story' is a funny and whimsical movie through and through..
LA Story was one of the rare films Steve Martin wrote a screenplay for.
Victoria Tennant is Steve Martin's true love (ironically three years before they divorced). |
tt0040753 | Saigon | World War II has ended and Major Larry Briggs (Alan Ladd) finds out that his friend Captain Mike Perry (Douglas Dick) has only two months to live due to a head injury. Larry and Sergeant Pete Rocco (Wally Cassell) are determined to show Mike a good time before he dies. For a $10,000 fee, Larry takes a flying job working for Alex Maris (Morris Carnovsky) a profiteer. Everything is set until Maris' secretary Susan Cleaver (Veronica Lake) shows up to board the aircraft. Mike falls for Susan and Larry convinces her to play along but she has fallen in love with Larry.
The first flight is disrupted by Maris arriving a half-hour late with the police right behind. Larry takes off but is forced to make an emergency landing after both engines fail. After checking into a small hotel, the Americans find Police Lieutenant Keon (Luther Adler) shadowing them who he believes are smugglers.
When Larry sees Mike falling for Susan, he wants the romance to end and despite her carrying $500,000 fro Maris, Larry tells her to leave immediately. When Mike longs for Susan, Larry relents and blackmails her into seeing him or he will turn her into Keon. Sailing to Saigon on a boat, Larry tricks Keon by stowing the money away into an envelope he mails to himself, and throws all suspicion off Susan.
In reaching Saigon, Larry knows he has fallen in love with Susan even though Mike has proposed to her. At Susan's hotel, an enraged Maris and his valet Simon (Luis Van Rooten) hold Larry hostage, demanding the money that has been posted. Bursting in, Pete realizes what is happening, and fights with Simon, but both falls off a balcony to their deaths. Susan has secretly arranged to retrieved the money from the post office, returning it to Maris. Mike and Larry confront him but in an exchange of gunfire, Mike and Maris are killed. After Mike's funeral, Larry and Susan start a new life together. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0356614 | Foolproof | The movie starts with Kevin (played by Reynolds), Sam (Booth) and Rob (Jarsky) playing a game, known as "Foolproof", in which they create working plans to infiltrate and burgle various targets. They do not actually execute these heists, preferring to simply simulate them. The rules of the game include the three of them to have the necessary technical and physical abilities to carry out the tasks required for the heist, and they cannot use a loaded gun.
All is fine until a famous criminal, Leo Gillete (Suchet), breaks into Sam's apartment, steals the trio's plans for a jewelry warehouse heist and accomplishes it. He then blackmails the group into designing and executing a plan to steal $20 million in bonds from a bank. Since he has evidence incriminating them in the plans, they accept.
Tension escalates within the group as Rob befriends Leo, while Kevin and Sam attempt to hinder his plans. They get the security codes to the safe and successfully switch the bonds. But the situation turns against them when Leo and Rob force them into an elevator and crashing it. Leo goes down and retrieves the bonds and shoots Sam.
It is later revealed that the gun had been switched and was loaded with blanks. Sam and Kevin get up and are greeted by Rob who was in on the plan the whole time. When Leo gets back to his place, he sees a fire started by the gang to destroy evidence against them and planted evidence against Leo on the latest burglary. Leo is taken in custody while the friends drive away in their car. | comedy, humor, flashback | train | wikipedia | Finally, a heist movie that doesn't have any noticeable plot holes, intriguing concept, and for Canadian viewers, doesn't attempt to hide a major Canadian city as somewhere in America.
So "Foolproof" came as a pleasant treat- there is a MAJOR twist in the plot that you will just have to watch for yourself.Watching "Foolproof" was like reading a nice mystery novel on a winter afternoon, (as it happens, I saw this movie on a snowy afternoon!)If this is the future of Canadian film, more please!.
Kevin (Ryan Teynolds), Sam (Kristin Booth) and Rob (Joris Jarsky) are best friends and they develop plans of foolproof heists as a game since the times of the university, but without having the intention of executing it.
Sooner, the mobster Leo Gillette (David Suchet), who has stolen the jewelery following the plan developed by the group, blackmails them with the following proposition: they have to steal US$ 20,000,000.00 in bonds from a bank, and he returns the stolen project of heist to them.
Kev, Sam and Rob decide to join the gang, afraid of going to the jail."Foolproof" is a surprisingly good action movie.
The story, full of plot points and betrayals, is engaging and recalls movies like "The Italian Job", "The Sting", or "Confidence", among others.
The heists (and camera/editing), while not exactly Mission Impossible, are innovative and exciting, and although you always know what's going to happen it's a fun ride getting there.Foolproof doesn't have the same star-quality you might find in some bigger releases, but the film looks crisp and colourful with good (eg.
believable, unobtrusive) special effects, and there are plenty of films - and big-name directors - who could learn a thing or two about getting sparky performances, and a pacy, neat little caper..
Too often has Toronto doubled for other cities in films, it was refreshing to see the "T dot O" being its good old self.Until I saw this movie, Ocean's 11 (the remake, not the boring original) was hands-down favourite heist movie.
I don't want to spoil anything, but suffice it to say that the plot surrounding the heist and the "thieves by mistake" is brilliant, twisting, and...foolproof!The characters were expertly played, with Ryan Reynolds really shining in his performance.
His comic timing blended very well with the tense heist drama.The great part about FoolProof is that, unlike Ocean's 11, it didn't try to hype itself up with some veteran all-star cast to try and sell more tickets.
I didn't know all that much about it and I went in thinking that there was a good chance that I was not going to like this movie.But I was surprised.
That's not to say that there weren't gadgets and neat props used to pull of the heists - just not a plethora of things like you would see in a huge budget Hollywood movie.
The setup, a trio of twenty-something friends making a game out of planning the perfect crime without actually any intention of pulling them off, was at least a refreshing start to a caper movie.
They are not looking to score diamonds and make it rich - they are satisfied with knowing that they outsmarted the security companies and that they could pull off these jobs if they didn't have morals and a respect for the law (they are just desk-jockies).I thought that the acting was well-done and the roles were believable.
The script was pretty good and at least there wasn't a bunch of cheesy one-liners and awkward dialogue (although I too found that they said "foolproof" more times than warranted).All in all I would have no problem recommending this to anyone.
I loved this movie.Foolproof is a pretty intelligent caper film that rises above standard caper/action movies that you get from, say, Arnold Schwarzenegger.Acting: It was very good, but the acting from Ryan Reynolds was great.
While not up to the pace and drama of The Italian Job or Heist,this made for cable epic is redeemed by a nice twist ending.Kristin Booth as the female lead has charm and presence.
Her smile lights up the screen and she looks capable of the part played by her character, with a well muscled build unlike the typical stick woman of Hollywood.David Suchet, who you may remember as the cop in A Perfect Murder, underplays the villain well though the other leads struggle more with the wooden dialogue.A diverting way to spend some time.
Enter bad guy, played with the stereotypical menace by David Souchet, another good actor whose talents were wasted by the director.
The problem is that like many great caper films, the script has to be airtight.
They blew their load on one or two scenes and the rest of the film looks like a TV movie.
Every joke is telegraphed, no character has any original quality whatsoever and the suspense sequences are completely lifted from everything we've already seen in a hundred other films.I can understand the need for Canadian cinema to compete with American cinema.
It's apparent from the opening sequence that everyone involved in the production is trying to be cool, instead of actually being cool.As a TV series pilot, this might not have been bad -- expectations are lowered, and the characters don't need to be as fleshed out yet as they should be on the big screen.
The story after all is interesting; a couple of people pretending to do heists get caught by reality.With such a plot one takes into account a certain level of disbelief and far fetched events but this movie however takes the level just a bit too far.
Careful planning goes into their ideas and everything must be solved by real solutions, not just "oh, I have this magic device that allows me to bypass the entire security system."I found the plot interesting and more intelligent that most heist movies I've seen recently.
Watch this if....you enjoy heist films with twists and turns.
This movie reminds me of a poor man's Oceans Eleven (2001) in some of it's presentation and story telling.Acting/Casting: 6* - Ryan Reynolds does a great job in the lead role and comes across very convincing as the mastermind behind his group's heists.
Kristin Booth and Joris Jarsky are average actors at best and I would have liked to have seen others in their roles, but an 8 million dollar budget doesn't offer a ton of options.
I really liked David Suchet, who I felt played the nemesis role extremely well.Directing/Cinematography/Technical: 6.5* - The directing is pretty good and the movie has an OK pace to it once it gets going.
A glaring issue with the film is the music, which is terribly out of place and doesn't fit the film whatsoever.Plot/Characters: 6.5* - Kevin (Reynolds) and his crew are planning a big jewel heist, but end up having their heist plans stolen and have to pull off a job for a vicious gangster in order to not have them turned over to the authorities.
It is a different take on the heist genre and this is a well written story.Entertainment Value: 6.5* - As mentioned, if you can get past the slow first 30 minutes or so, then the movie is a good watch.
If you turned an intelligent writer loose on "The Perfect Score" or "Catch That Kid" to gave these traditional heist pictures some "Enemy of the State" flavor and misdirection (and some good dialogue), you would end up with something like "Foolproof".
The group includes Ryan Reynolds, Kristin Booth, and Joris Jarsky; all Canadian and all unknown to me.
After "The Perfect Score," "Catch That Kid" and now "Foolproof," it would appear that the heist film genre is in dire need of either a blood transfusion or, at the very least, some serious mouth-to-mouth resuscitation.
The movie is so utterly slapdash in appearance and style and so utterly devoid of meaning and purpose that one wonders why any studio would ever even have bothered to release it.Is there really much point in watching a caper film about a trio of Pollyana-ish "criminals" who spend all their time tsk-tsking those involved in committing an actual crime?
We in the audience are smart enough to know right from wrong even when we're watching a heist film and don't need a bunch of can't-get-with-the-program moralists spoiling all the fun for us."Foolproof" lives up to only the first half of its compound word title..
Sadly writer/director William Phillips must have felt the need to take the name of the film to heart in every literal way as the movie, about three friends who find themselves getting in over their heads after someone steals their bank heist plans, feels the need to hold the audiences hand every single step of the way, explaining everything that happens in the movie and thus dumbing it down exponentially.
Great, I really enjoy this film the plot line was really genuine and the acting was good.
Foolproof is about two guys and a girl starting Rayan Reynolds from "Two Guys a Girl and a Pizza Place" ironically enough, who plan heist to rob jewelry stores and bypass their security systems but never actually go through with the plan its just for fun, or so they thought.Every thing was great until one of their plans gets stolen and the robbery actually takes place, now with all the evidence pointing to them they are approached by the guy who stole the file telling them that they have to due a job for him or he will turn the papers with their finger prints all over them to the police, whats one to due?Foolproof a great heist type movie good on the chills, action and every now and again comedy, over all you cant miss this one..
The plot is full of thrilling & subtle twists and the fast pace of the movie keeps you hooked until the end [and if you do get bored, then you have the gorgeous Kristin Booth to admire :-)]Though numerous dialogues are quotable, but the one when Kristin blurts out in exasperated anger "That little thief!!!!!!
this no name, no budget mystery caper surprisingly is a solid piece of film-making with an excellent plot twist, taut writing and acting along with a good music track.
The characters could have been more refined and restrained in a few places, but overall this a good "see" if one is looking for something exciting when it comes to crime films - a sort of mini Oceans 11 or 12 on a smaller scale without all the big action.
Foolproof is a lower budget Canadian heist film.
Foolproof is decent but not completely original, and at times feels like a made for TV movie, or television series.Even at an early stage in his career, we could see the star potential in Ryan Reynolds.
Although the screenplay tries mightily to justify their expensive self- indulgent role-play games, it comes across as nothing more than an elaborate and not particularly credible set-up, allowing a vicious criminal to hijack their plans, implicate them in the crime and extort their cooperation in an even more elaborate heist.
Production values are superior to those of a television movie or low-budget independent film, but not on par with most action/heist films.
Surprisingly, the film entertains at a level that was unexpected.The trio of theorists that devise such an elaborate plan are Kevin (a before really famous Ryan Reynolds), Sam (Kristin Booth) and Rob (Joris Jarsky).
FOOLPROOF was recommended to me by blockbuster and i thought lets have a look.This movie is simple pure script no special effects and no artsyvisual effects.
But the (to me until this movie unknown) trio Ryan Reynolds, Kristin Booth and Joris Jarsky hook on to his -as always superb- level of acting, and with success.The story is refreshingly original, and contains so many turns that any word on the content would be a spoiler, so I'd say: see for yourself!This movie breaths a non-Hollywood atmosphere (it is Canadian), and that also was one of the assets for me.
For the first 50 minutes, everything about this movie had been done better by other films.
The little jokes started to get infinitely better, the acting improved greatly, and the mandatory heist movie twist was pulled off spectacularly.
What the film lacks in three-dimensional characters, it makes up for with excellent pacing and enjoyable heists.
While most of the movie was enjoyable...I rather that Ryan Reynolds character been more smartassed, and less angry.
Three friends Kevin (Ryan Reynolds), Sam (Kristin Booth) and Rob (Joris Jarsky) play a game they call Foolproof.
And on top of that, they are blackmailed by the real thief Leo 'The Touch' Gillette (David Suchet).This is a Canadian production trying to play in the big leagues.
Ryan Reynolds, Kristin Booth, Joris Jarsky, Sean Sullivan, and David Suchet star in "Foolproof," a 2003 Canadian film.Reynolds, Booth, and Jarsky play Kevin, Sam, and Rob, who live in Toronto and play a game called Foolproof.
So what Leo wants in exchange for the plans is for the group to actually rob $20 million in bearer bonds.This is a very engaging film, with young actors who seem to have a lot of chemistry with one another; one truly believes they are friends as they laugh, yell at one another, bicker, and tease.
Foolproof is your typical heist film but with a nice "beginners" element.
Ryan Reynolds plays Kevin, a cutish little cubicle nebbish who in his spare time, plans, devises and pretends to hack banks, jewelry stores and the like with his two friends - Kristen Booth as the wired and angry Samantha, and Joris Jarsky as the nerdy, unkempt and slimy techie Rob. Let me impress upon you the seriousness of what they do.
Honestly, its like going to see "Batman" and having him say "I'm Batman" everytime he meets someone new...we get that the movie is called Foolproof, you don't need to beat us over the head with it.
My main problem in the first five minutes of the movie is that they do not give any screen time explaining how they got layout plans of the building, technical specs and blueprints of the building high security system, technical and chemical knoeledge enough to be able to recreate and then defeat these systems, or any real reason why a bunch of people would do this.
With the threat of turning over the plans to the police, one "Leo the Touch" , played with seething menace by David Suchet, blackmails the three into pulling a very big, very real heist.While blackmail is nothing new, in Foolproof it is a useful mechanism for forcing our three 'ordinary' protagonists into unusual situations.
The movie is actually so good and so bad at the same time.
I'd give it zero, but IMDb won't let me.This is another crappy Canadian film from our so called friends up north who in all this time have not yet learned how to make a movie without our help.Canadians keep hiding behind their weaker dollar and their lack of budget compared to Hollywood films, but this is an $8m film (Canadian dollars, but 2003) and it looks like it was made by some Youtubers.None of the actors, who are presented as some sort of Ocean's 11, know how to use a gun.
They work days and train nights to pull heists, but because they're good Canadians, they'd never actually go through with such a thing.A movie that wants the coolness of robbers and heist gangs but wants the morality and goody-little-two-shoes of Canadians.
Much better than Oceans 11 and 12...This movie also has one of the best actors working today.
this film showed he could play in action stories, with his humor always presented in a right direction.The most valuable thing in this movie is it's plot.
I would like to see Ryan Reynolds get more starring roles in bigger movies..
NOT) heist movie, as a group of three friends who devise intricate robbery plans for a hobby are suddenly force-recruited by the criminal elite of Toronto (don't laugh - we got mafia too) to pull off their latest crime scenario for real.Naturally, with the intelligence in the group you know they will turn the tables, but the fun is trying to figure out how they do it, which the movie does a reasonable job of keeping hidden until the end.There are some predictable gaffs along the way, like the excruciatingly long time they take to get under some security lasers when they have already shown they are skilled enough to have just turned them off, and the fact that if your going to fake your own death, you really need to know ahead of time how the bad guy is going to do it so you can plan it!
All in all very well written, look for some great acting from Kristin Booth as the super sexy ninja-girl and William House as the sinister mobster crime boss trapping them in the plan.Do NOT watch Ryan Reynolds, this guy should go back to modelling..
While (Kristin Booth) was a very very talented actress (I usually say talented only), (David Suchet) did good work despite the fact that he's not my cup of tea, and (Joris Jarsky) was near to flawless, (Ryan Reynolds) wasn't as good.
Either way, it is more clever and better done than most films of its sort nowadays.FOOLPROOF is about three 20-somethings (Ryan Reynolds, Kristin Booth, Joris Jarsky) who each have special skills that combined give them the ability to break into any "foolproof" security system.
Then, their plans for their next big "job" are stolen and they are threatened to be exposed by a local, shady businessman (confidently played by David Suchet) unless they actually go through with them and help him steal 20 million dollars.I found this film to be refreshingly funny without devolving into stupidity or even absurdity, given its premise.
The 3 leads Reynolds, Booth, Jarsky have excellent chemistry and you believe that they are really good friends who have been doing this for a while. |
tt0036546 | Yankee Doodle Daffy | Porky Pig, a producer, loaded down with luggage and a golf bag, leaves his office in a hurry to board an airplane. Daffy Duck, a talent agent, prevents him from leaving and attempts to secure an audition for his client, a lethargic child performer named "Sleepy" Lagoon (a reference to the 1942 Sleepy Lagoon murder). The pitch, intended to demonstrate Sleepy's allegedly wide and varied repertoire, consists of Daffy himself performing an array of musical and stage acts. Sleepy meanwhile stays seated, nonchalantly licking an enormous lollipop and silently commenting on Daffy's ludicrous behavior using signs bearing rebuses.
The songs that Daffy performs include I'm Just Wild About Harry, William Tell Overture and Angel in Disguise (the same song that Bugs Bunny and Sylvester the Cat would sing in The Wabbit Who Came to Supper and Back Alley Oproar, respectively).
Porky, with mounting frustration, repeatedly tries to escape from the pitch. Daffy handily foils each attempt in increasingly improbable ways, including by turning out to be the pilot of Porky's plane and then turning out to be the parachute Porky uses to escape said plane. Admitting defeat, Porky allows Sleepy to audition.
Sleepy calmly leaves his seat and begins to sing in a strong, operatic baritone that is not only surprising given his small stature but also substantially more dramatic than any of the acts Daffy used in the pitch. However, during a high note near the end, he erupts into a long coughing fit before weakly croaking the rest of the line. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Brilliant Daffy, curious title.
Yankee Doodle Daffy is an enjoyable cartoon.
It isn't the best though, the pace is a tad too fast and the title is enough to leave you puzzled as it has little to do with the cartoon itself.
But Daffy himself elevates it, he is absolutely brilliant here, uproariously funny as you'd expect.
Porky is once again sidelined but he is good, and Sleepy is entertaining with a voice that is totally unexpected, though they could've perhaps made the ending longer I felt it ended rather abruptly.
Other than Daffy, I immensely enjoyed the song and dance routines, especially the Carmen Miranda impression.
The pictorial signs while maybe ambiguous to a newcomer to Looney Tunes were also a hoot.
There are some great gags and the plot allows Daffy to have fun.
All in all, I enjoyed the cartoon, in spite of the head-scratching title.
8/10 Bethany Cox.
"This is your lucky day.
Opportunity is knocking!".
Despite the the title, this has nothing to do with the 1942 film biopic of George M.
Cohan or the song.
The plot has pushy talent agent Daffy trying to persuade producer Porky to give Daffy's client a job.
The client in question is an adorable little duck with a lollipop named Sleepy Lagoon.
It's not until the end of the short that we find out if Sleepy has talent or not as most of the time is spent on Daffy himself performing.
This is a funny short with early Daffy, meaning more zany and silly than the later smart-mouthed foil for Bugs.
Daffy's most of the show here but Sleepy is good, too, and Porky is fine as the ever-suffering straight man.
The vocal talents of Mel Blanc are, as always, wonderful.
The colors, animation, and music are all great.
Not one of the best Daffy & Porky shorts but a good one..
Crazy Daffy makes another great cartoon.
Smeller Productions shuts it's doors early when Porky Pig stops auditions for the day in order to go and get his plane for a business appointment.
However, his office is stormed by Daffy Duck - Actor's Agent, who is keen to push his young act in front of Porky.I love Daffy Duck, but I greatly prefer him when he is crazy, in his early days - not only do I prefer his character but also the cartoons seemed to have more value placed upon them.
Here I wasn't sure what to expect as the cartoon had a structure that I didn't think would lend itself to a crazy duck - how wrong was I!
The plot actually allows Daffy to be crazy (or screwball as his young client points out) in a very funny way.
The various acts he puts on are all very funny and work well because he is such a good character.
The cartoon dips a little bit when it leaves the office but it is still worth seeing.Daffy is brilliant.
The material may not be the strongest he has ever had but it is he who uses it really well and carries the film.
Porky is only really any good when he is reacting to the work of others and, for that reason, he is good here.
The little act in question is a small black duck that sits silently for the majority.
He is hilarious as he pulls out pictorial signs to comment on the relative sanity of his manager - it is not his fault that he is the focus of a punchline that serves as an anticlimax after such madness!Overall this is a fantastic little short that allows Daffy to demonstrate why I always prefer him in full `crazy' mode as opposed to his later incarnations.
He may be a ham, a corn and a screwball, but Daffy makes this cartoon what it is - great fun!.
Why Yankee Doodle?.
This is definitely one of Daffy Duck's best.
However, I wonder why the term "Yankee Doodle" was used in the title.
The cartoon was released during WWII, and Yankee Doodle was used in the title of a number of cartoons at that time, e.g., Tom and Jerry's _Yankee Doodle Mouse, The (1943)_ (qv).
With that term as part of the title, one could expect to see soldiers; airplanes; military maneuvers; the bashing of Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, or Tojo; or at least something related to the war in some way.
This cartoon has nothing remotely related to WWII.
Perhaps 'Friz Freleng' (qv) figured it wouldn't matter to his audience..
the best Daffy Duck best cartoon.
In my opinion, this has got to be the best Daffy Duck cartoon ever....all of the songs he does are great and very hilarious...especially when he sings Laugh Clown Laugh....had me laughing through the entire cartoon...classic Daffy stuff right here..
Very Disappointing.
With the title, I thought I'd see a parody of the great Jimmy Cagney film, "Yankee Doodle Dandy," but that wasn't the case.The story was just Daffy trying to impress a movie studio mogul (Porky Pig) to get a starring role in a film.
He holds Porky captive in the office for awhile and then follows him in a plane and even falling from the airplane, disguised as a parachute.All the while, Daffy performs his songs and impersonations.
The only one I thought was funny was of Carmen Miranda, the lady who made fruit-laden hats famous.
Overall, however, this just wasn't funny, which is very unusual for a Daffy Duck cartoon.
Hey, ya can't win 'em all!.
Friz Freleng's crowning glory- a jaw-droppingly fast paced short with a corking performance by Mel Blanc as Daffy.
'Yankee Doodle Daffy' is probably the greatest cartoon Friz Freleng ever directed.
As a Daffy Duck fanatic, I was bound to adore this film since it is basically a seven minute showcase for Daffy's wild energy.
It's a fine script but it hinges on the execution, meaning the stars of 'Yankee Doodle Daffy' are director Freleng and voice artist Mel Blanc.
The premise is simple; Daffy approaches talent agent Porky Pig with a new act but rather than let the act demonstrate his talents, Daffy insists on emulating everything he promises his client will deliver.
This results in a sensational series of song and dance routines in which Daffy pursues a reluctant Porky, who is trying to get away on holiday.
Finally, Porky agrees to see Daffy's client, resulting in one of my favourite climactic punchlines of all time.Friz Freleng is often considered a lesser director with many viewing his cartoons as formulaic and dull.
While he undoubtedly lacks the monumental talents of a Jones, an Avery or a Clampett, Freleng is too frequently underestimated.
In 'Yankee Doodle Daffy' he really shows his potential, beautifully directing a frantically paced script without any missed opportunities.
The short just pulsates with energy and Mel Blanc's vocal tour de force is up there with some of his finest performances.
In a list largely populated by his colleagues' work, Friz Freleng's 'Yankee Doodle Daffy' more than holds its own against the competition in my very favourite Warner Bros.
cartoons of all time..
Friz Freling's Yankee Doodle Daffy is one of his best.
This Friz Freling short has the duck trying to impress talent scout Porky Pig with the music abilities of his client, a kid duck named Sleepy Lagoon who sucks on a lollipop throughout most of the short.
Daffy sings and dances all over the place changing costumes behind a curtain as Porky keeps trying to leave for a plane to catch a business appointment.
This is the "wacky Daffy" of the '30s and '40s that keeps on moving in flashes of lunacy no matter how people react to him.
All musical bits are entertaining especially Daffy's Carmen Miranda number.
The twist ending is a hoot, too.
All in all, Yankee Doodle Daffy is one of Freling's best..
Yankee has talent.
Daffy is certainly daffy here.
Porky Pig has closed his office and off to catch a plane but he is rudely interrupted by Daffy Duck, actor's agent.He is representing Sleepy Lagoon, a young duck whose main talent lies in licking a large lollipop but wants Porky Pig to see him audition.In order to entice Porky Pig who just wants to get away, Daffy Duck gets screwy and puts on all kinds of various acts himself many of which were popular in the period, as Sleepy Lagoon just licks away.Porky Pig is the straight porcine and this is probably Daffy's persona at its best when he is just plain daft rather than envious of the more famous Bugs Bunny in his later days.The cartoon short is frenetic but not the best of the Warner Brothers cartoons..
it sucks to be Porky.
One thing that I always say about "Mister Ed", "Bewitched" and "I Dream of Jeannie", is that it sucks to be Wilbur, Darrin and Maj. Nelson, respectively.
I say that because these things that they have to experience at the hands of Ed, Samantha and Jeannie, have got to be mind-numbing.
In that respect, it sucks to be Porky Pig in "Yankee Doodle Daffy".
In this cartoon, Porky is a talent scout to whom Daffy tries to show the skills of his nephew, Sleepy McGoof.
Most of the cartoon has Daffy putting on a series of wacky skits, while Sleepy sits there sucking on a lollipops.
No matter what Porky does, he can't seem to get away from them.This one was a little bit more routine than some of the other Looney Tunes cartoons, but it's still worth seeing..
In the midst of World War II, this cheery, crazy cartoon short was made....
An earlier Daffy Duck episode, this topsy turvy, wild Daffy Duck short will entertain some and annoy others.
As bob the moo (on this site) is constantly putting forward, Daffy is always crazier in his early days.
This is one of the cases.
Many people may be irritated by the fact that Porky is being annoyed by Daffy, but if you look aside, you will see brilliant gags, an entertaining plot and good music featured.
This is my favourite Daffy Duck episode due to the music, Daffy's crazy personality - and that is about it.
Very well worth watching!In this, Daffy is an Actor's Agent representing a small duck (with a huge lollipop) to Porky, a talent scout.
Using the most crazy, fun and musical ways imaginable, Daffy shows Porky what the small duck can do.
At the same time though - Porky has a plane to catch...For Daffy Duck fans who prefer the crazier little black duck and for people who like music in cartoons.
Enjoy!
Please Stop!.
To me the early Daffy Duck is kind of like director David Zucker (Airplane!, Naked Gun series, Scary Movie 3) in a way that all the gags are coming at you at a rapid pace, and either they all connect and are hilarious, or it all just falls short.
In my opinion, the jokes and gags in Yankee Doodle Daffy fall short.
Daffy goes from one old song to the next trying to sell the talents of Sleepy LaGoon, a young protégé, to talent scout, Porky Pig. There were very few funny moments in the cartoon, such as when we're introduced to Sleepy and the classic signs Sleepy used to describe Daffy (Screw + Baseball = Screwball).
Other than that, Daffy is just annoying in this cartoon.
I was glad when it was over.
Daffy's done much better.My IMDb Rating: 4/10.
Daffy and Porky.
Yankee Doodle Daffy (1943) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Middle ground Looney Tunes short has agent Porky Pig getting ready to leave on vacation when Daffy Duck busts in with his nephew Sleepy LaGoof.
Daffy goes into a wild rant trying to get Porky to give the little one an audition but it appears Daffy is more the performer.
This has never been one of my favorite shorts in the series but it does have one thing going for it and that's the insane Daffy.
Seeing the out of control Daffy is the main reason to sit through this 7-minute short that doesn't have too many laughs but the duck is the star.
As far as the laughs go I really can't recall any but that doesn't totally kill the movie thanks again to Daffy.
I thought Porky was pretty much wasted in his part but Sleepy does end up getting the best moment at the very end of the film..
It ain't the kid who possesses the talent!.
"Yankee Doodle Daffy" is quite an excellent Warner Bros.
cartoon starring two of our favorite characters, Daffy Duck and Porky Pig, both voiced by that magnificent "Man of a Thousand Voices," Mel Blanc.
Porky is the president of Smeller Productions, and he so looks forward to his day off.
He doesn't get it, though, thanks to Daffy, a severely pushy talent agent, trying to impress Porky with his brand new find, a kid duckling who only cares about his lollipop.Highlights: Upon Daffy's first appearance, he puts away Porky's suitcases, golf clubs, and cap, all in rhythm to Carl Stalling's humorous musical accompaniment.
Daffy dresses up in a Carmen Miranda outfit and sings a song with incredibly rapid lyrics, beginning and ending with "Boom chicky boom chicky boom!" Daffy makes up his own words to the William Tell Overture while galloping after Porky down a few flights of stairs; he then ends his song with a couple bars of pure swing."Yankee Doodle Daffy" was directed by Friz Freleng, and no wonder.
Friz was a genuine music lover, a pure "song-and-dance man" who knew how to incorporate music in his cartoons better than any other director..
Yankee Doodle Dud *spoilers*.
Daffy Duck won't leave producer, Porky Pig alone in trying to get Porky to hire his young client, who seems content to just suck on his over-sized lollipop.
Daffy goes crazy as only he can singing and dancing to get his client a chance and when Porky finally relents, the little brat chokes.
Daffy just can't win.
There are a few laughs scattered here and there, but overall this short didn't do much for me and it probably will do nothing for you.
Only the truly die-hard Daffy Duck fans will be happy with him this time out.
And I like the character a lot.
This cartoon is on Disk 2 of the "Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 1" My Grade: C.
More loud and wild than funny or entertaining.
The 7-minute "Yankee Doodle Daffy" is a Warner Bros.
cartoon from 1943, so two more years and this one has its 75th anniversary.
This one features the talent of Friz Freleng, Tedd Pierce, Mel Blanc and Billy Bletcher (and others) like so many other times and to put it in perspective, this is from the dark days of World War II, so all comic relief was appreciated at that time I guess.
Nonetheless, this is one of the unpolitical Warner Bros.
short films.
It features Daffy as a relentless salesman trying to reach an agreement with Porky in this film named after "Yankee Doodle Dandy" obviously.
But it was not too funny I must say sadly, the exception were the pilot scene and the parachute scene, especially the latter.
But other than that the film did not rely on wit and creativity too much, but it was all about Daffy's chasing and singing and that just wasn't enough.
The ending is also not as memorable as it tries to be.
As a whole, I am certainly a bit baffled by this film's popularity compared to other superior cartoons.
Thumbs down from me.
Not recommended..
Daffy Duck humiliates Porky Pig .
. throughout YANKEE DOODLE DAFFY, primarily on the basis of relative body mass.
Just because he's a scrawny Ectomorph, the more limber Daffy thinks he can pull rank on Hollywood "Smeller Pictures" producer Porky, even though agent Daffy represents fourth-rate talents at best.
Daffy barges into Porky's office without an appointment, and stymies the busy pig from keeping his flight schedule.
(Later, Daffy does away with the flight crew of Porky's charter--off-screen--and kidnaps the Tinseltown exec while flying the purloined plane himself.) Somewhere during these proceedings, Daffy barks, "Just a minute, Chubby!" Pew polling in the 1930s showed that Porky Pig was the Number One Role Model for American kids, mainly because he looked well-fed (unlike many of them and their peers in the Depression-ravaged U.S.).
So when Daffy attacks Porky with a disparaging "Chubby," it's tantamount to an assault on ALL half-pint Yankee Doodle Dandies.
It staggers the mind that the U.S. War Department Censors allowed this renegade "Chubby" to sneak through under their noses, with likely "fatso's," "Lard-grasses," and "tubby's" lurking around the corner to hurt the self-esteem of future recruits! |
tt2873214 | Bad Turn Worse | After B. J. steals $20,000, he surprises his best friend, Bobby, and girlfriend, Sue, with an impromptu plan to party together one last time before Bobby and Sue leave rural Texas for college. B. J. later confides in Bobby that he stole he money from Giff, a local mobster who employs them. Giff immediately suspects his Mexican security guard, and Bobby and B. J. arrive at work as Giff savagely beats the man. Concerned that Giff will kill the worker, Bobby confesses to stealing the money, though it does not stop Giff from killing the man. As they dispose of the body for Giff, Bobby expresses regret that the man died, and B. J. berates him for getting them involved. When they can't repay him, Giff forces them to agree to rob a cotton mill owned by Big Red, an infamous mob boss who uses it to launder his funds. Over Bobby's objection, B. J. reveals that Sue was also involved in spending Giff's money, and she is forced to participate in the robbery, too.
When B. J. learns that Bobby and Sue are having an affair and plan to go to the police, he tells Giff about both situations. At the police station, the Sheriff obliquely warns Bobby to fulfill his obligations. Bobby and Sue discuss fleeing the town together, but Giff threatens to rape Sue if either one backs out. Unable to think of any escape, Bobby and Sue commit to the robbery. B. J. visits both Bobby and Sue, harassing them and leaving them wondering how much he knows about their affair. On the night of the robbery, Bobby and Sue enter Big Red's business as B. J. takes lookout duty. They find that the safe is empty and the workers have been brutally murdered. Confused, they return to B. J., only to find that he and Giff have decided to frame them for the crime.
B. J. initially does not believe that Giff murdered the workers, and Giff shoots B. J. when he protests. Before he can kill Sue and Bobby, Sue tells him that she has contacted Big Red, who she says is on his way as they speak. Convinced that she is bluffing, Giff attempts to kill the two, who flee further into the cotton mill. After an extended chase, Giff corners the two on rafters. Giff taunts Bobby and says that he is actually doing him a favor, as it will save him the pain and humiliation of being dumped by Sue as she finds a more ambitious and sophisticated lover at college. Bobby rushes Giff, and both he and Giff fall many feet to the ground. At the same time, Big Red arrives. Red allows Sue and the wounded Bobby to leave, and the two proclaim their love for each other. When Giff refuses to reveal the location of Red's missing cash, Red kills him. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | This film is an example of that very specific sub-genre, the Texas neo-noir.
That American state seems to have all the right ingredients for modern noir, with its sun-baked, dusty, dead-end towns, restless people in them trying to get out of them and places seemingly so remote that the law is run by its own set of rules.
We Gotta Get Out of This Place is certainly a movie that exists in the twilight world of this sub-genre.
Bobby and Sue plan to leave for good to go to college, while B.J. chooses the faster route of crime.
The name actors are Mark Pellegrino, whom I remember from being the bungling hit-man from Mulholland Drive (2001), in this picture he's still a violent criminal but a good deal more threatening; we also have veteran William Devane, star of several 70's classics like Marathon Man (1976), who here has no more than a cameo role.
But its arguably the three younger actors who make the most impact, namely Mackenzie Davis as Sue, Logan Huffman as the reckless B.J. and finally the young Chris Penn lookalike Jeremy Allen White as the dim-witted but good natured Bobby.
The cinematography is often fine too with some dusky shots of wind turbine landscapes being particularly standout, while the moody score put me in mind of the one used in Blood Simple (1984) and any comparison to that masterpiece of the Texas neo-noir sub-genre is of course a very good thing.
The story itself is maybe a little over-familiar for those who have seen their share of neo-noirs and it doesn't necessarily pan out into anything too unexpected by the end.
This is not a film for the faint-hearted.The story revolves around three young adults who are caught up in the aftermath of the robbery.
They become involved in the criminal underworld and the situation soon escalates.This film is a modern film-noir so as is typical for the genre there are lots of twists and betrayals.
Some plot twists are shown to us the audience before they are experienced by the characters, thus giving suspense, others are not.Mark Pellegrino has a meaty role, rather like that of James Franco in 'Homefront' (2013) or even 'Tommy' in 'Goodfellas' (1990).
The younger Logan Huffman plays a character like 'Tommy' in 'The Butterfly Effect' (2004).
His mental machinations and robust physique make him intimidating and scarily unpredictable.Mackenzie Davis and Jeremy Allen White play two college-student-types who get caught up in the mayhem.
The two young thespians act their socks off as they struggle in the situations their characters are plunged into.There is also good support from Jon Gries.
Veteran actor William Devane, in a cameo, got it just right, and shows, as he did in 'Marathon Man' (1976), that a small role can be played to make an effective and lasting impression.The film was directed by Simon and Zeke Hawkins.
Hopefully, we will see many more films from this talented pair in the future.If you liked the 2012 films 'Mud' and 'Everybody Has a Plan', or the 2013 films 'Cold Comes the Night', 'The Counsellor', 'Love Is the Perfect Crime' or 'Homefront', then this similarly dark film-noir will appeal to you.A grim and gritty 9/10 but a strong stomach is needed..
For first time directors the Hawkins Brothers have produced a very tight film that treats the viewer with respect.
I thought the film wasn't that bad, but it's not all that great either.It's not a nonstop adventure like "30 Minutes or Less." Its pacing is more like that of "Near Dark" or "A Simple Plan." And the pacing very fits well with the story and its setting.The script was pretty well-thought out and well-written, if not exactly moving or memorable.
When the film is over, you may forget the characters, but you'll remember the scenery.Mark Pellegrino has fun with his role as a charming and self-wise sociopath.
Logan Huffman sounds just like Bruno Kirby and somebody apparently thought he would be more believable as a Texan if he simply called everybody "Hoss" or "Podner." I doubt that annoys anybody outside of Texas (I see most of this movies rave reviews came from Canada, Scotland and Ireland) but sure annoys the hell out of people who know better.But my biggest complaint, however, is that I haven't heard so many racial insults since "Django." Again, maybe this is the stereotypical Texas that people elsewhere want to imagine, but people in south Texas haven't spoken like that since the '40s or '50s.
There's so much intermingling of ethnicities in that area that to think or speak like that would offend the overwhelming majority of ones' family and friends.Now granted, fictional stories deserve a wide latitude for artistic license, and people involved in nefarious activities can be offensive and without conscience.
It has a few nice twists and turns along the way.The acting is good enough and the movie has a nice pace.
Well I don't know whose rating these movies so high but must be someone involved with the production and on IMDb. Pathetic.One of THE worst movies I have seen this year, couldn't wait for it to end.Simple plot - boy steals money, no reason why, spends the money stupidly in some bars (not the real underworld mind you) and nothing amis here just some frat boys handing out in a country bar.Nothing happens in the middle of the movie, it's a love triangle.
Well this one doesn't disappoint.Bad dudes are non-existent in thie movie, so is acting generally - mostly just sitting around and boring dialogue.Who rates this piece of crap 6+ Give your head a shake, one of THE worst movies I have ever seen..
The tone, the setting, the characters, the acting, the music - it's a greasy, gritty, Texas neo-noir thriller that has impeccable style.
Gotta say too that Mark Pellegrino plays one of the all-time great bad guys in this film - probably my favorite performance of his.
And on top of it all, it's a perfect example of the power that indie filmmakers have, and should be an inspiration to others who want to make a film on very little money and a lot of heart.
Title Sums It Up. One day someone was listening to the Steve Miller Band's "Take the Money and Run" and thought they could make it into a feature length film.
They took the character of Billy Joe and shortened it to BJ and made Bobbie Sue into two characters, Bobby and Sue. The writer then tossed these characters into a plot about stolen money and young lovers on the run.I'm ok with people wearing their influences on their sleeves but unfortunately you get more pleasure from the three or so minutes running time of Steve Miller's song than you can extract from this train wreck of a movie.The obvious joke is the film's title doubles as its review.
(Logan Huffman), his book-loving girlfriend Sue (Mackenzie Davis) and best friend Bobby (Jeremy Allen White) live in a small Texas town.
Sue and Bobby are looking to leave for college.
He had stolen money from their local criminal boss Giff (Mark Pellegrino).
Bobby is shocked that it turns out to be $20k from Big Red (William Devane) and Giff wants Bobby to repay it.
Giff tells them to rob Big Red.I like the young threesome.
Not Bad. Three Texas teens hope to make a break for it and escape their dead-end existence in a cotton-mill town but get sucked into the seedy underbelly of organized crime when one of them steals from the wrong man.The general plot of this is pretty good, and fans of crime or heist movies will probably dig it.
There is a really cool scene with the heist run-through that really makes the film for me, and if nothing else, solidified this as a better-than-average movie.What are we to make of the "32 ways to tell a story" theme?
Bad Turn Worse is a crime thriller done without big budget, but still manages to entertain.
It presents good script, murky atmosphere of rural town and fresh partially ironic take on crime drama.
The movie is not without flaws though, the pacing might suffer at times and despite some good twist the characters fall into stereotypical teen early on.This is a story of three teenagers who live in Texas dusty town.
The plot takes speed after a while, although it's still marred on a couple of scenes.The premise is seemingly simple, yet the script is smart and it delivers nice twists in timely manner .
Acting is good for the three leads, they look juvenile, desperately determined and wanting promise of better life.
The chemistry works by meshing these bored boorish characters together in much more adult condition than they are supposed to have.What set apart this movie from mediocrity is the occasional moments of fresh delivery amidst its bleak visual.
Several of the scenes are interestingly done, a bit self-aware, surprisingly bloody and a very reminisces of classic pulp fiction.Having many genre familiarities, it can be a bit stereotypical and the display of boredom might be stagnant, but with its fine performance and good material, Bad Turn Worse is an engaging human and crime drama..
Saw this 2 years ago and decided to rewatch it today.I literally remembered nothing about it except that I found it underwhelming but passable as a time-waster.Rewatching it today unfortunately I ended up focusing on the wrong things, like for instance the acting which was subpar for the morepart.
Mark Pellegrino is an alright baddie but the youngsters in the lead didn't really impress.Especially Jeremy Allen White who had a constant blank face in every scene even in the most intense life-threatening ones and we are supposed to root for him after all which is hard when even he doesn't show signs of caring.But he's young and I'm sure he'll do better in other things.The pace doesn't help either as it highlights the flaws more than anything else.So yeah definitely not a movie you end up watching over and over again, I know 2 times is more than enough in fact I should have stuck at 1..
The film Bad Turn Worse explores these bonds and shows just how tight they can be.
(Logan Huffman) is your typical Texas High School senior, who is more concerned with meeting the right people, and getting a good job, then he is about going to college, which present a problem in regards to his best friend and girlfriend, who are both headed towards university.
B.J. wants to leave his friends on a high note, and decides in order to accomplish this, he needs to "borrow" some money from his shady boss.
What B.J. doesn't know is just how connected his boss really is, and once it's discovered that he took the money, his life, and the lives of his two closest friends end up being in jeopardy.
In that film, Huffman looked like he would be the next big thing in Hollywood, but playing a dim-witted character in a somewhat anti-climatic story didn't do him any favors.
I was hoping to see him open up and show some range with this role, but the truth is he was just playing the same character, a highly intelligent young adult who makes poor choices.
There is a lot of discussion and strains on the groups friendship, which pop up at the absolute worse times and pretty much stop the film dead in it's tracks.
Bad Turn Worse really did feature a pretty good story, with a ton of up and coming young Hollywood talent.
I have seen many coming-of-age films over the years, including the great 1971 film The Last Picture Show, which was set in a dead-end Texas town, but Bad Turn Worse took a familiar formula and not only executed it extremely well, but found a way to give it enough humor and relish that it was not predictable or formulaic.
As a filmmaker myself, I very much appreciate the meticulously of the directing, editing, and integration of the music into the story, and the kinds of performances crafted for and by all the actors.
I particularly enjoyed the energy and sadism of Mark Pellegrino as Giff, and the scene between Bobby and the Sheriff, who is trying to explain the reality of law enforcement in his town without ever being explicit.
Zee and Simon Hawkins' as director and editor respectively are a great team, and I look forward enthusiastically to their future film projects..
*****May Contain Spoilers***** The tale tells of a story that takes place in a small town in Texas where there isn't much to do except to figure out how to leave town or to get into some trouble, and that pretty much describes our three coming-of-age main characters.
Sue & Bobby would like nothing better than to leave this town in favor of college, and BJ knows that college just isn't for him and manages instead to get into trouble with some of the wrong people.
BJ steals money from a man named Giff and because of this Bobby, Sue, and BJ all end up all on the hook for it.
Giff wants them to commit another crime in order to make up for this one, and if they don't come through they will have to answer to Giff's boss who's known simply as 'Big Red'.Well people these first time filmmakers brought to Toronto not only a well-crafted story, but a quality looking film as well.
These brothers collaborated extremely well with director of photography Jeff Bierman, and together they expertly capture the look, feel, and texture of small town Texas.
In "We Gotta Get Out of this Place" they show you these long, wide, and barren shots of literally nothing to do, and all of this adds to the main characters main problem of seclusion.
Other complements go out to these two brothers for their very cool use of transitioning the film from one scene to the next, and they also made use of good lighting, shadows, and silhouettes throughout the movie.This now takes me onto the performances, which by the way are all above average.
The three main players are all solid, but I will start with the film's villain and best performance in "We Gotta Get Out of this Place".
The film's main antagonist is Giff, and he is brought to vivid life by the very talented Mark Pellegrino.
On the flip side Jeremy Allen White plays Bobby and is the film's central and lead character.
He also gives us a sense of always wanting to do the right thing if the right thing is even a possibility considering their current situation, and put simply you can't help but really like the kid.The other two leads are BJ & Sue played by Logan Huffman & Mackenzie Davis.
She continually strives to better herself and that is the motivation for the film's title "We Gotta Get Out of this Place".Now seeing so many films back-to-back day after day in Toronto
well sometimes you go into the theater not knowing what the movie is even about or who's in it.
This film is like "Blood Simple" meets "Last Man Standing" meets "Twilight", and what could've been a real missed opportunity is anything but.
With a fraction of a Hollywood budget and almost no known stars the Brothers Hawkins have done a fantastic job taking an already tight script, and turning it into an even tighter film.Okay just a few minor 'Nick-Picking' issues to touch base with.
Then there were 2 montages that I felt did nothing but add length to the feature, and at least one of them could've been cut in favor of more screen time for William Devane.At right around 1 hour and 45 minutes "We Gotta Get Out of this Place" was much better than average, and I would love to see this film get some recognition.
A solid crime drama with rich and believable characters all wrapped up in a great looking film
well I don't know what else you could ask for?
Nick's Reel Screen Review is a very highly recommended 3 ½ stars out of 4, and that's for the crime thriller "We Gotta Get Out of this Place"..
If you think the title is strange wait until you actually see the film.
It's not three young adults fleeing small town Texas to find a better life, it's actually just two.
(Logan Huffman) is losing both his girlfriend, Sue (MacKenzie Davis) and best friend, Bobby (Jeremy Allen White) to college.
However, in Bad Turn Worse, nothing is really what it seems.
***SPOILER ALERT*** The money B.J. is freely throwing all over the place for his girl and best friend is actually stolen from his boss (or is it?) And Bobby and Sue?
What unfolds is a big series of plot twists that could have been pretty good - except the horrible script by Dutch Southern and mediocre to bad acting got in the way.
It doesn't help that most of the performances were dry - as if the cast conceded early on that this will never be anything more than a B-rated film.
While they do an excellent job capturing the gritty feel of rural Texas, they don't do so well with directing the cast.
Often, a character will start rambling on with some parable that takes up entirely too much time; guess the writers intended for these stories to be awe-inspiring but they only leave the viewer confused.
Little of these heart-to-heart chats actually tie in well with what's going on in Bad Turn Worse, which actually ends with a references back to one of these little parables/speeches (or whatever the writer wants to call them) that happened early in the film.
Anyway, I give it a 4 out of 10 because I think the plot, though strange, was overall pretty good.
With some cleaning up of the script and better directing/acting, Bad Turn Worse could have been a winner. |
tt0166286 | No Rest for the Wicked | Santos Trinidad, a corrupt policeman, goes drinking late at night. After he is thrown out of a bar, he aggressively demands that a waitress at another bar serve him despite the fact that they are closed. The owner attempts to defuse the situation by offering Trinidad a free drink, but he inadvertently offends Trinidad, who breaks his nose. The bouncer draws a pistol, and Trinidad shoots each of them dead. As Trinidad cleans up the evidence, an eyewitness escapes. After Trinidad studies their wallets for clues on the identity of the eyewitness, he destroys all identifying papers.
Chacón and Leiva investigate the crime. Without any way to identify the victims, their investigation proceeds slowly, though they initially suspect a gangland hit. After using the police's resources to identify the witness' license plates, Trinidad searches his apartment and car. Trinidad takes the man's GPS device, which he uses to identify common locations. Though he attempts to disguise himself, he is caught on a surveillance camera. Trinidad later tracks the man down and pursues him to the subway, where he attempts to kill him, only to be stabbed by an accomplice that the witness calls.
Trinidad and Chacón separately come to realize that the murder victims had ties to the Colombian drug cartels. Each seek out Rachid, a police informer who was previously involved with the same groups. Chacón, through her contacts with anti-terrorism intelligence, finds him first. Rachid tells her that his former acquaintances move from drugs to Islamic militancy, though he lost track of where they were based. Chacón questions Trinidad after seeing his egress from the apartment on the apartment complex's surveillance camera, but without any solid evidence she is forced to let him go free.
By threatening Rachid's ex-girlfriend, Trinidad tracks down Rachid, whom he also threatens. Rachid takes Trinidad through Madrid, where they attempt to track down the Islamic terrorist cell to which the witness belongs. Meanwhile, the cell purchases and sets a series of bombs in a Madrid shopping mall hidden as fire extinguishers. Trinidad arrives at their headquarters while they place the bombs. Trinidad kills all of the terrorists, including the witness, before they can remotely detonate the bombs. However, he is again stabbed, this time fatally. Chacón and Leiva arrive at the scene after his death. The film ends with several scenes of crowds of people at the mall, none of whom know that the bombs are still active. | psychedelic, murder | train | wikipedia | This is a great film.It is a real acid trip.. The story line is excellent. THe two lead actors give outstanding performances. The psychedelics effects and editing are top notch. This movie is sure to become a cult classic. The music selection is great, it matches the scenes perfectly. The sound mix is also good.I give the movie 10 stars. I can't find a trailer on any of the internet sites. A friend of mine had a VHS copy of the film, including the trailer. It was awesome. I liked seeing some real Vietnam footage mixed in with the movie. The opening credit sequence blew me away. I would like to see this movie on the big screen, in theaters. Where can I see the movie?. Not bad for a first effort. I actually saw this before it was entirely finished, since I was friends with the director, William, at the time. Parts were a little slow, and the person cast as the "romantic lead" was way too young for the part, but altogether it wasn't a bad first effort. My major complaints were that the plot wasn't terribly believable and the "aging" on the lead was just silver hair spray. There was an interesting twist at the end, though, when you find out who the bad guy really is. I think that was my favorite part in the movie. Of course, it was the END (and if William ever reads this, he will probably never forgive me!)!. Great Cinematographie. Despite the fact, that Stefan Lysenko in the role as Father William looks much too young to have served 1971 in Vietnam this is a very interesting little film with a great cinematographic style.It is about a conspiracy in the catholic church. Father William, a Vietnam Veteran, who promised to dedicate his life to God when surviving the war, is witness, when his best friend gets murdered. His murderers think, he has told anything to William so they sent out a sexy Femme Fatale (Carla Sofia Lescius in a fine role).She seduces him and gives him acid so he would tell the truth. Father William is now on his acid trip. When he came back from his trip he finds out more about the conspiracy but falls in love with the girl. Bad for him: Frank Love (William Smith, good as always as the bad guy) and his mobsters think, that Father William knows much more than he tells.It finally comes to one last showdown ...Great music, brilliant cinematography, who pays references to Roger Corman's "The Trip", a fascinating but sometimes confusing story and great actors even in the supporting roles. The bad guys here are the best actors from the US-Independent scene: William Smith as mobster Frank, the always great Joe Estevez, Robert Z'Dar (who gets killed much too soon here) as Dino in a very funny role, Airwolfs Jan-Michael Vincent and Timothy "That's my Bush" Bottoms.This film is really worth to watch. Give it a try! |
tt3339674 | Burying the Ex | Nice guy and horror fanatic Max (Anton Yelchin) is dating the beautiful-but-manipulative Evelyn (Ashley Greene). Evelyn is an extreme environmentalist working for a blog company that promotes "going green", while Max works a dead-end job at the local horror shop named Bloody Mary's. In many situations, Max often finds himself trapped trying to do whatever he can to keep Evelyn happy, including changing his diet and selling his old car. In addition to this, Max dreams of opening up a horror memorabilia shop of his own in the future, much to Evelyn's dismay. One day at the shop, Max unloads the latest shipments and finds a Satan Genie, an object that claims it can grant anyone's wants or desires. Believing it to just be another silly item for the shop, Max places it on the shelf in the storage room and dismisses it. Later that night, he and Evelyn have sex in the shop and make a promise to each other that they'll be together forever. Shortly thereafter, Max has Evelyn move in with him. Max and Evelyn initially decide to celebrate this new development in their relationship by grabbing a bite to eat. Wanting Evelyn to try something he enjoys for a change, Max suggests they go to I-Scream, a malt hot-spot run by Olivia (Alexandra Daddario). Evelyn is immediately unkind to Olivia and believes her and Max were flirting with each other. As Max pleads his case to her, Evelyn tearfully admits that she doesn't want to lose him and that he's the only thing in her life that has made her happy since her mother's death.
All seems to be great until Max comes back home to discover that Evelyn has redecorated their entire apartment to what she feels is aesthetically pleasing and has put away all of Max's collectables and posters, ruining their price values. This leads to an argument where Max states that he and Evelyn should be making decisions together instead of her taking the reins on every little thing all the time. Feeling that Evelyn's overbearing nature will lead him to be unhappy for the duration of their relationship, Max plans to break up with her but is too scared to do so. Max turns to his slacker half-brother Travis (Oliver Cooper) for advice. Travis suggests that Max break up with Evelyn in a public place so he can make a quick getaway and have everyone present see her for the control freak she truly is. However, the plan backfires when Evelyn accidentally gets hit by a bus on her way to the park. She dies in the middle of the road as a tearful Max watches.
A couple weeks go by and Max has shut himself off emotionally, feeling responsible for Evelyn's death. Travis swings by his place and, after seeing the funk he's in, encourages him to get back out and move on. Max eventually runs into Olivia again and starts to hit it off with her. As the night progresses, Max and Olivia learn that they both share the same fascination for horror. But when Max and Olivia visit the Hollywood Forever Cemetery, Evelyn is shown to have risen up from the dead and has dug herself up out of the ground. After Olivia walks Max back home, he's quickly greeted by an undead Evelyn at the door. Evelyn is overjoyed and believes hers and Max's love is being given a second chance and thinks they're still dating. Frightened, Max realizes that the Satan Genie from the shop made their wish of being "together forever" come true and has brought Evelyn back from the dead. Still wanting to pursue Olivia, Max actively attempts to hide Evelyn from her. He's also left to ponder how exactly he's going officially dump Evelyn. Max presumes that the answer to his problems lie with the Satan Genie, only to have it shatter on the ground when he loses his footing. For his backup plan, Max then researches the occult/spell books the shop has available in the hopes of finding something that will send Evelyn back to her grave. He tries these techniques, but to no avail; as they have no effect on Evelyn whatsoever.
Travis stumbles upon Max with a drunken Evelyn, and is reluctant to help him. He soon has a change of heart and tells Max that the only true way he can get rid of Evelyn is to decapitate her with a machete. Max tries to accomplish this but backs out at the last minute. The day before Halloween, Olivia drops by the shop to visit Max. It's later interrupted by a phone call from Evelyn. Olivia (who still doesn't know that Evelyn's a zombie) thinks Max still hasn't gotten over her just yet, but offers him an invitation to a screening of Night of the Living Dead at the cemetery. Travis steps up to the plate and offers to kill Evelyn so Max can meet Olivia at the movie. Travis shows up at the apartment under the guise of searching for an old DVD Max never returned to him and intentionally prolongs his stay, annoying Evelyn. She then develops a sudden craving for brains and ends up eating Travis. Meanwhile, Max and Olivia are enjoying each other's company and end up having sex in the back of Olivia's car.
Upon Max's return, he discovers Travis's corpse in the living room. Knowing that Evelyn is now determined to kill anyone who gets in her way, Max tricks her into drawing a hot bubble bath for themselves in order to barricade the bathroom door and trap her inside. He rushes out of the apartment to get the police but leaves his cell phone behind. Evelyn doesn't take too long to break free and escapes. She then kidnaps Olivia after she's read the texts between her and Max. Having had no luck with the police, Max hears through one of the police scanners about someone knocking over a malt shop and realizes Olivia's in trouble. Back at the apartment, Max sees Olivia tied up and Evelyn threatens to kill her. A battle ensues between Max, Evelyn, and Olivia, ending with Travis (now revealed to be a zombie himself) fatally stabbing Evelyn through the chest with the machete. With Evelyn finally gone, Max and Olivia take her body back to the cemetery and bury her.
One year later, Max and Olivia's relationship is still going strong. Max has long since quit his job at Bloody Mary's, became business partners with Olivia—having joined his horror memorabilia store and her malt shop as an enterprise of their own—and is now truly happy. Max then surprises Olivia with an engagement ring, which she gladly accepts. And Travis, still in his zombie form, is shown sign-spinning outside the shop. | comedy, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5973626 | Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders | At stately Wayne Manor, Bruce Wayne (Adam West) and his ward Dick Grayson (Burt Ward), watch their favorite show The Gotham Palace. During the programming, a band that was supposed to play on the show is revealed to be hidden and replaced by four of the dynamic duo's greatest villains: Joker (Jeff Bergman), Penguin (William Salyers), Riddler (Wally Wingert), and Catwoman (Julie Newmar). Bruce and Dick suit up as Batman and Robin and head towards the Gotham City Police Department, where they receive a riddle from Commissioner Gordon (Jim Ward) and Chief O'Hara (Thomas Lennon).
They discover that the crooks are robbing the Acme Atomic Energy Laboratory of their newest invention, the replication ray, which has the power to make a perfect duplicate out of anything. After a brief fight, the criminals manage to escape Batman, but leave behind a clue that leads the caped crusaders to their lair in an abandoned TV dinner factory. While discussing what to do with the Replication Ray, Catwoman reveals her plan to make Batman join their side with a scratch from a substance called "Batnip." After Batman and Robin break in, they are defeated by the criminals and trapped on a frozen food tray heading towards a large oven. Catwoman uses her Batnip on Batman, but he is supposedly unaffected by it. The two escape the trap after the villains leave the factory.
Back at stately Wayne Manor, Bruce starts showing signs of aggression after Aunt Harriet (Lynne Marie Stewart) nearly discovers the Batcave. He blames Alfred (Steven Weber) for the incident and fires him leaving the butler to wander on the streets homeless. After days of not finding Joker, Penguin, Riddler, and Catwoman, Batman figures out that the four crooks are no longer on Earth and have hijacked a space station. The two heroes go into space with the help of their Bat-Rocket.
At the space station, Joker, Penguin, and Riddler betray Catwoman as they don't trust her on their side due to her feelings for Batman. They try to throw her out into space. She is rescued by the Dynamic Duo and aids them in defeating her former allies for revenge. Batman savagely beats the three men and recovers the replication ray, but Catwoman escapes in an escape pod in the process.
After the mission, Dick expresses concern towards Bruce for his behavior in the space station and at the Gotham City Police Department (where he left when Gordon wasn't looking without a word). Bruce kicks Dick out of the house and takes a break from being Batman, resulting in a crime spree in Gotham City.
A few weeks later, Batman returns to the Gotham City Police Department and blames the police for the increase in crime. He uses the replication ray on himself to replace Gordon and O'Hara as police commissioner and police chief respectively.
Batman soon replaces most of the government, jobs, and citizens in Gotham with his replicas and plans to take over the world. Dick realizes that the Batnip had a delayed effect on Batman and was slowly making him more evil over time. He then suits up as Robin and goes to Catwoman's lair to request her help in curing Batman which she agrees to do as she thinks the effects of the Batnip were more severe than she planned.
The two take the Catmobile to the Bat Cave, where Catwoman attempts to give Batman the antidote, but Batman anticipated it and took the Bat Anti-Antidote. Batman defeats the two in a fight and leaves them to die in the Nuclear Reactor, but they survive thanks to Robin's Bat Anti Isotope Spray. Knowing they can't take on an army of Batmen by themselves, Robin and Catwoman arrange the prison break of most of Batman's rogues gallery escape from Gotham State Penitentiary like Archer, Black Widow, Bookworm, Clock King, Egghead, False Face, King Tut, Louie the Lilac, Mad Hatter, Minstrel, Mr. Freeze, Sandman, Shame, and Siren by claiming to Warden Crichton (Thomas Lennon) that the ball and chains and pickaxes aren't in good shape. This resulted in the replaced versions carrying the villains out of the prison. While a prison guard tells Warden Crichton that Joker, Riddler, and Penguin didn't escape, the three of them mysteriously turn into a pile of dust.
The two confront Batman and his army on The Gotham Palace set, but they still lose even with the help of the criminals. Before Batman kills Robin and Catwoman, a disguised Alfred arrives and gives Batman a strong enough antidote to counter the Anti-Antidote. Batman returns to normal, and the rest of his clones turn to dust as the replication ray wasn't strong enough to make perfect clones.
Batman realized that his behavior change was used as a distraction by Joker, Penguin, and Riddler, and that the ones they arrested were fake copies. The real ones were using the opportunity to rob the Gotham Art Museum. Batman, Robin, and Catwoman (who came as vengeance for what they did at the space shuttle) chase them to Penguin's blimp, where the villainous trio is defeated after they're knocked off the blimp to a safe location to be arrested. Catwoman tries to escape with the stolen paintings, but Batman recovers them and Catwoman, unwilling to be put in a cage again, allows herself to fall into a smokestack, leaving her fate ambiguous.
Bruce and Dick then throw Aunt Harriet a surprise birthday party (acting as if that's the secret they've been hiding from her) before being called away by the Bat Signal. | violence | train | wikipedia | I particularly appreciated the camera panning homage around the bat mobile.Adam West, Burt Ward and Julie Newmar returned to voice their roles from the classic Batman TV shows of the 1960s.
There were other Batman adaptations for the movies before him (Lewis Wilson anyone?) but Adam West is the one we all remember.Julie Newmar got her deserved place back in this movie.
She played Catwoman in the original TV series but was replaced by Lee Meriwether in the 1966 Batman movie.
And since this movie is obviously trying to homage the old show as well as be it's own thing, Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders does a great job!
Well, because "Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders" really captured the essence and the spirit of the glorious Batman series from the mid-1960s.The animation was really good, and the art style was great.
I thoroughly enjoyed the particular drawing style that they went with in "Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders", because it really was a unique style in a retro-kind of way.But even more impressively was the cast to the animated movie.
And there really is a lot of great stuff for fans of the TV series from 1966.The story in "Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders" was just like an extended episode from the iconic TV series, complete with the hilarious dialogue and the exploding stars with various fight words when they were brawling on the screen, just like in the TV series.As for the voice cast, well as I just said, then it was a pure treat to have so many talents return to the Batman universe and come together in this 2016 animated movie.
However, if you are not familiar with the 1966 TV series, then chances are very high that you will find the dialogue to be kind of weird, if not downright odd and bizarre."Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders" is definitely aimed for the audience whom grew up watching the TV series on the television, such as myself.
And it always cracks me up to see that every item in the bat-cave and in the arsenal of Batman and Robin has to be labeled with Bat-something.If you are a fan of the Adam West era of Batman, then you should definitely not let "Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders" slip by.
With my growing interest in the female gender, I was a big Julie Newmar Catwoman fan and had great admiration for her dangerous curves.Return of the Caped Crusaders is OK, but it is hard to poke fun at something that always used to poke fun at itself.
The series was out-of-step with the original DC character which debuted in 1939, and it took a great deal of effort on the part of movie-makers to return the character to its dark roots.Fans of the 60s series are likely to enjoy this movie...
The campy return of Adam West mixed with our more adult look at Batman.
It is to the point where it seems like no one even remembers that Adam West was the original Batman.
However DC animation has helped bring back the old Adam West styled Batman in a major way.
While also realizing those original fans have probably grew up now so is more willing to lace the film with more sexual humor and also press buttons with the whole Batman taking around a boy with tights and how strange that really is.
Adam West as Batman and Julie Newmar as Catwoman were enjoyable to watch.
If you are a fan of the 1960's Batman, which starred Adam West and Burt Ward, you're gonna be in for a treat here, this is like a reunion movie to that series.
Julie Newmar reprises her role has Catwoman , but the other actors who played Joker, Penguin, and Riddler, have all passed away, so different actor are providing there voices, and I gotta say the actor who voices The Joker sounds amazingly like the original Joker Ceser Romero, to the point where I thought it was Romero.The animation here is not bad, not terrific but not terrible either.
Adam West and Burt Ward provide there voices in the characters that made them famous, feeling like they never really left.
It's fun and good natured entertainment that has some thinking involved where you must solve puzzles or at least try.You get some great cheesy lines such as,"Time to use my trusty Batzooka," and "Holy Salisbury Steak." This is well written and well animated.
Seeing both West and Ward fight their most famous and classic foes again in a well done animated movie is a treat.The movie has Easter eggs and other nods to various Batman incarnations and even pokes fun at times.
I went into this wanting to like it, we're seeing the return of the original old school Batman complete with Adam West, Burt Ward & Julie Newmar!Essentially this is an animated adventure based upon the original Batman television series and it's highly loyal and devastatingly nostalgic.It's faithfulness to the original series however is in many ways its downfall as if you didn't like that very "Marmite" show then you will hate this as well.Full of over the top goofy campy comedy, classic utility belt gags and villian designs we haven't seen in years I commend the creators for what they have done here.Sadly I was never a fan of the original show, I didn't dislike it I just wasn't the demographic and always thought it was goofy for goofy's sake.That being said for the fans of the show this is essential viewing and I'm highly impressed with what they've accomplished.
RIP Mayor Adam West.The Good:Very nostalgicLoyal to the original seriesExcellent voice castThe Bad:Still goofyThings I Learnt From This Movie:The fact we don't see the batzooka anymore is travestyDrinking everytime the word bat is spoken would be a dangerous drinking gameBatman has a great Batchelor pad *Badamtish*I don't understand why the eggman isn't a real villian!.
Maybe I'm just tired of having a "dark" Batman, and I say this as someone who collects the comics and has read many, many trades (yes, even New52 for you nerds going "wh-what?"), and seen the Burton Batman films countless times (the Nolan films get a little trickier for me, though Batman Begins is still a quality origin story).
Dead Parents!" So enter in this, the return of Adam West and Burt Ward in a feature in 50 years, and I found it a complete delight and blast to the solar plexus.Return of the Caped Crusaders isn't for the Batman fan that only grumbles about it being dark all the time, though interestingly this does reference the Dark Knight Returns in one line (and I had an especially riotous reaction to that).
I think that this was a great time for West/Ward/Newmar to return and for the filmmakers to try an animated movie since, oddly enough, after about 30 years of almost nothing but Dark Batman stories and movies (sure sure, with the exception of the Schumachers, but best to forget that for now), there's now at least some room, if not a turn around, for the campy and jokey and pun-explodingly-packed Batman series to return.I could go into the plot but suffice it to say it's appropriate that it's for a cartoon - it involves a Bat-formula that Catwoman concocts and gets on Batman's cheek so that he becomes a "Bad" Batman, eventually making multiple Batmans (or, Batmen, which one, not sure), and it's up to Robin and Catwoman(!) to stop him or try to turn him (but can they when Batman has an Anti-Antidote?) This is thoroughly silly and yet it's as inventive as the show was.
If you've seen the 66 movie then you should look at this as not so much a sequel as a simple follow-up, another in a series like when a new Pink Panther movie would come out.What I appreciated the most is how much attention is paid to alliterations, to puns, to fully embracing the silliness and getting even a little meta about the impact of Batman over the past 50 years.
There was a time this was seen as fun AND sophisticated, but that's been turned around by a lot of years of (often good, sometimes really great) Batman stories that returned it to its 'roots'.
But the Boy Wonder doesn't have time to dissect this new Batman as their vilest villains The Joker, The Penguin, The Riddler and Catwoman (Julie Newmar) have teamed up to take the Dynamic Duo down for good.
The cartoon continuation of the campy 1960s TV show, this DC Entertainment feature finds some original cast members returning to voice their characters as best as octogenarians can.
I was never a big fan of either version of Batman.Both versions had good points and bad points.When I saw there was a new cartoon movie in the TV show style, I had to see it and I was pleasantly surprised.It's exactly like the old show except sometimes they actually parody the show.It's kind of like if the newer Birdman and Space Ghost characters had just done their old shows.The story is about Batman becoming evil and making an army of Bat Clones.It's so funny.Plus, I think they actually bring back every villain from the show.I am so glad they brought back this Batman and I hope they make more.I see most of the positive reviews on here are getting down voted.The fan boys are ragin'!!.
They were given a few sympathetic moments.As a whole I'd say that if you enjoy the campy Batman and are a fan, then you'll have a great time with it.
Much like DC's recent "Batman '66" comics, it's a nostalgia trip, just as much as it's a new twist on an old favorite, that can be entertaining to those not familiar with these versions of the characters.
as part of a double feature with Batman vs Two-face and I liked both.I remember I use to watch re-runs of Adam west's show as a little kid back
stop Batman's silly chaos.This was a lot of fun to watch, the cool thing is, the key cast sound the same
mind some silly camp humor or if you like Adam West's Batman give it a look..
Very good film for a very old animation film if ur not into the old batman then watch this as it is different but still not like the new one.
Lol im watching this on netflix and its a really good tyrow back to the 60s show adam and burt were always fun to watch love the fact they also have the original catwoman i really reccomend this one to everyone that grew up on old school batman.
Overall an enjoyable film, although Adam West was the first Batman I was introduced to, his voice over sounded like his 88 years of age.
To get Adam West and Burt Ward to play Batman and Robin again!
Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders is a dose of nostalgia as it continues where the 1960s television series left off.Adam West and Burt Ward provide the voices of Batman and Robin in this animated adventure as they battle with the quizzical quipster Riddler, the fish loving Penguin, the clown Prince of Crime Joker and the nip picking CatwomanIt has all the fun and camp elements of the telvison show, there is a scene where multiple Bat clones fight the various villains of the week that appeared in the television show such as Egghead.The cartoon does feel too long, the animation is pretty good.
Unfortunately Adam West's voice does feel like that of an old man but Burt Ward still comes across as the boy wonder..
I enjoyed Return of the Caped Crusaders quite a bit, and found myself laughing uncontrollably from time to time, but that being said, this movie is honestly only as strong as its fan service.Before I get going, allow me to briefly introduce myself as a Batman fan.
I grew up watching the animated series, and have since dove headfirst into Batman stories across a wide variety of mediums, but my first introduction to Gotham City was when my parents showed me the old 1966 movie starring Adam West.
As such, it holds a special place in my heart, and I always like to watch reruns of the old series when I can, even though its lighthearted camp is quite different from what Batman has been for much of his existence.
It can sometimes be a bit cringe worthy.Thankfully, all of the fan service makes Return of the Caped Crusaders an enjoyable visit to a time when Batman was simpler and more innocent, in spite of its obvious shortcomings.
Those who enjoy Adam West's take on Batman will definitely find this to their liking, even if it isn't their preferred take on the Dark Knight.
I don't think it is going to be for any fan of Batman the animated series and beyond that..
The thing is, we've had 40 years since then of comics and movies and animation turning Batman into a serious character.
Adam West and Burt Ward return to the iconic roles of Batman and Robin, providing voices for a new animated take of the classic 60's campy series, in which the dynamic duo face a ...
If you grew up knowing that Adam West is Batman, you tend to find the movies a bit - childish.
This is not one of Morales' best-directed films as the pace is all over the place and gives the movie a rambling and disorganised feeling.I would stay away from this one if you're a Batman fan, especially of the cheesy '66 series.
Buy the original movie or rewatch the series as both are a hundred times better than this film..
Also, and this annoyed me so much, the film constantly uses quotes from old Batman movies and anime just to pander to Easter Egg hunters.
Oh, they have the original actors voicing their respective roles which would have been good if it didn't make Catwoman sound like an eighty year old lady and make Batman sound like the Mayor for Family Guy. I could go on and on, this movie is a mess and will just p!ss you off unless you are a zombie trendy..
"Return of the Caped Crusaders" has several references to the original TV series which will have viewers laughing in delight.
Chief O'Hara's "Begora" is great, as is Commissioner Gordon's comment, following Batman figuring out a criminal plan, "Of course, why didn't I figure that out?" From the animation, to the voices of original series' stars Adam West, Burt Ward, and Julie Newmar, to the plot (which was never really broached on the TV series), to the "inside" jokes, this film is a terrific homage to the TV series.
It was good to hear Adam West, Burt Ward and Julie Newmar reprise their iconic characters for this feature length animated film.
The actors don't sound all different to their time on the series.The animation strongly resembles the 1960s T.V show but the tone of this film is quite dark in places.
Batman is a bit more angry and Adam West played the character from this angle effectively.
Based on the 60's Batman series starring Adam West and Burt Ward as Batman and Robin, they return to voice the characters that made them famous.
They, along with Julie Newmar, who returns to voice Catwoman, are back with one of the best DC animated films in a while.
The four main villains, Catwoman, Penguin, The Riddler, and The Joker have all returned and it feels like it could be a direct sequel to the 1966 film that also had these four villains as the main antagonists to Batman and Robin.
If they tried to make it their own it would've destroyed the movie (Wally Wingert has actually voiced The Riddler in the Batman Arkham videogames so it was great to see him do the same character that was separate from that universe so well).
This movie is great fun to watch you don't have to be a fan of the 60's/80's Batman to enjoy this movie.
The best scene is act 2But I am glad they got Adam West, Burt Ward and Julie ???
(whatever her name is) back to reprise Batman, Robin and Catwoman with voice actors who weren't active at the time like Wally Wingert and Jim Ward..
A cartoon version of the 1966 Adam West Batman series.I must admit the first 20 or 30 minutes of this show were a struggle, even to a full-on 1966 Batman fan like me.Many others have said they struggled with Batman sounding so old, but that was not so much my issue, my early problem was that I am not a regular viewer of cartoons so, at first, I was just not comfortable seeing 1960s Batman filmed in this way.
If they can bring Peter Cushing back to life in Star Wars: Rogue One (2016) why not give us a young Adam West/Burt Ward in CGI?However, after 20 or 30 minutes I became more comfortable with the cartoon look and I just went along with the ride.This is a wonderful tribute to a 50 year old TV series.
Adam West and, Burt Ward voice their roles for the title characters and Julie Newmar returns to breathe life into Catwoman.
*I Will Try Not to include spoilers but will notify you beforehand if I deem it necessary.Overall: This movie was pure nostalgia for people who love the Adam West Batman.
This movie was thoroughly entertaining but many audiences, particularly those who do not enjoy or at least feel nostalgic from the Adam West era of the Caped Crusader.Good: It is very very well animated and the music is incredible and nostalgic.
This was more than likely made for fans of the older Batman series from the 60s, but good God was this hard to watch. |
tt0095871 | Pin | Dr. Frank Linden has a life-size, anatomically correct medical dummy in his office which he calls "Pin". Via ventriloquism, Dr. Linden uses Pin to teach his children, Leon and Ursula about bodily functions and how the body works in a way the children can relate to without it being awkward. Dr. Linden's interactions with the children are otherwise cold and emotionally distant, and his ventriloquism act is the only sign of a more warm and playful side to his nature. Unknown to Dr. Linden, Leon is mentally ill and has come to believe that Pin is alive. Due in part to his mother, who discourages Leon from playing outdoors or bringing anyone home, Leon has no real friends and sees Pin as the closest analogue. Leon is further traumatized when he secretly witnesses his father's nurse use Pin as a sex toy.
When Leon turns eighteen, Dr. Linden, having come back to retrieve case studies for a speech, catches him having a conversation with Pin (via ventriloquism, which Leon had learned). Realizing the extent of Leon's psychosis and that his son is mentally ill, Dr. Linden takes Pin away to use as a visual aid for a speech with the intention of leaving Pin at the medical school. As Dr. and Mrs. Linden speed to the hall, they get into a car crash caused by either Dr. Linden's recklessness or Pin; the Lindens are both killed instantly. Later, as Ursula sits in the back of a police car, crying, Leon secretly retrieves Pin from the scene.
Leon and Ursula, though grieving and orphaned, enjoy their newfound freedom until Mrs. Linden's sister, Aunt Dorothy, moves in. She encourages Ursula to take a job at the library, which Leon is against. Believing that she is influencing Ursula and after talking it over with Pin, Leon causes Aunt Dorothy to die from a heart attack by using Pin to frighten her. However, Ursula continues to work at the library, where she meets handsome athlete Stan Fraker and falls in love. Meanwhile, Leon takes his fixation with Pin to pathological extremes, first by dressing him in Dr. Linden's clothes and finally fitting him with latex skin and a wig.
Leon believes that Stan is only interested in Ursula's inheritance and that he wants to put Leon in a sanitarium. He invites Stan over under the guise of discussing a surprise birthday party for Ursula. Leon drugs Stan's drink, and when Stan fights back, Leon bludgeons Stan with a wooden sculpture. Following Pin's instructions, he puts Stan in a bag and plans to dump him in the river. Leon is interrupted by a call from Ursula, who says she intends to come home early. Leon quickly hides Stan's body in a woodpile outside the house and cleans up the blood.
To calm her, Leon tells Ursula that Stan is visiting a sick friend out of town; she believes him until she discovers a gift she gave Stan and a wet spot on the carpet. When she confronts Leon, he blames it on Pin, which causes her to run out of the house in hysterics. Leon asks Pin why he would not help him. Pin states that he has never lied to or for him and that Leon's motives were selfish. Ursula returns with double-bit axe, which she raises ready to strike; the screen goes white as Leon screams and cowers.
The police find Stan's body; to their amazement, he is still alive. Some time later, Ursula and Stan return to the house to visit Pin. Ursula tells him that she's going on a trip with Stan. Pin inquires as to whether she's heard from Leon. Ursula replies "No." Pin says that he misses him a great deal. Ursula agrees, it is revealed that she is talking to Leon, who has taken Pin's persona. When the dummy was destroyed, Leon had a psychotic break, which left only the Pin side of his personality to completely take over which also means that Leon has also become a real, life-size version of Pin. | tragedy, plot twist, murder | train | wikipedia | Impressively written and directed by Canadian filmmaker Sandor Stern (who is probably best known for scripting THE AMITYVILLE HORROR), this underrated psychological thriller comes as a rare and welcome surprise, especially at a time when Freddy, Michael Myers and Jason were hacking their way through theaters (and sadly, hogging most of the attention).The prosperous Linden family live in tight household headed over by a very stern doctor father (Terry O'Quinn) and an obsessive-compulsive clean freak mother (Bronwen Mantel) so extreme she keeps plastic slip-covers over all the furniture.
When their sheltered children, Leon and Ursula, begin to start inquiring about the birds and bees, O'Quinn uses his ventriloquist skills to bring a medical display dummy named Pin to life to answer their questions.
The film then jumps ahead ten or so years when the parents are killed in a car crash and Leon (David Hewlett) begins to display schizophrenic tendencies.
He still believes Pin is alive and is eventually reduced to using Pin to murder his "enemies" to keep his sister (Cyndy Preston) in his life.A film as subtle and quiet as this one requires solid, serious dramatic performances to work and Hewlett, Preston and O'Quinn don't disappoint in this thoughtful and eerie film.
Thats why I now get some of the negative remarks because if you want to get a psycho axe wielding maniac and his rotten mom you sure will be disappointed by nice guy Leon and his pretty boring doll.If you just watch Pin for what it is and that to me is a kind of apsychological drama, then it makes much more sense and has some interesting insights.
the downward spiral picks up pace and troubled Leon who desperately tries to keep his "family" together by keeping Ursula from other peoples influences starts going over the edge.Ursula know about Leons mental state and plays along with his schizophrenic role play and the Pin doll which Leon gives his voice just like his father did.
She doesn't want her brother to end in a sanitarium, realizing too late that her playing along just makes things worse.The movie is very slow and the deterioration of Leons mental state is not thrilling, everything is shown in kind of a normal way because thats what it is for Leon.
If you are interested in a psychological study in a "Psycho"-like set watch this movie, if you want corpses, thrills and scary horror dolls this sure is the wrong movie for you..
Ursula is trying to become a well-adjusted adult, but Leon finds that his only true friend is Pin and still thinks he is actually alive.
The latter half of the film doesn't focus on Leon's psychology as much as one would expect, though it is clear that the kid has a warped idea of sexuality based on his twisted parental guidance and a freaky...incident he witnessed involving his beloved Pin. The acting is above average for an 80s horror film, and most genre fans will recognize David Hewlitt from "Cube." He does a good job playing the potentially-psycho teenager, and Cynthia Preston is marvelous as the sister trying to bring some stability to the family.
The plot follows a brother and sister, Leon and Ursula, whose father uses ventriloquism and an anatomical dummy as a learning tool for his children.
A childish idea that leads to a very dark future for Leon.While the film lacks any real potent bite, it blends it's elements together with a good plot pace well enough to ensure that the film always offers compelling viewing and although the action gets a little predictable at times, we always want to carry on watching to see what happens.
Ventriloquism is a hobby that has always lent itself well to horror movies; from the dummy tale in 'Dead of Night', to this film and more; you can always count on a creepy movie if one of it's core subjects is the act of someone lending their voice to a plastic doll.
Sure, it may remind you of "Psycho" or of "Magic" (the 1978 thriller with Hopkins), but its slow pacing, its MORBID atmosphere and its weirdness make it feel completely different from those movies.
Scenes include a skinless mannequin giving a private sex lecture to a young brother and sister, a man giving his daughter an abortion, and a nurse who uses Pin as a sex doll when she thinks no one else is watching.This neglected gem is an example of 1980's horror at its most creative.
Cynthia Preston is also very good as the grown up Ursula, who tries to get her life back together, whilst also coping with the increasing demands of Leon/Pin. Don't expect anything too exploitative or overly sensational, as 'Pin' builds up the tension and the scares by telling a good story and providing proper character development.
The story: a young, lonely fragile-minded boy in need for parental love and guidance get's close-to-none from his too self-consumed parents and projects his needs into a medical display dummy which his father (a doctor) use as "a handyman" to help teaching his children.
Pin is a hard film to categorise, I'd say horrorish.......maybe just a thriller.It tells the story of a strict family raising their two children.
The father is a doctor who treats his anatomic educational mannequin as though it were a person and gets his children in on it as well.As you can imagine this effects the kids quite severely especially the son who grows up to be more than a little odd.Starring the excellent Terry O'Quinn and David Hewlett (Even though I didn't realise it was him until late in the film) this quirky little tale is filled with a combination of weird and deeply uncomfortable scenes.Not sure who the demographic for this one would be, I'd say a definite one for those with a taste for the less than usual.The Good:Terry O'QuinnDavid Hewlett is excellent but unrecognisableThe Bad:Unsettling filmNot exactly engagingThings I Learnt From This Movie:I'm genuinely concerned for the writer of the film and their level of mental health.
Papa uses Pin in his practice to help kids feel at ease during the visit - and throws his voice to Pin - ventriloquism for dummies.Fast forward to the 'present' - kids are grown (Leon & Ursula) and in their teens.
Suffice it to say that murder & mayhem and some general craziness come to play in this flick...Parts of this movie are out of place - the nurse's sex party, for example, and parts are right in place - the eventual end of the story, the love interest that grows, etc.Overall, a good flick with enough in it to keep your interest.
PIN was written by Andrew Neiderman, who has written forty-seven novels under his own name, but is perhaps better known for the sixty-eight -- and counting -- that's ghostwritten from V.C. Andrews and her Flowers in the Attic series.1988's Canadian movie adaption skips most of the incest, but trust me, it's no less strange.Directed by Sandor Stern (the writer of the original The Amityville Horror and writer/director of the Patty Duke starring Amityville: The Evil Escapes), PIN starts with Dr. Frank Linden (Terry O'Quinn, forever The Stepfather in our hearts), who keeps a human size, anatomically correct Slim Goodbody-esque medical model in his office that he's named Pin. He uses Pin -- throwing his voice to make him speak -- to explain how the body works without it being awkward.
He panics and runs to Pin for help, then uses the frightening doll to chase the girl away from the house.Leon believes that Stan is only interested in Ursula's money and to put him away.
After the death of his parents, a teenager grows closer and closer to his father's anatomically correct medical mannequin called Pin in this offbeat Canadian thriller from 'Amityville Horror' screenwriter Sandor Stern.
I didn't get to read much that day, and left with the idea that the novel was about a boy and his friend who was a person, or magical being, or *something* alive, named Pin. In adulthood I heard of the movie and assumed the same thing, that it was about some kind of plastic android, or something else that could actually speak.
I learned that it was a horror story for the first time then, and I assumed that Pin went on a killing rampage or something (I told you I didn't understand what it was about!).Well I saw the movie last night and of course I was surprised that that *wasn't* the plot at at all.
A friend rented this movie several years ago and we all agreed that it was an entertaining but deeply disturbed film - a little "too weird for this world." I'd recommend this movie to people who like to be spooked but can do without the graphic violence and gore, thank-you..
But there's something about it -- maybe that we all know someone like Leon, or that no other movie follows this storyline exactly -- that makes it worth viewing.
However, while the novel is more ambiguous about whether Pin is actually real or not for most of it, the film handles the story quite well.Leon and Ursula are the children of very strict parents, the father a doctor.
While we realize his problem (the film doesn't try to make you think Pin is real after all), it's the boy's sickness and his sister's compassion that makes the story intriguing.
David Hewlett (Leon), and Cyndy Preston (Ursula) handle their roles with a natural feel that makes you care for these people, and Terry O'Quinn as always can make you uneasy with just a simple stern expression.
While we know what Leon's problem is and the plot possibilities that will arise, it's the execution of it and the satisfying ending that will please those who don't expect more than this story is, and trust me folks, this is more a psychological drama than it's promoted "horror" label (and did I hear right, it aired on the Sci-Fi network?
In this low-budget descendant of "Psycho", Ursula and Leon are sister and brother, living alone, save for a large wooden puppet they call "Pin" (for Pinocchio).
When Ursula starts hanging around with new boyfriend Stan, Leon and Pin take action.What drew me to this film was Terry O'Quinn, who has never (so far as I'm aware) made a bad film.
PIN, so Leon believes has the answers to everything and sits in at the family table like the good block of wood he is.The flick goes right down the MAGIC path and eventually poor old sis, (delectable Ms Preston) finds herself at the whim of PIN or is it her brother..or are we, the viewers insane?
Tackling such delicate issues as parental abuse, incest, schizophrenia and psycho-sexual trauma, this is not your typical 80s horror by a long chalk, but rather a bold study of an extremely dysfunctional family and its eldest sibling Leon's gradual descent into madness.Given Leon's bizarre upbringing, though, one can hardly blame the poor guy for ending up more than a little disturbed: as children, Leon and his sister are led to believe that the medical dummy in their doctor father's surgery is able to talk (when, in reality, their father is simply throwing his voice); Leon's mother, a controlling germ freak, disapproves of his school friends; his younger sister, Ursula, develops an unhealthy obsession with sex at an early age, sharing intimate conversations with him about her 'needs'; at a crucial stage in his development, Leon witnesses a member of his father's staff sexually gratifying herself with his plastic pal Pin; and when his sister gets herself up the duff at age 15, good old dad performs the abortion and even invites Leon to watch!!!
His sister, who has long realised that the dummy cannot really talk, is naturally very upset by her new house-guest, but things go from bad to much, much worse when Leon, who harbours suppressed incestuous desires, takes a dislike to her new boyfriend Stan.Although Pin might be a little slow going at times, its delightfully perverse subject matter ensures that boredom is never an option.
David Hewlett as Leon Linden is extremely impressive in the key role, being convincingly off his trolley and more than a little bit chilling, and he is given excellent support by the gorgeous Cynthia Preston as his libidinous teenage sister, and the brilliant Terry O'Quinn of Lost fame (and The Stepfather, of course) as his father.
Director Sandor Stern occasionally allows his film to stray dangerously close to the absurd, but for the most part he handles his material both intelligently and confidently, wringing a fair amount of tension from his bizarre set-up in the process.Pin's subject matter might be a touch perverse for casual viewers seeking more traditional edge-of-the-seat entertainment, its subtleties may be lost on fright fans yearning for more primal thrills (meaning there ain't a lot of blood and gore in this one), and I suspect that the going will be a little too slow for many, but those actively seeking an unusual and daring horror/thriller could do a lot worse than to check this one out..
Pin is half a weirdly interesting film and half a predictable and boring one; so I'll spend a bit of time on the first weird half and gloss over the sucky last hour.Two young children Leon and Ursula live with their rich and ultra-strict parents in a large stately home.
A knocked up Ursula is already pregnant, they summon the courage to ask Pin even though Dad is not present, who says (much to their surprise) that she must deal with it, and not only does Dad get to perform his daughter's abortion – but he asks Leon if we wants to watch, telling him it might be interesting.With the confidence gained by a chat to Pin, Leon starts visiting him alone with great frequency for long chats, and when Dad finally finds out he is none too pleased.Now while this might sound like it is building up to something – this is actually where the movie becomes formulaic nonsense and peters out to a disappointing piffle.Ma and Pa are killed and Leon moves Pin into the large family home that he and Ursula now dwell in alone.
Leon spends more and more time with Pin and in between writes his own disturbing version of poetry, Ursula gets a job and finds a boyfriend, and the filmmakers try to make us decide what is going on.
The movie tries to be different and mildly hints at some disturbing content including incest and sexual relations with inanimate objects, but in the end the makers were too candy assed to actually explore the possibilities.If you like crappy psychological thrillers, camp or David Hewlett, watch this film.
Pin is too restrained to be a true horror film and not deep enough to be a good psychological drama as often happens with Canadian films.
But God,is this film great.It centers around a character called Leon(DAVID HEWLETT,of "DARKSIDE" and "CUBE"),who has this devilish-talking-dummy named Pin as a friend.POSSIBLE SPOILERS: Pin guides Leon on his every-move,even when it happens to do with his sister,Ursula(CINDY PRESTON of "DARKSIDE',"THE BRAIN" and "PROM NIGHT 3".I think "PIN" is one of the greatest horror movies of the 80`s.
Normally, this is far too ambitious for an independent horror film but Sandor Stern (co-writer and director of Pin
) efficiently blends it all into one seriously compelling and quite disturbing thriller.
Leon and Ursula are the kids of a successful doctor (brilliant B-actor Terry O'Quinn) who brings an anatomically correct office dummy to live with his ventriloquism-skills.
Leon descents further and further into madness while 'protecting' his younger sister and nursing the dummy.Pin
is a very unsettling film, story-driven and very well elaborated.
When both parents die in a car crash, Leon takes Pin home as a family member.The acting of David Hewlett as Leon is impressive.
When reading about it before I saw it, I thought it would end up much more like a horror cliché of the dummy coming to life.
The father has seemingly a self-mastered ventriloquist projecting his voice into "PIN" which talks to his patients, and his own son and daughter.The son (Leon) grows up so close to PIN that he truly believes it is a real person.
He even finishes PIN's clear skin to look more like a real human, which only adds to the bizarre creepiness.In the second half of the film we find an Aunt moving in to look after the kids.
He carries the movie through and helps makes the film feel less like a bad B-horror movie and more like a "Psycho"-style psychological thriller.
Leon is a tad off to say the least and chooses to have Pin, a life-sized anatomically correct medical dummy that his father (the legendary Terry O'Quinn) had used as a ventriloquist doll, as his best friend.
When Leon feels threatened be it from an aunt that the siblings don't particularly care for or an admirer of Ursula that Leon gets jealous of (yes Leon's slightly incestrial, I neglected to mention that), bad things start to happen.This film comes off like a slightly more twisted version of Psycho, with the dummy providing stand-in for Norman's deceased mother.
so when little Ursala and Leon grow up in the 1960's with their neat-freak mom and doctor father, they also grow up with Pin, leaving both of them more or less terrified of him, but as children considering the dummy their secret friend.
There was one moment that scared me as a kid but I now find comedic: when Leon scares his aunt to death literally, by holding Pin above her face at night and moaning like an old man.If you're a horror fan, I highly recommend Pin. The soundtrack is eerie, the acting superb for a low-budget film and it's certainly one of the most disturbing things I've seen, although it has very little, if any, gore. |
tt0059311 | Incubus | In a lake at a rock quarry, a young woman named Mandy and her boyfriend, Ray, are swimming. The two spend the night at the lake camping, but are attacked by an unseen figure; Ray is killed, and Mandy is taken to the hospital with a ruptured uterus and serious trauma. As the attack occurs, teenager Tim Galen experiences a recurring nightmare he has in which a woman is tortured by a monstrous figure; his grandmother, Agatha Galen, tries to dissuade him of his suspicions about the premonitory dream. At the hospital, Mandy is treated by Sam Cordell (John Cassavetes), a surgeon and physician in the small community of Galen.
Sam's teenaged daughter, Jenny, is dating Tim, but he disapproves of their relationship. At the hospital, Sheriff Hank Walden (John Ireland) questions Sam about Mandy's injuries, and a nosy local reporter, Laura Kincaid, arrives to question Walden, who forces her to leave. That night at the local library and museum, a librarian named Carolyn Davies is brutally raped and murdered while closing the building. During her autopsy, Sam finds she suffered similar wounds as Mandy, and finds an inexplicable amount of semen in her vagina.
Attempts to question the comatose Mandy about her attacker are futile. Sam shows Laura pictures of his deceased 2nd wife and their amazing resemblance to each other. The following day, local farmer Ernie Barnes and his two daughters are brutally slain at their farmhouse. Tim again is tormented by his vision, and runs into a local movie theater in an attempt to distract himself. While there, a young woman is raped and murdered in the downstairs bathroom of the theater, and the metal stall door is found nearly bent in half. Sheriff Walden and Sam arrive at the crime scene shortly before Laura, who insists she may be able to help the investigation. She confides in Sam that she discovered historical records detailing Satanism and similar crimes occurring throughout the town's history.
Tim confronts Jenny at her home, hysterical, and says he believes his dreams are responsible for the crimes. Sam gets a sample of Tim's semen to compare against that which was found inside the victims, but they do not match. Tim and Agatha meet with Sam, Jenny, Laura, and Sheriff Walden at the library that night, where Laura reads a passage from a book detailing the shapeshifter known as the incubus, which manifests through dreams and can appear in human form. Agatha reveals that Tim's mother had died before his birth and had been accused of witchcraft due to psychic powers she possessed; Agatha claims that the Galen family has a legacy of witch hunters, and that his dreams are a result of this.
Laura and Tim return with Sam and Jenny to their home. As Laura takes Jenny upstairs to go to bed, Sam attempts to induce Tim's dream to prove its connection to the murders. Tim goes into a seizure-like state and runs upstairs into Jenny's room where he tries to attack Laura with a dagger given to him by Agatha, but Sam intervenes and stabs him to death. Laura then approaches Sam, and her face briefly shifts into that of the monstrous incubus; it is revealed that Laura has in fact been the incubus all along, manifesting in female form. As Laura embraces Sam, he looks over her shoulder to see Jenny's dead body lying on her bed, blood pouring out from between her legs. | allegory, revenge, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1199550 | Hit and Run | Charlie Bronson (Dax Shepard) is enrolled in the Witness Protection Program, staying in Milton, California under the supervision of incompetent U.S. Marshal Randy Anderson (Tom Arnold). Charlie's girlfriend Annie Bean (Kristen Bell) is a professor at Milton Valley College and has a doctorate in Non-Violent Conflict Resolution from Stanford University, a major she created herself. Annie's supervisor Debbie Kreeger (Kristin Chenoweth) calls Annie in for a meeting, where she tells her that the University of California is starting a Conflict Resolution program and is interested in interviewing her. The interview is scheduled for Wednesday in Los Angeles at 4:00; Annie balks at the idea saying she needs to talk to her boyfriend about it first, until Debbie tells her to live for herself instead of boyfriends, and that she will be fired if she does not make it to the interview.
A perplexed Annie returns home and tells Charlie of the job interview, upsetting him since Los Angeles is the area he lived in prior to enrolling in Witness Protection and can't return to. Charlie insists Annie interview for the job for her own sake, even though he would be unable to follow her, but Annie instead returns to the college the next day to beg to keep her job. While she is gone, Charlie decides he would return to L.A. after all, and picks up Annie in his souped-up, restored Lincoln Continental, promising to take her to her interview.
Before they leave town Annie realizes that the teaching certificate she needs is at the home of her ex-boyfriend Gil Rathbinn (Michael Rosenbaum). She had previously told Gil that Charlie is in Witness Protection, and he urges Annie not to go with Charlie, who he is certain is a criminal who will chop her up. Annie blows him off and leaves with Charlie; Gil memorizes Charlie's license plate and asks his gay police officer brother Terry (Jess Rowland) to look up the plate, who finds that the vehicle is registered to "Yul Clint Perkins" — Charlie's real name. Gil uses the name to look up Charlie's past, discovering he is a former getaway driver who testified in an ultimately unsuccessful bank robbery case against his accomplices, one of whom shot the bank guard. Gil finds the Facebook page of one of the defendants, Alexander Dmitri (Bradley Cooper), and leaves a message saying he knows where Yul Perkins is for the next 24 hours.
Meanwhile, Randy calls Charlie after discovering he is not home. Charlie tells him he is returning to L.A., and Randy insists on accompanying him per Marshals Service policy, leaving Milton in order to pursue Charlie. A short time later Charlie and Annie discover Gil following them in his vehicle. Charlie pulls over, intending to beat up Gil, but instead tries to non-violently resolve the situation at Annie's insistence. Gil is unmoved, and reveals that he both knows Charlie's real name and has Alex Dmitri as a "Facebook friend". Charlie and Annie then flee from Gil in the Continental, in the process running Randy off the road as he arrives, but ultimately losing Gil. Elsewhere, Alex sees Gil's Facebook message, gathers his fellow bank robbers Neve (Joy Bryant) and Alan (Ryan Hansen) and heads to meet Gil.
Annie and Charlie gas up the Continental, where the vehicle's engine is admired by a redneck named Sanders (David Koechner). The two then make their way to a motel, where they are unknowingly followed by Sanders. In the morning, Charlie tries to start the vehicle, only to discover that the engine has been stolen in the night. Gil arrives shortly after, ambushing Charlie with a golf club, but Charlie distracts him and knocks him out, placing him in his vehicle. He quickly discovers that Gil was also accompanied by Alex's crew, who are at the front desk. Charlie grabs the VIN Number of a Corvette in the parking lot, makes a duplicate keyless entry for the vehicle using the former tools of his trade, and then leaves with Annie, Gil and Alex's crew in hot pursuit, with Randy joining the chase. During the chase Annie and Charlie argue over his past, where he reveals that he was a getaway driver who participated in 13 bank robberies, and that Neve was once his fiancee. The two ultimately escape their pursuers again.
Afterward, Annie demands Charlie pull over, where she confronts him for lying to her about his past. She decides to proceed to L.A. without Charlie; Gil arrives shortly after, and agrees to take Annie the rest of the way. A short time later they are run off the road by Alex, who takes Annie hostage and calls Charlie, telling him to meet at a nearby diner. Charlie arrives and Alex demands money in exchange for Annie, then argues about Charlie's betrayal, cut short when Alex reveals that he was raped in jail and blames Charlie for it. Charlie agrees to take him to a hidden stash of bank robbery money located at the home of his estranged father Clint (Beau Bridges). While in transit he surreptitiously places a call to Randy, now in the company of Terry (who's attracted to Randy) and his partner Angela Roth (Carly Hatter), and gives Randy his father's address. The three pick up Gil along the way.
At Clint's house, Charlie digs up a bag of money he hid in a pasture with his father, at the same time reconciling with him. His father carefully mentions he owns a Class 1 Off-Road racing vehicle; shortly after he knocks Alex down with a shovel, then fights with Alan as Charlie and Annie make their escape. The two get in the racer and flee just as Gil, Randy, Terry and Angela arrive. Alex and Neve attempt to follow, but Randy manages to shoot Alex as the latter fires at Charlie, forcing them to stop and placing the two under arrest. Two Marshals (Jason Bateman and Nate Tuck) later arrive and take Alex and his crew into custody, complimenting Randy and Terry on their work.
After their escape, Charlie tells Annie he is committed to getting her to the interview still, wanting to keep his word despite the fact that she no longer loves him. Annie responds that she still loves him, and the two reconcile before continuing the trip. Charlie makes it to the University of California campus in time for Annie to make her interview. Before she leaves, Charlie offers to spend the rest of his life with her, which Annie accepts. The final scene cuts some months in the future, showing Randy and Terry, now in a relationship, giving each other a brief pep talk before heading to take the Marshals' exam.
In a stinger segment, Annie makes her interview with Professor Sandy Osterman (Sean Hayes), interrupting him as he is smoking from a bong. After a rough start due to Osterman's embarrassment at hotboxing his office and confusion at him not being a woman as Debbie had described, Osterman reveals that Debbie is his sister and she has jokingly called him a girl since he was 9. Annie expresses sympathy for how this must make Sandy feel, earning his approval and an immediate job offer, which she accepts. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | Believing that she is good enough to drive, she winds up accidentally hitting a man on a dark road, but doesn't realize it until she gets home.
The film has a very suspenseful storyline about a woman (Mary Murdock) who accidentally hits a man (Timothy Emser played by a transformed Kevin Corrigan) on the road and unknowingly brings him back to her garage on her bumper.
It starts off well when Mary Murdock (played by Laura Breckinridge) drives home drunk from a party and has a near-accident on the road.
Overall, I'd say while this had some quirky unexplainable moments, it had what I basically look for in a horror movie, some gore, scares and suspense..
I like these sorta films normally, and to be fair the acting wasn't bad but something just went wrong, maybe I'm being too harsh as there were some good driving sequences (with a twist) and well shot.
I didn't expect the ending, but I didn't really care too much by this time, it was a bit like the writers gave up and asked some of his/her kids to help out.If you like suspenseful horror stalker type films then you may enjoy this, as my partner doesn't and she didn't like this.A couple of B movie gory bits as well.
The basic story is a very unusual tale of a young woman who thinks she killed a kindergarten school teacher but things go crazy unexpected ways.
Acting out of pain and rage, he lashes out at her and she whacks at him with a golf club hard enough to finish him off - or so she thinks.While it does succumb to the genre cliché of having a "villain" who's hard to kill, it does work in terms of a story where things just keep spiraling out of control.
I seem to remember many years ago a true story about a woman who hit a guy and drove all the way home with him crushed to the grill of her car.
And for the first half of the movie, that's the way it plays out, as sort of a drama about how this woman who has killed a guy with her car is coping and trying to cover it up.
But then all of a sudden it turns into Saw Part Seven the gore fest as the hit and run victim isn't really dead but is now a raving psychopath hell bent on torturing Mary the drunk driver.
There's just no point to this movie and I guess that's why it is so demented and hilarious.Members of MADD won't exactly get a kick out of it, because the victim of this drunk driving accident is a crazed lunatic wielding pruning shears, unless this is a vision of DUI hell.
We can't root for the girl either, because she's a stupid bimbo who, after all, did run over a pedestrian after binge drinking at a bar, and then re-kills him, like, four more times.
It has funny parts.Every few minutes the story changes...but one thing is sure...it's vivid.With a small budget to most people...but more than my weekly paycheck, this is an entertaining little feast that would be best viewed when drinking some hard liquor, eating a good pizza and smoking some fine herb or whatever your choice of recreation is.Just with the knowledge that you don't hop into your car afterwards before you sober up.I would have liked to see the dead dude open his eyes or crack a smile at the end..
Usually in horror films it's clear, here, its not because the victim and the killer behave in ways you don't expect in a typical horror fashion.The story structure is a journey of what to do next and then it turns that formula completely upside down when the main character who is in the driver seat becomes the passenger along for the ride.
The character in the "killer" role takes you to unexpected places with satisfying results.You never know what will come happen next with this movie, and that's the fun of it.
"Hit and Run" is a cool little low-budget horror that is more than meets the eye, IMO.One of the wackiest horror films I've seen in a while.
I thought the film plays as a piece of black comedy and horror which makes it pretty bizarre and worth watching, especially for a dtv.
The bad guy Kevin Corrigan does a good job as a school teacher who becomes a deranged weird villain after being buried alive.
One thing I did like the way the story took shape based on the accidental hitting of the guy.
Generally the lead Laura Breckenridge gave a decent indie-type performance as Mary the hit and run perpetrator.
Kevin Corrigan was not too bad as the hit and run victim-turned-killer.
Overall, I'd say it's worth a look if you like the B movie sensationalist films..
HIT and RUN follows the story of a college student who after she returns home from a night of late partying, is drunk and listens to music and before you know it, she is swerving off the road and almost has an accident.
She gets home just to be awakened by a noise coming for the garage and once she goes in there comes face to face what she has done, which is bring a man she hit with her car back home on her bumper all bloody and generally a real big mess.
One thing I liked was the way the horror parts were kind of concealed and surprised us in the second act.
The movie kept me asking the question that maybe the whole hit and run was in Mary's head and maybe the victim coming back for revenge was not real.
The story seems to be based on an urban legend where someone finds they accidentally hit a stranger at night and brought them back home to the garage stuck on the bumper and barely alive.
Kevin Corrigan (from The Departed) plays the twisted bad guy and while I wish there had been more of him, I liked what I saw.
He had a certain creepiness that caught me off guard.All in all, much to my surprise, this little movie offered a lot more than I thought, intense action sequences, some gore, horror, suspense and last but not least, some good dance music..
I thought the story worked pretty well right up to the twist at the end.I'm leaning to believe that this psycho-chiller film is intended to be morbidly funny.
I wasn't sure what was coming next and I think that's what i liked about it.And perhaps it's this very tension along with some high energy (especially in the second half) that makes the movie worthwhile among the current horror fare.
but the film is fairly good.The story is the bizarre tale of a woman who hit a man with her car and discovered him stuck on her bumper, based on a true story or an urban legend.The teacher in this case is played by the solid Corrigan, whose teeth give him a feral appearance, and this is his scariest role so far.I was pleasantly surprised by the lead actress and the events that unfolded.
Very natural.Worth watching, not bad at all for nightmare horror /suspense.Don't drink and drive folks, there are lunatics you could hit out there!.
Hit & Run in tradition of B movie horrors.
A crazy guy gets hit by a drunk gal, Mary on a dark road.
Story is getting unclear as the missing and dead man reappears at MARY's home.
First part of this movie Hit and Run is basically a thriller with some horror elements.
Rick her boyfriend ends up dead.At this point, the movie shifts gears into something like surreal horror.
More murders take place by Emser and when he takes Mary to bury her in the same grave, things take another turn when she gets away and another hit and run is going to happen, this one a purposeful one.In this second half, the thriller suspense gives way toward more grotesque fantastical horror elements.The movie somehow manages to blend these different styles into a somewhat coherent curious package..
Freshman director Enda McCallion's gripping little thriller "Hit and Run" is a nimble, well-made melodrama about a college student on spring break who may have accidentally killed a man that she has never seen.
Although the idea is straight out of "I Know What You Did Last Summer," "Hit and Run" is a worthwhile chiller.Mary Murdock (Laura Breckinridge) is on her way home after she leaves a bar where her friends and she were trying to drink the place out of liquor.
Imagine Mary's apprehension when she discovers the body of a man (Kevin Corrigan) stuck on the front bumper of her jeep.
Mary is in for a rude awakening when she learns that the body wrapped in the blanket at the burial site is not the school teacher!McCallion opens "Hit and Run" with a shot straight out of "So I Married an Axe Murderer" as a bartender fills shot glasses on a waitress's platter.
The Fluid camera work, straightforward scripting, and the use of reliable stalker movie scenes make "Hit and Run" a rather compelling sit and watch experience.
The uber-hot Laura Breckenridge is the accidental murderer in this very decent b horror movie "Hit and Run" which comes off more as an indie film.
This low budget horror has a little of that 'I know what you did last summer' feeling to it, but in a toned down way where it's mostly one person (mary) we follow.
It starts off very similar to Stuck (which I liked too), and then transforms into an unusual low budget horror movie.
The thing about this flick is that in this movie, you don't know for sure who is the the good guy or the bad guy.
The crazy guy (corrigan) who gets hit is first the victim of the hit and run, and afterward he becomes the villain when he goes all out and takes revenge on the girl.
Hit and Run [2009] starts out with young Mary, a teenager leaving a bar after a long night of partying.
Then I thought that it's even possible maybe the whole hit and run might not be real either and the whole thing was some kind of nightmare she'd entered, like "a Christmas Carol" or something and the freaky teacher back from the dead was like a ghost of Christmas Past teaching her a horrifying, nasty, never-to-forget lesson about why she's a naughty girl drinking and driving.
For a low-budget B movie thriller that had some compelling story twists, surprisingly Breckenridge is not bad as as young "scream queen'.
When i saw he was in this little horror movie playing a bipolar kindergarten teacher who goes ballistic on a hit and run driver, I had to see what kevin was up to in this movie.
Instead it is strongly based on an urban legend, you know, the one where a driver hits a bump in the night and unwittingly has hit a little girl on the road and brings the girl home to the garage on the car's bumper.
I heard something like that as a kid growing up in the Midwest (Ohio).I've seen both Stuck and Hit and Run, and am looking forward to see a new foreign film on this similar topic, an Indian movie called Accident on Hill Road.
In Stuck, she's well aware she's hit the guy and just lets him die, and in Hit and Run she's a college girl who doesn't realize till later that night she hit the guy when she hears noises coming from her garage, she tries to help him but ends up killing him..
HIT AND RUN is a very anemic horror movie apparently based on true events.The only thing the movie has going for it is the plot, which may not be unique but presents the opportunity for an exciting, suspenseful experience.
She then buries the seemingly dead guy, who later comes back for revenge.From reciting the plot, it is clear the movie is heavily influenced by I KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER, as well as the final story in CREEPSHOW 2.The direction is very pedestrian.Imagine the suspense and atmosphere - you'll have to because these things are not in the movie itself!
Instead, the driving scenes merely resemble the opening of many movies without doing anything special despite the importance to events happening later.The scenes where the supposedly dead man comes back for his revenge could have utilised much suspense and tension.
I thought Miss Breckenridge was a very bland lead actress who does not have one tenth of the appeal or charisma of actresses such as Kate Beckinsale from VACANCY.Kevin Corrigan fares better as the mysterious victim of the hit and run accident, but it is clear he is held back by an uninspired script and poor direction that failed to properly demonstrate character motivations and bring genuine menace to the audience.Overall, HIT AND RUN is a very anemic movie that demonstrates little effort or imagination.
so this chick avoids a tire by going off the road, after a night out with her friends, and by the time she gets home and hears some noises, she realizes that she hit a guy, who ended up getting stuck in front of her car.
Read on.I find it baffling that any movie could be based on the premise that a drunken teenager runs over a totally innocent guy, beats him with a golf club, then buries him alive...and then make HIM the bad guy.
I don't know about you, but if I think there's an intruder in my house the last thing I'm doing is announcing my presence.Nothing really works in this movie.
This' film can't do' well' 'at' the box' office this movie wad boring' not entertaining at all' The film starts off no where and goes no where' A woman' drives home and then' finds a' 'dead' body in her garage'!
And that's' the only' price I'll ever' be paying for a movie like this' In one scene a young woman' screams her head off while barring' the body!
After drinking a lot of booze with her girlfriends in a bar, the wasted Mary Murdock (Laura Breckenridge) drives her jeep home; however, she looses control and runs over a passageway.
When Mary realizes that she has killed the man, she panics and decides to bury the body in the woods, with tragic consequences."Hit and Run" is an imbecile movie with an imbecile character.
But, then the very teenagers this thing was aimed at would find it boring and over their heads.In any event, if you are a low to average intelligence and enjoy gore, by all means view this flick.I would give it a one, but the concept of a woman discovering she has run someone down, and then what to do, is a good idea for a decent screen play, but this wasn't it..
The dumb protagonist decides to drink drive and accidentally run over somebody; instead of going to the police she buries the body in the woods before somebody starts stalking her.This cheap tale goes for a mix of atmosphere and gore, but fails on both counts.
I really need to mute my curiosity.It tells the story of a girl who leaves a party, drives under the influence and runs a guy over.
I know that Mary, the girl who discovers she has almost killed a guy, could panic.
Or things like blood coming out of a phone, leading us to think that the whole story is just a bad dream.
don't ask me..Maniac then drives her around town and the camera-work kicks back in as the car speeds around trying to scare Mary, by this stage I had lost interest as you might do to be honest, the rest of the film is empty and nothing is worth watching.
Of course, there are still some "reviewers" who give such a picture 10/10, like "angela-filmsociety" who titles her one-and-ONLY-review on IMDb "Hit & Run in tradition of B movie horrors".
From beginning to end, watching Hit and Run is not a comfortable experience, which is exactly how a horror film should be.
While some say that Hit and Run bears too strong a similarity to Stuart Gordon's Stuck, the two are actually very different if you look beyond the surface level.When Mary (Laura Breckingridge) goes out with some of her girl friends over Spring Break, it seems that they are going to have a fun night.
Mary never expects that while driving home after having a few drinks she would encounter a situation that would turn her world upside down and running for her life.
She begins seeing little signs around her house that imply that someone knows what happened and it trying to mess with her.The film twists in another unexpected direction as Mary discovers that her intuition is right.
While it is no surprise that the man she hit starts coming after her seeking revenge, there are a number of sudden turns in the plot that will keep a horror movie fan on their toes till the very end.
There are so many positive reviews that I expected to like it despite the low IMDb rating of 4.7.After a night of drinking, Mary (Laura Breckenridge) unknowingly runs over Timothy Esmer (Kevin Corrigan) in her Jeep.
You kind of feel sorry for her even; though she runs over a guy while she's drunk, and tries to cover it up instead of manning up and taking responsibility.
Well this movie is not like that but it has kind of a similar tongue-in-cheek thing going on, I know it's a stretch but almost an homage in some ways, with the teenage girl Mary hitting and running over a bi-polar teacher who was out wandering aimless in the woods, and later in her garage finds him there hanging on bumper. |
tt0397053 | Deus Ex: Invisible War | === Setting ===
Invisible War is set in 2072, twenty years after Deus Ex, and is based on the premise that a combination of all three of the original game's possible endings occurred. The actions of JC Denton in Deus Ex caused the world to descend into a period of war and economic depression known as "the Collapse", during which several factions built themselves into world powers. These factions include the World Trade Organization (WTO), which converted many of the world's remaining metropolitan centers into highly regulated city-states; The Order, a religious order which created a new world religion from elements of all major religions and sociopolitical principles; the "Knights Templar", who advocate the complete prevention of biomodification; the Omar, a society of heavily biomodified humans possessing a group mind, which runs a global black market, and wishes to become a transhuman race through biomodification; and ApostleCorp, which seeks to help JC Denton achieve his goal of biomodifying every human on Earth, and thus equalizing the race. While JC Denton is seen by the public as a threat to society, these organizations seek to use or eliminate his power to rebuild the world in the way they see fit. In keeping with the series' conspiracy theory theme, several of the major factions are revealed to be secretly connected—the Knights Templar originated within The Order, while the WTO and The Order are separate branches of the Illuminati. The story is now told more through character interactions than through game text. Books and newspapers in the game world are still readable, though the interface is now modal.
The developers placed Invisible War further in the future than its predecessor to give it a distinct setting, rather than "rehash[ing] what had come before". Lead writer Sheldon Pacotti stated that the advanced timeline "[loses] a little bit of the frisson of a near-future real-world setting", but is "more visibly shaped by time and technology", bringing the "social and technological issues ... more into the foreground". At the same time, the developers wanted to make the game relevant to current world affairs, and focused on themes including terrorism, while placing the game in real-world locations "linked in the public consciousness", such as Seattle, Washington. Other criteria for locations included both a "distinct feel" and "recognizable landmarks", as well as "believable hooks for [the game's] conspiracies and fiction".
=== Story ===
The game begins with Chicago being destroyed in a terrorist attack. Alex D, the protagonist, and another Tarsus trainee, Billie Adams, along with several Tarsus leaders, are evacuated to another Tarsus Facility. Some time after their arrival, the facility is attacked by forces of the Order Church.
Alex is contacted by Billie, who reveals that she is a member of the Order. She claims that Tarsus is using its trainees as test subjects in a biomodification program, and asks Alex to join the Order. Once at the Order base in Seattle, they are asked to find out what happened to a group of Order troops sent on a rescue mission to a Tarsus facility. They discover that they defected to the Knights Templar, who take a more militant approach to matters than the Order.
Over the course of the game, Alex goes on a series of missions for the Order, the WTO, ApostleCorp or combinations of those factions. The missions take them to Cairo, Trier, Antarctica and Liberty Island, New York. During the course of the game they discover that they are a clone of JC Denton, the protagonist of the first game with aspirations of creating a perfect global democracy through a bioengineered hive mind. They also learn that the organizations they are working for each desire to rule the world. ApostleCorp seeks to fulfill Denton’s vision of the future; the Illuminati, who control the WTO and the Order, want to use Denton’s technology to create a benevolent dictatorship; and the Templars want to eliminate biomodification entirely and create a global holy empire.
Near the end of the game, Alex comes into possession of data necessary for any of the factions to take control of the world. Each faction asks Alex to upload the data to their base on Liberty Island. Who rules the world in the end depends on which of the factions the player decides to upload the data to. It is also possible to simply send the data to none of them, instead destroying all of their bases on Liberty Island. This allows another faction, the Omar, to take control of the Earth after allowing the rest of humanity to wipe itself out in various wars. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0053888 | Hamlet, Prinz von Dänemark | === Act I ===
The protagonist of Hamlet is Prince Hamlet of Denmark, son of the recently deceased King Hamlet, and nephew of King Claudius, his father's brother and successor. Claudius hastily married King Hamlet's widow, Gertrude, Hamlet's mother, and took the throne for himself. Denmark has a long-standing feud with neighboring Norway, which culminated when King Hamlet slew King Fortinbras of Norway in a battle years ago. Although Denmark defeated Norway, and the Norwegian throne fell to King Fortinbras's infirm brother, Denmark fears that an invasion led by the dead Norwegian king's son, Prince Fortinbras, is imminent.
On a cold night on the ramparts of Elsinore, the Danish royal castle, the sentries Bernardo and Marcellus and Hamlet's friend Horatio encounter a ghost that looks like the late King Hamlet. They vow to tell Prince Hamlet what they have witnessed.
As the court gathers the next day, while King Claudius and Queen Gertrude discuss affairs of state with their elderly adviser Polonius, Hamlet looks on glumly. After the court exits, Hamlet despairs of his father's death and his mother's hasty remarriage. Learning of the ghost from Horatio, Hamlet resolves to see it himself.
As Polonius's son Laertes prepares to depart for a visit to France, Polonius gives him contradictory advice that culminates in the ironic maxim "to thine own self be true". Polonius's daughter, Ophelia, admits her interest in Hamlet, but both Polonius and Laertes warn her against seeking the prince's attention. That night on the rampart, the ghost appears to Hamlet, telling the prince that he was murdered by Claudius and demanding that Hamlet avenge him. Hamlet agrees and the ghost vanishes. The prince confides to Horatio and the sentries that from now on he plans to "put an antic disposition on" and forces them to swear to keep his plans for revenge secret. Privately, however, he remains uncertain of the ghost's reliability.
=== Act II ===
Soon thereafter, Ophelia rushes to her father, telling him that Hamlet arrived at her door the prior night half-undressed and behaving crazily. Polonius blames love for Hamlet's madness and resolves to inform Claudius and Gertrude. As he enters to do so, the king and queen finish welcoming Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, two student acquaintances of Hamlet, to Elsinore. The royal couple has requested that the students investigate the cause of Hamlet's mood and behavior. Additional news requires that Polonius wait to be heard: messengers from Norway inform Claudius that the King of Norway has rebuked Prince Fortinbras for attempting to re-fight his father's battles. The forces that Fortinbras conscripted to march against Denmark will instead be sent against Poland, though they will pass through a portion of Denmark to get there.
Polonius tells Claudius and Gertrude his theory regarding Hamlet's behavior, and speaks to Hamlet in a hall of the castle to try to uncover more information. Hamlet feigns madness but subtly insults Polonius all the while. When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern arrive, Hamlet greets his friends warmly, but quickly discerns that they are spies. Hamlet becomes bitter, admitting that he is upset at his situation but refusing to give the true reason why, instead commenting on "what a piece of work" humanity is. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tell Hamlet that they have brought along a troupe of actors that they met while traveling to Elsinore. Hamlet, after welcoming the actors and dismissing his friends-turned-spies, plots to stage a play featuring a death in the style of his father's murder, thereby determining the truth of the ghost's story, as well as Claudius's guilt or innocence, by studying Claudius's reaction.
=== Act III ===
Polonius forces Ophelia to return Hamlet's love letters and tokens of affection to the prince while he and Claudius watch from afar to evaluate Hamlet's reaction. Hamlet is walking alone in the hall as the King and Polonius await Ophelia's entrance, musing whether "to be or not to be". When Ophelia enters and tries to return Hamlet's things, Hamlet accuses her of immodesty and cries "get thee to a nunnery," though it is unclear whether this, too, is a show of madness or genuine distress. His reaction convinces Claudius that Hamlet is not mad for love. Shortly thereafter, the court assembles to watch the play Hamlet has commissioned. After seeing the Player King murdered by his rival pouring poison in his ear, Claudius abruptly rises and runs from the room: proof positive for Hamlet of his uncle's guilt.
Gertrude summons Hamlet to her room to demand an explanation. Meanwhile, Claudius talks to himself about the impossibility of repenting, since he still has possession of his ill-gotten goods: his brother's crown and wife. He sinks to his knees. Hamlet, on his way to visit his mother, sneaks up behind him, but does not kill him, reasoning that killing Claudius while he is praying will send him straight to heaven while his father's ghost is stuck in purgatory. In the queen's bedchamber, Hamlet and Gertrude fight bitterly. Polonius, spying on the conversation from behind a tapestry, makes a noise.
Hamlet, believing it is Claudius, stabs wildly, killing Polonius, but pulls aside the curtain and sees his mistake. In a rage, Hamlet brutally insults his mother for her apparent ignorance of Claudius's villainy, but the ghost enters and reprimands Hamlet for his inaction and harsh words. Unable to see or hear the ghost herself, Gertrude takes Hamlet's conversation with it as further evidence of madness. After begging the queen to stop sleeping with Claudius, Hamlet leaves, dragging Polonius's corpse away.
=== Act IV ===
Hamlet jokes with Claudius about where he has hidden Polonius's body, and the king, fearing for his life, sends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to accompany Hamlet to England with a sealed letter to the English king requesting that Hamlet be executed immediately.
Demented by grief at Polonius's death, Ophelia wanders Elsinore. Laertes arrives back from France, enraged by his father's death and his sister's madness. Claudius convinces Laertes that Hamlet is solely responsible, but a letter soon arrives indicating that Hamlet has returned to Denmark, foiling Claudius's plan. Claudius switches tactics, proposing a fencing match between Laertes and Hamlet to settle their differences. Laertes will be given a poison-tipped foil, and Claudius will offer Hamlet poisoned wine as a congratulation if that fails. Gertrude interrupts to report that Ophelia has drowned, though it is unclear whether it was suicide or an accident exacerbated by her madness.
=== Act V ===
Horatio has received a letter from Hamlet, explaining that the prince escaped by negotiating with pirates who attempted to attack his England-bound ship, and the friends reunite offstage. Two gravediggers discuss Ophelia's apparent suicide while digging her grave. Hamlet arrives with Horatio and banters with one of the gravediggers, who unearths the skull of a jester from Hamlet's childhood, Yorick. Hamlet picks up the skull, saying "alas, poor Yorick" as he contemplates mortality. Ophelia's funeral procession approaches, led by Laertes. Hamlet and Horatio initially hide, but when Hamlet realizes that Ophelia is the one being buried, he reveals himself, proclaiming his love for her. Laertes and Hamlet fight by Ophelia's graveside, but the brawl is broken up.
Back at Elsinore, Hamlet explains to Horatio that he had discovered Claudius's letter with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's belongings and replaced it with a forged copy indicating that his former friends should be killed instead. A foppish courtier, Osric, interrupts the conversation to deliver the fencing challenge to Hamlet. Hamlet, despite Horatio's pleas, accepts it. Hamlet does well at first, leading the match by two hits to none, and Gertrude raises a toast to him using the poisoned glass of wine Claudius had set aside for Hamlet. Claudius tries to stop her, but is too late: she drinks, and Laertes realizes the plot will be revealed. Laertes slashes Hamlet with his poisoned blade. In the ensuing scuffle, they switch weapons and Hamlet wounds Laertes with his own poisoned sword. Gertrude collapses and, claiming she has been poisoned, dies. In his dying moments, Laertes reconciles with Hamlet and reveals Claudius's plan. Hamlet rushes at Claudius and kills him. As the poison takes effect, Hamlet, hearing that Fortinbras is marching through the area, names the Norwegian prince as his successor. Horatio, distraught at the thought of being the last survivor and living whilst Hamlet does not, says he will commit suicide by drinking the dregs of Gertrude's poisoned wine, but Hamlet begs him to live on and tell his story. Hamlet dies in Horatio's arms, proclaiming "the rest is silence". Fortinbras, who was ostensibly marching towards Poland with his army, arrives at the palace, along with an English ambassador bringing news of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's deaths. Horatio promises to recount the full story of what happened, and Fortinbras, seeing the entire Danish royal family dead, takes the crown for himself. | tragedy, insanity, revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | "Hamlet" by William ("We all make his praise") Shakspeare is arguably the greatest play ever written - in fact, it's possibly the greatest work of literature ever written in the English language.
Given these facts, imagine my surprise when Mystery Science Theater 3000 (the recently defunct TV show in which bad movies are goofed on by a janitor and his two robots) decided to give this their special treatment.Specifically, they did this 1960 production for German Television, featuring the highly respected Maximilian Schell in the title role.
Herr Schell is more than credible as the Melancholy Dane, and the dark dreary scenery only serve to underscore the mood of the play and its characters.
As for dialogue, well how could you possibly go wrong?As for complaints that much of the play was missing, it must be remembered that our friends at Best Brains had to edit the movie (which as I understand, ran for about 3 hours) to fit their little TV show, which ran for 2 hours, including commercials.I, for one, am inclined to cut this movie a good bit of slack..
The dark and sparse sets give you a real sense of Hamlet's brooding mind..
But now we come to Maximilian Schell's take on the Bard.For one, this is a dubbed version of a German TV production of William Shakespeare's venerable chestnut.
Having seen it on MST3K helps, with Mike and the robots taking jolly good jabs at the old boy, puncturing the profundity of black and white TV, Shakespeare and the wisdom (?) of Germans acting out an English play and making it look like an Ingmar Bergman reject.Of course, the best parts are the MST riffs.
"I'm gonna unleash the Great Dane", "I don't think so, 'breather'", "Meet the Beatles", "Hey, Dad, will you help me with my science project" and, my personal favorite, during a party - "Garrison Keillor's leaving Germany (YAAAY!!)".But then there's Schell, playing Shakespeare's greatest character much like a department store mannequin would, only not as expressive.
At least the book isn't dubbed by Ricardo Montalban.One star only for this "Hamlet"; ten stars, naturally, for the MST3K version.Good-night, not-so-sweet prince..
You'd think that the immortal words of William Shakespeaere would be able to rise above just about anything, but alas bad acting and really bad sets will drag down even the most wonderful playwright.
The fact that it's dubbed into English from German doesn't help this production.
It's still a horrible minimalist production, Hamlet's Dutch uncle is inexplicably dubbed by a Spaniard (whether it's Ricardo Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before.
Most of the dialogue makes it through unscathed, and the fact that the MST3K version feels obliged to point out repeatedly that the speeches are long *duh* doesn't strike me as incredibly humorous.
Having seen the English dubbed version, I would have preferred seeing the original in German with subs; dubbing tends to affect the emotional performance(s).
Having Hamlet being shot in black in white gives the production a bleak, surreal sort of mood.
For a second, I had thought that Rod Serling would come out with cigarette in hand saying:'These guard sentries do not realize it yet, but that shadowy spectre looming off in the darkness..will set off a series of events..all beginning with one Danish prince.'Kudos to Maximilian for his portrayal of Hamlet.
The only thing that saves this movie is the fact that it is Hamlet, and Hamlet is a terrificly written piece of literature.
The voices stuck true to the dull, gloomy, dreary, life-sucking atmosphere the movie gave forth.
I have seen this version of Hamlet on the fabulous Mystery Science Theater 3000 three times, and each of the three times, I was on the brink of turning off the TV, despite it being MST 3K.
Yes folks that WAS Ricardo Montalban dubbing for Claudius, and his voice, his reading was quite good!
That didn't stop the comedian-hosts of MST3K" from making cracks about Cordoba car commercials & "Fantasy Island." I'd say the worst thing about this thing is the cheapness of production (lost of black background, very few set pieces, very simple pieces) and the god-awful dubbing!
Maximillian Schell, an excellent actor, is not half-bad as Hammie, but my favorite thing was listening to Ricardo Montalban.
Produced in German for German television, this production of Hamlet becomes distinctly eerie when dubbed back into English.
The production design is also "German Minimalist", typical of that era, making the movie rather bleak, even for Hamlet.Despite the virtually non-existent sets and English-German-English translation, Maximilian Schell turns in an admirable performance as Hamlet.This film was screened on Mystery Science Theater 3000.
Whether or not this movie was "bad" enough for such dissection is open to debate, but Mike and the Bots leveled some excellent quips ("Honey, what happened to all the ear poison?")..
One of the reasons why the play works is that there's an underlying sense of hope in it, and that's exactly what Franz Peter Wirth takes away from this production.
Shakespeare probably turned over in his grave when this first aired.There are thousands of productions of Hamlet.
This version is quite literally so bad, that not even the presence of a great thespian like Maximilian Schell in the title role can save it.
This movie's only redeeming quality is that it made great fodder for "MST3K"; Mike, Servo and Crow had a lot of fun with this one.But either way, I'm sure that Shakespeare, had he been alive when they made this, would not have wanted his name associated with it.
a copy of the stage design of a popular theatre production of the play mentioned in 1.4.
I hoped that the filmed version would be better, that Schell would at least have a body language to underline what he's saying - nothing.
It won't work in a film based on a play that actually has believable settings.
That the idea for the set was copied from the theatre production in which Schell played the Hamlet already...
I ask myself how Schell could get the part of Hamlet anywhere in first place and how anybody could allow him to play Hamlet a second time.
If you've got the choice to view any of the about sixty films based on "Hamlet", don't watch this one, unless you're a masochist, or really hardcore, or like to poke fun on untalented actors..
I have seen only about 70 episodes of Mystery Science Theater 3000 (my personal idea of the greatest achievement in television), but this version of Hamlet, produced for German television, probably has to be the best film I've ever seen shotgunned on that program (whoops - I forgot they did "Day of the Triffids").
do not watch any movie; read 'Hamlet'.
note to George Litman, and others: the Mystery Science Theater 3000 riff is "I don't think so, *breeder*".my favorite riff is "Why were you looking at his 'like'?", simply for the complete absurdity.
that, and "Right well did not!" over all, I would say we must give credit to the MST3K crew for trying to ridicule this TV movie.
Sure, I saw this on MST3K, which isn't very reverential to the final product as dubbed into English.
I'm a fan of both Shakespeare and MST3K, so I waited anxiously to see this episode.
I'll comment on the movie first, then the MST3K episode.
The recipe for this movie: take talented actors, rich and beautiful Shakespeare material, and a $1.25 budget.
Movie, I give 3 out of 10, because the actors at least deserve a little bit of credit.
However, when I watched it a second time, I realized that there was a whole host of intelligent references and good lines I missed the first time around.
Worst adaptation of any Shakespeare play, hands down..
Hamlet is arguably the greatest play ever written.
But you wouldn't think so after watching this terrible, terrible, terrible filmed version.
This film makes the Mel Gibson/Glenn Close "infotainment" version look like the work of geniuses.
However, although the IMDb doesn't list the voice-over actors who dubbed the English version, I and my friends were certain that Claudius was voiced by Ricardo Montalban.
Maximilian Schell plays a mopey, droning Hamlet in this rather awkwardly dubbed German TV production.
When Good Plays Go Bad. Here we have undeniable proof that even the best material cannot save a shoddy, poorly-mounted production.
Yeah, I know Hamlet is supposed to be a pretty bleak story about death, vengance, madness, and all those other wonderful things that spice up life.
But this dreary, depressing piece of German Existentialism pretty much sucks any trace of life from Shakespeare's unparalleled poetry.Depression seems to be common stock in Denmark.
The wood-and-Styrofoam set would embarrass a high-school drama club, and the poor lighting and dark clothes make for a lot of disembodied heads and hands floating across the screen.Credit the MST3K boys for tackling this misguided piece and bringing some life back to one of the Bard's greatest works..
How bad is this version of Hamlet?
The original dialogue was translated into German, which was in turn dubbed in English...
I don't know about you, but my head is spinning.Anyway, this looks like a filmed play, on the set of an Obsession advert, and the only amusement to be had is trying to catch the words match the lips.Notable as being the only film to bring culture (?!) to MST3K.
The movie was ineptly dubbed into English, with the English voice actors occasionally mumbling their lines.
When the actors aren't mumbling, they're all whispering for some totally unexplained reason.I like the play Hamlet.
I loved Kenneth Branagh's version, and I liked Mel Gibson's.
I read the original play and found it entertaining, once I got used to the old English.These actors male it unbearable.
There is nothing worse than watching one of history's greatest dramas being DUBBED (badly) into English.If you're at all familiar with the show "Mystery Science Theater 3000", then you'll love this.If not, I'd run as fast as possible to the closest copy of "Ishtar".
I am only going to comment on the Mystery science theater 3000 version.How could this ever be saved?
The movie is so horrible, and bad that their jokes just fall flat.
Danish clowns." I feel that the only way this movie is watchable is on MST3K.
Try another MST3K episode Like Puma Man; Jack Frost; Overdrawn At the Memory Bank; Space Mutiny.
This Hamlet made for one of the boringest MST3000 episodes ever.
It is also one of the hardest movies to find because there are so many Hamlets listed.
This is the one MST 3000 I can't watch in one sitting cause the way the guy playing Hamlet says his lines can put anyone to sleep..
This should have been pretty good, seeing that it's based on a timeless play and that it had Maximillian Schell as Hamlet and Ricardo Montalban dubbing Claudius.
That it did feature on MST3K and that it was placed #1 on the "Mystery Science Theater 3000: 10 Worst Movies They Riffed" list did make things rather dubious though.
Then again the list did have Sampo(aka The Day the Earth Froze), I personally found that a good Soviet-Finnish film that suffered from bad unnecessary American dubbing, so I thought maybe Hamlet isn't as bad as all that.
However, other than for the fact that Monster A-Go Go, Manos, Pod People or Space Mutiny should have taken the #1 spot instead on the list this version of Hamlet is as bad as all that.
It is structurally pretty faithful to Shakespeare's play and has Ricardo Montalban's menacing and droll voice dubbing that saves it from being unwatchable, but of the Hamlets I've seen this is the worst by a considerable distance(I was mixed on the Mel Gibson version but thought Laurence Olivier's and Kenneth Branagh's were outstanding).
It is a poor-looking film, the starkness could have been effective with the mood and Hamlet's state of mind but actually the lighting and sets looked too amateurish and dreary to give off any real atmosphere.
The music at best is annoying and whatever movie it is meant to be part of, it sure ain't Hamlet.
I can see why the movie was dubbed, but the actual dialogue came across as stilted and voices didn't fit with the characters, the only real notable exception was Montalban.
The acting is not much better either, even Maximillian Schell- so good in Judgment at Nuremberg- gives a very uninspired performance, it is very one-note and mannequin-like with just one real facial expression.
In relation to the MST3K episode, it was fun enough- much more so than the movie- but perhaps because trying to riff Shakespeare is in a very different style to what is usually seen from them it really wasn't one of their best episodes in my opinion.
Overall, plodding and dreary, not among the worst movies featured on MST3K but it is really the worst Hamlet you'll ever see and one of the worst Shakespeare adaptations I've come across.
There's probably a reason why no one's heard of this German version of Hamlet, or that no one's heard of anything else the director Mr. Wirth did, or as well why the only recognizable name here (acting-wise) is Maximillian Schell, the noted character/stage actor.
Oh sure, Ricardo Montalban is there to carry some of the hammy weight of scenes, but overall it's such a drag that you end up wanting to insert words of your own.Which leads me as to why you should see it: the only way to watch it now is in a truncated version via the guys at Mystery Science Theater 3000.
It's one of their funniest with Mike Nelson, with many of the lines going not just for the horrid acting and weird staging in some instances (there's one particularly dancing type of scene that gives them plenty of good ammo to shoot at the screen) but the actual Hamlet dialog itself.
As usual they make the drekkiest drek to ever drek on crap street more than tolerable, but with an added appreciation that for all of the effort, whatever it was, it comes out swell such as that really, really bad death scene with Schell (I'm not spoiling Hamlet!
I literally fell asleep 3 times watching this movie.
But this movie exceeds any barrier of long soliloquies and what not, that may prevent many from just not caring about a Shakespeare based story.The largest roadblock to this production is the complete flatness of the characters.
Granted, I believe this movie is dubbed in English.
Certainly they could've obtained voice actors which could've added a bit more drama to these classic, literary lines.It would be difficult to rate this movie greater than 1, although perhaps that's based on prejudices of perhaps age and what would seem a very low budget.
If you insist on Hamlet, do yourself a favor and read the book again.
This movie is definitely not the best production of Hamlet, it's rather bleak and slow, but halfway watchable.As to the MST3K episode, this is the ONLY one in my collection that I've only watched once (I've even watched Catalina Caper and The Sidehackers multiple times).
After all, no matter how poor the production of Hamlet, the words would still be Shakespeare's, and it just doesn't work with MST-style humor.However, if you're looking to get this episode as part of the DVD collection vol.
I mean it's Shakespeare's Hamlet for goodness sake probably one of the best known plays ever written.
I'm not embarrassed to admit that I came to this version of Hamlet the way most people on IMDb have through Mystery Science Theater 3000.
In a word, this German, made-for-TV version of Hamlet is dreary.
A 3/10 sounds about right to me.As much as I enjoy MST3K, their comments don't help to make Hamlet any more palatable.
There are a few good riffs here and there, but overall, Hamlet is just the wrong movie for MST3K.
As much as it pains me, I've got to give Hamlet a 1/5 on my MST3K rating scale..
** Possible spoilers ahead **I saw this movie only through the aid of Mike and the bots from Mystery Science Theater 3000 a.k.a MST3K.
I've read "Hamlet" a few times.
This is the fourth film version of Hamlet I've seen, and it is the worst.
This 1960 version just absolutely reeks of badness.Not only is Shakespeare rolling in his grave but Laurence Olivier is probably rolling in his, too, and I don't blame them.
I loved the riffs from MST3K such as "Hamlet-Man," and "the famous rap artist, the notorious K.I.N.G." Oh, and this movie is very poorly dubbed into English.
The filmmakers and directors of this sad, sad, film version of Hamlet are all Laurence Olivier wanna-bees.
It was blatanly obvious that they were copying Olivier's film techniques from his version of Shakespeare's tragedy.
It will never work.My hats off to MST3K for making this film tolerable..
Bad but tolerable movie, HORRIBLE episode of MST3K **spoilers to the MST3K version**.
In FACT, I find "Hamlet" a good but vastly overrated play.
I won't really comment too much on the movie, rather I will dissect the utterly horrible MST3K episode.
The riffs fall flat, the host segments (par usual) are at best mediocre, and when the movie itself (which isn't that bad) is actually BETTER (I mean, as a quality movie, not as camp, like "Prince of Space") than the MST3K version of it, you know the show must be bad.
The movie isn't horrible; it's just a German version of Hamlet.
The actors are good enough, and though the dubbing isn't the greatest, that's not in itself a reason to hate this film.
Four stars for "Hamlet"; THREE, yes THREE for the MST3K version. |
tt0106056 | Living Single | Living Single centered on six people consisting of four women and two men living the single life in the heart of Brooklyn, New York.
The series focused on two different households in one brownstone, one shared by a trio of independent women and another shared by a pair of male friends who have known each other since they spent their youth in Cleveland, Ohio. In the first apartment, Khadijah James (Queen Latifah), a hard-working editor and publisher of the fictional urban independent monthly Flavor, lived with her sweet, but naive cousin, Synclaire James (Kim Coles), an aspiring actress who worked as Khadijah's receptionist and has an affinity for Troll dolls; and her childhood friend from East Orange, New Jersey, Regina "Régine" Hunter (Kim Fields), an image-conscious, boutique buyer who was in a constant search for a well-to-do man to spend her life with (and spend his money). Later in the series, Régine became a costume assistant for the soap opera Palo Alto. When the show was canceled, she became a wedding planner and left the apartment to move in with her fiance, Dexter Knight (Don Franklin). Maxine "Max" Shaw (Erika Alexander), a sharp-tongued attorney and Khadijah's best friend from their college days at Howard University, frequently stopped by to share her unique insights; keep them entertained by sharing her day; to make sure that the girls' refrigerator isn't overstocked; and to start trouble with Kyle.
Kyle Barker (T.C. Carson) lived in the second apartment with Overton Wakefield Jones (John Henton). Kyle was a stockbroker whose constant verbal sparring with Max did little to mask their obvious sexual attraction. Overton was the friendly but not too bright maintenance man for the owner of their (and neighboring) building who held deep affection for Synclaire. Kyle and Max ended up pursuing a sexual relationship, but when he decided to take a job in London and invited Max to join him, she turned him down. Maxine subsequently became distraught over her decision and, after defending a man who claims to be the second coming of Jesus (Harold Perrineau), she began to seriously look for the purpose of her life. Through a series of events, Max decided that her purpose must be to become a mother and during the insemination process unknowingly picked Kyle's sperm specimen based on a list of qualities she would like for her child to have. Kyle returned in the series finale and the two reconciled. Overton and Synclaire also got together and their relationship culminated in marriage by the end of the fourth season. In season five, they moved in together, leaving Overton and Kyle's apartment open for new character Roni DeSantos (Idalis DeLeon), a New York-area D.J., to move in. It was eventually revealed that DeSantos had a fling with Ira Lee "Tripp" Williams III, (Mel Jackson), the new roommate of Khadijah and Régine who moved in when Synclaire's room became available. Tripp was a songwriter. Synclaire joined a comedy improv troupe where she gained the attention of Tony Jonas, a Warner Bros. television exec who cast her as a nun for a new comedy series he was developing.
Along with trying to make Flavor a success, Khadijah also spent time looking for Mr. Right. She eventually found him in childhood friend Scooter (Cress Williams) with whom she left the brownstone for the final time in the series finale. | romantic, humor | train | wikipedia | Great little sitcom that unfortunately was up against "Seinfeld" for a good portion of its run.
FOX did not handle the exit of the series with any kind of finesse; in fact, it was done very sloppily, with the show being cancelled, and then brought back for a few poorly done episodes.
Synclair and Overton had just about become non-entities after their characters were married.
I like these "Friends" much, much better!.
"Friends" before there were "Friends", Living Single was a far more relatable slice of New York City life and a far funnier one!
Set in 1990's Brooklyn, this story of three female roommates living in the same apartment building as two male roommates, with a single-dweller thrown in was good fun to watch.
The ensemble cast was great with Erika Alexander one of the stand-outs at the always mooching Max and Kim Fields as the mercenary Regine.
And the rest of the cast blended nicely to make for a very funny sitcom.
Each character had its own special sparkle, the dialogue was realistic, and the situations fun.
If I had to choose between reruns of "Friends" or reruns of "Living Single", I'd take "Living Single" 7 days a week and twice on Sundays!
The foundation of most sitcom humor is the weaknesses of characters; this show is a priceless exception.
The writers should be so proud to have presented us with characters who were strong and loving and fun to watch..
Surprisingly, a lot of critics liked this show and compared it to the future megahit FRIENDS.
More critics liked LIVING SINGLE than the latter NBC show and I can see why: The LS cast was far more funny without being silly.
The show also didn't hit the viewer over the head with the fact that the characters were black, their race just happened to be incidental to the show.
However, the one thing that I DIDN'T exactly buy was the apartments that Kadijah and the girls lived in and Kyle and Overton had.
Somehow, I don't think that these people would have THAT lavish a home considering that "Flava", Kadijah's magazine, wasn't exactly running on the level of, say, "Sister 2 Sister" or "Black Elegance".
I first tuned in because I liked Queen Latifah but soon liked all the other characters, especially Maxine Shaw, Attorney at Law, and Kyle.
The episode where they finally got together was a scream and the cliff-hanger for that season.
I agree that the well-decorated apartments and designer duds were out of sync with the incomes of the characters, but it was fun.
Also interesting about the characters in the context of their upscale lives were their eating habits.
In the end, these were humorous young people engaged in active social lives during the early days of their careers..
If you're as old as I am you may remember not only comparisons to FRIENDS and THE GOLDEN GIRLS, but this sitcom was also called 'a black version of DESIGNING WOMEN' by critics and viewers.
I know we're supposed to be living in a color-blind society denying that any current racism still exists, but this is ridiculous.
How many hundreds of sitcoms are produced in Hollywood (and set in New York) every year which feature swanky apartments that no one with an annual salary of less than $200,000 can actually afford?
Nobody questions why the out-of-work actor or the struggling chef on FRIENDS are in the huge apartments they're in.
It was allowed (after a fashion) to flourish and find its audience and in that time it even started to give shape and background to its core characters- not to mention allowing them to advance (in the way of job promotions, romances, breakups, and even a wedding).
I never thought it ended satisfactorily, but I'm happy for the five years FOX allowed it on the air.
Considering that it preceded FRIENDS on the air by one year, should we conclude that FRIENDS was a white version of LIVING SINGLE?.
Relative to Kim Fields, the site noted that she joined Living Single in 1993.
They identified Living Single as "Fox's African-American ANSWER (emphasis mine) to Friends." How could Living Single be an answer to Friends when it preceded Friends by one year?
If anything Friends was a rip-off of Living Single.
Moreover, Living Single was much better quality show.
With that said, most people would likely describe Friends as groundbreaking and Living Single as derivative.
I loved Living SIngle.
Queen Latifah is one of my idols and I used to make an attempt to take a 30 minute break out of my day to watch this.
I wonder if Max and Kyle reunited for the sake of their unborn child, and if Regine ever got married or settled down with someone, or if Khadijah's magazine made it bigger than what it already was, or if Synclaire and Overton made plenty babies.
Someone should make an attempt to make a Living Single Reunion movie.
Living Single on DVD!.
The first season of Living Single is finally finally on DVD!
There's Cree Summer who was Freddie on ADW as Summer the girl Overton dates right before he and Synclaire get together; Charnele Brown (Kim Reese) as Khadijah's friend who works at Flava and then wants to tattoo permanent makeup for a living; Jasmine Guy (Whitley Gilbert) played a psychologist that Khadijah's goes to see when she's way over-stressed; and Kadeem Harrison (Dwayne Wayne) is a hotshot reporter that tries to beat Kadijah out for the scoop on this fighter who pays off his opponents.
Also the adorable, but pathetic Ivan Ennis is Bumper Robinson who played Dorian Haywood (the guy who wouldn't get with Jada Pinkett Smith's Lena unless they were married) I could go on and on .........See how many you can count!~ Smooches ~"I laughed, I cried and when you opened that coffin, girl, I damn near died!" - Overton after seeing Synclaire perform in The Calling Hours or (as it was renamed) A Funny Thing Happened on the Way To The Funeral...starring Synclaire James!.
Loved this show and it may have been the reason why I never watch Seinfeld when it was on its original time slot.
I wake up at 6:00 AM and watch two episodes back to back.
You just think they are good friends.
I loved the show and I am constantly searching for a download of the song that Kyle (T.C. Carson) and Khadijah (Queen Latifah) sang at Overton (John Hinton) & Synclaire's (Kim Cole) wedding.
Living Single #1.
I record all episodes on Direct TV every day shown on Oxygen.
My 8 yr daughter has become a very big fan of Queen Latifah through watching Living Single reruns.
I love the witty banter shared by the girls and their male friends upstairs.
I love that all the girls were successful in their own careers and always supported each other.
I want to know why Regine left the show so abruptly?
The writers for the show were so very creating for the first 4 years but they let the fans down with the final season ending with some many hanging story lines.
I vote for a Living Single reunion..
"LIVING SINGLE," in my opinion, is an absolute FOX classic!
I don't think I've seen every episode, but I still enjoyed it.
It would have been nice if all the main characters stayed with the show throughout its entire run.
In conclusion, even though it can be seen on Oxygen now, I heartily recommend you catch it just in case it goes off the air for good..
Living Single....the apartments, lifestyles and clothes are not realistic?
I love, love, love Living Single!!
It had some truly great story lines and was funny as all get out....and it "looked" like me.;-) Now, what I am not understanding are the comments suggesting they could not afford their lifestyles.
And, can we not also deduce correctly that since Kyle IS a successful stockbroker ON THE RISE with NO KIDS and NO WIFE, it is completely feasible he can afford the apartment, his designer clothes, and art collection not only WITH Overton, but by himself as well?
Last, but not least, Max lives across the street in the same neighborhood.
I'm thinking EACH one of these "tenants" HAD to make a MINIMUM of $50k per year in NYC, with Kyle, Max, and possibly Khadijah on the higher end of $75-85k or better, wouldn't you agree?
Or, in Kyle's and Overton's case, $1800 a piece BEFORE Overton's "live-in" Handyman's discount is applied, making the apartment surely close to, if not free?
(In Season 4, she was looking for apartments around that price range after her building went co-op and she wasn't sure if she would be able to purchase it).So, my point is (and to sum this sermon up lol).....if Carrie did this on her own with multiple pairs of $450+ shoes in Manhattan on a writer's salary (no matter if we are in TV Land *wink*).....tell me why my beautiful, each successful in their own right, black "family" cannot REALISTICALLY afford their digs in Brooklyn with three apartments and SIX incomes between them.......TOGETHER.....IN THE NINETIES....WITH NO RESPONSIBILITIES.....AND UNDER THE BILL CLINTON ADMINISTRATION???
This show is kinda like THE GOLDEN GIRLS but with a younger cast.
It's funny and highly entertaining; and unlike t.v. shows like FRIENDS, this show is actually funny and intelligent with a brilliant cast!
I really liked this show when it aired from 1993 to 1998.
The characters were interesting and funny.
For a TV show, the characters had great depth.
Like some of the other reviewers, I thought this show was a lot better than "Friends".
I really miss this show, and have not really been interested in any of Fox's offerings since this show left the air in mid-season '98..
I never knew how much I missed this show until the first season came out on DVD, and then I couldn't wait to watch every episode all over again.When the show first came on back in the 1990s I was still a teenager but wanted my life to turn out like theirs.
Living in a big city with my college friends and still being able to hang out with people from my childhood.
Now that I am in my mid 20s some of those things have come true; I have a friend who acts like Max, I still hangout with several of my childhood friends, and I got a Kyle and Overton, we just don't all live in the same area.
Point to all of this is they just don't make shows like this anymore.
I watch crime drama now, but I still like a good laugh now and then, even though the show was fictional a lot of the issues they discuss were real topics.
Me and girlfriends watched the episode when Max started dating Regine's ex and it caused friction between them, we sat and laugh at the episode but we discussed how that would hurt our friendship.
I really miss this show and will always be a Living Single fan....
How long do we have to wait for Season 2 to come out on DVD!!
How long do we have to wait for Season 2 to come out on DVD!!
This show was a forerunner of Friends, Sex in the City, and Girlfriends.
This show was a forerunner of Friends, Sex in the City, and Girlfriends.
I am hoping for more Living Single.
I am hoping for more Living Single.
Living Single is one of my favorite TV shows and I generally don't like sitcoms.
All the characters are great, although Sinclair was my least favorite.
is very funny and relaxed in her role and seems like someone you know.
Maxine was good, but as the series evolved her character became cartoonish.
I wish the actor who played Kyle Barker would show up again somewhere--he was wonderful.
If you get a chance to watch it, then do, cause you will love it.
The Forerunner To Friends: Amusing, Light-Hearted -Yet Far More Intelligent.
Living single was lauded as the African-American version of Designing Women and Friends.
With the latter show being a forerunner to Living Single.
Like Friends, it was based in New York- only this time in Brooklyn and as opposed to just 3 guys and 3 girls, there were 2 guys and 4 girls who all hanged out in a little apartment.
The show's ensemble cast was one of the best, let alone in a Black sitcom; Queen Latifah was superb as Khadijah- she was laid-back but also, had a no-nonsense yet still firm attitude.
Erika was at times hilarious as Maxine, Kim Fields was very, very good as Regine and managed to be sharp and sweet too.
My favourite was Synclaire (notice the spelling, there is an 'e' at the end of it); played by actress and later TV host, Kim Coles.
She was by and large the Black version of 'Phoebe' from Friends.
Another Friends- like character was Kyle- he was the show's version of Ross but he was less goofy and more reserved, he came off as being very 'dashing' and exquisite in contrast.
And last but not least was Overton- he was the more laid-back, easy going, fun loving guy.
Arguably, most of the jokes and funnier moments were much better handled and executed well; thus, it stood out more than NBC's worldwide hit, Friends.
Each character had their own agendas, as well as individual personalities and the actors all had depth and they brought something different to them to make them as likable as interesting as they are.
I also noticed whilst watching a few of the episodes that there seemed to be an air of intelligence, especially in the writing that made this head and shoulders above many other black sitcoms.
The scripting of Living Single was excellent.
One's initial viewing of this show would be this is a 'chick' show, but for a so-called chick sitcom, Living Single was both clever AND amusing.
I read also that like many sitcoms over the last decade, Living Single fell foul to terrible writing towards the last couple of open-ended episodes of the final season, which later resulted in its cancellation by network Fox- only for the series to be brought back and wrapped up in the final 3 eps.
Living Single was very under-rated as a show; the characters were well developed and story-lines were well-written; the writers did extremely well in juggling and handling both the humour and drama.
The rights were never bought in the UK, and so I don't recall Living Single ever being shown on terrestrial and satellite TV over here.
But I have watched a couple of the episodes on-line and for me, it is a really good sitcom.
Overall, it was and still is amusing, light-hearted and one of the most intelligent sitcom shows around.
Living Single may not have been an outright sitcom classic, yet it was terrific fun that during the 00s its relatively short success was later followed by the likes of 'Girlfriends'- another sitcom that was remarkably similar to Living Single in many respects.
Living Single was a show that was fresh and unique that deserved to be handled much, much better than it was by Fox..
I also never watched "Seinfeld" because I liked this series.
Thankfully, I can now see "Seinfeld" on endless re-runs on Fox. These shows went across racial lines.
Who'd ever think that Queen Latifah would become such a big star?
Very funny series.
I used to watch this a while ago when it would come on before The Simpsons on Fox, and I liked it pretty well.
wanting to buy living single series.
I love this show and i bought the first season.
I want to buy the entire season.
Let me know if we need to write someone for them to put this show on the market because it is worth every bit of money that its worth.
Other shows are on sale and I feel like this should also be on sale.
Thanks so much a very true fan of living single...
My favorite show is when kyle and max got together and went to the hotel to get busy and Kim Fields was being nosy and trying to find them too funny..
Looking for New DVD of second season.
I also Would like to know when the second season of Living Single is coming out on DVD.
Please Let me know how to find OUT.I enjoyed Living Single very much It was good to see a black TV show that was good and not made blacks too stupid.
The actors were great, Max got to be a little over the top.
The way Kim Fields was written out was not good, but we don't know all the details of why she left.
I have only recently watch Friends in reruns the show seems to be really silly.
Living Single touch on some important topics at times.
Living Single Follow Up. Actually in the last episode, Max and Kyle ended up leaving together, Regine became engaged to a rich man, Synclair and Ovalton, of course, are married and Khadijah is still dating Scooter from what I remember.
But, they are now showing the Living Single marathon on TV ONE.
It featured all the main characters except Queen Latifah.
They discussed how "Living Single" came about, how they all got their parts, and the experiences they shared working on the show together..
I like the show because the characters are pretty well developed with two pair that are similar.
The first pair is Sinclaire and the apartment handyman Overton.
The other pair is Max the over sexed, man using, lawyer and the commodities broker Kyle.
Kyle rooms with Overton upstairs from the three girls that live together.
Although Max has her own place she is over so much and eats so much free food she might as well live with the others. |
tt1703049 | Trigun: Badlands Rumble | The exposition shows a bank robbery orchestrated by the titanic, towering thief known as Gasback. As a thief, he only pulls off the most difficult heists that offer the biggest rewards. Gasback's trio of henchmen, however, are tired from the increasing danger and expense of each successive job and decide to seize the winnings from his latest heist at Macca City, kill Gasback and retire to a life of luxury. When Cain, the leader of the trio goes to fire the killing shot, his gun is mysteriously knocked out of his hand...
Vash the Stampede appears from underneath a counter where he had been cowering and immediately throws the thieves off guard with his odd behavior and complaints about ruining his doughnuts. Gasback attempts to shoot down his former companions as they run away, but Vash manages to throw his aim off and no one is killed. Police begin to circle the building just as it is revealed that Vash is the legendary "Humanoid Typhoon." Gasback is confused why he would want to try to save even robbers and Vash responds in his usual way telling him that it's better to be alive. Gasback ultimately escapes the police by using a barrage of explosives for cover, one of which damages the city's power Plant.
20 years later the movie picks up with Gasback's former henchmen who had been living luxuriously on the money they had stolen. Gasback has taken revenge on one of them, destroying his business and property and leaving him to seek refuge with Cain Kepler. Cain used his portion of the robbery money to repair the city's Plant that was damaged by Gasback's escape and became Mayor. His vanity culminates in a huge rotating statue in his image built in the center of the city. Fearing Gasback will try to steal it, he insures the statue for 5 billion double-dollars prompting Milly Thompson and Meryl Stryfe to travel to Macca City to run risk prevention.
Vash travels to the city aboard a sand steamer and intervenes in an escalating brawl with some thugs harassing a young woman named Amelia. She is appreciative of Vash's assistance, but spurns his over-the-top advances (and rather humorously has a physical allergic reaction to men touching her). Amelia is actually a bounty hunter who has traveled to Macca City in anticipation of Gasback's appearance. Over the years the thief has accrued a 300 million double-dollar bounty and Amelia is only one of a great number of bounty hunters gathering to take a shot at bringing the criminal down. Meanwhile, Gasback continues planning his revenge and is ambushed by police who open fire on the bar he is playing poker in and level it to the ground. Gasback is shielded from the gunfire by his bodyguard who turns out to be Nicholas D. Wolfwood. Gasback discovered the priest dying of thirst in the middle of the desert (in a nod to Wolfwood's first appearance in the anime) near a water vending machine that wouldn't accept his crumpled bills. Feeling indebted to the thief, Wolfwood agrees to act as his bodyguard, but not actively participate in the robbery against Cain.
Vash continues trying to unsuccessfully court Amelia and they end up at dinner with Milly and Meryl. A brawl breaks out and afterward Vash carries the inebriated Amelia back to their hotel. That night Gasback attacks and destroys a factory owned by the second henchmen at a nearby town, leaving him to seek refuge with Cain and word spreads that the rumored attack on Macca City was a hoax. The bounty hunters, including Amelia, begin to leave the city early the next morning just as Gasback arrives. The bounty hunters, most of them nursing hangovers from drinking the night before, offer little resistance and soon Gasback fights his way to Cain's doorstep where he is halted by Vash. Wolfwood orders Vash to let Gasback pass and opens fire, distracting him just long enough for the thief to get inside the mansion. With his contract complete, Wolfwood puts his gun away allowing Vash to chase Gasback inside.
Gasback confronts Cain just as Vash and Amelia arrive. Vash hopes to defuse the situation while Amelia aims to kill Gasback. Amelia learns that Vash was the one who allowed Gasback to escape from the botched robbery 20 years ago. During Vash's interruption Cain manages to escape and once again Vash allows Gasback to leave despite Amelia's protests. She tells Vash that because he saved Gasback 20 years ago countless lives were affected by his robberies including her own life and her mother's who suffered because of the thief. She swears to chase him down and take revenge.
Elsewhere in the city Gasback confronts Cain once again and explains to his betrayer that he's not going to kill him, but instead steal everything that belongs to him. Cain had believed the target of the theft was his statue, but in fact the object is far more valuable. Gasback sets off a string of explosions which separate the city's Plant from its cradle and the massive light-bulb like Plant rolls through the town past dumbstruck citizens straight to the city's main gates where a special getaway vehicle secures the Plant and drives away. Amelia immediately takes a vehicle and chases after Gasback and she is followed by Vash and Wolfwood. She catches up to Gasback and starts shooting coming dangerously close to hitting the Plant. Vash and Wolfwood pull up between them and Vash tries to calm Amelia down, but he is shot by one of Gasback's henchmen and falls into dry quicksand. Wolfwood leaps in after him to save him, but only manages to pull up Vash's sunglasses. They take the sad news back to Milly and Meryl in the now darkened city and Amelia starts to think that she's no better than Gasback.
The following day Amelia enlists Wolfwood (wearing Vash’s sunglasses in tribute) to help track down Gasback and reclaim the Plant. They attack the thief’s caravan, but are quickly outmaneuvered. Just as one of Gasback's men moves to shoot Amelia, the gun is shot out of his hand by Vash, who reappears without a scratch. The bullet that struck him lodged in an extremely tough piece of smoked meat he was carrying in his coat pocket (and he barely avoided drowning in the quicksand pit due to Milly and Meryl nearly falling in the same pit and inadvertently pulling him out). Gasback then challenges him to a duel and Vash handily defeats him with a shot to the leg and shoulder. Gasback then activates a secret energy-based weapon, but Amelia steps forward and reveals a strange mechanical glove she wears which counters the weapon. Gasback recognizes the glove immediately as something he made for his wife, Amelia's mother. Amelia explains she was born shortly after Gasback left home to commit another robbery. The thief left his wife well-provisioned, but rival thieves came and stole almost everything they owned and none of their neighbors would help the family of the notorious criminal Gasback and not even doctors would help when Amelia's mother lay dying. Amelia holds the gun on him, but ultimately decides to spare his life having adopted Vash's outlook. A disheveled Cain arrives on the scene with a gaudy missile bearing his face which Wolfwood dispatches with a single shot from his Cross Punisher.
The closing credits show scenes where the town is restored. Vash and Wolfwood are walking when they are greeted by Meryl and Milly, who go off to report on the events. Gasback, his henchmen and his former cohorts including Caine have been taken into custody; as the police caravan travels, Amelia is seen following them from a distance. Vash and Wolfwood discuss the events of the last few days, including the circumstance that if Vash had not saved Gasback 20 years ago, Amelia would not have been born. A newspaper page blows into Vash's face. Vash reads it and declares they are heading in a new direction. Wolfwood asks what is going on and learns from the paper that the Dodongo Brothers have escaped prison. Wolfwood interprets Vash’s silent detachment as a sign that the legendary outlaw has something to do with the Brothers as well. | romantic, comedy, fantasy, prank | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0294590 | Future War 198X | On September 16 of a certain year in the 1980s, the United States conducts an orbital test of the new Space Ranger antimissile laser defense system. American scientist Burt Gains oversees the test under the aegis of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency with the target warhead being launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base as the international media covers it. The Space Ranger module successfully destroys the warhead and the crew of the Space Voyager shuttle carrying the module returns to worldwide adulation. Gains looks at the successful test as a sign that nuclear war can be prevented, but has reservations about its potential to inflame the arms race. His sister Laura, and his best friend Wataru Mikumo soon find out that he was kidnapped by Soviet spies while heading off to work. A Soviet Alfa-class submarine is tasked to transport Burt to Vladivostok. Seeing the danger of Burt forced to replicate his Space Ranger work for the Soviets, US President Gibson orders the submarine sunk with nuclear torpedoes.
Tension builds up between the US and the USSR in the wake of the sinking, with President Gibson attempting a peaceful solution with the Soviets, who promptly put their forces in Eastern Europe on high alert. Wataru is promoted to lead the Space Ranger research team as Laura is medically confined due to depression over her brother's death.
On Christmas Eve, the Soviets get the news that an elite Soviet Air Force pilot has defected, flying the USSR's most advanced strike aircraft, the Black Dragon, to a German Air Force base in West Germany. Fearful of NATO getting their hands on the Black Dragon's technology, the Soviets launch a Spetsnaz commando raid to kill the pilot and destroy the plane. The raid is but the first act of the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact going into battle, easily blasting across West Germany and capture Paris.
The Soviets keep up the offensive, with attacks on Iran, Turkey, and the Near East to capture oil resources while launching airstrikes on Japan; China joins the war as well, ordering PLA forces to attack the USSR. US forces invade Cuba. Soviet First Deputy Premier Kutuzov convenes the Politburo on Premier Orlov's behalf and proposes a ceasefire to secure oil rights to the Middle East while plotting to arrest Defense Minister Bulgarin, who earlier pushed Orlov to go to war. However, Bulgarin appears and has the entire Politburo arrested.
A Soviet Navy ballistic missile submarine receives orders to launch on the US, but comes under attack from the US Navy and gets badly damaged. Waiting for a recall order from Premier Orlov himself, the submarine captain refuses to launch the missiles, but with the sub rapidly sinking, his executive officer kills him and completes the launch with his communications officer. Several US cities are destroyed in the attack and President Gibson authorizes a massive nuclear counterstrike. Bulgarin launches a second strike while one of his assistants kill Orlov as he tries to negotiate peace with Gibson over the hotline. The Soviet attack hits more US and allied cities, with casualties estimated at 20 million. Gibson learns that Vandenberg is still safe and authorizes the Space Ranger's deployment with Wataru sent up as well. Meanwhile, survivors in the war zones begin a peace movement together with deserting soldiers. When Bulgarin learns that the deserters include Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops, he prepares to launch all remaining Soviet nuclear missiles, but Kutuzov reappears in a bid to force him to stop. Bulgarin is killed, but not before he presses the launch button with the override canceled.
Word of the new strike inbound reaches Gibson and the Space Ranger forces, with four modules in orbit to stop the warheads. While the satellites destroy many MIRV warheads, three are destroyed by the Soviets' killer satellite network and one warhead severely damages the fourth and the Space Voyager shuttle. Wataru decides to head to the last remaining satellite and repair it ahead of another wave of MIRVs before his oxygen ran out. The module is repaired and Wataru shoots down seven MIRVs, but is forced to maneuver the satellite to get close and shoot down the eighth bearing down on Los Angeles, but the blast shakes him loose from the module and out into space. Laura, who was evacuated to the US after being caught in the Soviet airstrikes on Japan, flies in another shuttle to save Wataru while Kutuzov orders the crew of a nearby Soviet space station to rescue him. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | Future war 198x out of VHS in Australia. This anime is ahead of its time.It was cutting edge animation and controversial when it first came out in 1982.The anime is inspired by General Hackett's book The Third World War and its depiction of war is as realistic as anime can get.(note: for war enthusiasts, the huge tank battles on the North German plains are shown here and are quite good).Anyways, it came out from Wizard Video in Australia in the 80s(its in PAL) and its in English albeit not a full translation but an English narration.They also cut several scenes from it(I saw the original Japanese version) but its still quite good.Forgot to add:The original Japanese version is 125 minutes longThe German version is 115 minutes longThe English version(from Wizard video, narration instead of dialogue, added soundtrack from Tangerine Dream, Asia(Only Time Will Tell & Wildest Dreams) & Rush(Witch Hunt). The added soundtrack worked quite well with the Witch Hunt music really complementing the massive tank battle on the North German Plain and the ending music of Only Time Will Tell(which made me get more Asia music btw)) is 90 minutes long.. Heartrending war melodrama. It's a shame this movie is so hard to come by. I only managed to get a hold on it through the Internet.This story tells of WWIII and was written during the Cold War. From the beginning, it shows the war through many sets of eyes: civilians', the engineers', the world powers, and the soldiers'. Probably the most realistic portrayal of war in a cartoon.It's extremely somber and depressing, which is the right tone for it. That is, until the end. I felt the ending of it really reversed all of the buildup and drama the movie had going for it.But even though it's heartbreaking, it ends on a note of hope. There's something to be learned from that.The Japanese music is better in my opinion. Not too much that is important was cut, though, just a scene showing Japan's involvement and some of the gorier details (for instance the shot of a bloody stump of a soldier's arm is cut). Laura is also implied to be in a relationship with the character who was her brother in the original.Either way, it is wonderfully animated and a real gem, making it a shame that it's so obscure. |
tt0078227 | Semi-Tough | Wide receiver Marvin "Shake" Tiller and running back Billy Clyde Puckett are football buddies who play for a Miami pro team owned by Big Ed Bookman (Preston). Bookman's daughter Barbara Jane is roommates with both men, and the film depicts a subtle love triangle relationship between Barbara Jane and her two friends. She initially has romantic feelings for Shake, who has become more self-confident after taking self-improvement training from seminar leader Friedrich Bismark. The program is called Bismark Earthwalk Action Training, or B.E.A.T. After Shake completes his course, he and Barbara Jane sleep together and start a relationship. Barbara Jane is not a follower of B.E.A.T., and Shake is warned by his leader Bismark that "mixed marriages don't work."
Barbara Jane is determined to make it work, so she attends B.E.A.T. in an effort to "get it." At the end of the training session, she is worn out from Bismark's "sadistic abuse, pious drivel and sheer double talk." Barbara Jane also feels guilty that she did not "get it." Shake is insistent that the training has had proven results for him, noting that he has not dropped a football pass since completing B.E.A.T. Billy Clyde also has feelings for Barbara Jane and enrolls in B.E.A.T. in order to understand what she is going through. In the training, Billy Clyde is shown coping with the seminar rules forbidding going to the bathroom. For a time Puckett pretends he underwent a conversion to Bismark's way of thinking. While Barbara Jane and Shake are at the altar about to be married, the minister turns to Bismark and gives him some advice on how he can avoid capital gains tax in his business. Billy Clyde ends up exposing the movement's shallow side, and rescues Barbara Jane from both B.E.A.T. and her impending marriage to Shake. After leaving the wedding together, Barbara Jane and Billy Clyde reveal their feelings for each other. | satire | train | wikipedia | "Semi-Tough" has got to be one of the best comedies of all time.
You could really identify with Kris Kristofferson, Bert Reynolds, and Jill Clayburgh as lost children of the 1960s looking for the answers to life in the 1970s.
They parody to a "T" some of the self-help and consciousness raising scams of the times.I especially loved the thinly disguised "BEAT" which closely paralleled "est" (Erhard Seminars Training, and they always wrote the acronym in lower case) which attracted many followers.
While Kris Kristofferson "got" the training, Jill Clayburgh did not.
Since they wanted to get married they were afraid of a "mixed marriage." Fortunately Burt Reynolds also takes BEAT training and pretends to "get it" although you later learn he saw right through it from the beginning.
Burt Convy as the seminar leader bore a striking resemblance to Warner Erhard, the founder and leader of est.For your $300, the training consisted of two weekends spent in a hotel ballroom from about 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM both days.
There were no breaks even to eat or go to the bathroom (no kidding!) The stunts in the movie paralleled the real est training, with things like lying on the floor hugging your pillow while kicking your feet in the air.
Fortunately, I found another job where I was not subject to "estual harassment."Robert Preston, the Team Owner, played his role perfectly too.
In fact, one other football player was a devotee of "pyramid power," proudly wearing a pyramid from a necklace.This movie has been on TV but not recently.
Yeah, they weren't around during those happy days of Disco, Leisure Suits, disaster movies, gas lines, est, Lifespring, Rolfing, Pyramid Power, and of course, "Happy Days."If you enjoyed "Semi-Tough," another film you'd like is "Serial.".
This film is a sort of decent stab at adapting Dan Jenkins great book, but, mainly due to language and Political Correctness, it ends up falling flat.
Since much of that had to be dropped from the film, a good bit of the books' humor is lost.
And, as with many films, there is less room for character development than in a book.
Still, with Burt Reynold and Jill Claiburgh, it has some considerable charm and humor.
Kris Kristofferson offers up a surprisingly good performance, and he's never impressed me as an actor before (nor singer either, for that matter).
Overall, not a bad film, but you'd probably like the book better - I do!.
Burt Reynolds and Kris Kristhofferson play two pro football players who are interested in the the daughter of the owner of the team.
Two men competing for the girl, and willing to make total fools of themselves in the process, until the Burt Reynolds character wises up, steps back, examines the situation objectively and then plots his strategy to gain the girl's attention.
It's not the greatest movie, and it's definitely not a sports movie, but it's worth watching, has funny moments, and shows what a guy is willing to do to get a woman..
Advertised as a sexy comedy about pro-football players and their women, this Michael Ritchie film, based on the book by Dan Jenkins, instead takes aim at fads and other eccentricities of the 1970s, using the sports world as a backdrop.
It wasn't the big commercial hit some were predicting, though it garnered good notices for Burt Reynolds, doing another of his amiable walk-throughs.
Jill Clayburgh, just prior to her breakthrough in "An Unmarried Woman", plays the daughter of the football team's owner, and her rapport with Reynolds is surprisingly instantaneous.
There are some funny potshots at the EST craze, with Bert Convy well-cast as a self-help guru, but the romantic comedy at the heart of the piece never quite takes off.
Jenkins's novel is one of the funniest books ever written, and THE funniest sports novel.
The movie is a total trashing of Jenkins's work.
It retains only the title, the names of a few of the characters, none of the book's plot, and none of its humor.
Billy Clyde's diary of the week leading to the Super Bowl, with all its hilarity, has been replaced by a silly look at self-improvement fads and crazes and Gene Autry music.
Reynolds and Kristofferson are not believable as professional football players, although Kris would have been a great Elroy Blunt, had that important character been retained from the book.
Jenkins informed the director that in the book, the scale went the other way, with a "1" being the top vote.
If you'd read the book and then went to see the movie, you probably ran screaming from the theater, vowing revenge on the @$$hole writers, director and producers who ruined one of the funniest sports books ever written.
It sure wasn't the author of "Semi-Tough", sportswriter Dan Jenkins.
I understand the compromises that must often be made when bringing a book to the screen, I understand that cuts and character deletions are necessary to squeeze a good-sized novel into a 2-hour (or so) movie) - but why rewrite the whole damn thing?
Do yourself a favor - instead of trying to track down a copy of this movie on DVD (it's out there), get a copy of the book (it's been recently re-released in trade paperback format) and laugh yourself silly - then track down copies of "Life Its Ownself" and "Rude Behavior" (they're both a bit harder to come by - for reasons I can't fathom), the 2 follow-ons to "Semi-Tough", and laugh some more.Then - go find copies of every book by Dan Jenkins that you can lay your hands on and read them all: "Baja Oklahoma", "You Gotta Play Hurt", "Dead Solid Perfect" (the "Semi-Tough" of golf, featuring Kenny Lee Puckett, another Fort Worth native.
This book also had an unfortunately mediocre movie made out of it - but with the minor thrill of seeing the luscious Corinne Bohrer (who usually plays squeaky-clean suburban mommies) as the lascivious and uninhibited Janie Ruth Rimmer (Kenny Lee's 3rd ex-wife-to-be), walking full-front naked down the hallway in a British hotel to fill the ice bucket - the shocked middle-aged couple who spot her are author Dan Jenkins and his wife, June, in a quick cameo appearance).More of Jenkins' books that are must-reads: "The Money-Whipped, Steer-Job, Three-Jack Give-up Artist" ('nother golf book, with another - different - Texas golfer) and its follow-up, "Slim and None".
Burt Reynolds and Kris Kristofferson team up to play a pair of amiable pro-football players in Semi-Tough a good natured comedy about these two and the owner'd daughter.
Sounds like you should be waiting for punchline and in a sense the whole film is one.Jill Clayburgh is the owner's daughter, the owner being Robert Preston who is a flamboyant Texas millionaire and owner of the Dallas football team which for copyright reasons is never referred to as the Cowboys.Having grown up with the team Clayburgh is on a first name basis with all the players and they treat her with due deference.
She'd like a little more going with either Reynolds or Kristofferson, but can't make her mind up which one.
It's almost like Crosby/Hope/Lamour without any songs.Some nice performances will be found from masseuse Lotte Lenya, fake motivational speaker Bert Convy, and also the best from Brian Dennehy as a defensive end who's really abusing the steroids.
It's from Dennehy that we get some potentially serious moments in an easy going film.Fans of the leads should appreciate Semi-Tough..
If you know who Elroy Blunt was, don't watch this movie.
The whole thing is a shame, because this was by far the funniest book I ever read.
Then I heard that Burt Reynolds, Kris Kristofferson and Jill Clayburgh were the stars and thought "oh-oh." Still, I went to see the movie -- just awful.
While I respect the "favorable" reviews given by some above, it's obvious that they didn't read the book.
I'd invite them to do so, then watch the movie again and see how they'd rate it again..
I loved the book, but failed to heed warnings to steer clear of the film.
Reynolds, as Billy Clyde Puckett, gives his usual smirking performance, while Kristoffersen devil-may-care mien of his character, split end 'Shake' Tiller, and Dennehy adequate captures the man-child, T.J. Lambert.
However, the script does little justice to Clayburgh's character, Barbara Jane, who was the best developed and most interesting character in Jenkins' novel..
This obviously big-budget studio comedy has more in commonwith discursive satires like "Smile" or "Nashville" than other studiocomedies of the period, although it is far more well-made and plottythan either "Nashville" or "Smile": I think it's the best of both worldssatire and spontaneity wrapped up in a comfy old-fashioned romanticcomedy.
So there's no opportunity for a commentary track unless Reynolds, Kristofferson and Clayburgh decide to get together to do it, which would be an excellent idea.
Jill Clayburgh's best work is arguable, but for someone who got her start in soaps in th 60s and whose movies include Portnoy's Complaint, Gable and Lombard and Hanna K., Semi-Tough has to be a highlight.
His performance as the football team owner is priceless.
True, it's not a great movie, but for those of us who were there or who'd like to know about the excesses of the 70s, this movie is very hard to beat for laughs and a sometimes painful look at the way we were..
I know that's bold talk but currently "Semi-Tough" is my favorite Burt Reynolds movie.
That said, "Semi-Tough" is a wildly funny movie with a surprisingly sweet love story.
"Semi-Tough" covers so much ground it's hard to call it a "football" movie.
Director Michael Ritchie was known for comedies but made one of the best sports movies of the 1970s, Downhill Racer about a selfish, self obsessed Olympic skier played by Robert Redford.Semi-Tough is a satirical light romantic comedy.
Billy Clyde (Burt Reynolds) and Shake Tiller (Kris Kristofferson) are football stars who are both involved in a relationship with Barbara Jane (Jill Clayburgh) the daughter of their team owner.Inspired by a self help guru Friedrich Bismark (Bert Convy) it is Shaker who gets engaged to Barbara Jane which makes Billy Clyde realise that he also loves her.This is an engaging look at two egocentric men, the influence of lifestyle gurus.
There is a scene where an argument between two rival football players ends up being a discussion between rival self help courses.Ritchie brings an almost anarchic style to the film yet has a cutting edge on the lifestyles of the rich and famous sports stars.There is a famous scene where Billy Clyde gets involved in a 48 hours intensive find yourself seminar run by Bismark in a locked hotel room.
Participants cannot leave even to go to the toilet but Billy Clyde has attached a device where he could relieve himself.Burt Reynolds gives an engaging fun performance.
Not even Burt Reynolds can save the script of this forgettable drivel.
I lost all respect for the author of the book, Dan Jenkins, for allowing this thing to be made.
The book BTW is hilarious, and has no resemblance to the film.
Want to watch a football movie try the Longest Yard or North Dallas Forty.
Lively satire that demolishes pro football and self improvement ads.
The film also features Carl Weathers, Brian Dennehy and Robert Preston..
I didn't think this movie was good at all.
Some parts were funny like when he smiled almost evily but other than that, not that good.
Very much of its time and not only because it focuses on a number of dippy US 70s fads like est (beat here) when viewed today Semi-Tough is something of an oddity.
Early on, a minor character enquires of Reynold's amiable football-playing jock something about why he plays and his answer (something to do with black men and showers that would probably be enough to get my IMDb account deleted were I to repeat it verbatim) was actually quite shocking.
It was certainly the only time my interest was piqued.Apparently the film is based (loosely) on a laugh-a-page novel.
Jill Clayburgh seems to be completely out of her depth (if the word depth can be applied to a film like this) and there's something a little disturbing about hearing those Anglo-Saxon expletives issuing from her demure features.
She certainly doesn't seem the flighty type to inflame the passions of such macho characters as Reynolds and Kristofferson.Kristofferson is outshone in every department by good-ol'-boy Burt, which is a pretty damning statement when you think about it.
There just doesn't seem to be any vitality about the man, and he mostly drifts through his scenes with an expression of serene disinterest an expression I shared with him for most of this film's running time, especially the overlong est-whitewashing sequence which appeared to be one long run-in to Reynold's mildly amusing peeing-in-a-flask gag..
Read the book or watch *anything* else.
This was "based" on a very funny book, one of the most enjoyable I have ever read.
And I usually liked Burt Reynolds and Jill Clayburgh, and didn't mind Kris Kristofferson in a couple of other movies..
"Semi" Movie.
Essentially "Semi-Tough" sells the pain of misdirected love by chasing the emotions down with a shot of football-player toughness and religious/spiritual ineptness.
Semi tough even one-ups Shakespeare by taking using the same characters to embody these disparate virtues.In biting off this challenge, however, the movie strays from the characters and into lapses of football games and farcical "individual awareness" training.
Be it "Downhill Racer" (1969), "Bad News Bears" (1976), "Smile" (1975) or "The Candidate" (1972), all his films during this period are explicitly about competition, American institutions and individuals who put their personal goals (and/or profits) before a team, community or group (or vice versa).One of Ritchie's weakest films, "Semi Tough" is a shapeless and abrasive satire which focuses on the world of American Foodball.
Tonally, the film struggles to juggle comedy, satire and drama."Semi Tough" is criticised for being smug and abrasive, but that's understandable, considering it's populated by smug, abrasive and self-obsessed characters.
The world of professional football players (though not necessarily the sport itself) is given a ribbing in this loose adaptation of the popular book of the same name by Dan Jenkins.
Reynolds and Kristofferson are players on a fictional Miami team who share an unorthodox relationship (not to mention living arrangement) with the team owner's daughter Clayburgh.
The triangular love story plays out against the sometimes-bizarre backdrop of locker room shenanigans, commercial endorsements, road-trip sexual escapades and, most notably, the world of self-improvement guru Convy, based on a real-life entrepreneur named Werner Erhard, founder of the "est" program.
The film starts out promisingly disarming and saucy, with some startling dialogue and some skin-baring locker room shots, followed by an amusing deodorant commercial shoot and some good work by Catlett as a sexually desperate groupie and Lenya as a no-nonsense physical therapist.
Eventually, however, the film becomes mired in the not-too-involving aspects of the love story and the then-topical, now tiresome jabs at self-help.
Reynolds has appeared in a lot of junk over the years, but is woefully underrated when it comes to his ability to convey subtle emotion through his charm on the screen.
Convy, in visibly heavy makeup for some reason, has a good handle on his role (and went to a similar seminar in real life in order to prepare.) Lenya has just the one scene and is well cast in her role.
Oddly, for a film featuring the after hours exploits of a football team, there is almost no female nudity, just one brief, gratuitous topless scene during a mêlée in a church.
Rascally Billy Clyde Puckett (a fine and engaging performance by Burt Reynolds) and laid-back Marvin "Shake" Tiller (a supremely amiable portrayal by Kris Kristofferson) are a couple of professional football players who are involved in an offbeat (and platonic!) menage a trois relationship with the sassy Barbara Jane Bookman (splendidly played with spunky aplomb by Jill Clayburgh).
Director Michael Ritchie, adapting a sharp and biting script by Walter Bernstein and Ring Lardner, Jr., pokes wickedly spot-on fun at silly 70's self-help programs and the quintessential all-American emphasis on winning while showing a genuine warmth and affection for his three endearingly flaky main characters.
Reynold, Kristofferson, and Clayburgh all do sterling work in their roles, with excellent support from Robert Preston as irascible, eccentric good ol' boy owner Big Ed Bookman, Bert Convy as smarmy, pretentious self-help guru Friedrich Bismark, Roger E.
Comic highlights include Shake doing a deodorant TV commercial, Billy Clyde visiting a brutal physical therapist (Lotte Lenya in an inspired cameo), a protracted forty-eight hour self-help seminar, and a climactic wedding which degenerates into a wild brawl.
The time lapse involved between reading the Dan Jenkins book and catching this picture is now closing in on about forty years for me.
My best recollection is that the book was hilarious, one of those stories that you don't stop reading until you're done.
I didn't get that much of a charge out of the flick.So calling this a football movie would be a misnomer, there's really very little game action in the story.
Jill Clayburgh was the perfect casting call for the role of Barbara Jane.
I've seen her in a few other films and she's got the tedious thing down pretty well pat.Reading some of the other reviews I see the film has it's share of adherents, but if it's a 'real' football movie you want, along with Burt Reynolds, your best bet is to head on over to 1974's "The Longest Yard" or the 2005 remake of the same name - Reynolds is in both..
OK, the movie isn't that great.
On the whole, not a movie I would sit down for entertainment.But what has got me about this film is the way Burt Reynolds character becomes; laid-back, relaxed, unjudgemental, wise and very respectable. |
tt0087277 | Footloose | After a long night of partying, Bobby Moore and four of his friends become drunk and drive over a bridge and crash into a truck, killing all five. Bobby's father Shaw Moore, the Reverend of the Bomont, Georgia church, persuades the city council to pass several draconian laws, including a ban on all unsupervised dancing within the city limits (based, in part, on New York City's Cabaret Laws).
Three years later, Ren McCormack, a Boston-raised teenager, moves to Bomont to live with his uncle, aunt, and cousins after his mother's death from leukemia and his father's abandonment. Soon after arriving, Ren befriends Willard Hewitt, a fellow senior at Bomont High, and from him learns about the ban on dancing.
He soon begins to be attracted to Moore's rebellious daughter - Bobby's sister Ariel - who is dating dirt-track driver Chuck Cranston. After an insult from Chuck, Ren ends up in a game involving buses, and wins despite his inability to drive one. Reverend Moore distrusts Ren and forbids Ariel from ever seeing him again. Ren and his classmates want to do away with the law and have a senior prom. After a while Ariel begins to fall for Ren and dumps Chuck, and Chuck beats her up. Moore asks if Ren beat up Ariel. When Moore demands Ren's arrest, Ariel tells him that he can't blame everything on Ren just like he did with Bobby. She then reveals that she is no longer a virgin, which prompts Moore to beg for her to not talk like that in church, having Ariel sarcastically ask Moore if he will pass another law, and how it didn't stop her and Chuck from having sex. But Moore slaps her without warning, which shocks Vi, Moore's wife, and prompts Ariel to tearfully and angrily criticize Moore for slapping her, and storm out of the church. Moore tries to apologize, but Vi stops Moore, telling him, "You've done enough." Vi is supportive of the dancing movement, explaining to Moore he cannot be everyone's father, and that he is hardly being good to Ariel. She also says that dancing and music are not the problem.
Ren goes before the city council and reads several Bible verses given to him by Ariel, that describe how in ancient times people would dance to rejoice, exercise, celebrate, and/or worship. Ren also teaches Willard how to dance. The city council votes against him. Undaunted, Ren convinces the cotton mill owner to let them have a prom there; the mill is just outside city limits. Ren goes to see Moore, knowing that Moore still has enough influence to pressure the parents not to let their teenagers come. Ren tells Moore that even though they denied the motion to dismiss the law, they cannot stop the dance. He then asks him respectfully if he can take Ariel.
On Sunday, Shaw asks his congregation to pray for the high school students putting on the prom. Not long after Ren and Ariel arrive at the prom, Chuck and several of his friends arrive to beat up Ren. However, Ren, Willard, Rusty and Ariel subdue them. Ren then flings confetti into a shredding machine and yells, "Let's dance!" The movie ends with everyone dancing to the opening song "Footloose". | cult | train | wikipedia | (Even if I am torn between wanting to cringe and dance when I hear the theme!)On reflection it's no cheesier than something like "All the Right Moves" (which has a great cast doing their best but suffers from a plodding story) In fact, it's miles better!
Enrolling at the local high school, he is appalled to discover the town's adults have imposed a law on "public dancing" and rock music, as enforced and practiced by the local preacher(John Lithgow).
Ren quickly sets about changing things, falling in love with the preacher's daughter Ariel (Lori Singer) in the process.The story is a little unlikely yet it is perfectly suitable for the teenaged audience at which it is pitched.
The first sees Ren dancing by himself in a barn; the town meeting where Ren presents his case to the townspeople and explains to them the meaning of the dance; and the final prom sequence in which the teens of Bomont revel in their newfound liberation.As the leading man, Kevin Bacon carries off his role very well.
In these scenes he excels and his character's development seems very natural.On the technical side, the film is well-shot and the gloriously Eighties soundtrack complements the proceedings very well, bringing the necessary exhuberance and bounce to the whole movie.Whilst "Footloose" is certainly no masterpiece, it succeeds in being a lighthearted knockabout caper, and as such is a very enjoyable movie..
And even if it's largely to make fun of it, I still love it for old times' sake.Kevin Bacon is the tough city kid stuck in some podunk Midwest town where dancing has been outlawed.
Immediately gets you in -Kevin Bacon's character has one of the all-time great movie names: "Ren McCormack" -Funny how this is probably Kevin Bacon's greatest role, maybe only challenged by "Flatliners".
-"Moment I regret now"- Christopher Penn's dance sequence to "Let's Hear It For The Boy" (although it's a great sequence in the movie) -Kevin Bacon's speech to the council was possibly the greatest speech up until that time in cinema history.
Nothing new happens in this movie but you will watch with a smile on your face (especially during Kev's big drinking/dancing scene.) A great representation of what an 80s flick is all about..
This movie also stars John Lithgow from 3rd Rock from the Sun!!Footloose has awesome sound track , is full of great songs!!!This is one great musical along with Grease in the 1970's!!.
It's set in a high school in a small mid-western town where dancing has been banned; (it reminds me of a joke I heard here in Ulster; 'Why do Free Presbyterians disapprove of making love standing up?' 'It might lead to dancing').Kevin Bacon is the new kid in town who wants the ban lifted.
The funny thing is that I performed Footloose in my high school, it's now like 5 years later and I realized when I bought this film yesterday that I had never seen the movie.
The story is just so much fun and original, you just fall in love with Ren McCormick from the start.Ren is a new guy from the big city of Chicago coming into a small town and now this small town has banished dancing since a big accident that happened years ago that killed several teens after a dance, there were drugs and alcohol involved, so naturally these folks think that it's all apart of dancing.
He wants the kids to have fun though and wants a big dance thrown for the town and must convince them to cut their foot loose.Footloose is just a fun movie that I'm sure you'll have fun with.
This is the first movie I ever seen in the theater I must have been 13 or 14 when this came out,, and to me it still holds up well, I haven't seen the remake,, nor do I really want to,, this soundtrack is totally amazing, I had to buy it as soon as it came out,, the music fits almost every scene in the movie,, Kevin Bacon star just took off after this movie,, Lori Singer is really beautiful and did some decent acting,, although her character I didn't care for, Chris Penn did a wonderful job,, but John Lithgow steals the show for me.
RELEASED IN 1984 and directed by Herbert Ross, "Footloose" chronicles events in the small Western town of Bomont where dancing and loud music have been outlawed because of an accident that killed some kids years earlier.
Preacher's daughter Ariel (Lori Singer) rebels against the legalistic measures while taking liking to a new student from Chicago, Ren (Kevin Bacon), whom her father (John Lithgow) disapproves of because he perceives Ren as a "troublemaker" who wants to change the town laws against dancing.Also on hand are Chris Penn as Ren's "country boy" pal, Willard, and Sarah Jessica Parker as Ariel's friend, Rusty.
Penn's character is real fun and Sarah was a real cutie back in '84.I stayed away from this film because of Roger Ebert's scathing review and the fact that I thought the story was about some big city fop moving to a small town and dancing on the tables of the local high school, etc.
It's about the struggle of teens for freedom & the difficulty parents have letting go of their children.The film centers around a town, which led by its preacher (Lithgow) has banned dancing, music & alcohol.
The more the town represses the teens, the more they seem to want to rebel & Ren (Bacon), an outsider becomes their leader.Most people like this movie because of Kevin Bacon & the great soundtrack.
I watched this movie only this year in Locarno with 2 swiss friends!We all fell in love with the movie,the actors and the music!Although the story is simple and a bit unrealistic,the choreography was splendid and the movie entertaining!A definite 10/1O!Why?'Cause it made me want to do what no other movie has made me want to do.......DANCE!.
Son and bully fight and...resolution.However, it goes a bit deeper in that it references several cases of high school kids actually taking on town ordinances against dancing.And Kevin Bacon is the new kid in town, so he's like the Karate Kid, but he also serves in the Pat Morita role as instructor.And the evil dojo is actually a church and the bad guy is actually a preacher and not a Karate trainer and has a very kind heart and cares a lot for his community.
So the main villain isn't really evil he just has a different point of view, and unlike movies today, he is allowed to have a different point of view, to really be wrong in his beliefs, and still be portrayed as a kind and caring person.So, it's like the Karate Kid only with actual depth and much better soundtrack..
Lori Singer's character is rather intriguing and her progression throughout the film is possibly the best thing about this film, despite Kevin Bacon obviously getting all the credit as the main character, Ren. Chris Penn is an exceptional supporting actor and this film really does not deserve some of the hatred it gets.
The dance sequences are full of energy and will make you want to get up and imitate Kevin Bacon's fast feet, while the music and dialog are sure to make you remember what it was like to be a teen in the 80's (or just a teen in general).
Footloose (1984) *** (out of 4) A teen (Kevin Bacon) from Chicago moves to a small city, which has been ruined by a preacher (John Lithgow) and his wife (Dianne Wiest) who have convinced everyone that dancing and rock music are sins.
I really enjoyed watching this movie, but the one thing that irritated me was Ariel, I just DID NOT like her character, and have no idea why Ren would take an interest in her.
Fortunately, he was flexible enough to make the change, so we get a terrific ending and one of the greatest and most fun dance movies of all time.The chemistry between Kevin Bacon and Lori Singer is terrific and Chris Penn and Sarah Jessica Parker are both great in their sidekick, comedian roles.
The plot of course has big city boy Ren McCormick (Kevin Bacon) moving to a small town where Rev. Shaw Moore (John Lithgow) has banned dancing, and challenging this.
But the story really makes the film a hit.Kevin Bacon is Ren McCormick, a Chicago teenager who moves with his mother to a small Midwestern town called Bomont after his father leaves.
Throw in there a humorous subplot involving Willard (Chris Penn), who doesn't know how to dance and befriends Ren. Can Ren convince Shaw Moore and Bomont that a dance will bring not only renewed freedom of expression, but also emotional and spiritual healing?"Footloose" is a story that could have taken place, as there are some, however few, real-life communities like Bomont.
Features a great 80's soundtrack and a show stopping performance from Bacon as a new kid in town who has a problem with the community's law against kids dancing.
This film boasts outstanding performances by Kevin Bacon and John Lithgow, a plausible plot (certainly more plausible than the plot in Flashdance!) and great 80s music!
There's no rock music or dancing allowed in this Right Wing Valley, so the local teens hit a neighboring town to shake off the cobwebs, including the preacher's daughter (too bad we don't see the preacher's wife kickin' up her heels as well, but the movie isn't that imaginative).
A city teenager (Kevin Bacon) moves to a small town where rock music and dancing have been banned, and his rebellious spirit shakes up the populace.There is really no need to review a film that everyone has already seen, but I will just say this: it is rightfully a classic.
Footloose is not a great movie with a very dry and easy to tell storyline,the cast is pretty solid but other than that this movie does not stand out,Kevin Bacon and John Lithgow did do a good job though.I thought that this was a musical,which it is in plays,I'm not very in to musicals but when I put this on I expected a lot of singing.There is very little music in it,but where there is,there the most enjoyable parts.Ren McCormack (Kevin Bacon) moves to a town where music and dancing is banned.Ren is very passionate about this and trys to bring it back with the help of his school mates.-DILLON HARRIS.
The main one being I like to see movies as an escape and when escaping with this film I get to go into a small town where dances and such are not allowed.
And with 'Footloose', is no different.This movie tells the story of Ren McCormack (Kevin Bacon), a boy from Chicago that moves to a small town.
The soundtrack is excellent with great original songs like 'Footloose' and 'Let's hear it from the boy', but you don't get to see anyone dancing in the most of the movie.
Maybe the people that dislikes this film so much sides with the idea of "NO ROCK MUSIC" thus, hated the *idea* that Ren McCormack (Kevin Bacon) brought rock-music back to the town as well as the pleasurable activity of dancing.Maybe some people just dislike Kevin Bacon and will bash everything he does - including this movie - instead of judging each of his works by merit.
But the new kid in town played by an amazing Kevin Bacon is about to defy that rule and get the minister's daughter while he's at it.My favorite scene in the movie is the very beginning when we see all the shoes dance.
Kevin Bacon is "Footloose" in this 1984 film which also stars John Lithgow, Dianne Wiest, Lori Singer, and Chris Penn.
Bacon is Ren, the new kid in a town that doesn't allow dancing, and he sets out to change that.That's actually about all there is to the plot, except that Ren gets involved with pretty Ariel, the daughter of the preacher (John Lithgow).
Ren revolts with best friend Willard (Chris Penn) and the minister's daughter (Lori Singer)." Veteran director Herbert Ross guides everyone's steps well."Footloose" makes a few of the mistakes "teen" movies make, but it still kicks up some fun.
And, Mr. Penn's dance instruction is topflight.******* Footloose (2/17/84) Herbert Ross ~ Kevin Bacon, Lori Singer, John Lithgow, Chris Penn.
The movie has also got a great soundtrack which mainly consists of pop/rock from the 80's this movie will definitely get you up and dancing.Now lets move on to the main cast roles, We have Kevin Bacon who you will probably remember from Friday 13th Part one if you have see that movie.
Kevin Bacon has actually been in quite a lot of good movies and i will have to say that Footloose really did suit him at the time if you want great acting, good story and one hell of a rockin soundtrack then Footloose is the one for you ENJOY!!!!.
The book-burning scene showed the Preacher the folly & error of his ways.Kevin Bacon as the rebellious teenager held the film and Lori Singer was good as the wayward teenager , trying to break free from a Preacher Father who suffocated not only a town but also his own family with his predjudices & beliefs.Footloose had a great soundtrack for 80's lovers , music from Australia as well as the US.
"Footloose" is the movie that jettisoned Kevin Bacon into stardom by his boyish charisma and the upbeat dance moves.PLOT: However, this is not a hackeyed musical that doesn't give the starring roles a chance to dance and/or burst into song.
It's a mainly serious drama about a Chicago teen (Kevin Bacon) who moves into a town where dancing/rock music is banned, thanks to a pastor (John Lithgow, of "Third Rock From the Sun" fame).
Without the music, Kevin Bacon, and the end dance scene, there is nothing memorable or special about this one note film.
No one will take anything to heart, except the fact I think this film is a case of "talked about too much, resulting in too little." There is enough here to sustain a movie, but everything is taken in such an awkward, one dimensional manor that it's hard to like.Some people will be able to find the humor, the drama, and the fun in Footloose and that's great.
A young pup, played by Kevin Bacon(in a good role for him, actually) arrives in town from Chicago wanting to change things.
It is leaps and bounds better than the reboot which came out two decades later.The story is about Ren, a young man from Chicago, who moves to a small town which doesn't allow music or dance.
Ren has a chance to rebel against the authoritarian leaders of the town by showing them that dance and music doesn't have to be a drug filled orgy of sex and sweat.Kevin Bacon does a great job of playing the lead part, it was said that Tom Cruise and Rob Lowe were also in line for the lead role but Tom Cruise was doing All The Right Moves, Rob Lowe was injured.As the lead interest, Lori Singer/Ariel Moore, plays the preacher's daughter, Jon Lithgow, which was originally supposed to be Madonna, or a hundred other famous young actresses which didn't seem to work out.
However Lori Singer does a great job as a country girl trying to get noticed by her father.The rest of the supporting cast does a fine job and there is Sara Jessica Parker (Sex in the City) and Chris Penn (Reservoir Dogs) to name a few.The soundtrack is loaded with many top 10 songs of the era including "Bang Your Head (Metal Health)" by Quiet Riot, "Hurts So Good" by John Mellencamp, "Waiting for a Girl Like You" by Foreigner and the extended 12" remix of "Dancing in the Sheets".The soundtrack includes five rock singles—the title song, "Footloose" and "I'm Free", both by Kenny Loggins, "Holding Out for a Hero" by Welsh singer Bonnie Tyler, "Girl Gets Around" by Sammy Hagar, and "Never" by Australian rock band Moving Pictures (the song played during Bacon's solo dance scene); three singles—"Let's Hear It for the Boy" by Deniece Williams, "Somebody's Eyes" by Karla Bonoff, and "Dancing in the Sheets" by Shalamar; and the love theme "Almost Paradise" by Mike Reno from Loverboy and Ann Wilson of Heart.I hear complaints that this movie sucks and that it doesn't hold up over time.
I also think the first ten minutes of the film are effective: with the camera showing different views of what's clearly a small town and then taking us to church, where Reverend Moore (John Lithgow) gives a speech about how dancing corrupts the spirit of young children.
Within the movie Footloose, the main character Ren, moves from big-city Chicago to a small town in the West where dancing where rock music and dancing are illegal.
He also falls for the minister's daughter.Ren who is very passionate about is music and dancing, wants to change the rules in the new town where he moved in.
I think this is a good movie to watch, to show how people have their own opinions, and how to solve problems.In conclusion , everyone in the town was finally happy to have music and dancing back, because that was just part of their everyday lives that they didn't have for a while.
"Footloose" is one of those fun movies from the 80s that has a rocking soundtrack and great dancing.
The story is about a young man named Ren, played very well by Kevin Bacon, who moves from the big city to a small town where dancing is outlawed.
I also liked Chris Penn as Ren's friend Willard, whom he teaches how to dance.I have a problem with one scene in this movie.
"Footloose" is one of the great dance movies of the 1980's. |
tt0385988 | Red Riding Hood | Valerie is a young woman who lives in the village of Daggerhorn, on the edge of a forest plagued by a werewolf, with her parents, Cesaire and Suzette, and older sister Lucie. She is in love with the town woodcutter Peter, but her parents have arranged for her to marry Henry Lazar, son of the wealthy blacksmith Adrien Lazar. Valerie and Peter plan to run away together, only to learn that the Wolf has broken its truce not to prey on the townspeople in exchange for cattle stock sacrifices and has murdered Lucie, who is revealed to have had a crush on Henry Lazar.
Suzette learns of Peter and Valerie's love, telling Valerie she too did not love her husband at first, but learned to love him – that she had loved another. Father August, the local preacher, calls for the famous witch hunter, Father Solomon, to help them but the townspeople decide to venture into the Wolf's lair to destroy it. They divide into groups, with one consisting of Peter, Henry, and Adrien. Peter separates from them moments before the Wolf attacks and murders Adrien. The Wolf is cornered by the men and killed. Valerie finds Suzette mourning Adrien and figures out that he was her love. She also realizes that Lucie, being the older daughter, should've been the first to wed and should have been engaged to Henry, but could not as she was the illegitimate daughter of Adrien, making her Henry's half-sister.
The following day, as the people celebrate, Father Solomon arrives and reveals that, had they killed the Wolf, it would have returned to its human form as it is a werewolf, but what they slew was a common grey wolf. He also reveals that they've entered the Blood Moon Week, an event that happens every thirteen years, in which whoever is bitten by the Wolf is cursed to become one as well. Father Solomon's men, led by The Captain (Adrian Holmes), isolate Daggerhorn and begin to investigate its people in search of the Wolf. That night, the Wolf attacks and, while the townspeople rush to the Church (as the Wolf is unable to step onto holy ground), Valerie and her friend Roxanne venture into the village to search for Roxanne's autistic brother, Claude. They are cornered by the creature and Valerie discovers that she is able to understand the Wolf's sounds. It threatens to kill Roxanne and destroy the village if Valerie doesn't leave with it. The Wolf then escapes, vowing to return to learn Valerie's decision.
The following day, Claude is captured by Father Solomon's men. Having witnessed Claude performing a card trick earlier, Father Solomon claims he's a student of the dark arts and attempts to force the frightened Claude to reveal the Wolf's identity. When Claude is unable to do so, Father Solomon locks him up in a large iron elephant brazen bull. In exchange for Claude's release, Roxanne reveals that Valerie is able to communicate with the Wolf but Claude is already dead by the time the Captain opens the elephant. Believing Valerie to be a witch, Father Solomon has her captured and displayed at the town's square in order to lure the Wolf out so he can kill it. Henry and Peter join forces and help Valerie to escape. Peter is captured by the Captain and thrown into the elephant, while Father Solomon orders Henry to be killed for helping Valerie. Father Auguste saves Henry and is then killed by Father Solomon.
Henry takes Valerie to the church, but they are attacked by the Wolf, who bites off Father Solomon's hand, which contains silver-coated fingernails. The townspeople shield Valerie from the Wolf, who is once again forced to flee, but not before burning a paw by touching holy land. Valerie dreams that the Wolf is her grandmother, who lives in a cabin in the nearby woods, so she goes to check on her. Father Solomon, having been cursed, is killed by the Captain.
After retrieving Father Solomon's hand, Valerie rushes to her grandmother's cabin, but is confronted on the way by Peter. She then notices that he is wearing a glove on his right hand, the same paw that the Wolf burned trying to enter the church, Valerie assumes Peter is the Wolf and stabs him. Arriving at Grandmother's house, Valerie is horrified to find her dead, and learns that the Wolf is her father, Cesaire. He reveals that the curse was passed to him by his own father, and he intended to leave the village but wanted to take his children with him. He sent a note to Lucie pretending to be Henry to meet him at night so he could ask her to accept her "gift". However, when he confronted her, she couldn't understand him. Realizing Lucie was not his daughter, he murdered her in a fit of rage. He then took revenge against Adrien, his wife's lover, and now wants Valerie to accept the curse.
Valerie refuses, just as Peter appears and confronts Cesaire, who bites Peter (thus giving him the curse) and tosses him aside. Peter is able to throw an axe into Cesaire's back, distracting him. Valerie stabs Cesaire to death with Father Solomon's hand. Valerie and Peter fill Cesaire's body with rocks so he can never be found and dump the body in the lake. Peter departs in order to learn how to control his curse, vowing to return only when he's able to ensure Valerie's safety. Valerie narrates that Henry found his courage and joins the ranks of the Captain's monster hunters. Valerie's mother finally accepts that her husband will never come home, and the village continues to live in fear even though the wolf never returned. She then moves to her grandmother's house, leaving her old life behind as she can't go back to the village because she is married to the wolf (Peter) and wants to keep that a secret.
The last scene shows Valerie outside the cabin on a full moon. She hears a slight growl, turns around and sees Peter in wolf form as she begins to smile. In an alternate ending, Valerie is seen holding a baby, which is her baby with Peter. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | The creativeness of this movie was lost from the beginning when the writers and directors left out a good story line, only to substitute with horrible special affects.
"Red Riding Hood" (2006) is a silly version of the Grimm Brothers tale with annoying songs.
I watched this movie with a girl I was babysitting and I found it surprisingly inappropriate.
First, an eleven-year-old looking "Red" plans on sneaking out of the house wearing lots of make-up and little clothes.
Also, the "wolf" sings a song about "red" that is filled with sexual innuendos.
Otherwise, the special effects are terrible and it seems that the WHOLE movie was shot in front of a green screen.
The theater was packed, apparently with friends and families of the production crew, because only a few of us walked out by the first hour.The songs were the most literal I've ever heard in a musical "don't take the short cut, honey, there's a wolf in the woods..".
You know, it is possible to write for adults and children at the same time see under "Pixar".On the positive side, the virtual sets looked nice and were well-integrated with the actors.
For me, the best reason to watch this Red Riding Hood version is the Hunter played by Henry Cavill.
If I like watching a movie, I do not care if someone else puts it down so much.
If you want to view an incredible wonderful and handsome man like this Henry Cavill, then you will almost certainly want to rent this movie.
Gross, glad I was watching this with my daughter, I don't want her to think it's normal for families to view quasi kiddie porn together.
Very bad, Very sad it's sold as a family film, Joey Fatone will probably be embarrassed he was in it.
Great children's movies are wicked, smart and full of wit - films like Shrek and Toy Story in recent years, Willie Wonka and The Witches to mention two of the past.
But in the continual dumbing-down of American more are flocking to dreck like Finding Nemo (yes, that's right), the recent Charlie & The Chocolate Factory and eye-crossing trash like Red Riding Hood..
Worse, she insists that Claire and Matt listen to her reworking of the Brothers Grimm classic tale "Little Red Riding Hood".
Claire imagines herself as Red, and her brother, parents and grandma as....her brother, parents and grandma.Although this movie's star drawing power is represented by Lainie Kazan as Grandma, singer Joey Fatone as the werewolf and Cassandra Peterson (a.k.a. Elvira, Mistress Of The Dark) in a small role, the real fun is watching freckle-faced Thompson and Sam Stone (who plays Matt and Rusty) reciting their one-liners.
(When the werewolf as Grandma tells Red that she must eat to "fill out", Red looks at her chest and says, "Yeah, I know.") Undeniably the funniest version of this story that I've seen.IMDb and other web sites claim 2004 as the year of release, however Key DVD (20th Century Fox's revival of Key Home Video, the company Fox created to distribute movies it was too embarrassed to put it's name on) claims both 2005 and 2006 copyright dates on the box, while the film itself states 2006.For the record, this is my fourth and final "Little Red Riding Hood" review..
This movie, obviously, is not a Hollywood blockbuster, and its target audience is kids, so it should be judged accordingly.
That said, my daughters, ages 6 and 8, are absolutely delighted by this movie, and when I finally gave in to their insistent pleas that I watch it with them, I could see why.
All the actors, including the kids, have a great time with their parts, and ham it up at every opportunity.
The gags surrounding the juxtaposition between modern life and the classic tale of Red Riding Hood fly by so quickly that before you are finished appreciating one, you've missed two or three more.
Anyone who rates this movie poorly didn't watch it with an 8-year-old.
Like all adaptations there are varying degrees of differences to the original text, however the reviews some of the others are ridiculously narrow-minded, this adaptation is a new / novel approach to an old theme.
I found the look of it quite attractive and colorful particularly the background as Red was cycling through the landscape on her way to Grandma's house.
I thought the idea of Laine Kazan engaging her two grandchildren's attention by reading to them, especially as the girl wanted to go out with her friends, was very nice and affirming showing the power of a good story and encouraging reading as well as family bonding.
also the girl playing Red was very good and has a promising future ahead of her as an actress..
I watched this as preparation for the Tim Burton "Alice in Wonderland." That and "Riding Hood" are surely among the most stretched, adapted and versioned stories ever told.
Red is particularly interesting because the versions all contain the same elements: girl, wolf, grandma, hunter.
Hey, you should have seen the last red Riding Hood I saw: the very clever porn version.Other commentors are offended by the flamboyant staging and effects.
Every effect was deliberately shown to be an effect within a story.The framing is that Lainie Kazan plays a grandmother who reads the story featuring her two grandkids — one of whom is Red. The wolf is a werewolf who can assume the appearance of his victims.
I expect it will be no more scrambled, excessive, stereotypical and sexual than Burton's Alice.Red's cloak/hood is often a dramatic character itself.
Everything about it was funny and i thought Morgan Thompson was absolutely fantastic, and the fact that she was born in Australia is even better.So aside from the obvious low budget appearance, I think to enjoy this film is to appreciate its simplicity rather then looking for sexual innuendos, special effects, etc...It's a family film, aimed majority at kids who don't absorb this kind of nonsense.
I really want to watch the rest of the film because from what i've seen so far, it looks like a good film to have a hearty laugh at..
Morgan Thompson is a natural for Red. Lainie Kazan, Debi Mazar and Joey Fatone work well in this lively musical.
Andrea Bowen, Daniel Roebuck, and Cassandra Peterson (aka Elvira) are more than film worthy.Music is up-beat and with staying power for this genre.
The rich and vibrant scores flow well and may be the strongest feature of this colorful musical that is both avant-guard and mainstream family entertainment.Randal Kleiser and David Stump are perfect for the production skill requirements.
High Def Magazine Volume 5, Issue 4 cover is Morgan Thompson in "Red Riding Hood" with a full cover story by Jack Serino.Sandman Studios was over six months building the virtual sets for the 3D special effects and over two years in post production.
Baytech Cinema and FotoKem complete the new era technology by making "Red Riding Hood" the first-time-on-film do...
I think this movie to be distributed by 20th Century Fox will be closely watched by High Def people."Red Riding Hood" with Director Randal Kleiser is designed to take you on a journey that leaves "hum-drum reality" floating somewhere in the imaginary forest.
Red Riding Hood (2005); Motion Picture Production Enters A New Paradigm.
This modern day "Red Riding Hood" rolls along luxurious celluloid never deamed of before...Over the bridge and through the dell will lead to Grandmother's house in a new way.
Enter the dewy "rainbow" of film technology seen with this Red Riding Hood.
Advanced photographic systems are pegged to computers that house the real time production of virtual effects, easily allowing viewers to enter a "dance along" three dimensional fantasy world.Red Riding Hood (2005) distributed by 20th Century Fox may be thought of as the first motion picture in an improved era of film making.Randal Kleiser's directorship of Debi Mazar, Lainie Kazan, Joey Fatone, Henry Cavill, Ashley Rose Orr, Andrea Bowen, Morgan Thompson and many others augments the lavish musical style of this Red Riding Hood production.
Sean Fairburn who is respected by his peers as one of the most talented and knowledgeable High Definition Directors of Photography in the business, and Steve Sobisky (Effects Supervisor of Aritfical Intelligence AI and Shrek) who came from DreamWorks to plan and help produce the special effects, all benefit much to the final excellent film qualities shown in Red Riding Hood.The total effect of a movie like this creates a lasting memory..
State Of The Art Special Effects With Creative Musical.
"Red Riding Hood" empires battle-worthy "new technology" special effects arranged, photographed, and completed by experts from twelve countries.The mostly virtual reality sets are very creative.
Multi-layered virtual effects were live-on-demand programmed into the sets, creating a 3D look that is enhanced by expert Director of Photography David Stump and cameraman B.
Sean Fairburn.Bruce Robert's music is lively and works well with the action line.Randal Kleiser who directed "Grease" also directs this film musical..."Red Riding Hood" features a "previously unknown" as Red who is likable with both kids and adults.Joey Fatone, Debbie Mazar, and Lainie Kazan work well in this musical drama.
I didn't think I would enjoy this movie.
It's low-budget, and the trailer looked like something a 13-year-old could put together in Windows Movie Maker.
I think the cheesy, low-budget special effects were priceless.The story is timeless -- but this movie gives it a more modern edge and a unique flair.
Morgan Thompson as Claire was delightful, Joey Fatone was hilarious as the Wolf, and Henry Cavill was delicious as the Hunter.
It's a great movie to watch with your family.
Once upon a time there was a cute, musical, and imaginative new version of an old story.
But, first Grandma suggests that she be allowed to read them a fairy tale and, perhaps, Claire will be able to go meet her friends.
Yet, G-mama insists and suggests that the two younger folks invent new aspects for the chosen tale, Red Riding Hood.
Claire, who turns into Red, wants the family to live in a lighthouse at the edge of the woods and Rusty is avid for the wolf to become a werewolf (Joey Fatone).
Red starts out bicycling up a beautiful coastline, then turns into the forest which leads to Grandmas house.
Meanwhile, the werewolf devours a fisherman plus three nagging girls in charge of a toll bridge and he has his eyes on Red but his alter ego suggests he go to Grandma's first, eat her, and then wait for RRH, thus having a multi-course dinner.
All the while, Red sings some songs, the WW sings some songs and the rest of the family members chime in, too, to add in the fun.
Will someone step out to rescue Red from the Wolf, as in the original story?
This fun little musical version of a classic has something for most viewers.
Very important, too, is the fact that the film subtly encourages reading and the use of the imagination, both good values.
Families, you haven't seen it all if you haven't caught this new version of an old, old tale..
"Red Riding Hood" dances across new boundaries.
Art Film lovers will find solace here in the modern rendition of "Red Riding Hood" that uses state-of-the-art digital photography technique to capture a somewhat three dimensional look with an at times ethereal transience.
The "Welcome" mat is laid out as well for the entire family, as "Red Riding Hood" moves gracefully from each visually carpeted scene augmented with creative use of acting style that is both exasperating and subtle.Adept camera usage exaggerate the scenario and dramatic musical release explain the quality look rendered by advanced technology whose revolutionary use attracted some of the world's most skillful cinematographers and digital sleuths.Even with the wealth of special effects, the use of mood is most highlighted by the cast of talented actors, many of whom are just now becoming "known." Morgan Thompson perfectly fulfilled the leading role.
Henry Cavill while enjoying quite a following of young ladies in European movie theaters is until now a relative unknown in "The States." The two made for an entertaining duet.
Joey Fatone portrays a vividly animated wolf and somewhat (in a Wolfy way) likable fun-loving antagonist.The music is robust and may make inroads across the media due to unusual yet catchy melodic sounds moved upon by these talented singers.
Several "Red Riding Hood" acting performers are well followed on Broadway and music concert stages.It can not be overlooked how much the project has evolved into a "flagship" adventure.
This "Red Riding Hood" will have been defined into a modern-day "Fine Arts Film" when it is ultimately released.Overall, the motion picture has a rightful claim to being one of the most interesting productions of the year.
Watch and see if "Red Riding Hood" Oscar consideration is increasingly apparent..
She sounds like the mean old lady down the street and is completely clueless when it comes to kid's movies.
I saw Randall Kleiser's "Red Riding Hood" at digital screening in Hollywood with an industry audience who laughed and applauded the jokes - which update and parody the classic Grimm's fairy tale.
This movie is utterly charming, witty, campy and fun.
Children, especially girls, will love this movie --- unless they are given a poisoned apple from an evil witch, like Fleetmind..
A great family movie.
A great family movie.
This is a modern retelling of the classic "Little Red Riding Hood" fairy tale as a musical.
A grandmother of two kids baby-sits one night and manages to invite the modern children to a world of imagination by reading the old tale from an old book.
I wouldn't be surprised if the real world children get drawn into the story the same way as they do in the film and experience the same transformation.Since I never was a great N'Sync fan - no offense, just not my genre - Joey was a pleasant surprise as the villain.
A good choice to play the wolf, right blend of funny and scary.
One might expect a high tech looking Riding Hood, but instead the technology was used to create a beautiful, old world, fantasy where unexpected things can happen.
This movie is the ultimate parody of a classic story line, but set in modern times.
The lead character, Red, is just a complete darling, and the Big Bad Wolf is side-splitting funny.
My young daughters just loved it, and my wife and I laughed throughout the whole movie.
We liked it so much that we bought it, and our girls have watched it many times.
They know all the songs by heart.For those who get hung-up on special effects realism and need first rate acting, maybe this film isn't for you.
And yeah, the special effects are crude, but this film doesn't pretend to be anything more than it is.
This film is 10x better than a whole slew of other family movies..
Much Fun. I admit; I looked for the sound track to the movie after I rented it.
They went for the music and story over visual effects.
When you make a movie out of a fairy tale, you have to pad it.
I was lucky enough to see Randal Kleiser's "Red Riding Hood", a technological breakthrough in shooting full stream HD with the Viper camera on a virtual reality stage.
With outstanding performances from Joey Fatone (the N'Sync star portrays a sharp dancing wolf), Laine Kazan and a host of newcomers, this picture entertains very young audiences in the sure way that only the master Kleiser can.
I watched this movie last night with some friends.
They warned us previously that it was the worst movie ever made, but because of that reason it was hilarious.
The movie had everyone screaming while Red was in her grandmother's bedroom with the wolf in disguise.
The biggest problem for me was Red Riding Hood's extremely short skirt.
So if you can stand watching this sort of movie and are in need of a good laugh, I highly recommend this one..
It plays like a music video for the most part.
The young lady that plays Red Riding Hood is great, hopefully this film will get her many roles to come.
Extremely Funny & Child Inappropriate Movie.
I loved this movie.
If you think you're going to be watching something along the lines of Rogers & Hammersteins' Cinderella you're going to be disappointed.If you think you're going to be watching a Buffy-esque, snarky version of Red Riding Hood, you'll enjoy it..
Little Red Meets Joey "the fat one" Fatone.
i happen to like the film very much and think it's surprisingly well done for what it is and it's ambitions(which are few)are.
i think people are a little "put off" by this movie because the end result is unintentionally bizarre and way over the top.
Joey Fatone is way too young of a performer to seem like such a has-been, washed out, Las Vegas, Wayne Newton type.
i doubt Fatone will ever enjoy the respectability that N'Sync buddy Justin Timberlake is enjoying now as a serious actor.the two best performers are the girl portraying 'Red' herself, and Lanie Kazan, who is delightfully ditzy as the yoga loving, hippie, liberal grandmother.
the only thing that parents should be strongly cautioned about is the age inappropriate love interest for Red Riding Hood.
that's an age difference that's bound to make any uptight father of a tween girl cringe.i'm not going to pretend this movie is great cinema.
but it is a musical and a fairy tale, two things i absolutely love.
it's an unintentionally strange film (probably due to it's being a musical), but i think it's fun and it was directed by Hollywood pro Randal Kleiser who always turns in a polished looking production even when the material is kind of junk. |
tt0217630 | Loser | Paul Tannek (Jason Biggs), a small-town, intelligent kid from Upstate New York is accepted into NYU on an academic scholarship. Trying to follow the advice of his father (Dan Aykroyd) he tries to gain friends by trying to be polite and interested in others. His attempts are noticed by his new roommates Chris (Thomas Sadoski), Adam (Zak Orth) and Noah (Jimmi Simpson), three rich, spoiled, obnoxious city boys who consider his polite behavior, working class background and determination for education lame and brand him a loser. To salvage their reputation, the trio concoct a false story to the housing administration about Paul's attitude and have him thrown out of the dorm. Paul takes residence in a veterinary hospital. Chris meets Paul and again concocts another story about how they were trying to help him as a ploy for Paul to let them use the hospital to throw parties since a resident at the dorm fell into sickness due to excessive alcohol, forbidding them to hold any parties thereon.
Paul meets classmate Dora Diamond (Mena Suvari) and develops an attraction to her, unaware that she is having an affair with their decorated but highly pretentious English professor Edward Alcott (Greg Kinnear). Dora is equally as intelligent as Paul but doesn't have a scholarship and works shifts as a waitress in a strip club to pay for her tuition until she is unceremoniously fired. To avoid a long daily commute which she can no longer afford, Dora asks Alcott to let her live with him for a while to which he selfishly declines for fear of losing his tenure at the university if their relationship is found out. Paul and Dora bump into each other one night and Paul invites her to an Everclear concert after discovering when they met that she is a fan. Dora agrees to the date, but first goes to a job interview for a night shift in a convenience store, but is denied the position because she's a woman. Adam is at the same store buying beer and pretends to be sympathetic as a ploy to invite her to a party which she accepts, but says she will be there only for a short time so she can meet Paul. At the party, one of the boys slips a roofie into Dora's drink and she passes out. Paul returns dejected from the concert to a huge mess and an unresponsive Dora and immediately rushes her to the hospital. At the hospital, Paul pretends to be her boyfriend since neither he or Dora can afford to keep her there overnight. He also learns that Dora listed Alcott as her case of emergency contact which he tells Chris the next morning without thinking.
Paul bonds with Dora as she recovers and they start to develop feelings for one-another, he also learns that Dora can't see past her blind infatuation with Alcott even when she says even though he loves her, he doesn't want a relationship. While Paul continues with his studies, Dora searches for a new job. She pulls Paul out of class and invites him out to celebrate receiving a spot in a medical experiment. They steal a loaf of bread from a bakery, coffee from a dispenser in the park and sneak into a Broadway show. Paul goes out to grab a pizza and a movie for both of them hoping it may lead to something further between them only to return to find Alcott with Dora and learning that Alcott has changed his mind about Dora living with him. Alcott reveals to Dora that Chris, Noah and Adam are blackmailing him with the knowledge of their relationship in return for a passing grade on their transcript and also tells her that he believes Paul is in on it. After discovering roofies were involved at the party, he steals Noah's supply and replaces them with placebos. Paul then pays a visit to Alcott's office to ask how Dora is doing and is instead given his final exam as a take-home test by Alcott to buy his silence, Paul takes the moral high ground and refuses the test, jeopardizing his scholarship and place in the university.
Dora, since living with Alcott, has become his errand-girl and overhears Paul on the phone with his father talking about how much he misses her, Alcott then admits he learned that Paul had nothing to do with the blackmail, but still intends to fail him. Dora then realizes that Paul is the one who really loves her and terminates her affair with Alcott, beginning a relationship with Paul. Afterwards, Adam, Noah and Chris' behavior get the better of them and their lives plummet into failure, Alcott is found out and sent to prison for having an affair with a different student and Paul and Dora remain happy in their relationship. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Amy Heckerling's latest teen comedy, 'Loser', is an old-fashioned charmer where nice guys finish first, sweet girls end up making the right choices, and pushy 'users' get their just desserts!
Perhaps nobility is passe in films today, but 'Loser' makes a great case for working class heroes who succeed by 'doing the right thing'.Paul Tannek (Jason Biggs) is a farm boy who wins a scholarship to a college in New York City.
Paul is lonely and frustrated, which makes a simple act of kindness by fellow student Dora Diamond (Mena Suvari, in her best performance, to date) take on special significance to him.
Diamond is a kindred spirit, although she has been manipulated into believing Professor Alcott loves her, and has become his clandestine lover.As both of their lives take downward turns (he gets thrown out of his dorm, she loses her waitress job), they develop a platonic friendship (he is far too much a gentleman to attempt to break up a relationship!), and the film becomes a game of guessing when these two terrific people will realize they belong together!'Loser' features a lot of very funny cameos, by Andy Dick, David Spade, Andrea Martin, Colleen Camp, many others, and, to Heckerling's credit, these 'guests' never detract from the positive message of the film.This makes a great date movie (particularly if your date loves kittens!), and is a 'feel-good' flick you can enjoy again and again!
Granted, being better than most teen romantic comedies isn't much of an accomplishment, but Loser is a good movie, even though I knew what was going to happen.I thought Jason Biggs played his part as Paul very well.
Obviously, it's not extremely deep, and it won't change your life or anything, but it's still good, and it makes the movie very worthwhile.I think that lots of people didn't like this movie because they were expecting something along the lines of American Pie, given that both Biggs and Suvari were in that.
If, however, you want to see a good romantic film, that's funny at times, but serious at other, just like real life, then I think you will enjoy Loser.
It relies on little sex and profanity, but instead has its success rooted firmly in the acting and charisma of young stars Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari.The film centers around Paul Tannek (Jason Biggs), an all-around nice guy from a small town who is now going to college in a big city due to a scholarship he's received.
After some mishaps involving a party, Paul begins to develop a strong friendship with Dora and his feelings for her begin to go even farther as he wonders if he even has a chance to have a relationship with her.A warning before watching this film: if you're expecting similar antics from Biggs in American Pie, prepared to be disappointed.
True, there aren't exactly a huge amount of belly laughs in the proceedings, but it's always entertaining, fast, witty, and charming.As I said before, the movie's success lies squarely on the shoulders of Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari, and they're as good as ever.
Biggs nice-guy performance is his best to date and he creates one of the most genuinely likeable and true characters I've seen in movies for a while.
There are also appearances from well-known comics like Andy Dick and David Spade, and their brief cameos bring a few good laughs.Amy Heckerling wrote and directed this film, and while her script may be rather predictable, her direction is still good and she shows the same talent she had in the 80's.
With standout performances, excellent chemistry between the two leads, Loser is a great date movie and one you certainly cannot pass up if you're a fan of both Biggs and Suvari.
I don't know why people like to bash this movie, it is a nice little remake of the 1960 classic "the apartment" where in a businessman sells out to his bosses so they can use his apartments to have affairs with other women, but when one attempts suicide in his house, it happens to be the one he falls in love with, the same story is evident here, Biggs plays the role well, and Suvari could play Shirley MacLaine in future remakes, the same with Kinnear and MacMurray, this could become one of those films that could get young people involved into the classics..
another teen/young adult college comedy coming your way, spiced up with a little romance, the usual boy-meets-girl-falls-in-love-but-she's-already-with-someone storyline, and that's really all there is to tell, aside from a few notable college pranks that kinda make you wonder what _you_ did with your time back then...The acting is alright, teen-movie poster child Jason Biggs as the "Loser" delivers well, Greg Kinnear does a great job in his role as the slick, uppity, self-important, boneheaded college professor with a dirty little secret....
As for the rest of the movie, it's more like "same old, same old..." - if you like Mena Suvari, you're bound to love it, but otherwise, not that I'd tell you not to bother, but just don't expect to be too thrilled because it's really all been done before (and some of it actually by none other than Jason Biggs in some of his better-known flicks)..
Because the main heroine (Mena Suvari) knows who is the right one in her life (her choices are the teen Jason Biggs and a married professor Greg Kinnear) and takes too long to find out who the right one is (I am not revealing who that is).
Mena Suvari plays 'the girl' and as usual for Suvari she comes across as annoying and not nearly as smart as her character is supposed to be.If you are looking for the next "Clueless" check out "I Could Never Be Your Woman" (2007) it better matches Heckerling's potential.
Many films you watch once and never watch again, but for me i can watch this film many times and still get that same fuzzy feeling from when i first watched it.The acting is pretty good, I think pairing Mena Suvari and Jason Briggs was perfect as they'd already worked together in American Pie. The film is also more plot to it than most teen-comedy movies.
Jason Briggs does really well and you end up really liking his Character, He does a really good job at playing Mr Nice and really charming you.Give this film a watch.
Although Amy Heckerling (director of "Clueless", "Fast Times at Ridgemont High") tries to create another teen pop film, "Loser" is shallow and boring.
Greg Kinnear ("As Good As It Gets") does a fair job, which seems god-like in comparison to Biggs, Suvari, and the rest of the cast.
I liked this movie alot I found it to be very funny Jason Biggs in a role better than the one he had in American Pie and his American Pie Mena Suvari also has a great part and the roommates are pretty funny i was lucky enough too catch this movie on a sneak preview and it is on my list as a summer favorite.Grade:AIt's also a great date movie..
Dora (Suvari) on the other hand has a mess of bad things happen to her, and then she changes her opinion about her relationship with her professor (Kinnear), which means she's the only character who evolves throughout the film.
Although not hilariously funny it's good to watch the relationship between Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari.
I've watched this film because of Wheatus music video Dirtbag Baby (this song is a theme of Loser) expecting to see something like that in a movie but a movie was different than music video and still I wasn't disappointed.
But it just goes to show that now we're going to have to start STUDYING the trailers -- looking for tricks like this.If you're a big fan of romance comedies, then this movie might not leave that feeling of pulsing anger when you leave halfway through.
No dice.To sum the movie up, the producers figured out that it would be profitable to hire the hottest stars (Suvari and Biggs) of the movie that is the reigning king of teen comedies(American Pie - great movie, btw), throw them together (while they're still relatively cheap) along with some advertising and a bare bones movie with something akin to a plot (geek gets out) and script (character types that don't exist in the real world).The resulting pile of ass is just a drain on our patience and our wallets..
Loser is a comedy film written and directed by Amy Heckerling and starring Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari.
Loser is a American,cheesy 2000 comedy film starring Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari.
The film centers on two people Paul and Dora,Paul is an awkward nerd trying to make friends after just getting into a college with his sex,party freaked maniac roommates while Dora is a girl who dates her professor and desperately needs money.
Frankly, i think this is a pretty good movie, this is my favorite movie too, all the actors did their part, i'm amazed by Jason Biggs on how he portrayed his character.Unlike his other movies such as American pie, American reunion, etc.
the story line of this movie could also happen in real life for people who "just received a scholarship and moves to another place for collage and gets a crush on a girl" type of thing, this is a really good movie, i recommend this movie for a lot of people but this is not like American pie though, so i'll give it 10/10..
Biggs and Suvari, while sweet and a hell of a lot better than a lot of their teen compatriots, are no Lemmon and McLaine, Greg Kinnear just doesn't have the oily charm of Fred MacMurray's original, and the ending doesn't have anything like the understated impact of the Wilder original.Not surprised it bombed, because it's too flacid (the transposition to college life doesn't work) it doesn't work as an original, it doesn't work as a tribute (due to no new insight) and it doesn't work as a remake (class always wins out over youth).
with a really good cast of unkowns and a good main character played by american pies Jason Biggs, who holds the part of good hearted and kind LOSER who ain't used to the life in a city.good thing bout this film is that it ain't a stupid slapstick film, its good comedy that manages to be pulled out of serious situations that are probly undergone by a rather large population of the college student era, i'm getting at drugs,parties and relations etc.
Jason Biggs, who you normally think of as getting it on with a pie, actually does a real good job in this movie i think.
plus, mena suvari...her own character has issues in the movie, and i'm glad her character finally released how much jason biggs' cared about her, and how much better they were for each other.
Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari are both great in whatever they do and they were sooo adorable in this movie.
Basically, Biggs chases Suvari around for 120 minutes trying to convince her to go for him because he's such a nice guy (which is true, but you'd think the girl would catch on quicker).Add to the mix three moronic dorm buddies who don't even resemble real people (or real college kids, for that matter; all three look to be around 25-30).
I found very little of it actually funny, but I thought the onscreen chemistry between Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari was absolutely excellent.
Led by a strong cast, which includes two American Pie alumni (Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari), a veteran director in the field of teen angst/comedy/romance movies, and New York City, the movie has potential.
Therefore, for those fans of Mr. Biggs and Ms. Suvari, like myself, I would highly recommend this movie because you will love them as much as you loved them in American Pie. For everyone else, Loser will seem very generic and predictable, unless you have never seen a movie in your life!.
I had seen previous Amy Heckerling movies (Clueless, Fast Times at Ridgemont High) and enjoyed them greatly, and appreciated the teenage characters and situations.
The comedy is really a romantic comedy focusing on "Loser" Paul (Jason Biggs) who falls for a classmate Dora (Mena Suvari) who is head-over-heels in love with their professor (Greg Kinner) who is not very nice to her or many other people.
Mena Suvari and Jason Biggs had the on-screen chemistry and both were great in their roles, but the lack of plot, needless to say, made me lose my interest in the movie.
I would have much rather watched the Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari in American Pie again..
I thought this film, coming from Amy Heckerling (Clueless, Fast Times at Ridgemont High) was going to be another cute, charming comedy.
I really liked the characters played by Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari, and they had great chemistry together.
What stood out about this movie was the great chemistry between Mena Suvari and Jason Biggs.
However, in all of these cases the movie was touted as a remake, and not sneakily re-written in some kind of hope that no savvy viewers would realize what they were watching.I have a secret love for stupid teen comedies, so I watched Loser expecting a brainless fiesta.
Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari have great chemistry together and I would give Loser 7/10..
This film would have been better if its flash-in-the-pan stars, Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari, were even half as funny as the supporting cast.
Jason Biggs plays Paul, the 'nice guy who comes last' who initially gets taken advantage of by his room mates and hides his crush on another student called Dora (Mena Suvari).Dora is sleeping with one of their lecturers (Greg Kinnear)...
'Loser' has exactly 2 things going for it- the good (but by no means great) performances of Jason Biggs and Mena Suvari as a matched set of lovable college kids who are no respectable human being's idea of 'losers'.
One likeable character has bad luck or is dealt a bad hand in life, goes from one wacky mishap to another, and ends up at the end of the movie with the girl, the better outlook on life, and his tormentors get their comeuppance.Loser, however, does so with genuine heart and emotion for the titular character, Paul Tannek, played by Jason Biggs of "American Pie" fame.He is abused by his college roommates, even kicked out of the house they share because he studies instead of parties.
Along the way, Paul gets to know Dora Diamond (Mena Suvari, from "American Beauty", and also of "American Pie"), a quite girl whom is having an affair with their mutual college professor.
But Biggs and Suvari inject a reality into both of their roles that is refreshing, charming, and end up making this movie lean a little into "teen romantic comedy" territory.
Most seemed to expect the high-school hijinks of Amy Heckerling's previous "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" and "Clueless," but as it follows its characters in a college environment, "Loser" is a more mature work that is more focused on the relationship between its lead characters than on providing laughs (which it does have).The "loser" of the title is Jason Biggs's Paul Tannek, a nice but naive small-town boy who experiences a rude awakening upon arriving as a freshman at a big-city New York college.
Things brighten when Paul ends up falling for Mena Suvari's equally sweet Dora Diamond, a homeless classmate who is involved in a relationship with her smug professor, Greg Kinnear's Edward Alcott.The plot which follows is basically "Will Paul and Dora end up together?" Although this is a standard scenario that has played itself to its inevitable conclusion in many a similar film, "Loser" is fresh in its lack of pretentiousness and melodrama in getting there.
shame on those who thought every time they saw Mena Suvari, they'd have rose petals flying all over the multiplex...The best thing about Loser is that there is no goal at the beginning of the movie.
Jason Biggs is funny but I think he could've done better than this, and one of my fav new actresses Mena Suvari was ok in this but I expected so much more.
Paul Tannek is a small-town boy who is accepted into New York University.But for someone like Paul it's really hard to fit in.But he meets this girl, Dora Diamond, he really likes.The only problem is she's involved with her professor.Loser (2000) is directed by Amy Heckerling.Jason Biggs, who had one big hit under his belt at that time (American Pie) is the right guy to play Paul.The chemistry thing works between him and Mena Suvari, who's also known from American Pie franchise.Greg Kinnear is great as Professor Edward Alcott.Dan Aykroyd is terrific as Mr. Tannek.There are also lots of cameos by some pretty known names in this movie.Colleen Camp plays Homeless woman.Andy Dick is Another City Worker.Steven Wright is Panty Hose Customer.Brian Backer plays Doctor.Alan Cumming is himself/Emcee.David Spade plays Video Store Clerk.Then the band Everclear is seen there.You can hear them on the soundtrack department.And there's also Teenage Dirtbag by Wheatus, which was a pretty big hit at the time.Then there's a song by The Offspring.The song is Pretty Fly (For A White Guy).Remember?
And Jason Biggs does actually go through the whole movie playing a character different than the one in AMERICAN PIE.
No one liked Jason Biggs in "American Pie" more than I did, but here he is wasted in a unbearably stupid movie.
Both actors performed perfectly in American pie JASON BIGGS and MENA SUVARI portray a good on screen chemistry, the film shows behind the scene to life in both an American college and NYC ie, the difficulties of working learning and socialising.. |
tt3021360 | Faults | Ansel Roth, a writer and cult specialist, fraudulently uses an expired voucher to pay for a meal at a hotel restaurant and is forcibly removed after refusing to pay. The manager of the hotel tells Roth that his speaking engagement is almost ready, and Roth steals towels and batteries as he checks out. His presentation on cults is interrupted by a heckler, who proceeds to beat him up for his involvement in the suicide of a troubled woman, the man's sister, who had been involved with a cult. Evelyn and Paul approach Roth and request an autographed copy of his book for their daughter, Claire, who they explain has become involved in a mysterious cult. Roth declines to become involved.
Mick, an employee of Roth's manager Terry, approaches Roth in the hotel's parking lot and delivers a letter. Terry has dropped Roth as a client and wants Roth's debts paid back within a week. Evelyn and Paul again request his help, and he agrees to listen to their story when they offer to buy him breakfast. Roth offers to deprogram Claire, a risky process that involves abducting her and confronting her with the truth about the cult. Roth hires two men to help him abduct Claire; one of them strikes her during the abduction. They take her to an isolated motel and prevent her from sleeping.
After paying the men, Roth begins the process of deprogramming. Excited that she is being cooperative, he lets Claire momentarily see her parents, who are in an adjoining room. Paul becomes increasingly demanding and controlling of both the situation and his daughter, and Paul becomes enraged when Roth meditates. The deprogramming is interrupted when Mick locates Roth and again demands payment. Roth awkwardly requests half of his fee from Paul, who reluctantly agrees. Roth advises Paul and Evelyn to lock Claire in the bathroom overnight (he has moved the lock to the outside) to prevent her from escaping while he is gone.
When Roth delivers partial payment to Terry, Terry berates him for letting people walk over him, strikes him with a paperweight, and demands the rest of the money in two days. Roth is surprised to find Claire unconscious outside the hotel room. When he brings her back inside, her parents say she was locked in the bathroom; Claire claims to have teleported herself using meditation techniques learned from the cult. As pressure mounts on Roth, he suffers from lack of sleep, physical abuse, and threats from everyone but Claire, who seduces him as he experiences a nervous breakdown. Afterward, Roth watches a videotape of his failed television show while Claire has sex with Paul in the background as Evelyn watches.
Roth wakes in his car. He rushes to the hotel room, where he finds Claire alone. She explains that her parents have left and seems puzzled when Roth confusedly questions her about the videotape and her sexual encounters. Roth and Claire become accidentally trapped in the bathroom when the door closes and locks from the outside. As the phone rings, Roth becomes hysterical, knowing that it must be Terry. Claire takes control of the situation, and forces him to face his many failures, including his divorce and guilt over the young cult member's suicide. Roth tearfully admits that he exploited the girl for his short-lived television series. As Claire leads him in meditation, she breaks him completely and convinces him that he has unlocked the bathroom door using his mind.
As they exit the bathroom, Mick enters the hotel room. Terry follows him there after he becomes impatient and is horrified to find Mick dead. Terry explains that Mick was just an actor hired to intimidate Roth. Roth kills Terry as Claire silently observes. Claire, now in complete control, tells Roth to wait in the car while she takes care of something. Paul and Evelyn, hidden in the next room, say they have murdered the man who struck her during her abduction. They identify her as Ira and she thanks them for their help, kisses them, and hands each a pill, which they swallow before lying down. When she joins Roth in the car, he apologizes to her for the car door being broken. She tells Roth to not apologize for anything because they have each other and they are strong. When he asks where he is going, she replies, "Home." | brainwashing, comedy, cult, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | Let me make this clear from the beginning, even if some might claim to see where this is going, you can have a lot of fun watching it develop and going to its destination.The acting is really great and even if the main character is a bit unlikeable, he still is able to pull quite a few things off.
In the last 5 years, we have been watching films such as Martha Marcy May Marlene, Red State, Sound of My Voice and The Sacrament, whose focuses vary considerably, but they all examine the disturbing phenomenon of brainwashing, and the apparent ease with which some people let themselves be dominated by charismatic leaders who promise some kind of spiritual salvation when, in fact, they only seek their own benefit.
The film Faults presents a very interesting perspective, moving away from the "commune" and the specific details of the cult, in order to focus into the regenerative process of lost identity.
something like the classic alcoholic detective from various cop films, or the priest without faith who is so common in horror cinema, but even more down at heel (I point out the fact that Faults doesn't belong to either of those genres).
This tortuous main character complicates the situation more, and makes a Faults a subtle and fascinating thriller, in which not only the victim's future is in danger, but also her redeemer's.
The screenplay of Faults shines because of its precision and sagacity, keeping us in suspense during the whole film, until leading to a satisfactory ending.
And then, we have the excellent performances, starting by Leland Orser as the main character.
Orser is one of those actors whose names we don't know, even though we immediately recognize their faces when we see them in a film or TV series.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead also brings a perfect performance as the victim of the cult; she's modulated in her role, but she never loses spontaneity or passion.
The screenplay of Faults might occasionally make a few small traps, but that didn't avoid me from liking it very much, and I definitely recommend it as a hypnotic and audacious thriller, specially to those ones who find the concept and existence of "cults" equally intriguing..
The story revolve around a cult group called Faults and two characters...
and Claire whose parents approach Ansel in desperation to get their daughter back from the cult...
It's a place where pressure builds until it releases."Leland Orser and Mary Elizabeth Winstead star together in this unique dramatic thriller written and directed by Winstead's husband, Riley Stearns.
Faults is his feature debut and after this, there is no doubt he's going to be getting more offers because it is a very inventive drama that feels like no other movie because it changes and morphs as the story progresses.
It is hard to classify this film because it doesn't feel like any other movie I've seen.
Orser plays Ansel Roth, an expert on mind control, but it is clear that his glory days are long behind him.
The girl's name is Claire (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and she claims to be at the happiest point in her life so apparently it won't be an easy job for Ansel who is going through his personal lowest.
Faults is a low budget indie film but it never ceases to amaze with a production design that sets the film somewhere around the early 80's although there is no mention of when the story actually takes place.
The film is perfectly executed, it has an interesting premise, and the screenplay is beautifully written by Riley Stearns as it transforms along the way.
Faults isn't trying to fool us, instead it is simply telling a story that unfolds in unexpected ways as we reach the climactic finale.
We believe he actually knows his stuff on mind control and free will but life has given him an unexpected blow that he seems to be able to recover from.
On the other hand Mary Elizabeth Winstead's Claire is enigmatic and we never know what she is really thinking.
Winstead delivers one of the best performances of her career as well and the two turn Faults into a highly engaging and hypnotic film well worth your time.http://estebueno10.blogspot.com/.
Original, well acted, and well produced/edited.This film is well worth seeing if you like original, well produced movies.From the beginning you are never really sure where the characters are heading - until the end.The characters draw you into their world and keep you there.
I had never seen any of the cast in previous movies, so it was refreshing seeing new faces (to me) bring the story to life.Whatever expectations you have for this film just forget them and let the story telling take you where it is going to go..
Ansel (Leland Orser) is a failed expert on cults, once widely regarded for his books and television show and his ability to "deprogram" those brainwashed by cult leaders, but now - after a spectacular failure - he is barely making it through the day by selling another, shoddier book and giving "seminars" at dumpy hotels in return for a room and a meal.
When an older couple approaches him to ask for his help in restoring their cult-taken daughter Claire (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), he reluctantly agrees, only because his former manager is hounding him for a rather large sum of money that Ansel owes.
With some help, he kidnaps Claire and begins the process of deprogramming her in an anonymous hotel room, but it soon becomes unclear as to who is treating whom....This is kind of a strange movie, neither fish nor fowl as they used to say; in some parts, it's quite funny and absurdist, and in other parts, it's deadly serious.
The acting is fine throughout (though it's odd that the IMDb doesn't name the actor playing Claire's father!) and the sort of quietly desperate, slightly sleazy world which the characters inhabit is shown well, but I was left scratching my head at the end of it, going "huh?" A bit disappointing, really..
I started off really loving this movie and was really hooked by the opening scenes setting up the main character, who is played to perfection by Leland Orser.
A washed-up "expert" on cults and brainwashing, his character is sad, funny, and interesting all at the same time.
You also really empathize with him and feel his sense of desperation and frustration at the start of the movie.As the story unfolds, a mother and father approach him offering desperately needed money if he would be willing to kidnap their daughter from a cult and reprogram her back to "normal." So far so good and everything leading up to his character retrieving the girl and beginning his treatment seems promising.
I was expecting a more interesting series of twists and turns and looked forward to seeing the enticing cat and mouse mind game that the movie seemed to be setting up.
Instead, the movie just kind of got inexplicably stranger and ended up taking a path that I felt was a bit too predictable and unsatisfying.It's worth checking out for Orser's performance and character alone.
Dips A Bit As It Goes, But Still Fun. Claire (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is under the grip of a mysterious new cult called Faults.
Desperate to be reunited with their daughter, Claire's parents recruit one of the world's foremost experts on mind control, Ansel Roth (Leland Orser).Writer-director Riley Stearns cited Paul Thomas Anderson's works, namely "Punch-Drunk Love", the Coen Brothers' "Fargo", Yorgos Lanthimos' "Dogtooth" and "Alps" among the many works he was inspired by.
To prepare themselves for the role, Winstead and Orser read the book "Let Our Children Go" by Ted Patrick and watched YouTube videos from that era of people in cults or people who had just gotten out of cults.
I'll always remember Leland Orser for his nervous role as a surviving victim of Se7en's John Doe. I've probably seen him in bit parts since without realizing it's him, but Faults reveals his talent as he steps up to the task of a leading role.
Its premise of cult manipulation is immediately compelling, and it frames its story in a way that's offered skimmed over when it's portrayed on film and never committed to a full 90 minutes.
Faults is a very confident debut, but it's a shame that the film wilts in its second half.
Hired to deprogram a young woman who has fallen victim to an abusive cult, an expert in mind control techniques starts to question whether or not there is actually some value to her cult in this curious independent film.
From the outset, the movie seems like a contemporary updating of the likes of 'Split Image' and 'Ticket to Heaven' -- two sensational films from the early 1980s about rescuing youths from religious cults -- but the results here are decidedly different as the film ends up as anything but a straight drama.
There are elements of comedy, drama, mystery, thriller, horror and even fantasy throughout, and while all this genre-hopping is sometimes detrimental (none of the comedy really works and the scenes with the protagonist's publisher and his hired goon do not quite fit in) for the most part, the multi-genre style renders the film a perfectly unsettling experience.
Suffice it to say though, the ending is endlessly creepy and for a film that is not overtly horror, the chill that 'Faults' sends down the spine is incredible..
Story: A writer of a book (and some times active deprogrammer) about how to override the influence of cults and sects on supposed vulnerable new recruits has some faults one of which is a past failed deprogramming.
The film characters were not so complicated, but towards the end it looked like unavoidably becomes that way.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead is very good here, really gripping on to her character in surprising, unexpected ways, even if she can't really elevate the film that much more.
Leland Orser plays an expert on debunking cults, who has fallen on very hard times.
Ansel is giving a presentation about cults at a hotel.
At the start of the movie, He believes he is entitled to a free meal in exchange for the presentation, but his scam doesn't work.
Knowing Ansel is an expert on cults, they ask him to get their daughter Claire out of a cult.
His second book is not selling,Ansel hires goons to find and kidnap Claire.
Still, signs are there that Claire may come back to her old life.With Terry still demanding his money, Ansel asks Paul for half his fee.
Paul protests, but Ansel doesn't want to be visited by Terry's goons, and he delivers the money to Terry, who seems nice but shows another side entirely.
So what we have to ask is whether Ansel will be able to return Claire to her old life.
I didn't see the VCR, but we see a tape of a TV episode where Ansel takes advantage of a victim of a cult, making money and getting famous by showing the world her emotions.
Leland Orser is definitely funny, but comes across as quite intelligent when he finally shows he knows what he is doing.
Flawed but interesting black comedy about cults and deprogramming.
The film starts out overtly comedic about a down on his luck author and cult expert on a very low rent book tour.
On this darkly funny and depressing book tour he's approached by a couple who want his help rescuing their daughter form a cult.
Their daughter, an excellent Mary Elizabeth Winstead, is then held captive in a a hotel room with the cult expert for a character duel along the lines of "Death and the Maiden" or "Oleanna," where interesting power dynamics emerge between the two.
Leland Orser, who's on my list of great one-scene-performances for his one scene in "Seven" as the lust victim in the massage parlor, gives a great performance here as the troubled cult expert, though it's really Winstead who steals the film.
I admit it...love MEW, the main character, name escapes me, always does a good job as well, so I thought I'd catch this even though I feel the deprogramming a cult member has been done more than enough.
In Faults its "Ansel" played by Leland Orser a 50s writer/expert on cult control.
Faults is a movie that doesn't really fit into a specific genre, but it has elements of dark comedy, drama and a bit of mystery while being set more as a character study piece.Great performances all around with Leland Orsher and Mary Elizabeth Winstead (who I will definitely be looking forward seeing more from) in the 2 leads.It's about a man (Orsher) who's a specialist on cults and mind-control who's asked to revert a cult-member's mind (Winstead) to a 'normal' way of thinking.More part of the movie takes place in one setting but it never gets boring as the characters are rich and interesting..
I found the film disturbing and unpleasant.When the movie starts, it's a comedy.
A complete loser named Ansel (Leland Orser) is doing crappy workshops where he talks about cults and cult deprogramming.
He's darkly funny to watch and I enjoyed the film...so far.The plot then thickens.
A set of parents inexplicably recruit this idiot to deprogram their daughter who's been caught up in a cult called "Fault".
I thought this was a brilliant movie, from the bizarre introduction of a grown man trying to reuse a coupon to get a free meal and then being forcefully removed from the hotel restaurant to only discover he is the main speaker holding a seminar on mind control cults.It was a great introduction to the, main character and his struggle to recover from his previous success as a leading authority cult specialist to living hand to mouth trying to make ends meet.
Amazing film with explosive ending and very disturbing scenes **Spoilers**.
Amazing little indie that came off as a black comedy and then drifts into darkness, while pulling you along.The acting's smart, the pacing's crisp, the jokes register darkly, and the dialogue snaps.After researching this movie and not finding an appropriate answer, one scene that really stands out is: Once Ansel is watching his TV interview, one can barely see schemes of "Dad" having sex with Claire, while "Mom" is watching.
Cult members who, under her guidance, pretended to be her parents so she could brainwash Ansel.
seemed to be an exiting film about saving a girl from a cult, the complex mind game it takes to deprogram someone.
so instead of being this poor confused girl, she turns out to be a psychological master mind, easily making his victim throw away any form of sensible reasoning.the story seemed to be all over the place, and as you near the end, you realize that they tie it together in the worst possible form they could.
Taking a look at IMDbs Film Festival board,I spotted a plan for an IMDb fest based around a series of titles.With not having heard about the film before,I decided to take a look at the page for Faults,which I discovered featured Final Destination 3 scream queen Mary Elizabeth Winstead,which led to me getting ready to discover who is at fault.The plot:Getting in debt by self-publishing his advice book on how to pull troubled minds out of "cults", Ansel becomes increasingly uninterested in the people who attend his book tour.Lashing out at an audience member after they blame him for the death of a teenage girl who appeared on his now-cancelled TV show,Ansel tells the crowd to pay him some cash so that he can sign their books and then leave.Walking on tiptoes up to him, Evelyn and Paul ask Ansel if he can help them to get back their "baby girl" Claire,who has gone and joined a cult.Initially dismissive of their requests,Ansel finds the couples willingness to cover his costs to be a real charm bracelet.Suspecting from the details they give that Claire is at the deep end with the cult,Roth tells Evelyn and Paul that the only option left for them is to kidnap Claire and take her to a remote location,where she can be de-programmed.
Receiving the thumbs up from the parents,Ansel goes and kidnaps Claire.
Placing Claire in a secure isolated location,Ansel begins the intense de-programing program,but soon begins to fear that Claire may not be the one who is getting de-programmed.View on the film:Filmed in just 18 days,writer/director Riley Stearns shows no faults in his excellent debut,which mixes jet-black Comedy with nerve- shredding indie chills.
In order to stay one step ahead of his agent (aka threatening creditor) he accepts a commission from Claire's parents to de-program her.A synopsis leads you to believe that this is a drama: it turns out to be a mystery (indeed, you may still be baffled by some of it when it ends), a character study and, at times, a very black comedy.Ansel is played by Leland Orser.
The average reaction on reading the name is "Who?", but the average reaction on seeing the face is "Oh, him!" - having had a lengthy and successful career playing supporting parts, he gets a lead role here and is phenomenal.Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Claire.
I started watching this, and stopped it after his presentation at the hotel so I could get other people to enjoy this with me because it looked like a good one.
It's as if Winstead and Orser were in two different movies and I wouldn't have recommend either of them to anyone..
I have to declare an interest : i chose the film on the basis it starred Mary Elizabeth Winstead whom i'd watched for the first and only time in 10 Cloverfield Lane.
As in Cloverfield Winstead gives a restrained and on this occasion slightly sinister performance while Leland Orser's depiction of desperate penury is utterly convincing and motors the film on. |
tt0069824 | Fratello sole, sorella luna | Francesco, the spoiled son of Pietro Bernardone, a wealthy textile merchant, returns from fighting in the war between Assisi and Perugia a changed man. Struck by a feverish illness that has forced him to leave the war, Francesco lies on his bed tormented by visions of his past when he was a boisterous, arrogant youth. During a long recovery process, he slowly finds God in poverty, chastity and obedience, experiencing a physical and spiritual renewal.
Healthy again, Francesco returns to his normal life as a rich young man. However, to the consternation of his parents, he begins to spend most of his time surrounded by nature, flowers, trees, animals and poetry as he becomes more and more reluctant to resume his prior lifestyle. Pietro's obsession with gold now fills Francesco with revulsion, creating an open confrontation between Francesco and Pietro.
Francesco wanders into the basement where the family business is located. He feels the heat and humidity of the dye vats, passing through colorful lots of drying cloth, to see the workers with their families laboring in the heat without much rest. Rejecting his father's offer to take over the family business, he instead pulls the laborers out of the building to enjoy the daylight. Then he throws the costly textiles out of the window to the poor gathered below. When his father sees the loss, Francesco invites him to join in throwing the cloth out the window so he can know the joy of being free of worldly possessions.
Pietro, completely frustrated, beats Francesco, drags him to the bishop's palace and humiliates his son in front of Assisi's bishop and the rest of the population. Lovingly, Francesco renounces all worldly possessions and his middle-class family including the name "Bernardone", removes his brilliant clothing and leaves Assisi, naked and free from his past, to live in the beauties of nature as an ascetic to enjoy a simple life as a man of God.
Francesco comes upon the ruins of the chapel of San Damiano, where he hears God's voice asking him to "restore My Church." Believing the Voice means San Damiano, Francesco begins to beg for rocks to rebuild that church. Much to the dismay of his family, some of Francesco's friends join him. He gradually gains a following from the sons of the wealthy, who begin to minister among the poor and the suffering.
The bishop supports Francesco, since he is rebuilding a church without pay and performing the works of mercy Christ demands of His followers. Francesco's friend Bernardo happily joins him after returning from the Fourth Crusade, a venture that left him in sorrow and emptiness. Two other friends, Silvestro and Giocondo, admiring Francesco's new vocation, help to rebuild San Damiano.
During a rainy afternoon, Francesco and his friends separate to beg food from the families of Assisi. Francesco comes to his family's home. Seeking forgiveness, he begins to recite the Beatitudes, causing his mother much anguish while Pietro pretends not to hear, refusing to be reconciled with their son.
Clare, a beautiful young woman also from a wealthy family, serves and cares for lepers of the community. She joins the brothers in their life of poverty. Meanwhile in Assisi, the city's nobility and wealthy merchandising families protest against Francesco and his group, worried about them "corrupting" the whole of Assisi's youth, and they command Francesco's friend Paolo to hinder and stop the so-called "minor brothers."
One day the rebuilt chapel is set on fire, and one of Francesco's followers is killed. (This scene, introduced for dramatic effect, is unhistorical.) That people can hate so much causes Francesco much sorrow. He blames himself but cannot understand what he has done wrong. He then decides to walk to Rome and to seek out the answers from Pope Innocent III.
In Rome, Francesco is stunned by the enormous wealth and power shown in the clothing of the papal court surrounding the throne of St. Peter. When granted an audience with the Pope, Francesco breaks from reciting Paolo's carefully prepared script and calmly protests against pomp and worldliness, reciting some of Jesus' words from the Sermon on the Mount praising humility to protest that Christ's teachings are totally opposite to Rome's obsession with wealth. The cardinals, bishops and abbots of the papal court are insulted at having the words of Jesus thrown in their faces. Francesco and his friends are expelled. Finally accepting his admiration toward Francesco, Paolo decides to join them. Francesco tries to protect Paolo, saying that he is not one of them, but his friend insists on joining the friars, convincing Francesco of the sincerity of his conversion, and they are put out with the others.
On his throne Pope Innocent, seemingly waking from a dream, orders Francesco and his friends to be brought back. The Pope addresses Francesco: "In our obsession with original sin we have forgotten original innocence." In language from one of the Psalms, Innocent prays that Francesco's order "flourish like the palm."
Then to everyone's astonishment, Pope Innocent kneels, kisses Francesco's feet and blesses him and his companions, wishing for them a long world-wide society of men and women willing to serve God in humility. One of the final lines places the sincerity of the Pope's response in question when an unnamed cardinal, observing what the Pope has done, comments to a bishop: "Don't be alarmed, His Holiness knows what he is doing. This is the man who will speak to the poor, and bring them back to us." This line actually has some historical value since the heretical Cathars, otherwise known as Albigensians, dressed as humbly as Francesco and his followers, were finding followers in Southern France and other parts of Europe by denouncing the wealth of the Catholic Church, while rejecting many Catholic dogmas and doctrines, especially the need for an ordained priesthood.
The film finishes with the sight of Francesco slowly walking alone into the distance in the countryside as Donovan sings "Brother Sun and Sister Moon." | insanity, avant garde, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | Is there something magical about it?I think that what makes me, personally, fond of it are four most basic factors: the director himself, Franco Zeffirelli, whom I have always admired for his "artistic soul", the story, far from the true, but still moving and retaining the gist of Francesco's life - love to God and His creatures, the music by Ken Thorne and sung by Donovan (especially the title song), and scenery in which the movie was shot.Franco Zeffirelli chose excellent cast.
Graham Faulkner was very much like Saint Francis: these profound eyes, smile full of love.
The mosaic of Monreale Pantocrator looking deeply into everyone's eyes, pope's dream and second calling of Francesco and finally his blessing to the amazement of others - the film is worth watching for thanks to this scene alone.
Film's Assisi is a lovely Italian town of San Gimignano, the hills of Umbria are replaced by Piano Grande, a parish church of Assisi by an old medieval abbey of Sant' Antimo, and finally a Roman basilica - the cathedral of Monreale - a real masterpiece of Norman - Byzantine art in Sicily (10 kilometers from Palermo).
And this movie does it mostly by the power of flower and song.I will end this review with a prayer of Saint Francis.
The filmography by Zefirelli is stunningly beautiful -- one of his best -- a masterpiece worthy of a Florentine artist (Zefirelli's home city).Being an admirer of Francis of Assisi, I've seen several films which attempt to portray his life.
It has made a lasting impact on my own faith and spirituality since I first saw it in Italy in the early eighties.The Italian version of 'Fratello Sole, Sorella Luna' is edited differently and has the beginning scenes in an order slightly different from the English version.Note: It's helpful to know something about the life of Saint Francis before viewing the film.
BROTHER SUN SISTER MOON Aspect ratio: 1.75:1Sound format: MonoThe early life of St. Francis of Assisi (Graham Faulkner), the son of a wealthy merchant who underwent a spiritual conversion following his experiences in the crusades and later renounced his worldly goods before establishing a holy order separate from traditional Church teachings.Conceived and executed in much the same visual manner as his ultra-popular ROMEO AND JULIET (1968), Franco Zeffirelli's BROTHER SUN SISTER MOON attempts to draw parallels between the work and philosophy of St. Francis and the ideology which underpinned the worldwide hippy movement throughout the 1960's and early 70's.
Hence the ragged-but-lyrical cinematography (by Ennio Guarnieri), fractured editing (by Reginald Mills), and the use of contemporary - but strangely timeless - folk songs written and performed by Donovan, all of which conjures the requisite mood of spiritual awakening whilst simultaneously dating the movie quite firmly within its period.
Daringly, Zeffirelli's script (co-written by Suso Cecchi d'Amico and Lina Wertmuller) contrasts Francis' piety and virtue with the bloated pomp of official Church doctrine, weighed down by internal politics and social indifference, though it's difficult to gauge if this represents a veiled attack on Christian orthodoxy or is simply a reflection of Francis' dismissal of outdated customs in favor of a return to Nature.Lovingly crafted by Lorenzo Mongiardino (art direction) and Danilo Donati (costumes), the movie is toplined by a cast of gifted newcomers and screen veterans, including Judi Bowker (one of the most beautiful actresses of her generation), Leigh Lawson, Kenneth Cranham, Valentina Cortese and Alec Guinness.
Here, Faulkner's intense beauty and fresh-faced innocence are illuminated by Guarnieri's worshipful camera and Zeffirelli's attentive direction, which places him center-stage throughout (there's even a generous, PG-level nude scene halfway through the movie).
But here, his grace and dignity are displayed in abundance, and it's hard not to fall in love with him, every time he appears on-screen.The alternative Italian version (FRATELLO SOLE SORELLA LUNA) runs approximately 14 minutes longer and replaces Donovan's music with a fully orchestral score by Riz Ortolani.
Upon seeing this movie in my young 20s, I fell in love (metaphorically speaking) with St. Francis of Assisi and the simple message of life that he practiced.
Though many of the absolute facts were stretched, like in most "historic" films, the movie was completely on the mark about his simplicity and his love of nature and mankind.
In addition, it gave a very plausible and probable glimpse of the love relationship he had with St. Clare, all in contrast with the idea of love and sexuality which we have in these times.Though the Italian version soundtrack was not by Donovan, the English language songs he sang gave the movie great focus and support.
Bowker is one of the most beautiful and sensitive young actresses of that period, so it is with wonder that she was not more utilized or popular.Yes, the film does have the allegorical connection with the hippie movement, but that does not diminish the story nor the impact.
This definitely hurts a few of the scenes, but overall people who like this movie should be very happy to have the DVD.In the scene just before the meeting with the pope, a former friend of Francis chases after him and tries to convince him not to go to Rome.
(I don't know whether it is original with this screenplay or was borrowed from tradition.)Some lay-order (Third Order) Franciscans told me that they object to the role of Francis being done in this movie by a gay actor.
My own understanding is that indeed there is no reason to think that the real Francis was gay; and that he was probably not so pretty or so much like a 1960s flower-child as presented in the movie.
But I do not agree with those above-mentioned objections: the movie does a very good job of dramatizing in a lyrical way the spirit and times of Francis..
The scene at the end with Pope Innocent III, Francis and his little band was as powerful as anything I've seen in film, religious or not.
This is an excellent film, thought provoking, and beautiful portrayal of the life of Francis of Assisi.
People sometimes criticise the film for the "flower power" scene with the music of Donovan in the background and it is perhaps a little over the top.
The music strikes a chord with the period in which it was made and anyway to focus simply on that one scene and avoid the rest of a finely crafted and beautiful take on the life of Francis and his challenge (still) to the materialism of the life of his time and our own - this makes for an excellent film.
Saint Francis of Assisi, one of the most appealing figures in Christianity, is portrayed in this movie as a flower child romping his way through Umbria in the early 13th century to the groovy music of Donovan.
("It's so _plastic_, man!") Bishop Guido is given particularly short shrift here; the real life bishop was very sympathetic to Francis, and gave him more support and understanding than the movie would have us think.Minor complaints, though.
Francis invented them.Donovan, the ultimate hippie, wrote the entire musical score and I must say it is the single worst score I have ever heard in a movie.
(Incidentally, I think the real St Francis would probably have said "you may set up your camera, but we'll just be ourselves")If I had a brilliant period script, I would gladly hire Zefferelli to film it.
I work as a film critic in Mexico and let me tell you that i have seen a lot of movies from a lot of countries and this one changed my life.
I have seen another movie about St. Francis and this one is better, maybe its missing some info about his life but thats why this one is great,little peaces of his life tell you all you need to know about him.
I don't know what they could have done to make this film any better.Graham Faulkner is perfectly cast, and Judi Bowker is the perfect Clare.It's hard to believe that I walked out on it the first time I saw it on a double bill with "Siddhartha", another of my all time favorites.
Donovan's songs in the American version of the film are reminiscent of the Flower Child/Hippie troubadours of the 1960's and the 1970's; with lyrics that are beautifully melded, in some instances, with actual words of the First Franciscan; so what better music would be so perfectly representative of the Peace and Love which St. Francis practiced?
This film was released in 1972, so it feels at times a product of the flower generation, but it is such a joyous film that I cannot stop watching it.My favorite religious "musical" used to be Godspell (great songs, funny humor), but maybe Brother Sun, Sister Moon is my favorite now, although it is not strictly a musical but rather a dramatic film with many incidental songs or chants.Anyways, you must check out this film!
Franco Zeffirelli is responsible for three of the greatest films ever made: 'Romeo and Juliet', 'Jesus of Nazareth' and 'Brother Sun, Sister Moon'.
I understood why when I saw it on DVD format.As we know Franco Zeffirelli, he did great with either Shakespeare flicks (Romeo and Juliet among others) or Jesus of Nazareth, nor he did not so with Endless Love.This time he succeeded with the rendering of Francis of Assisi's life.Back from the war, wounded emotionally, Francisco found peace by seeing a lark on the roof, and rejecting the luxuries of his father's business.
However, the higher clergy jealousy takes over him and his new order, Francis must ask for forgiveness to the leader of Christianity: Pope Innocent III.With songs by Donovan and strong interpretation, beautiful photography and well written script, this is one of the best Christian stories ever told.Now I understood why it was such a cult favourite..
It employs what I believe is some of the greatest use of colour, thus the movie is beautiful beyond words, with my favourite moment being the end, when Francis meets the pope.
Franco Zeffirelli's different approach driven to a lyrical life of St. Francis and St. Clare since the early days, it's more realistic and accurate in several ways giving us the most rough idea this remarkable and unique man and women,shown precisely your relationship with Clare deep and pure and how she becames a nun and one many your followers, by the way the picture range both in same time but more focused in St. Francis due your status, uplifting life of the most important being under christianity after Jesus, the most impressive scene was in the middle when one their followers saw a woman's breast and declare yourself unsustainable to take ahead in such feelings, so he leaves upon St. Francis's blessing!!!Resume:First watch: 1990 / How many: 5 / Source: TV-Cable TV-DVD / Rating: 10.
Donovan delivers a great soundtrack in this inspiring and beautiful movie about Saint Francis of Assisi, Italy.
hope our pope Francis one day watches that movie and feels inspired by it..
This was Zeffirelli's first film after his successful rendering of "Romeo and Juliet" on location in Verona in a very expressionistic and emotional interpretation, and the same poetry and beauty favorably dominates this very sensitive and personal view of the person of St. Francis and how he started, including all his conflicts, above all with his father.
Despite Brother Sun, Sister Moon has a stunning photography, epic music, and amazing actors, the true value of this movie is the ability to reset your soul and let you enter Francesco's heart.
The movie actually drives you into the exact mood of Francesco (and the Zeffirelli's Flower Power message): "return to the roots of purity and love" This is one of my favorites movies ever, everything is at it's best: the camera is like a paintbrush, the actors are more than real, the music can move you and let you cry.
If you want to know more about life, war, religion, the church, God, St. Francis, love, parents, children, devotion, humanitarian care, community living, aesthetics, ethics, metaphysics, etc.
FRANCIS (Francesco, giullare di Dio 1950), divided rightly by the before/after of Francis' pilgrimage towards Rome, at once with radically opposed visual punches, a perfect set for a double-feature, color Vs. black and white, lavish versus austere.The nearly non-Italian cast (excludes Valentina Cortese) is dubbed with Italian in the version I watched yesterday, it inevitably thwarted the fluency of the film, which, as a matter of fact, could be mostly paid no heed to as the performances are ludicrously overblown, particularly Graham Faulkner's Francis, Zeffirelli's personal preference triumphs in this film in every respect, the unrealistic beauty of St. Francis and his apostles is to meet the eyes only!
"Kitsch", he says, is "the epitome of all that is spurious in the life of our times." One cinematic example might be Brother Sun, Sister Moon, the 1972 film by director Franco Zeffirelli that depicts the early years of St. Francis of Assisi, a Christian saint of ecology and the environment.
After one of his followers is killed, however, he goes to Rome to find out what he is doing wrong and, after much hesitation, receives the blessing of Pope Innocent III who is played by Alec Guinness in the only scene in the film that has any real emotional depth.
Nonetheless, Brother Sun, Sister Moon is a beautiful looking film that might have still worked if the director had simply followed the teachings of his protagonist and shown less ostentation and earnestness, more naturalism and simplicity, and more appreciation than exploitation..
This is a film focused on the early years of Francis of Assisi, where he breaks up with the traditions of the catholic church and decides to take the life of Jesus seriously and where he is willing to offer everything to live according to the Gospels.
I felt like I was watching a movie that was filmed in Italian and overdubbed in English, although this is not the case.
Brother Sun, Sister Moon is an excellent movie with it's share of powerful scenes.
Amazing acting, wonderful directing, and the beautiful setting of Assisi (shot on location) the movie goes through the beginning ministry life of St. Francis of Assisi and his comrade St. Clare of Assisi..
In essence this is a religious movie and a good one at that, it can help strengthen anybodys faith, but besides that, it is a movie about beauty, passion for life and freedom, it shows a freedom that surpasses the boundaries of money and into the hope and lives of people in the real world, where love for each other and faith is more precious than any jewel that you can shine.The story is an excellent translation of St. Francis` life.
The acting is great and the script is very faithful to the life story of St. Francis of Assisi.
In the same late '60s spirit most of the film leans toward unforgivably trite platitudes: witness the ludicrous scene between Francis and a tearful Pope Innocent III, played by Alec Guinness like he was anticipating his future role as Obi Wan Kenobi.
Good acting, some nice cinematography, all in all good considering it an old film but I must say it was way too spoonfeeding for my tastes and a lot of the life of St Francis was left out.
In the days when kids were chanting, "tune in, turn on, drop out" are the days when Franco Zeffirelli chose to make a film about St. Francis Of Assisi whom he turns into the world's first Christian flower child.
There is a more traditional film biography of Francis with Bradford Dillman in the title role.This one also has a score of songs that well fit the director's idea by British folk singer Donovan.
Innocent III was no dope.Brother Sun, Sister Moon is an interesting interpretation about the life of one venerated as a saint..
Here is how: the late intellectual, Charles Colson, some time ago released a list of "50 Films Every Christian Should See" of which Brother Sun, Sister Moon was part of.
And it keeps people enslaved to the existing economic-religious order, asking nor expecting nothing and certainly no threat to Catholic authority.Brother Sun, Sister Moon thus becomes little more than a propaganda piece for Christian theology and misses the most interesting aspects of St. Francis' life and message.
I watched the two movies one after the other with my Catholic mother-in-law, and she strongly preferred "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" to "Francis of Assisi." This film conveys real emotion and reminds us that those who feel called by God are different from most workaday folk.
Moving story covering the general life of St. Francis of Assisi.
The life Francis begins to lead, and the message he then lives out, is so radical to Assisi of the 11th century (not to mention to our own times) that he is thought of as "mad".
Some of the most remarkable scenes in the movie when his infectious message overcomes friend after friend, all of whom decide to join him in his simple way of life in love of God. It is indeed in Francis' transformation, and the transforming effect he has on others, that makes the film so moving.I think it has been pointed out that the movie is a somewhat fictionalized version of the life of St. Francis of Assisi, and the movie only covers the important years of interior conversion he experienced rather than his later life.
But as a movie reflecting the basic message and youthful life of St. Francis, it is quite moving.
The impressive medieval filming location, the ornate costumes, and the landscape scenery add to the Middle Ages feel of the time and help bring us closer to the authentic life of the Saint..
"Brother Sun, Sister Moon" was about Saint Francis and his way of life. |
tt0029801 | Yodelin' Kid from Pine Ridge | In a large pine forest in the American Southeast called Pine Ridge, a feud is ongoing between cattlemen who want to burn the forest for grazing land, and "turpentiners" who make their living harvesting pine sap. The cattlemen suspect that the turpentiners are rustling their cattle, not knowing that the man organizing the rustling is Len Parker (LeRoy Mason), a cattleman. Arthur Autry is among the cattlemen who believe they should raid the turpentiners and burn them out. Arthur's fair-minded son, Gene Autry (Gene Autry), opposes the action, and is in love with Milly Baynum (Betty Bronson), the stepdaughter of the leader of the turpentiners. When Gene warns the turpentiners of the upcoming raid, his good intentions backfire as the turpentiners fight back and his father is wounded. Believing that Gene was fighting against the cattlemen, his father disowns him, and Gene leaves his home.
Two years later, Gene returns to Pine Ridge as the star of Colonel Frog Millhouse's Wild West show. Although glad to see Milly again, Gene is distraught to learn that his father is now destitute after his cattle were secretly stolen by Parker. After paying all of his father's bills, Gene learns from Milly that Arthur's cattle have been grazing in a distant meadow, and when Gene investigates, he is captured by two of Parker's henchmen. Parker orders his henchmen to replace Arthur's cattle with his own and take the stolen animals to Fox Canyon.
Back in town, Frog waits anxiously for Gene's arrival so the show can begin. One of Parker's henchmen tells Frog about Gene being captured. Frog is forced to start the show using a double for Gene. Believing that Gene has escaped, Parker orders his right-hand man, Jeff Galloway (Jack Dougherty), to kill him, and Galloway shoots the double. Meanwhile, Gene, who has escaped his captors, arrives back in town and learns about the crime. He tells Sheriff Martin (Henry Hall) to meet him at Arthur's ranch. When he arrives, Gene discovers that his father is dead, and rushing over to the Baynum cabin, Gene finds Milly's stepfather Bayliss has also been murdered. Because Bayliss was bludgeoned with Gene's gun, which Parker's men had stolen, Sheriff Martin arrests Gene for the murder and takes him to jail.
Believing that Gene will be set free because he is a cattleman, the turpentiners arrive at the jail intending to lynch him. Frog, Martin, and Milly prevent the lynching and Gene escapes. He goes to Parker's office, where he finds a receipt for the sale of his father's cattle. While Gene attempts to take Parker and Galloway to the sheriff, a gun battle between the cattlemen and turpentiners breaks out in the street and Parker, who killed both Arthur and Bayliss, gets away. Gene and his fellow entertainers chase after Parker and his men, and while the show people round up the gang, Gene apprehends Parker who is taken to jail. With the feud now ended, Gene and Milly decide to get married. | comedy, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt3520702 | Bloodline | Sam Roffe, President of Roffe & Sons Pharmaceuticals, dies in what appears to be a climbing accident, leaving his daughter Elizabeth (Audrey Hepburn) a billion-dollar empire. Roffe's board members see an opportunity to settle old scores, jockey for higher position, and reap lucrative profits. However, an investigation into Sam's death discloses that it was a murder and that a power struggle is going on within the company.
Lead investigator Max Hornung (Gert Fröbe) informs Elizabeth of his list of suspects, which includes her closest advisers and financially strapped family members. During this time, she marries CEO Rhys Williams (Ben Gazzara), but he, too, is identified by Hornung as a suspect. As president, Elizabeth follows her father's wishes and refuses to let shares of Roffe & Sons sell on the world market. Her choice prevents the board members from selling their shares as the company's by-laws prohibit it until all board members agree; on the other hand, her death would allow for a unanimous decision.
After several attempts on her life, an international chase across Europe ensues. Hornung is able to connect these murder attempts to a series of homicides of prostitutes, which have been recorded on snuff films using Roffe film stock with a witness in a black Gucci leather coat (several suspects are linked to this coat).
Elizabeth returns to her father's villa in Sardinia during a scirocco for protection from the unseen murderer, who sets her house on fire after she begins destroying objects and shouting, "Now try to make it look like an accident!" Williams and one of the shareholders, Sir Alec Nichols (James Mason), both show up to save her, but Hornung figures out that Nichols is the killer and shoots him before he can murder Elizabeth in a symbolic snuff film. | flashback | train | wikipedia | You cared about the characters and you so wanted to know what had happened in the past.Without spoilers I will just say that season 2 was dumb and boring and season 3 was weird and stupid.
Smart characters did dumb things.If you can watch Season 1 and then stop, good for you.
Having now watched the complete series in an utterly unstoppable binge I can say without a shadow of a doubt that, for me, this is up there with the greats like True Detective, Breaking Bad and Rectify (to name but a few).
The cinematography is phenomenal and I bet you will all be wanting to move to The Keys after watching this I do hope they make a follow up series, however if they want to leave us wanting more but very satisfied at the same time stopping here would do just that.
Bloodline is a quality Netflix series, that totally validates their strategy of delivering a season in complete, binge-worthy form, rather than an episode at a time.
But it is a near constant reminder of tragedies that have plagued the family who own and operate the resort.The place in the sun the Rayburns enjoy is one they have carved out through hard work and determination guided by the vision of their folksy yet menacing ex-sailor/ex-ranch-hand patriarch Robert Rayburn (Sam Shephard) and his adoring yet industrious wife Sally (Sissy Spacek).Though seemingly every tropical acre evokes painful memories they have put far too much in to consider leaving.
They watch everything he says and does looking for signs of betrayal of their secrets.The rivalries within families about the direction of their legacy play out in a more compelling way in a more believable setting on this show.
That is how good the writers were in finding that commonality.The opening montage with its time-lapsed view of the beach during a thunder storm is coupled with suitably haunting theme music beginning each episode with dark mysticism.
It is perfect for the intricate rhythm of each teleplay.Bloodline is nothing less than exceptional viewing worthy of multiple Emmys particularly for writing and for the acting portrayals delivered by the entire brilliant cast.
Sucked So Bad. I CANNOT BELIEVE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO ONE OF THE BEST SHOWS I've SEEN IN YEARS !!Season 1 and 2 are excellent ...Season 3 is an absolute mess , not one bit interesting exciting ,it seems it was made by a totally different production company its just horrible ..every episode is slow meaningless drawn out , its simply lazy writing to wrap up a once good story !
I really enjoyed season 1 , this series really promised a great deal, season 2 was a disappointment in comparison with the plot becoming more and more far fetched and with some new characters who just didn't fit , you know when the script writers start running out of ideas when "ghosts ' or figments of imagination start appearing and by season 3 they were running riot and haunting the whole show with dream after dream and whatever!
Wonderful, amazing plots and people--Kyle Chandler is total eye candy:)Netflix is doing a wonderful job in the original series department...Just say no to cable TV:) Netflix Keep up the great work....I loved this series--because its real~real people, real family problems,no veneers, fake boobs, lips or face jobs or other distractions to take away from the great story line...very refreshing~ I hope that you bring more indie type series as well, cannot stomach sitcoms or the totally fake reality TV- thank you for carrying the new artists and new talent in the production services as well-It is going to be a great summer:).
Thanks to another reviewer I saved 2 hours of my life and skipped the last two episodes.I have to wonder what it is like to be a quality actor who has had two great seasons and then learn that your task is to watch the whole enterprise go down the drain because the writers ran out of juice.The third season has been a disaster with even the set up for the trial not being believable.I guess that's my bottom line: little of the third season is believable.
Lots of talking and not much doing.Similar to the electronic music genre "progressive", just when you think something exciting is about to happen, it sedates you back into Boringville.The acting is good for what its worth, but if you have any imagination whatsoever, you can probably come up with a more thrilling story on the bus during your commute to work.KR out!.
The series start highly promising, however from the second season the whole thing gets too slow, uncertain and badly directed.
The acting and character development and the plot was great throughout the series but the 2nd half of season 3 seemed to lack creativity and dissappointed us..
Which isn't necessarily a bad thing were it not that it at the same time just doesn't deliver when it comes to character building or plot development.
I have watched all the big shows that get high scores, if they are slow or fast doesn't bother me, as long as they deliver in the end.
(You will get it when you watch )It didn't have any one boring scenes throughout the whole thing !The actors are great with a a great performance not the still learning type we see in any new series .Gonna Continue with this i think this series will be something in the near future .Recommended.
So it's amazing thing that NetFlix gave you not only one episode but like a whole season over two days :D ...The Show started slow ,, and kept on going slow ,, and just in the last couple of minutes Boom gives you a surprise.
The plot was not clear in the first hour just brothers who had problems with their oldest one and try to figure out whether letting him to come back home or not.Honestly,The writing needed just a little bit more work ,, the plot itself appeared not that tight ,, loose all over the first fifty something minutes, but it gets more organized with each episode and kinda more intriguing ,, again thank god there were seven of these episodes because if i only watched the first one i wouldn't keep on watching it.The cast is okay ,, the characters of "Danny and John Rayburn" are the most mysterious ones and the Actors did a good job keeping it that way.For me it's not the type of Thriller i'd usually be eager to watch because a two minutes thrill out 50 is no thrill,, but the Drama is flowing and growing without interruption so who knows what's coming next, 13 episodes have been ordered so still 6 episodes to see where this is going.....update...."Danny made a mistake and now they're all paying for it" :D The last 6 episode were so tense and intriguing ;) to be more specific ...
The ending of the episode 12 and the finale is just surprisingly thrilling and unpredictable,, "We're not bad people but we did a bad thing" ;) well they're talks they might renew it for more than a couple of seasons ,, so let's watch how the Rayburn's story is gonna evolve.well after all it moderately Recommended ;).
Season 3 was a waste of time to watch with little or no story line and constant flashbacks that we all just love (NOT) I think the writers ran out of story line and just use fillers of random nonsense to fill the gaps.
The gradual build-up of psychological tension between a family makes this series compelling to watch, even to the extent of feeling uncomfortable as you witness how things unwind.
Need say that this guy is born to do broken and hard characters, even sometimes I think that he's to deep and involved in the creation of his characters in most of the movies and shows that he was part.Great show, and Ben deserve so many nominations and awards for this performance.
The unravelling of the family dynamic will keep the viewer captivated, as well as numerous plot twists to keep the tension at an all time high, as each episode escalates into a greater drama for the Rayburn Family.
I just finished watching Season 1, and it was great.The cast includes Sissy Spacek, Kyle Chandler, Ben Mendelsohn, Linda Cardellini, Sam Shepard, Norbert Leo Butz, and Chloë Sevigny.The story is about the prosperous Rayburn family, headed by Sally and Robert Rayburn (Spacek and Shepard) who own a inn in the Florida Keys.
Linda Cardellini, whom I only know from Mad Men, is very different here as a confused woman not exactly sure what -- and who -- she wants.The showy role belongs to Ben Mendelsohn, and he is fantastic as the attractive charmer Danny, who brings and makes trouble wherever he goes.
She seamlessly becomes the character she is playing, and her Mrs. Rayburn is sensitive, a little on the fragile side, in some denial, and a woman who loves her children.Highly recommended especially as a binge-watch.
The story itself is also played out in a great way in witch even though you are going from a start to end (not working back in time to figure things out) they are constantly giving you flash backs and flash forwards to help give curiosity and build the final scene, ( that might not make sense but as you watch you can figure it out).
The acting, direction and locations were superb, and the main plot and writing kept me interested and always wondering and guessing what was next for this family.
By Sunday evening we had finished the entire first season (no spoilers here, but there is a second season on tap).The acting is good enough that you forget you are not watching a real family.
not to my surprise, it turns out the show creator was responsible for a couple of seasons of Sopranos, so know you are getting that level of sophisticated drama).The show is just gorgeous to watch.
The intricate family history is portrayed frequently through flashbacks, but all timed perfectly to build the story and lead the viewer through a harrowing tale that literally had me cringing and on the edge of my seat on multiple occasions.Thank you to the cast, crew, writers, producers, and Netflix for raising the bar sky-high for scripted dramas and providing such a truly enjoyable viewing experience.
I do; however, know that it brings you in like a David Simon piece, (without the story line of an ensemble cast) The acting is great.
The story of a family ravaged by rampant alcoholism and a careless attitude towards boating safety measures in the Keys.It's captivating to watch them guzzling booze like there's no tomorrow while sharing dark anecdotes and bad memories until awkwardness ensues.There's quite a few skeletons in this family, so many in fact that painkillers addiction and cocaine abuse look pale in comparison.The characters, their relationships and the Keys are realistic as hell and make for a great series in all seriousness.
It took me a long time to start watching Bloodline.
I felt I should, because it got such solid reviews, but the description - black sheep brother returns home, did nothing for me.When I finally started watching it, though, I realized the description didn't in any way convey the intensity of the series.This is a show about a brother whose homecoming raises old conflicts and causes new ones.
Ben Mendelsohn is particularly memorable as Danny.The story is punctuated by flash forwards that are brilliantly put together in the season finale.
My recommendation: watch the first season as a mini-series, then stop..
I just happened across it looking for something good to watch; just finished both seasons and O.M.GBloodline blows away several mainstream shows.
I watched the entire season in 2 days and recommend that you binge also so you don't think of the plot as slow rather than a episode by episode unfolding thriller..
Ben Mendelsohn plays the black sheep of the family Danny Rayburn who is easily the most interesting and unique character from the series, every moment he is on screen he shows how much of a tortured soul Danny really is and you don't know if you should feel bad for him or if he truly is an evil person but i feel he is playing both perfectly.
Kyle Chandler also holds his own character John Rayburn very well as the second oldest sibling as the show progresses we see how the smart sensible son slowly loses his mind and forms his own dark secrets.there's only a handful of series and films which I feel deserve a 10 star rating and after only seeing 1 series of Bloodline I feel this definitely deserves a 10/10..
This is just by far the best family drama/thriller I think I have watched.
I'm sure Netflix produced this for binge watching because I know I couldn't stop once I was pulled in.
I haven't watched the entire season yet - I'm up to episode 9, but it's like one of those books where you can't help but turn the page and keep reading.
I love the Keys, and Kyle Chandler is always great, but watching this was like pulling teeth.
But the last episode, while answering the questions of this season just added more and made you want to continue watching what happens to this family - so loving and perfect on the surface, so flawed where no one can see it, Cannot wait for the new season!.
I watched the whole first season in 5 days so everything is pretty much fresh in my mind, I can say episode one gets you hooked for sure (as any other good enough pilot episode would do) but what comes after that for the next 5-6 episodes is painful, massively slow development and even slower story-telling.
Then in the last 4-5 episodes is where the thing really accelerates and starts progressing smoothly.The acting by Ben Mendelsohn and Kyle Chandler is pretty good, the rest of the cast is OK and honestly don't know why but I never really felt Linda Cardellini character, she lacked depth, don't know if it was due to a lack of her performance or due to some poor writing for little Meg.Overall this is an average series, enjoyable at points, full of clichés and honestly I would have never kept looking watching it if all the episodes weren't at my disposal from day one as you can lose interest pretty quickly going through the episodes (imagine if you had to wait for weeks, rating would have dropped nosediving).
The first half of season one was good -- not great -- but enough to keep watching.
I loved this show when it first started up until the last few episodes of season 2.
However, this cliffhanger alone has forced it to become a series which does seem like a bit of "money grabbing" from Netflix to try and squeeze out another season from the writers.Overall though, this is one of Netflix's best and I would give an enormous amount of recommendation to anyone who loves crime dramas with a lot of depth.
I also loved "Friday Night Lights", with the great actor Kyle Chandler who does an amazing acting like all the Rayburn family.I'm in the 11th chapter and i don't want it ends....The way they tell the story...
There's a bit of draw-in because all the flash-forwards leave you wanting to know how exactly things end up and what happened to get there, but really, you could skip several of the episodes in the middle.
Really, slow pace and pretty bad acting splashed with a bit of drama (dragged on for 13 episodes) do not an amazing show make.
Sure some of the things done to him in the past were bad misdeeds, but his "revenge" is just the workings of his pathology, and it is hard to watch the others around him not see what he is up to - in real life I doubt he would get as far with his seriously screwed up life and plans as the character in this show allows.It is a good look and reveal at how good at the con a sociopath can be...A good little book about this is "the sociopath next door" or something quite similar....
I really had a great time watching the first 2 seasons!
I literally just started watching this show 2 days ago and I could not stop watching it I am addicted I'm already done the first season and it is absolutely amazing the writers of this show are geniuses I have not seen a show that has been this good in a very long long time very suspenseful keeps you guessing you do not know what the next step is...
I started watching this show when it came out, and I absolutely loved the first season.
The following two seasons do not tell a story which needed to be told, none of the new characters are interesting (and some are downright annoying), and the episodes move at a snail's pace, and stuffed with the worst kind of boring filler.
Think again.Watch season 1; watch it three times over if you like.
I'm not complaining that all doesn't end well (no spoiler since we all know that) but from the way the season (particularly the last two episodes) leaves us confused.
Such a shameful ending for one of the absolutely GREAT T-V series of all time..
Strong feelings and great performances from all actors while the mystery and family secrets reveal episode by episode!The second season was not so good as the first.
If you love character driven story lines, then you will probably like this show.
Bottom line: if you don't like slow drama, then don't watch this.p.s. I had never heard of Ben Mendelsohn before, but WOW he absolutely kills it in his performance.. |
tt0388644 | Soupçons | In December 2001, novelist Michael Peterson called to report that his wife Kathleen had fallen down a set of stairs and died. The authorities disbelieved Peterson's story that Kathleen had fallen while drunk and concluded instead that Peterson had bludgeoned her to death, most likely with a fireplace poker which was discovered missing from the house. Peterson was soon charged with murder and the film details the ensuing case from the point of view of Peterson and his defense team, led by David Rudolf. During the trial it is discovered that while Peterson was living in Germany a family friend of his died from an intra-cerebral haemorrhage followed by the body falling down stairs after collapsing which resulted in similar head injuries to those sustained by Peterson's wife. An investigation by German police and US military authorities concluded that the death was accidental and Peterson ended up adopting the woman's two daughters. The prosecution introduced this death into the trial as an incident giving Peterson the idea of how to "fake" Kathleen's accident. During the trial, Peterson's daughters stand steadfastly by their father. The prosecution argues that Kathleen had discovered that Michael was bisexual and had been having affairs with men, which led to an argument where he bludgeoned her to death. Peterson claimed that his wife knew about his sexuality and that they had an open marriage. He claims to have been outside by their pool when Kathleen fell down the stairs and injured herself. A defense team recreation shows that it would have been possible for Peterson to have missed his wife's cries for help had he been by the pool. The jury ultimately convicts Peterson. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0113501 | Just Cause | Paul Armstrong (Sean Connery), a liberal Harvard professor opposed to capital punishment, is persuaded to go to Florida to investigate the conviction of Bobby Earl Ferguson (Blair Underwood) for murder. Ferguson, a former Cornell University student, who was convicted of raping and murdering a young white girl named Joanie Shriver (Barbara Jean Kane). Armstrong must save him from being executed in the electric chair. Ferguson tells Armstrong that he was tortured by two police detectives to get a confession. As Armstrong digs deeper into the case, he discovers that Tanny Brown (Laurence Fishburne), the chief detective on the case, did indeed coerce Ferguson's confession.
The plot thickens when Ferguson tells the professor that the murder was actually committed by Blair Sullivan (Ed Harris), a serial killer awaiting execution, who later reveals the location of the weapon used to kill the girl. When Armstrong discovers the weapon, Brown tries to threaten him into abandoning the investigation. (It is revealed that the murdered girl was Brown's daughter's best friend.) Ferguson gets a re-trial and is freed from prison. Subsequently, the governor signs Sullivan's death warrant.
Armstrong receives a call from Sullivan, who says he has a final clue to share, but first wants Armstrong to visit his (Sullivan's) parents and tell them he said goodbye. Armstrong is shocked to find their butchered bodies. Back at the prison, Sullivan gloats that he and Ferguson struck a deal: Ferguson would kill Sullivan's parents in exchange for freedom, while Sullivan would claim responsibility for the girl's murder, which Ferguson did in fact commit. Armstrong asks why he was needed for their scheme, and Sullivan replies that was "Bobby Earl's call." Armstrong has the last laugh by lying to Sullivan that his parents were alive and that they "forgive him." Sullivan becomes enraged. He resists the guards taking him to the electric chair, where he is executed.
Armstrong and Brown go after Ferguson, whose motive for everything turns out to be a desire for revenge on Armstrong's wife (Kate Capshaw); she was the prosecutor against him in a previous rape trial which, while thrown out of court on a technicality, resulted in him being brutalized and castrated in jail, as well as being kicked out of Cornell, robbing him of any chance of a future. Ferguson plans to murder Armstrong's wife and daughter (Scarlett Johansson) and then disappear. Armstrong and Brown join forces to kill Ferguson and save Armstrong's family. | revenge, neo noir, murder | train | wikipedia | Just Cause takes some of the best parts of three films, Cape Fear, A Touch of Evil and Silence of the Lambs and mixes it together to come up with a good thriller of a film.Sean Connery is a liberal law professor, married to a former Assistant District Attorney, Kate Capshaw and he's a crusader against capital punishment.
He's sitting on death row for the murder of a young girl.When Connery arrives in this rural Florida county he's up against a tough sheriff played by Laurence Fishburne who's about as ruthless in his crime solving as Orson Welles was in Touch of Evil.
Responding to a plea, Armstrong comes out of semi-retirement and travels to Florida to help the young, black death row prisoner Bobby Earl Ferguson, who claims he has been falsely convicted of murder.
Upon investigating Bobby Earl's case, Armstrong soon discovers several grave discrepancies, to the dismay of the local police officer, Tanny Brown (played by Laurence Fishburne).
There are several plot twists which surprise the audience (one of them includes Armstrong's young wife and her past), and towards the end of the film, the action really starts to set in, and Armstrong's own convictions are tested as he finds his family in the hands of a mad killer.
It is nicely photographed, with several scenes from the damp, alligator-filled swamps surrounding the little Florida town.Sean Connery is reliable as the stout, solid professor Armstrong, and as the centerpiece of the movie, he is totally convincing.
Compared to another movie psycho, the deliciously evil Hannibal Lecter, Harris' Sullivan is simply annoying."Just Cause" doesn't offer anything radically new in this movie genre, but it is a solid, mostly well-acted film who should deliver enough thrills and excitement to satisfy most viewers.
Still I regard "Just Cause" as an above average thriller simply because of the fine cast.Maybe Sean Connery was miscast in his role.
But he of course is helped by a very solid supporting cast that consists out of actors like Laurence Fishburne, Blair Underwood, Ned Beatty, Hope Lange, Lynne Thigpen and Ed Harris.
I was left feeling surprised that Connery, Harris, Fishburn and Capshaw had anything to do with this turkey, individually or collectively.The film up until the final thirty minutes was rather engaging and I like the way the story was unfolding and the nature of the film overall.
What's worse is that, once the twist was revealed, the remainder of the film became excruciatingly predictable.Harris gave a terrific performance and Connery is like Morgan Freeman in that he never gives a bad performance, even if the movie ain't that great!
The film has some good lines, mainly by the great Sean Connery, who is a hallowed presence in the movie.Arne Glimcher's film is about a Harvard law professor who decides to reopen a murder case, eight years after the case closed due to a plea of innocence.
Several turns are predictable or hard to believe, but this film also shows some interesting character development with Sean Connery, who seems to be a little too old for this role, but was quite believable as the law teacher, who had to learn some lessons about reality and law as it is practised in reality.
But since the plot, especially the last third or so, is really contrived, and Kate Capshaw is so annoyingly bad and shallow in a key part that usually calls for a more sensitive performance, I can not really recommend this film wholeheartedly without having a guilty conscience.
The film is mediocre, but seeing Ed Harris' performance as a manipulative serial killer (I'm not giving anything away by telling you this) is worth the entire movie.
This professor is a retired lawyer named Paul Armstrong, (Sean Connery) who has reason to believe that a man on death row is innocent of rape and murder of a very pretty little white girl.
Here it's Connery in the do-gooder Poitier role while the black Fishburne takes the Stieger part.Bobby Earl is on death row for the rape and murder of a young white girl.
He enlists the help of Connery's law professor to take his case on board arguing that serial killer Ed Harris has confessed to the murder while in jail.
Luckily we have the great Ed Harris exuding genuine menace as the incarcerated serial killer, wielding his power, Hannibal Lector style from inside his prison walls, while Blair Underwood as Bobby Earl displays real promise, suave and bland enough to make you wonder if he is guilty or not..
A corrupt black hating cop, Christopher Murray is a nasty and detestable piece of work, really making us think the poor young convict, Blair Underwood, is innocent of committing an atrocious murder of a little black girl.
Underwood implores Harvard law professor, Connery, to take up his case again, as serial killer monster, an unforgettably evil Hannibal Lector'ish Harris, who's murdered his folks, has confessed to the killing, too.
Just cause is a psychological thriller, but it's a manipulative one too, in the way it shows death row prisoners, pulling the wool over your eyes, using their intellect to befool you, if for notoriety or a bid for freedom where by the end you really feel suckered, as really there wasn't much a puzzle.
I consider Just Cause one of my favorite Sean Connery's movies, it is a tense psychological thriller with excellent performances from the Cast, especially Connery..it also has one of the best lines i have seen in movies, so the dialog is pretty good in this one..
It also has one of the best scenes in movies ever, when Sean interviews Ed Harris's character in prison is just fantastic..i enjoyed this one a lot and i can not recommend this enough, really do not miss this one !
Things then take a dark turn as the good professor learns a hard lesson himself...Solid thriller has good acting by all, and efficient direction, but it is the surprising story turns that really make this stand out, and it is good to see a Hollywood film not take the obvious,(and easy) way out in regards to the controversial subject matter, which lead to an exciting and satisfying end..
Ed Harris's work in this film is up to his usual standard of excellence, that is, he steals the screen away from anyone with whom he shares it, and that includes the formidable Sean Connery.
Certain actors just seem pretty much the same regardless of what role they play, and at least for me, Connery is one of them.The story has numerous twists and turns in it, but they're all of the kind you can see coming a long way away.
Sean Connery is an anti-death penalty crusader brought in to save a seemingly innocent young black man (Blair Underwood) from the ultimate penalty.
Seems like this movie had two parts,, first, the leadup to what has happened and what we assume to be the conclusion,, second part is where all of the twists come into play,, I have to admit at first that they confused the heck out of me trying to figure it all out,, Sean Connery,, and Laurence Fishbourne star in the movie,, with small supporting roles for Daniel J Travanti and Ned Beaty..
Each actor in this movie is a pleasure to watch (especially Ed Harris, who's convincingly scary and crazy, without hamming it up too much) and the plot offers lots of unpredictable twists and turns.
I was able to watch most of this movie on an old movies channel while waiting for the total LUNAR eclipse last night.It is about a law professor, Sean Connery as Paul Armstrong, going down south to help free a man who was convicted of murder.
The story revolves around a court case in which a black man, sentenced to death for raping and murdering a white little girl, claims to be innocent.
The film does also somewhat philosophical considerations about justice and how it should be done.In summary, this is an excellent thriller where tension follows the entire movie and holds your attention to the end.
Just Cause (1995)Plot In A Paragraph: A Harvard professor (Connery) is lured back into the courtroom after 25 years to take the case of a young black man condemned to death for the horrific murder of a child.I don't get the hate aimed at this move, as I enjoy it.
Connery gives his usual solid performance, whilst Laurence Fishburn, Blair Underwood, Kate Capshaw (Mrs Steven Spielberg) Ned Beatty and Ed Harris are all solid, and we even get an early role from Scarlet Johansson, whilst I just love seeing Ruby Dee in anything.
After to read the comments here my first reflection is how hard is to make good movies like this in America, where people have troubles understanding The Simpons plots...but after to read the Dr Jacques COULARDEAU comment from the nice France Im clear the problem is global....In this good movie you can see very clear how bad is work from the prejudice, even if is a liberal one...and how easy is to build prejudices from the safe academy...and how long in the way from theory and reality when is about people, evilness and society...sadly the good intention is ruined in the last part, probably because the director remembered his target audience...the moral of this tale:the best option for filmmakers is to look for a new job....
Ed Harris truly did a superb job and I loved the mention of Florida State, but the ending was terrible and absurd and featured Laurence Fishburne's on screen daughter talking like a Northerner and letting a strange man (Connery) walk into her house.
Heavy handed, guilt ridden and clichéd it moves along at an even pace not ever becoming fully engaging except after we meet a very disturbing psycho-killer (an unforgettable Ed Harris).Not a bad film, it is just trying to be too much and delivers some really unremarkable remedies to tie it all together and it ends up making the movie more confusing and less satisfying than it had to be.A modicum of a script rewrite, eliminating some of the weakness to interject intellectual insights and complex motivations might have made this much more satisfying as a down and dirty ditty of good vs evil.
"Just Cause," a 1995 thriller with Sean Connery as a law professor who takes his knowledge into the "real" world when attempting to clear a black man of a murder conviction, is neither good nor believable, despite a surprising second half.Connery, once again playing the kind of dignified, seemingly all-knowing man of virtue that seems to be the only way in which producers see him, once again demonstrates why it took him so long to shake off the image of James Bond: he simply does not choose his projects carefully enough.
There's nothing mystical about the character he plays in "Just Cause," and whatever pomposity he displays doesn't last long, but Connery is once again an aloof, "I just came down from the clouds" kind of guy; a professor of law who agrees to help clear a Death Row inmate of the charge that he raped and murdered a little white girl.
The performances by Connery, Laurence Fishburne and Kate Capshaw are strictly average, but Ed Harris as a serial killer is so good, you wish he were in a better movie.
But this movie is about a retired lawyer who hasn't practised for 20 years getting involved with a black guy on Death Row so it begins in true Horror mode when we see him beaten up.According to him he suffered a couple of weeks of beatings yet when he's seen he hasn't a scratch on him he looks like your average everyday black.
By the time Bobby Earl-the black man who sounds more like a member of a doowop group-is in court for a retrial to prove miscarriage of justice he's cleared but that's not quite the end.
Sean Connery, Kate Capshaw, Blair Underwood, Ruby Dee, Ed Harris, and Laurence Fishburne star in "Just Cause," a film from 1995.Connery plays a professor, Paul Armstrong, who lectures at Harvard against capital punishment.
Now he's on death row.Bobby is young, good-looking, and well-educated black man, and it's easy for Paul to see why he was disliked in this one-horse town.
Bobby believes that another inmate, Blair Sullivan (Harris) might know something about the murders.I really enjoyed this film, but I will agree with other people on this board that it fell apart at the end.
I enjoyed this movie, granted it is mainly because I enjoy seeing Sean Connery act and this one has the added bonus of having Ed Harris and Lawrence Fishburne in it too.
The director was certainly burning with a desire to make his own "silence of the lambs",as Ed Wood tries to recapture Anthony Hopkins' intensity,but even for an excellent actor like him,it's a waste of breath.When you cannot rely on a solid script,it leads you nowhere.Sean Connery does not seem to believe in what's he's doing-A far cry from his great parts of the seventies like "Robin and Marian"(1976) and "the man who would be king" (1975)-and he gives a listless performance.He's not given strong support by Kate "temple of doom" Capshaw,who could be his daughter anyway.As soon as the black convict is released from jail,everything becomes predictable and implausible at once.A run of the mill thriller..
We think that this movie is going to be about something with Connery's conviction against capitol punishment in the beginning but it turns out to be nothing but a standard, contrived for the audience's sake, run of the mill, let's never get it over with, thriller.
Yes there is some good acting here, especially from Blair Underwood, Fishburne, and Ed Harris in a psycho-supporting role but the story does not work from almost the beginning to the very long-awaited end..
It's about some black man who is accused of having murdered a little girl and therefore he is send to the electric chair, to stop all this injustice they bring in the help from ex-professor Sean Connery.
Then the Bobby Earl character,(played by Blair Underwood)the main bad guy in the movie, is black.
That's the argument I used to convince my wife to rent this instead of the 'Joy Luck Club' again.I think I'd sit through the pain of the entire showing of the Joy Luck Club rather that watch the ending of Just Cause again.Things looked good - the plot moved along well, and the characters were played quite nicely....
"Just Cause" is a disappointing movie about a law professor (Sean Connery) who is trying to free a condemned killer (Blair Underwood) on death row for a crime he did not commit.
How does a director cast Sean Connery, Laurence Fishburne, Ruby Dee and Ed Harris in the same film, set it in the deep south with the potential of atmosphere and suspense galore, start off with a pretty nifty premise concerning a man unjustly sentence to the chair--and come up with a turkey?
Sean Connery is a good reason to see "Just Cause" if there is one, but wrestling alligators, deceptive main characters and the truth is a shade far-fetched for my liking..
A Compelling Thriller!!, 10 December 2005 Author:littlehammer16787 from United StatesJust CauseStarring:Sean Connery,Laurence Fishburne, and Blair Underwood.A liberal,though good-hearted Harvard law professor Paul Armstrong is convoked to the Flordia Everglades by unjustly convicted black guy Bobby Earl.Confessing that sadistic,cold-hearted cops vilifyied and beat him to a pulp to get the confession of a gruesome murder of an eleven year old girl.
Despite not having practiced law for decades, teacher and anti-death penalty speaker Paul Armstrong takes the case of a young black man (Bobby Earl) who has been on death row for almost 8 years and needs help with an appeal.
"Just Cause" is a well-done thriller: assuredly directed (it was only Arne Glimcher's second film, but you'd never know it), with a strong sense of place (the American South), a top-notch cast (Sean Connery and Laurence Fishburne are as commanding as ever; Ed Harris is perhaps a little over-the-top but genuinely disturbing), and one spectacular car stunt.
Anyone who has never seen a thriller, a court drama, a story about serial killers, an anti-death penalty plot, scenery being gobbled by Ed Harris, the Everglades, or a movie unsure enough of itself that it has to front load the whole thing with a bunch of big and medium names will find Just Cause absolutely riveting.Oh, JC wasn't bad (except for Sean Connery looking a bit bewildered).
JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.Weird casting, but the movie plays serious mindf** with the audience.
Paul Armstrong is a liberal, Scottish-born, professor of law at Harvard, known for his passionate opposition to the death penalty, who is hired to take on the case of Bobby Earl, a young black man from Florida who has been convicted of the rape and murder of Joanie Shriver, an eleven year old white girl.
Sean Connery as Armstrong and Laurence Fishburne as the black Sheriff are rather better, but neither is good enough to save the film.
The first half of the film looks like a standard liberal "issue" movie, anti-death penalty, anti-racist and critical of heavy-handed policing.
You just can't imagine how many stereotypes were actually used in this film.How else would you call: Two racist cops beat up and torture an innocent black man (who isn't accepted in his community because he is smart, well educated and handsome), to make him confess that he kidnapped, raped and murdered a beautiful, blond 11-year old girl.
Basically law professor Paul Armstrong (Sir Sean Connery) is given a letter by Evangeline (Ruby Dee), grandmother of Bobby Earl (Blair Underwood), and he wants him to prove his innocence. |
tt1320291 | The Reef | Luke (Damian Walshe-Howling) is delivering a yacht to a customer in Indonesia, and invites his friend, Matt (Gyton Grantley), and Matt's girlfriend, Suzie (Adrienne Pickering), to join him as he sails there, including Matt's sister, Kate (Zoe Naylor), and fellow sailor, Warren (Kieran Darcy-Smith). To get to Indonesia, they must sail through a coral reef. On the second day of their journey, the yacht strikes part of the reef and capsizes when the keel is destroyed.
With the current taking them further away from land, Luke gathers supplies from the overturned vessel with the intention of swimming to nearby Turtle Island. With the group gathered on top of the overturned hull, Warren activates the yacht's EPIRB, but Luke informs him that it is an older model that requires a plane to fly overhead to receive the signal. When Luke suggests the others join him in swimming to the island which Luke estimates to be twelve miles away, Warren refuses as he believes the water is shark-infested. With encouragement Kate, Suzie and Matt follow Luke into the water as he begins the journey.
During their journey, the group find the carcass of a sea turtle that has had its head bitten off. On the overturned yacht, Warren spots a large Great White Shark circling the vessel. Soon, the group are also stalked by the same shark. It approaches them several times, even brushing past Kate, before leaving. Kate and Suzie are supported by Matt and Luke as they are both in shock. However, during the encounter, Kate lost the bodyboard she was using as a flotation device. When Matt goes to retrieve it, he is attacked by the shark. His legs are severed and he quickly dies. As night falls, Luke, Kate and Suzie are once more stalked by the shark. Suzie blames Luke for talking the group into swimming to an island he seemingly can't find.
In the morning, the group has drifted to a shallow area of the reef, where they are able to stand and rest. In the distance, they can see a larger rock formation protruding from the water, and they swim towards it. Paranoia affects the group as they continue. They share a laugh when they mistake a dolphin for the shark that took Matt. However, the shark soon returns and kills Suzie. Luke and Kate rest on the reef, and they both declare their love for each other. They begin to swim the final distance to the rocks as the shark closes in. Luke assists Kate in climbing to safety, but as he climbs onto the rocks the shark seizes him and drags him underwater. As she sits on the barren rock, she scans the ocean as she continues to call Luke's name and cries hysterically.
The written epilogue reveals that Kate was rescued by a fishing boat the next day, however extensive searches failed to locate Warren or the vessel. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0053168 | Pickpocket | Michel (Martin LaSalle) goes to a horse race and steals some money from a spectator. He leaves the racetrack confident that he was not caught when he is suddenly arrested. The inspector (Jean Pélégri) releases Michel because the evidence is not strong enough. Michel soon falls in with a small group of professional pickpockets who teach him their trade and invite him to join them on highly coordinated pickpocketing sprees in crowded public areas.
Visiting his mother, Michel meets Jeanne (Marika Green) who begs him to visit his mother more often. His friend Jacques goes on a date with Jeanne and invites Michel along. But after stealing a watch, Michel leaves Jacques and Jeanne at the carnival. While in a bar, the inspector asks Michel to show him a book by George Barrington about pickpocketing at the station on a convenient morning, and Michel goes down to the police station at the appointed date with it. Once there, the inspector barely glances at the book. Michel returns to his apartment realizing that it was all just a ruse to search his apartment. However, the cops failed to find his stash of money.
Michel's mother dies, and he goes to the funeral with Jeanne. Later, the inspector visits Michel in his apartment, and tells him that his mother had had some money stolen, but later dropped the charges, probably knowing the thief was her son. The inspector leaves without arresting Michel, who decides to leave the country. He travels from Milan to Rome and ends up in England where he "spent two years in London pulling off good jobs", but throws his earnings away on alcohol and women.
Returning to France, Michel returns to Jeanne, who has had a child by Jacques but did not want to marry him and is now left with nothing. Michel begins to work again to support her, but gives into temptation and goes back to steal at the horse track, where he is caught by a plainclothes policeman. Jeanne regularly visits him in jail. On one such visit, Michel realizes he is in love with her. | romantic, mystery, suspenseful | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0203237 | Yu yu hakusho: meikai shito hen - hono no kizuna | Yu Yu Hakusho follows Yusuke Urameshi, a 14-year-old street-brawling delinquent who, in an uncharacteristic act of altruism, is hit by a car and killed in an attempt to save a young boy by pushing him out of the way. His ghost is greeted by Botan, a woman who introduces herself as the pilot of the River Styx, who ferries souls to the "Underworld" or Spirit World (霊界, Reikai) where they may be judged for the afterlife. Botan informs Yusuke that his act had caught even the Underworld by surprise and that there was not yet a place made for him in either heaven or hell. Thus Koenma, son of the Underworld's ruler King Enma, offers Yusuke a chance to return to his body through a series of tests. Yusuke succeeds with the help of his friends Keiko Yukimura and Kazuma Kuwabara. After returning to life, Koenma grants Yusuke the title of "Underworld Detective" (霊界探偵, Reikai Tantei, lit. "Spirit World Detective"), charging him with investigating supernatural activity within the Human World (人間界, Ningen Kai). Soon Yusuke is off on his first case, retrieving three treasures stolen from the Underworld by a gang of demons: Hiei, Kurama and Goki. Yusuke collects the three treasures with the aid of his new technique, the "Rei Gun", a shot of aura or Reiki (霊気, Reiki, "Spirit Energy") fired mentally from his index finger. He then travels to the mountains in search of the aged, female martial arts master Genkai. Together with his rival Kuwabara, Yusuke fights through a tournament organized by Genkai to find her successor. Yusuke uses the competition as a cover to search for Rando, a demon who steals the techniques of martial arts masters and kills them. Yusuke defeats Rando in the final round of the tournament and trains with Genkai for several months, gaining more mastery over his aura. Yusuke is then sent to Maze Castle in the Demon Plane (魔界, Makai, lit. "Demon World"), a third world occupied solely by demons, where Kuwabara and the newly reformed Kurama and Hiei assist him in defeating the Four Beasts, a quartet of demons attempting to blackmail Koenma into removing the barrier keeping them out of the human world.
Yusuke's next case sends him on a rescue mission, where he meets Toguro, a human turned into a demon. In order to test his strength, Toguro invites Yusuke to the Dark Tournament (暗黒武術会, Ankoku Bujutsukai, "Dark Martial Arts Association"), an event put on by corrupt, rich humans in which teams of demons, and occasionally humans, fight fierce battles for the chance to receive any wish they desire. Team Urameshi, consisting of Yusuke, Kuwabara, Kurama, Hiei and a disguised Genkai, traverse through the strenuous early rounds to face Team Toguro in the finals and win the tournament. They learn that Team Toguro's owner, Sakyo, was attempting to win in order to create a large hole from the human world to the Demon Plane and allow countless demons through. With his loss, Sakyo destroys the tournament arena, killing himself in the process.
After the tournament, Yusuke returns home, but has little time to rest as he is challenged to a fight by three teenagers possessing superhuman powers and who end up taking the detective hostage. Kuwabara and the others rescue him and learn that the whole scenario was a test put on by Genkai. It is disclosed that Shinobu Sensui, Yusuke's predecessor as Underworld Detective, has recruited six other powerful beings to help him take over where Sakyo left off, opening a hole to the Demon Plane in order to cause genocide of the human race. Yusuke and his friends challenge and defeat Sensui's associates one-by-one, culminating in a final battle between the two detectives. Sensui kills Yusuke then retreats into the newly opened portal to the Demon Plane. Yusuke is reborn as a partial demon, discovering that his ancestor passed down a recessive gene that would hide until an heir with sufficient power surfaced, when his demonic lineage would be revealed. Yusuke travels to the Demon Plane and defeats Sensui with the aid of the spirit of his ancestor who takes control of Yusuke's body to finish the fight.
As they return to the human world, Yusuke is stripped of his detective title as King Enma orders he be captured and executed in fear that Yusuke's demon blood could cause him to go on a rampage in the human world. Yusuke, unsettled at having been controlled by his ancestor Raizen, accepts an offer by Raizen's followers to return to the Demon Plane. Raizen, desiring a successor to his territory, is on the brink of dying of starvation, a death that would topple the delicate political balance of the three ruling powers of the Demon Plane. Hiei and Kurama are summoned by the other two rulers, Mukuro and Yomi, respectively, to prepare for an inevitable war. The three protagonists train in the realm for one year, during which time Raizen dies and Yusuke inherits his territory. Yusuke takes initiative and proposes a fighting tournament to name the true ruler of the Demon Plane, which is agreed upon by Mukuro and Yomi. During the tournament, Yusuke and Yomi meet in the second elimination round where Yusuke is defeated and knocked unconscious. Yusuke awakens days later to find that the tournament has ended and that a similar competition is to be held every so often to determine the Demon Plane's ruler. Yusuke stays in the Demon Plane for a while longer, but eventually returns to the human world after several years to be with Keiko. | paranormal, violence | train | wikipedia | Why not use the show's cast?!. Yu-Yu Hakusho is in my top five list of favorite anime shows, so naturally I got excited when I discovered Poltergeist Report. I was very disappointed when the characters started speaking, however. The dubbed cast for the movie is awful compared to the English cast for the show, which is awesome. I know the movie came to America long before the show (you really don't need to know jack about the show to have some understanding of what's going on in the movie), but I really wish that FUNimation would re-release it with the TRUE English cast. Another flaw with the movie is the same flaw the show has: the animation, well, let's just say it's not offensively horrible, like what one would expect from an episode of Scooby Doo, but it could be better. The story is typical of movies based on action anime (an hour-and-a-half-long episode), but it is still an entertaining plot, so no harm done there. Overall, Poltergeist Report is something worth watching, it just depends on how you tolerate partially-formulaic approaches to movies.. Not bad, but the dub and the continuity errors make it a look like a mess. This Movie is not terrible... It's decent! The English voice acting for this movie is actually hilarious. It made the movie really fun to watch as me and my friends were nitpicking the hell out of it. The plot was okay, though it was a little convoluted at times... but the animation was pretty great for its time... So overall it's not bad but not any good either as the incompetent dialogue completely takes away what made Yu Yu Hakusho's characters great in the first place... Also it's impossible to understand where this movie fits in the cannon.. Not bad Good story!. This was not a very bad movie. It kept me somewhat interested with the story line. The dialogue was okay but there was very little comedy relief in the film. It also was not as graphic violently as I had expected. The fight scenes in the film were great. Although it may seem that I am downing this movie I am not. I own the film and recommend it to any anime movie lover. If you do not know what anime is then do not try to watch this film before learning.. Never say goodbye.. Yu Yu Hakusho is quite possibly the best anime series ever. With action, comedy, drama, and... more action, a diverse cast of characters, and Kurama, quite possibly the coolest anime character in existence, you have one obvious hit.SPOILERS IN THE NEXT PARAGRAPHThe 2nd movie features one good plot. In it, Spirit World, or Rei Ki, is mysteriously destroyed by an oncoming flood. Back on Earth, or Nigenkai, Yusuke discovers the only person to escape the flood-- an extremely injured Botan. Before falling into a coma, she tells him to go and find the guide to Rei Ki, Hinageshi. With Kuwabara's help, Yusuke is able to locate her, but she's being attacked by demons! The two easily defeat the monsters and save Hinageshi, who then is able to tell them how to restore Rei Ki. Soon, the YYH heroes(Yusuke, Kuwabara, Kurama, and Hiei) are off to unseal five elemental sites and use their power to bring back Rei Ki....... but something goes horribly wrong. Each of them is ambushed by the movie's villain, Yakumo, and his goons, who then DESTROY the elemental sites as part of the plan to restore their own world, the Netherworld. But Yakumo's plan is not complete without one object.. something called the power sphere. And it ties in with Botan's current condition.END SPOILERS.Of course, the movie has each of the YYH heroes having their own dramatic 1-on-1 fight with each of the villains in the film. One nice thing is it also ties in a bit with Kurama's past, showing a bit more of his past life before the series begins. I won't spoil it, but it's pretty neat. Also, the animation and music of the film are superb. They take everything from the TV show and amplify it. It really does feel like a big budget version of the TV series.Now for the bad...... the horrible English dubbed voices. Handled by Central Park Media and U.S. Manga Corps., the people behind this decided to use the worst voices from the English versions of Poke'mon and Slayers to do the voices in this. It is BAD! Yusuke sounds like some comic book super hero, Hiei ridiculous, and Kuwabara is so awful I shut the mute button anytime he starts speaking. In fact, the dubbing company even renamed Kuwabara! Avoid this horrible translation! The DVD has Japanese and English... don't play the English one!On an end note, the film ends with an excellent piece, titled "Never Say Goodbye."(I think that's the song's title, at least.) Luckily, no horrible English version of the song has been made, unlike FUNimation's constant trend of dubbing the TV show theme songs.BOTTOM LINE: An excellent tie-in for those who want to see more YYH. |
tt3504048 | Housebound | Kylie, a troubled young woman, attempts to steal the safe from an ATM. Her accomplice knocks himself out while attacking the ATM with a sledgehammer, and, when she is slowed by attempting to save him, the police capture both. Due to her history of recidivism, she is sentenced by the judge to house arrest for eight months under the care of her mother, Miriam. Kylie does not get along with either her mother or her step-father, Graeme, both of whom she considers to be nothing but boring annoyances. A security contractor, Amos, explains that Kylie's ankle monitor will alert the police if she ever leaves the premises of her mother's house.
Kylie is further frustrated when Miriam calls a radio talk show and says that her house is haunted. After a disembodied hand grabs her ankle in the basement, Kylie becomes convinced that an intruder is in the house. Amos, responding to an alert from her ankle monitor after it reports tampering, takes Miriam's suggestion of a haunting seriously, much to Kylie's annoyance. Amos promises to return with ghost hunting equipment and perform a thorough examination of the house for free. When Kylie expresses continued skepticism, Amos chides her for having a closed mind.
After a series of unexplained experiences, including repeatedly encountering the same animatronic teddy bear, Kylie comes to believe that there may be a ghost in the house. Dennis, a clinical psychologist assigned to Kylie, becomes concerned with what he believes to be possible delusions in both Miriam and Kylie. After reviewing footage from security cameras, Amos does not believe her reports and accuses her of lying. However, once Graeme reveals to Kylie that their home was once a halfway house and the site of a horrific murder, Amos once again becomes interested. As they investigate further, they discover evidence of the crime, including an orthodontic retainer. During a visit, a blackout occurs, and Dennis is attacked by an unknown assailant. The police are skeptical of Miriam's insistence that a ghost is responsible, but they do not push any further.
When Kylie and Amos discover that her neighbour uses a retainer, Kylie breaks into the man's house and wakes him as she attempts to take his retainer. After she flees back to the family's home and hides in the basement, Kylie panics when she believes the neighbour to be stalking her, and she accidentally stabs Graeme, who has also entered the basement. As Graeme recuperates in the hospital, Amos in turn attempts to break into her neighbour's house. The neighbour says that he is not the killer, and he tells the story of a young savant, Eugene, whom he adopted. Eugene is an expert at mechanics and electronics, and he disappeared a year previous to the killing, though the neighbour believes him to be possibly responsible.
At the same time, Kylie accidentally discovers Eugene's secret hallways in their house, and she flees. Kylie and Amos separately converge at the police station, and Amos corroborates her wild stories of a serial killer who lives in hidden passageways. However, the police find no evidence, and Dennis convinces all involved that it would be best if Kylie were institutionalized. Once Dennis reveals that he wears a retainer, Kylie becomes suspicious of him. When she confronts him with evidence that he was an intern at the halfway house, he turns hostile and attempts to kill Miriam and Kylie. He kills a policeman. When Amos arrives at the house, Dennis incapacitates him. Kylie and Miriam flee into the secret tunnels, where they encounter Eugene.
Realizing that their paranormal activity has been Eugene all this time, they are at first frightened but realize that he is friendly. Dennis stabs Eugene, and, after an extended hunt that results in Dennis' presumed death, he knocks out Kylie and begins to strangle Miriam. Eugene wakes Kylie and hands her a weapon, which she uses to stab Dennis. As Dennis sees that the weapon is connected to a long cable, Eugene throws a switch, and high voltage explodes Dennis' head. Months later, all have recovered, Amos finally removes Kylie's ankle monitor, and Eugene has seemingly become an accepted (albeit mostly unseen) member of the household. | paranormal, plot twist | train | wikipedia | Delinquent serial-offender Kylie is sentenced to nine month's house arrest at her family home in a small town on New Zealand's Twin Coast Highway, forcing her to move back in after many years with her slightly loopy mother, who we learn has long been convinced that the house is haunted.
Initially more than a little sceptical, Kylie soon begins to experience unexplained phenomena herself, and before long local security contractor/probation officer Amos (who is principally responsible for ensuring Kylie doesn't leave the premises) offers his services as an amateur paranormal investigator.Part ghost story, part murder mystery, it would be counter- productive to know any more about the plot before viewing, as various revelations and red herrings keep the mystery quotient high.
Also one particular character is presented in a manner that pushes the film firmly into farce territory; one of a couple of aspects that could have been executed slightly more believably, as absurd as that sounds in relation to a film of this type.The performances are all top notch; Morgana O'Reilly has great fun with Kylie's mardy persona, Glen-Paul Waru is perfect as likable doofus Amos and Rima Te Wiata excels as Kylie's dotty but ultimately caring mother.
Just when you think you know which way it's heading, it either makes fun of the standard clichés or skips them entirely, casting us into a twist and turn that starts it all over again with an entirely new plot development.
I also enjoyed the fact that even though this film gets pretty violent and gory at times, overall it is a good-natured, feel good movie that, like a roller coaster ride, is scary and fun and shocking and harmless all at the same time.
As the mystery deepens, Kyleigh, her mother and Amos all realise that they're gonna have to solve it before whatever it is that dwells in the house engulfs and destroys them all...Housebound is a very pleasant surprise comedy horror gem from New Zealand, but with nicely done scares and a creepy atmosphere to go with the chuckles, which come mainly via hilarious interactions with the dysfunctional trio.
With some gold one liners and effective scares, it's emerged as one of the better horror viewings of this year and while frequently hilarious, it's primarily a horror thriller that simply tempers things with some very deft comedic relief.Overall a highly recommended gem from New Zealand and it went down well with the audience at the Dead by Dawn festival where I caught it, so any horror fan should keep an eye out for this one.
I went into this not expecting much, bored one night at home and saw it on demand, the trailer portrayed it as a straight-up haunted house type horror, which it is not.I don't usually care for horror movies that can also be classified as comedic, I like the scares, chills, and suspense of a good horror move and tend to stay away from the super campy or "funny" types.
It's well worth watching even for those who don't typically like horror.And I have to add that the scene at the end of the movie, where the epic "fight for their life" begins, is so funny, I was simultaneously nervous and tense while also laughing hysterically..
Nobody strains to give a comedy performance, in best Antipodean tradition the humor is totally deadpan.The set-up is similar to the forgettable Famke Janssen horror flick 100 Feet but this film does the premise of being under house arrest in a haunted house justice.
'Housebound' plays out with some typical horror elements, but the main character refuses to follow suit and every time something 'unusual' happens, she tackles those situations more level headed than most horror movie characters, which creates some great humor.
The 9th Annual Toronto After Dark Film Festival opened last evening with a sell-out crowd on hand for the screening of Housebound, a New Zealand horror film that takes on the tried-and-tested genre device of the haunted house.Morgana O'Reilly plays Kylie Bucknell, a troubled young woman who is sentenced by the local courts to home detention after a failed ATM robbery and is ordered to house arrest under the care of her mother Miriam (Rima Te Wiata).
Security officer and self-anointed ghost hunter Amos (Glen-Paul Waru) also assists in the deliberate tickling of the audience's funny bone as he teams with Kylie for an unlikely duo that were a Scooby snack eating dog away from being the New Zealand Mystery Inc.Writer/director Gerard Johnstone makes his feature film debut with Housebound and proves he can deliver the goods on a multiple genre platform to please most audiences.Housebound may be a bit uneven as it switched from ghost story to violent cat-and-mouse murder solving, but it has just enough of everything to ensure that audiences are provided with valued entertainment.
This is a great little movie, but you have to accept it for what it is: it's quirky, it's British comedy, and it's also a murder mystery with a smattering of paranormal worked in.If you go into it expecting either a traditional horror film or a traditional comedy, you won't like it.
The truth, however, is far stranger than a simple case of disgruntled ghosts: as Kylie investigates, with a little help from security man Amos ( Glen-Paul Waru), she unravels a decades old mystery surrounding an unsolved murder.Kiwi comedy/horror Housebound was recommended to me by my colleague Helen, to whom I'm very grateful: it's scary, funny, and utterly demented, with a plot that constantly surprises, starting off in a seemingly supernatural vein but evolving into something altogether different by the end.
It takes a lot for a movie to make me jump in fright, or laugh out loud, but Housebound managed both several times, with effective scares and wonderfully quirky Kiwi humour throughout (best moment: "Jesus!"—trust me, it's hilarious!).
Housebound is half dry-witted comedy and half mystery-horror and Kiwi Gerard Johnstone has one twisted but amusing imagination.If you look up the word Idiosyncratic in the dictionary you will find the movie poster for Housebound.
Housebound is one peculiar oddball of a film that is, among other things, most certainly unique.Hailing from New Zealand, Housebound tells the story of Kylie Bucknell, a hooligan constantly in trouble with the law who is housebound by the courts for her most recent infraction, or as Americans know it as: house arrest.
The chemistry between O'Reilly and Miriam, played by Rima Te Wiata, is uncanny and Te Wiata's Miriam is a delightful nitwit.Thank goodness for the twisted mind of Gerard Johnstone to think up and then execute this ambitious creation whose narrative and plot are superb.Once the film focuses on the mystery of the house occurrences it manages to authentically convey what real life people would naturally think and do under the circumstances.Housebound is a subtly nuanced horror comedy that is uniquely realistic as opposed to the typically outrageous romp that most horror-comedies are nowadays.
Very confused at the high ratings...there is absolutely nothing original about the story and how its directed...it does painstakingly make attempts at humor that truly falls flat mainly because Morgana O'Reilly is just horrible in this mess...as for horror I am not sure what was horrific other than the standard bumps and creaks and noises and doors opening by themselves....If you want to watch a nearly 30 year old Woman chain smoke, act like a 14 year old with a snotty attitude and dark snarky moods employing the F word when challenged....THIS is your movie...there is absolutely nothing interesting about the performances in this movie...there is indeed the odd witty retort coming from Kylie's very fastidious Mother but other than that...there is no real humor and using the last part of the show to get the gratuitous blood scenes in does not a horror movie make....the most interesting aspect of this movie are the rare glimpses of the Kiwi Countryside and I have to admit a New Zealand accent is interesting to listen to.....I watch a lot of classic horror and this is one the most boring and over-hyped I have ever seen...how Peter Jackson approved of this is beyond me...maybe he felt an obligation.....
Its just a good fun, and occasionally slightly scary film, with a cracking script, a cracking cast and satisfying denouement.The first lead actress is how so much attitude, that if I ever happen upon her in real life (unlikely since I don't live anywhere near new zealand) I wouldn't dare ask for her autograph.
"Are you familiar with the term dissociative identity disorder?"After having watched the hilarious New Zealand mockumentry, What We Do in the Shadows, I decided to follow it up with another Kiwi film written and directed by first time director Gerard Johnstone.
Usually when you have a film like this, it is either more concerned in delivering on the comedy or on the horror, but very few times does it actually manage to do so on both ends.
At first you think it's going to be a parody of haunted houses or supernatural horror movies, then it becomes a suspenseful mystery, and it continues to deliver twists up to the very end of the film.
It was hard to like the main character of this film, Kylie, played by Morgana O'Reilly because she was completely into herself and treated her mother horrendously.
I couldn't stop laughing at some of the scenes and really thought about them even after the film ended, but this is no joke this movie definitely has some scary moments.Just watch it and enjoy!!!!.
Not many horror/comedy films that can really scared the hell out of you while leaving you laughed like hell afterward, look no further as Housebound is that kind of film at its best.
Overall, this is such a bloody brilliant horror/comedy film from New Zealand that really brings out the best in both genres it's trying to be and never fails to entertain from the start till finish.
If this is what is termed as a good New Zealand movie, what the heck is a bad one like?!I actually turned this junk off ten minutes from the end because I knew it wasn't going to improve with anything.What a waste of time this was..
The movie shifts between horror and comedy so easily, it's as if Psycho and Home Alone happening at the same time at the same house.
These are not clean cut personalities of usual on-screen haunting victims, at first they might not be likable, but in the end one can't help but to laugh at them or cheer for their potential survival.Story revolves around Kylie Bucknell (Morgana O'Reilly) after she botches a robbery attempt, thus sentenced for house arrest.
It's worth the time to check this one out, I love the main character, she does very good.Don't go into this movie serious but just enjoy and let it flow, no matter the silliness at times.This is definitely a small little unexpected hidden gem, I'm sure many will enjoy if given the chance.This is something fresh and new than the regular movies I have watched.
Housebound deserves it's critical acclaim because it strives to be different, and not only does it do this, it does it well, very well in fact.Housebound is a good film to watch if you are looking for that perfect and effective blend between horror and comedy.
It has a low 2 star rating (as of now) on Netflix for some reason, so I didn't want to waste a perfectly good horror movie night on it given that I get time to watch them (though I love them) so rarely.
For a change, it was nice to see a movie that was not full of plot holes and only once left me wondering what the f*** this character is thinking (and I believe that that scene was supposed to make me feel that way...so another score to the positive in that case).
Giving us, the viewers, all the background we need to start to create a backstory in our minds.The film then follows what seems like a normal haunted house story until it's twisted on its head and we are shown other possibilities (can't really say more without ruining it for you).
This is played on throughout by Gerard, when you think you have worked out what is going on, he throws in another smokescreen, using all the rules of horror to twist it around and then as you start to get on top, he throws in another misdirection with the use of some top comedy to knock you off the scent.It's not a complex story nor does it try to be, it just a fun roller-coaster of a ride through one outrageous situation to another.
We have a rebellious young women, pushover parents, a suspicious neighbor, a man living within the walls of the house, a few twists, genuine scares and laugh out loud moments.The film has very good cinematography and excellent sound effects.
One thing leads to another and before long we learn a strange backstory for the house that includes the murder of a young girl, a strange neighbor and Kylie having to question what she believes about everything.The plot of the story isn't very unique but it has a few laughs and, honesty, the young lady who plays Kylie did such a good job acting out her despicable attitude, she really had me wanting to yank her around a bit.
I watched it because it seemed like it would be a good late night suspense / horror movie.
I enjoyed watching the film(On Netflix), It was a different than the creepy house is haunted type horror that floods the cinemas.
I think that if you are reasonably intelligent and have seen a few horror movies before watching this, you won't experience any real plot surprises.
Of all the movies that are out there on DVD and VOD for Halloween right now, 'Housebound' is really a winner if you are looking for a movie that delivers a good dose of comedy along with some genuine suspense and just enough heart and family drama to make you care about the characters involved and their relationship.The story is about a young delinquent woman who is forced to move back in with her Mom after the court places her under house arrest.
At the same time, she must mend the damaged relationship she has with her mother and family, but all this stuff is done with wonderful subtlety and never weighs the movie down with sappy nonsense.The movie's plot takes some wild twists and turns, some of them coming out of nowhere, but you easily forgive this and some of the movie's other many flaws just because of how much fun the whole thing is.While it does deliver some very genuine moments of creepiness and suspense, this movie is really, at the end of the day, more comedy than horror.
All along the movie is great with a great story line, but the final third is magnificent, I am a big fan of dark humor films, and this one is really a must if you are into this kind of films, for me it really is a modern dark humor masterpiece; a script written beautifully, also very we'll directed, the whole movie is based in the house and it is given a dark ambient that makes the whole situation a lot more scary and overall great acting from it's actors I loved the acting of Morgana O'Reilly (Kylie) and Rima Te Wiata (Kylie's mother Miriam) Again really impressed I loved it don't even hesitate to watch it..
It's always a pleasure to discover good horror-comedy movies.It takes some time for the plot to unfold and might be boring at first, but when the the action begins it is worth it.
It has more funny scenes than your average horror-comedy, and some became instant favorites.Generally: original humor, nice characters, some things are predictable and some are not.If you are a fan of the genre definitely check it out.
So great.Writer-director Gerard Johnstone says, "I wanted to make a horror movie my mother could watch, because the story really is a love letter to her." He succeeded.
After few recommends that I got from my friends to check out this movie, I finally manage to see it."Housebound" starts with troublesome young girl Kylie being arrested and sentenced to nine months of house prison, but things get worse when her house turns out to be haunted by the spirit of the dead girl that was murdered exactly in her room 15 years ago...
Yes, it's suppose to be horror-comedy, but movie doesn't do both really well - it's not particularly "scary" or atmospheric, nor it's very funny (like Evil Dead 2 or Shaun of the Dead) and some jokes fall flat.
It's getting real hard to do this hooptober with some ounces of bad slime that I've been reviewing, this film is a horror comedy which I didn't know going in, I laughed about once so you can tell it didn't achieve it's goal although some people actually like this more power to them I don't see the appeal.
If you don't know or can't decide what genre of film to watch, Housebound is the one, great storyline involving horror, comedy, action, drama, mystery, crime and probably some others too.
The plot is quite good and quite unique for a horror movie and also has some nice twists.Housebound is also decently scary and has some nice funny moments here and there.I think that this movie will keep you interested for its entirety due to its nice combination of mystery,horror and black humor/comedy.
Overall,I think Housebound is a movie worth watching especially if you like horror-mystery movies.You will be positively surprised..
By the way, the movie's genre is comedy/horror, and only New Zealand's movie of that kind I have seen is Peter Jackson's "Dead alive".
I mean how many times have you ever viewed a good natured, engaging and charming comedy/mystery/horror film? |
tt0935075 | Rabbit Hole | Becca and Howie Corbett's four-year-old son Danny is killed in a car accident after he runs out into the street after his dog. Becca wants to give away Danny's clothes, remove Danny's things, and sell their house, but Howie is angry at Becca's elimination of anything that reminds them of their child. Howie also wants to have another child with Becca, but she refuses.
Becca's mother, Nat, has also lost a child—Becca's brother, who died of a drug overdose. Becca states the two deaths are not comparable but eventually realizes their grief is the same in that it will never stop. Becca's sister, Izzy, is pregnant, and Becca keeps giving Izzy advice about becoming a mother, which Izzy resents.
Becca and Howie attend a self-help group, but Becca is irritated by some members of the group, particularly by one couple who attribute their child's death to God's will. Howie continues to attend the meetings without Becca and he and long-time member Gabby start smoking pot in her car before the meetings. They almost begin an affair. However, Howie backs out of it stating he is in love with his wife.
Meanwhile, Becca starts meeting with Jason, the teenaged driver of the car that hit Danny. She discovers he feels guilty and tells him she does not blame him for the accident. Jason tells her about a comic book he is writing called "Rabbit Hole", which is about parallel universes. He brings the book to her at home and as he gives it to Becca, Howie realises who he is and that Becca has been meeting him in secret. Howie is distressed at this revelation and demands that Jason leave immediately. Jason complies but is distraught by Howie's reaction.
Howie and Becca begin to have new activities, such as bowling and playing games and they start to accept their son's death.
Howie and Becca decide to have a garden lunch. The scene begins with Howie telling Becca how the lunch would take place, while simultaneously the screen fades into the lunch as Howie continues to speak in the background. The film ends with Becca and Howie sitting in their garden alone after all their guests have left staring into space. Becca reaches out to Howie and touches his hand. They hold hands affectionately as they continue to sit and stare into space. | tragedy, boring, entertaining, sentimental | train | wikipedia | Aaron Eckhart also gives a terrific performance as the grieving husband and father and, after 'Love Happens', shows that he is back to serious acting as he was in 'The Dark Knight'.The best aspect of Rabbit Hole is how you begin by knowing very little about these characters but end up knowing them as if they were your own neighbors.
The story is about a family, husband (Aaron Eckhart) and wife (Nicole Kidman), that have to deal with the emotional consequences of losing their 4 years old child.
It's a quiet, contemplative film, brimming with sadness and humor, and lead by a wonderful central performance.Nicole Kidman returns to the theme that first brought her to international attention - that of a mother grieving the loss of a child, and the emotional aftermath that such a trauma entails.
This is her most fully-rounded character and detailed performance in years - nimble, layered and completely magnetic.Becca's journey with her husband Howie (Aaron Eckhart), eight months after the tragic accident that killed their son, is beautifully captured by Cameron Mitchell's lens.
This strand of the story, exploring the idea of parallel universes and fate, gives the story a unique edge and Miles Teller is easily the stand out of the supporting cast.Ultimately what gives this film its power is that Mitchell's focus is always fiercely rooted in the reality of the situation, side-stepping the potential sentimentality of the subject - biting humor undercuts the sorrow and there certain moments of confrontation between Becca, Howie and Jason that strike quite a visceral chord.
Everybody, who likes good dramas which are based on a tragic stories and concentrates on the relationships between characters, will fancy this film very much.Aaron Eckhart and Nicole Kidman are a great couple here.
Recently I saw Rabbit Hole, a drama that centers on a married couple that includes Becca (Played by Nicole Kidman), and Howie (Played by Aaron Eckhart), who are going through a tough time.
Still, as thoughtful as the writing and direction may be, the film can't help but feel stagy at points, and a tad distracted.Regardless, I recommend seeing it, if only to behold the performances of Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart.
This is a very emotional movie and you cant helped but be moved by what happens in Becca & Howie's world and the way their relationship unfolds after the death of their son.
Sensitive drama from writer David Lindsay-Abaire, based upon his play, about a benumbed married couple, mourning the death of their little boy, who seek different paths to deal with their grief; the wife forms a tentative friendship with the teenager who hit the child accidentally with his car, while the husband contemplates having an affair.
this film is bold,beautiful,emotional,touching with some excellent performances from Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart.this is one of Nicole's best performances.Also Miles Teller deserves a special mention.he appears in a small part and he has acted well too.Iam sure that this film will definitely win many awards.Allover this film is a beautifully crafted emotional drama.I only wish this film had more running time.Its not just a film.Its an experience I loved it.I give this movie 10/10..
Rabbit Hole is an intense portrayal of the grief and bereavement underwent by a suburban couple, Becca & Howie (Nicole Kidman & Aaron Eckhart), after the sudden and tragic demise of their only child.
The feature is based on a Pulitzer winning play of the same name written by David Lindsay-Abaire and directed by John Cameron Mitchell.The film is backed by incredible acting from Nicole Kidman who starred as Becca, Aaron Eckhart who played Howie and Dianne Wiest who played Nat, Becca's mother.
Rabbit hole definitely belongs here.Becca(Kidman) and Howe( Echkert) play a couple who have lost their young son in a car accident.
Grand performances open a window to people's pain of the hardest kind, and David Lindsay-Abaire's screenplay from his Pulitzer Prize winning play allow for a truer look at events no one is equipped to handle.Eight months after losing their young son Danny in a car crash, Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie (Aaron Eckhart) are past the point of the shock and now are left in a living purgatory of despair.
Fine supporting performances from Diane Wiest as Becca's mother who compares tragedy with the loss of her son and Sandra Oh as a professional wallower at the self help groups Howie and Becca attend, fill out a tough but challenging film that will take you down the rabbit hole."This" will take you down the rabbit hole.John 17:24.
Based on a script by David Lindsay-Abaire from his Pulitzer Prize-winning play of the same name, John Cameron Mitchell's Rabbit Hole depicts the grief of a young couple, Becca (Nicole Kidman) and her husband Howie (Aaron Eckhart) after their four-year old son Danny is killed by a teenage driver when he runs into the street chasing his dog.Though Becca and Howie are materially comfortable and live in an upper class suburban home, they are not spared from tragedy, an equal-opportunity antagonist that does not care about economic circumstances.
I mean, one knows what to expect in a sort of film like this, and while Rabbit Hole is certainly another heavy drama, it still feels rather unique and personally motivated.The screenplay is effective, having strong characterization that is only helped by a strong cast.
this is one the most descent movies I've seen this year so far,Nicole Kidman and Aaron Ekhart performance is top of the line.I saw Shortbus from the directer John Cameron Mitchell 2 years ago and I have to admit that I liked it,so when I had the opportunely to see the Rabbit Hole I grabbed it and believe me I was not disappointed.
the story is bit depressing,the death of a young kid and its effect on a family,and how every things falling apart around them.then the psychological aspect of the bizarre relationship between Kidman and a teenager who supposedly was involved in the child's accident.and the infusion of a comic book (Rabbit hole)into the story that at the beginning seems out of place but fits well at the end and makes sense finally..
Based upon the 2007 play by David Lindsay-Abaire who also provided the screenplay for this translation to the big screen, Rabbit Hole is a one of a kind powerful dramatic piece that owes it to both Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart to play the central characters of Becca and Howie as the married couple coming to grips with the death of their young son.
Directed by John Cameron Mitchell, this snapshot of the couple's life is an examination of how people deal with immense grief, and thankfully isn't plodding on melodrama, but reliant on strong scenes that bring out both the best and worst of human emotions without going overboard.There are many ways in which we deal with grief.
There were moments of unintentional comedy that plays on ambiguity and perception during the part where Aaron Eckhart's Howie hosts a prospective family to whom to sell a house to, and that was as effectively movie yet comical in a bleak manner, ramming home the point that he's perhaps the more sentimental of the couple in finding it difficult to let go.Not willing to be outshone by Aaron Eckhart, Nicole Kidman also puts on an Oscar winning performance as the housewife who had given up her high flying career, and becomes almost like a recluse in not wanting to mix too much with neighbours and friends lest they bring up her deceased kid inadvertently.
There's a mix of emotions that Kidman displays brilliantly through the many subplots her character got involved in, from that with her sister's pregnancy out of wedlock no thanks to her musician boyfriend, and that of stalking her son's killer (Miles Teller), the latter of which subtly begins a healing process that's undoubtedly painful, before finding solace in the difficulties of enacting forgiveness.What also made the film powerful is how restraint it is in telling its story, without finding the urge to want to put everything verbatim on screen.
We don't need to see what happened so much as how the characters deal with it.Although in the beginning Nicole Kidman reveals a little bit of her Australian dialect, the rest of the movie she is believable as an American mother who has lost her son.
Becca needs this as her and her husband Howie (Aaron Eckhart) are continually fighting over keeping memories of their son or getting a fresh start by not clinging to what has gone.The relationship between Becca and her mom Nat (Dianne Wiest) was well-done, as we find out that Nat also lost a child at 30 years of age.
Rabbit Hole (2010) **** (out of 4) Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie (Aaron Eckhart) are a married couple trying to put their lives back together eight months after their 4-year-old child ran out into a road chasing his dog and was struck and killed by a car.
Not all soon-to-be parents would want to watch a film about parents who have to cope with the loss of their four-year-old son.The untimely death affects Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie (Aaron Eckhart) in different ways.
The highlights of "Rabbit Hole" are the truly superb performances from Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart as Becca and Howie, a young couple struggling to put the pieces of their lives and their marriage back together after the death of their young son in a car accident.
Howie begins a friendship with a woman from the "group" that seems to lead him finally to the realization that he needs to save his marriage, while Becca strikes up a bizarre friendship with the teenage driver of the car that struck and killed her son (Jason, played by Miles Teller.) The movie's title is taken from a comic book that Jason is writing called "Rabbit Hole" which deals with the idea of parallel universes, and which seems to comfort Becca by convincing her that somewhere there's a place where she's living a happy life, presumably with her son still alive.This is a heavy movie.
What really makes this movie work, though, are the performances from Kidman and Eckhart, who each manage to portray the numbness their characters are still feeling eight months after their son's death and who lead us convincingly through a series of emotional ups and downs.
What the film does feature, however, are some of the best acting performances you will ever see, as well as a unflinching look at grief and how one couple try to cope with it.For a basic plot summary, "Rabbit Hole" focuses on Becca (Nicole Kidman) & Howie (Aaron Eckhart), a couple who lost their young son in a terrible accident.
The story itself doesn't have many arcs, its unrelentingly gloomy, following a middle class couple 8 months after the death of their young son who was hit by a car while chasing their dog into the street.The grief displayed by Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart is raw and well portrayed in its many forms as the couple shun friends and neighbours while the icy 'Becca' tries to banish memories of her deceased son by disposing of his possessions and Howie lives in the past.
They attend group therapy (together for a while) and Howie befriends the (pot smoking) Sandra Oh. Becca in turn secretly meets with the driver of the car that killed Danny and tries to come to terms with her sisters impending birth and her mothers own loss.This is a couple barely hanging on, its powerful and raw, often painful to watch but worth the effort for the convincing performances.I loved all the leads in this; Sandra Oh, Aaron Eckhart and Nicole Kidman always does a great job.
Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie Corbett (Aaron Eckhart) are holding it together after their son Danny is killed by teen driver Jason (Miles Teller).
John Cameron Mitchell's first actual drama is a well-shot and well-directed adaptation of David Lindsay-Abaire's Pulitzer Prize-winning play (of the same name).Becca (Nicole) and Howie (Aaron) lost their their young 4-year-old son Danny eight months ago in a car accident, and they are still stuck in a maze of guilt, longing, regret, memory, pain, and rage, and a state of meaninglessness.It's mainly the stellar cast which boosts this strong emotional journey with their powerful acting.
However, the are hardly any bright moments and the ending could have different as well.The cast is great and the characters are well elaborated: I liked Nicole Kidman as Becca Corbett, Aaron Eckhart as Howie Corbett, and Dianne Wiest as Nat most; I was less impressed by Tammy Blanchard as Izzy and Miles Teller as Jason (instead of the latter I would have preferred e.g. Logan Lerman or Anton Yelchin).In other words, the movie is primarily watchable due to strong performers, but it is hardly a movie you like to watch repeatedly - although it is short (1h 20 min.).
Kidman plays a mother who had recently lost her 4 year old son in an accident and how she and her husband Howie (Aaron Eckhart) try to move on from the grief.
John Cameron Mitchell's "Rabbit Hole" is a heart-breaking, somewhat depressing film that deals with one of the worst tragedies a couple can face.
KIdman repeatedly plays the fragile, emotive, little girl, self-indulgent, I understand vulnerable.....which often sucks the life out of a simple, intelligent story whatever the cinematic genre.Rabbit Hole is a sad, neurotic movie and all the actors know why they chose this holiday..
The adaptation of David Lindsay-Abaire's play aims to tackles this tough subject in a really well action drama, Rabbit Hole.Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie Corbett (Aaron Eckhart), are a well-off married in Yonkers, New York, who are struggling with the grief after the death of their son eight months ago.
Their marriage is struggling and soon both of them go on their own journeys: Becca starts to follow and befriend the boy, Jason (Miles Teller) who ran over her son and Howie continues with going to group therapy when he starts to get close with another woman, Gabby (Sandra Oh).Rabbit Hole is clearly an actors film and it was clear the characters were what the actors were interested in.
There is a broad theme of moving on for all the characters, Becca and Howie in their problems of their grief and relationship, the relationship between Becca and her mother and Becca's sister Izzy (Tammy Blanchard) is forced to grow up from the woman who gets into bar fights, to someone who has to accept responsible when she finds out she is pregnant.Rabbit Hole is at times an awkward watch and it is hard to call it entertainment.
Rabbit Hole is a movie based on a play by David Lindsay-Abaire, starring Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart it deals with the aftermath of this terrible tragedy.
And it is not useful at all, unless you already know a thing or two about how personal people are when dealing with anything life throws at them.Nicole Kidman, Aaron Eckhart, Miles Teller, Sandra Oh are the pick of the actors for me, but everyone was really immense and if nothing else this film is about great acting..
As a result, scenes that should hit like a gut punch, like one in which Nicole Kidman's brittle, suffocated mother assaults another mom in a grocery store, flit by so quickly and so independently of anything on either side of it, that it carries almost no emotional weight.Despite this, there are scenes that hit home, like a lovely soliloquy in which Dianne Wiest, as Kidman's mom, tells her how the grief over a dead child evolves over time, or the ending, in which Kidman and Aaron Eckhart, as her husband, decide to stop fighting each other and tentatively face a future with a black hole at its center.Mitchell, whose "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" I loved and whose "Shortbus" I very much admired, feels oddly out of touch with the material, as if someone who doesn't at all understand what it would be like to lose a child decided to make a movie about that very thing and could only guess at the emotions involved.I wanted to like "Rabbit Hole" much more than I did.Grade: B.
Fortunately, her role in Rabbit Hole takes the maximum advantage from that talent, and I think that she brings one of the best performances from her career in this film.The only thing I can say against this movie is that a few details from the screenplay could have been better polished.
One of the best responses to parallel universe theory comes from the film Rabbit Hole where Nicole Kidman sighs on a park bench and says, "Somewhere out there I'm having a good time." Becca and Howie (Kidman and Aaron Eckhart) are an affluent Connecticut couple whose four year old son ran out into the street chasing a dog and was hit and killed by a car.
More than being just a mundane drama with a familiar plot Rabbit Hole delivers powerful performances and twists in the story which makes it special.Nicole Kidman is annoyingly yet wonderfully portrays Becca which is a very challenging role in her recent career.
It is so easy to believe and associate with Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie (Aaron Eckhart) making Rabbit Hole so realistic, it's incredible.
After their four year old son dies after getting hit by a car, Becca & Howie (Kidman & Eckhart) try to move on.
But the performance of Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckhart as Becca and Howie Corbett moves past the shock of loss.
Nicole Kidman as Becca wife of Aaron Eckhart's character Howie tries to cope on her own with the accidental loss of her only child.
Becca (Nicole Kidman) and Howie (Aaron Eckhart) are attempting to paste together their lives since the loss 8 months ago of their only child Danny in a freak automobile accident: Danny was chasing his dog into the street and was hit and killed by teenage driver Jason (Miles Teller). |
tt0096477 | Yateem | Story revolves around a police officer who kills a bandit and adopts his orphan son. The boy becomes a police officer and falls in love with the man's daughter Gauri played by Farha. The step-mother who is the police officer's wife falls for khrishna(Sunny). Meanwhile, she is also having an affair with Girivar(Danny). Khrishna rejects the step mother. In anger she tells her husband that Krishna raped her. Shiv Kumar(Inspector) has Krishna thrown into jail. The step mother now arranges for Gauri who is in love with Khrishna to marry Girivar. Khrishna breaks out from jail to prevent this. He crashes the wedding and runs off with Gauri hoping to prove his innocence. | revenge | train | wikipedia | Awesome!!. There has been only three Hindi movies till date which can be categorized as pure Western and Yateem is one of them with Sholay and Dacait being the other two. Released in 1988, Yateem was much ahead of its time and narrated a story which would find few takers in even 2008 i.e. a son and a step-mother relation. Like JP Dutta's other films, cinematography is top notch and could be adjudged as his finest in terms of shot takings. Sunny has given a performance of his life time, which's as good as Ghayal. The Salim Chisti Dargah at Fatehpur Sikri is shot so beautifully, it stays in your mind much after the movie and the Qawalli is brilliant. On the acting front, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Danny, Amrish Puri, Sujata Mehta light up the movie screen when ever they come. For me Yateem is one of the best movies I've ever seen and still watch the re-runs on television when ever I get a chance. Sad, JP Dutta doesn't make these kind of movies now a days but Yateem rocks!!. excellent!. have always been a JP Datta fan! especially his early cinema. one of the few 'orignal' film makers from India. yateem probably has been his best work. strangely neither the media or the box-office saw much in it.see the film for the brilliant characterisations, for the scene constructions, for the cinematography, for the use of a beautiful location (datta always picks stunning locations, has a keen eye for using India well, specially rajasthan. though yateem was shot mostly in Madhya Pradesh and UP.Danny and kulbhushan kharbanda in their best performance ever!(i do tend to be generous, but you have to see the film for yourself!) so is the rest of the cast.the film is a bit long, the revenge could have been 'non-filmi' but then i am nit picking. overall a truly nice film! see it if you like Hindi cinema. A Fantastic Film. The story depicts the plight of an orphan. Sunny Doel and Farha give magnificent performances and have never looked better on screen. Khulbasan as the father delivers his greatest performance. Amrish Puri in a cameo is menacing as is Danny.JP Dutta, the master film maker wonderfully depicts the narration of the story of Krishna and his search for name, destiny, love and revenge.The cinematography is visually stunning, and the score like all his films is haunting.A definite must see for the elite Bollywood fans.. One of the better Sunny Deol films from the 80s. Sunny Deol started his career with the 1983 blockbuster Betaab but success eluded him till his next blockbuster Arjun from 1985 which established him as an action hero. What followed after this were a bunch of hits like Dacait and Yateem supported by super hit Tridev and hit Chaalbaaz. Whereas, other Sunny Deol releases from this time like Manzil Manzil, Zabardast, Soni Mahiwal, Samundar, Sultanat, Savery Vali Gadi were average runners while Sunny was a flop and Vardi was a disaster. It may seem like Sunny Deol didn't have a good 1980s period but those few super hits and blockbusters were enough to establish him as a star.Yateem is one of his better films from the late 80s period, this is the time when Sunny Deol wasn't at his best as the turning point(Ghayal) released in 1990. However, he still managed to get a good amount of hits. Yateem is a simple story of how an orphan gets adopted by a police inspector. However, a rift is created between that police officer and the orphan. The orphan is arrested and lodged in a cell, it is then Sunny escapes prison, runs away with his love and tries to unravel the truth in front of his fathers eyes. How he does this and how he stops the villains forms the crux of the story.The movie is actually good but being a simple and original story of an orphan. Being an orphan's story, he isn't always pushed around and he knows how to fight for his rights which is well shown in the film. However, there is no actual verbal abuse done to him therefore, that part doesn't apply much to the film. The film has been well written and there is a flow. However, as most films the movie slows down and tends to drag and bore in typical style. This means all that crying and that sobbing could have been a bit less used in the film which is what got irritating. But then again, what's a hind movie without typical ingredients like crying? Absolutely nothing is the write answer.Direction by JP Dutta is fab, he handles many scenes properly, he could've dealt with the drag but for the most part, he does a brilliant job. Dutta's films were always original which were the best things about them, there wasn't any copied story with Bollywood nonsense thrown in.Action is good, not many action scenes are in the film which isn't a bad thing as too much mindless action is what mediocre Bollywood movies contain. However, the end where Sunny deol drops picks up the gun and shoots in time to kill Amrish Puri is hilarious and unrealistic.Sunny Deol does a good job as the orphan, he makes everything look real and he doesn't overreact. Farha Naaz looks simple and does a good job as the actress, she is natural. Sujata Mehta simply annoys especially when she pretends to be molested by Sunny Deol(to frame him). Kulbhushan Kharbandra is good, he doesn't overact surprisingly. Amrish Puri and Danny are the villains, they do what is required.On the whole, Yateem isn't a bad film and it works well for the most part. This is one film of Sunny Deol's worth watching from the 80s as it not only contains good performances but good direction. |
tt0083694 | Britannia Hospital | A new wing at Britannia Hospital is to be opened, and the Queen Mother – referred to as HRH – is due to arrive. The administrator of the hospital, Potter (Leonard Rossiter), is confronted with demonstrators protesting against an African dictator who is a VIP patient, striking ancillary workers (opposed to the exotic gastronomic demands of the hospital's private patients) and a less-than-cooperative Professor Millar (Graham Crowden), the head of the new wing. Rather than cancel the royal visit, Potter decides to go out and reason with the protestors. He strikes a deal with the protest leader — the private patients of Britannia Hospital are to be ejected and, in return, the protestors allow a number of ambulances into the hospital. However, unbeknown to the protestors, these ambulances actually contain the Queen Mother and her entourage.
Mick Travis (Malcolm McDowell) is a reporter who is shooting a clandestine documentary about the hospital and its dubious practices. He manages to get inside and starts to investigate Millar's sinister scientific experimentation, including the murder of a patient, Macready (Alan Bates). As mayhem ensues outside, Travis is also murdered and his head used as part of a grim Frankenstein-like experiment which goes hideously wrong.
Eventually, the protestors break into the hospital and attempt to disrupt Millar's presentation of his Genesis Project, in which he claims he has perfected mankind. In front of the assembled audience of Royalty and commoners, Genesis is revealed — a brain wired to machinery. Genesis is given a chance to speak and, in a robotic voice, utters the "What a piece of work is a man" speech from Hamlet, until it continuously repeats the line "How like a God". | psychedelic, comedy, satire, murder | train | wikipedia | This film completes the Mick Travis trilogy, of which the first two installments are if
(1968) and O Lucky Man (1973).
This would be Anderson's Playtime, in that, much like Hulot in Playtime, Mick Travis (Malcolm McDowell) becomes just one of a million different characters.
Calling Britannia Hospital Anderson's Playtime oversells the film, unfortunately.
The film would probably benefit if I were to watch all three installments in a row, because there are apparently a lot of characters that are shared between them (I only recognized Mick Travis and Professor Millar; it's been over two years since I've seen the other films).
After satirising Britain's education system in 'If....' and the British justice system in 'O Lucky Man!', Lindsay Anderson takes a look at the health care system in this final part of his trilogy with Malcolm McDowell.
It is not as effectively dramatic as 'If....', nor is it as delightfully whimsical as 'O Lucky Man!', but even if slightly inferior, this is a good film in itself, full of fascinating ideas and colourful characters.
Britannia Hospital, an allegory for what was transpiring in England at the time, was released in 1982, and is the final part of Lindsay Anderson's brilliant lose trilogy of films that follow the adventures of Mick Travis as he travels through a strange and sometimes surreal Britain.
(1968) to his journey from coffee salesman to film star in O Lucky Man (1972), Travis' adventures finally come to an end in Britannia Hospital which sees Mick as an investigative reporter investigating the bizarre activities of Professor Miller, played by the always interesting Graham Crowden, whom he had had a run in with in O Lucky Man. Checkout the Pig Man scene (This is well before Seinfeld.)As is usual with an Anderson film the acting, by a top notch cast, most of whom had been in the previous two, is uniformly good.
Some of the characters from If...., that didn't turn up in O Lucky Man, returned for Britannia Hospital.
Askwith handles his role with skill, making Keating quite a likable character.Over the years Britannia Hospital, as with the other two, has been revaluated and is now considered another classic from the Anderson stable.
Whilst there is a riotous strike going on outside the hospital there is weirdness going on inside, as an eccentric doctor performs some truly sadistic acts on his patients to fulfill his own ambitions.Its full of faces any 30-plus British audience will recognise, and if you're an Orbital fan you'll love the speech at the end which they sampled for Snivilisation.A cult black comedy, with some quite horrific bits in, its quintessentially British, but definitely not in the vain the Full Monty or Four Wedding (thank god!)..
Anderson has created his own little universe with his Mick Travis Trilogy and expect the unexpected when watching this film.Overall, I say it was a good watch.
Britannia Hospital brilliantly mixes the macabre, the comic, and the profound with beautiful imagery, wonderful production design, and Lindsay Anderson's astute sense of direction.
The writing is flawless, the characters are flawless, the story is engrossing and the film is in my humble opinion the second best work of arguably the greatest director and visionary in British cinema history.
Anderson's dark satire on politics within a hospital (perhaps after the apocalypse) falls slightly flat only for those familiar with the 2 exceptional films that this one is ostensibly a sequel to.
Britannia Hospital: A Lindsay Anderson film which succinctly portrays some glaring deficiencies of British health care system..
It can be anybody's wild guess that most viewers would bring to their minds a sick nation which needs to be urgently cured come what may whenever they hear about a film with a wacky title-"Britannia Hospital".
However, one has to bear in mind that "Britannia Hospital" is no ordinary infirmary as it is infested with numerous dubious characters intent on getting their personal agendas furthered at a time when the eponymous health establishment is getting all spruced up to celebrate its 500th anniversary.
One can thus watch with customary mirth a scientist determined to produce the best brain in the world, an hospital official who would like to instruct its staff about the right manners in which British queen must be received, a reckless reporter who would like to stealthily film irregularities of an hospital etc.
A long time before Romanian director Cristi Puiu burst on international scene with his absurd tale set in a Bucharest hospital, The Death of Mr. Lazarescu (2005), Lindsay Anderson-one of British cinema's greatest auteur had already made one of the best satires in the history of British cinema.
Upon its release in 1982, a horrible time for Britain, this Lindsay Anderson film was butchered beyond recognition by some vested interests of British press.
Lindsay Anderson was several years ago one of my favourite directors and then, 5 years ago, I thought that this film is possible his best.
Since then I saw again Britannia Hospital at least five times - and it didn't worked always - in contrast Anderson's If..., which is better and better with every watching.
However, Britannia Hospital is still a very good film, but its content maybe too disturbing for a lot of viewers.
Although Lindsay Anderson's satire is focused on Britannia Hospital, where the most of the plot plays, this parabolic form is about the whole world: from the poor people to the rich, from the caretaker to the mad scientist.
Britannia Hospital is full of moments of horror and black comedy (namely its subplot is parody/paraphraze of Frankenstein-story), but its strongest parts are when its laughing (or crying) on the figures of government and other leaders (the master of BH, the main strikers, even the Queen).
BRITANNIA HOSPITAL (Lindsay Anderson, 1982) ***.
[1973], all directed by Anderson, written by David Sherwin and starring Malcolm McDowell as Travis) and the only one I hadn't watched before; ironically, the film made it to DVD before the others which are still M.I.A.
Actually, it comes off as quite underrated and its satire on British society at large - with the titular hospital serving more or less as a microcosm of all that was not well with the country during the early 80s - is just as harsh, if admittedly somewhat hit-and-miss (the "Frankenstein" scenes, for instance, and the fact that royal representatives are played by a midget and a man in drag are more tasteless than anything else!).
Still, it's very funny - for those who can take its unbridled savagery - along the way and the cast is brimming with talented character actors (Leonard Rossiter, Graham Crowden, Joan Plowright, Jill Bennett, Peter Jeffrey, Brian Pettifer, Dandy Nichols, Richard Griffiths, Brian Glover, Robbie Coltrane, uncredited bits by Alan Bates and Arthur Lowe, and even unlikely appearances - in fairly important roles - by Robin Askwith and Mark Hamill!), many of whom had already appeared in the two earlier Mick Travis films.
"Britannia Hospital" was not exhibited (although advertised) in Panamá in 1982, so I didn't have a chance to see the last part of the Mick Travis trilogy, created by Lindsay Anderson and David Sherwin.
In the early 1990's I found a video copy of the film, but not until now have I seated to watch the film, after enjoying two Ealing comedies ("Kind Hearts and Coronets" and "The Man In the White Suit") that surprised me one more time for the pleasant way that social and political issues are usually treated in British cinema.
(MILD SPOILERS) Social issues are all over "Britannia Hospital", the most saddening conclusion I have ever seen of a character, though luckily not affecting the admiration I have for the two previous films.
"if...." (1968) introduced Mick (Malcolm McDowell) as a rebel in a public school; in "O Lucky Man" (1973) he was a young man seeking a job in the capitalist world, and in this final appearance, Mick has returned from the USA and apparently works as a spy -with a mini video camera- for an American TV station (represented by Mark Hamill, completely stoned inside a mobile unit) in the coverage of the anniversary of Britannia Hospital (metaphor of the United Kingdom) and the launching of a sinister Frankenstein-type project, while the workers are on strike, militants demand the exit of an African dictator from the hospital, with his wives, children and staff, and Her Royal Highness is on her way to the festivities.
In the previous films, there were elements of fantasy handled beautifully, even in a poetic way, but this time writer David Sherwin turned the story into a Stuart Gordon fest, which Anderson relished with a scene right out of "Re-Animator".
Britannia Hospital stands for Britain and the problems in it, including bowing down to corrupt dictators, allowing monstrous experiments, easily-swayed union-leaders, cradling the rich and just general madness.The film does not do as well as the last two as it seems rushed, you don't go as deep as you would like and the black humour and satire is unsubtle, obvious and boring quite frankly.Mick Travis is not given enough time as he should have been other than being turned into a Frankenstein creation and dying.
Probably to continue the sequels.The good points of the film include the acting and the cinematography, by far the best scenes were the ones including Graham Crowdan as the mad doctor.The ending may have prevented this being a bad movie in general, as it eloquently notes by a brain that when man tries to be God, the result can be indescribable.
There is no solution to this problem we have as the brain says and thus sums up the whole trilogy's message and Lindsay Anderson's view on the human race.But other than that, he took a huge nose dive compared to his other two masterpieces and he really didn't need to feel that he had to make a sequel to "O Lucky Man!" as it said pretty much everything this did and better..
Throwing stones at people may catch peoples attention but it's almost certainly not going to make you friends or further your career; a shame that young, talented director Linday Anderson never realized this, and that "Britannia Hospital" virtually obliterated his livelihood.For many viewers – especially those English viewers being stereotypically depicted – the film was too vitriolic to be truly funny.
is one of my favourite films and within that film Malcolm McDowell is Mick Travis, as good a character as Alex De Large (Clockwork Orange) and one which he makes his own.
It was a very important British film and is one of a few classics from the sixties (Saturday Night Sunday Morning, Loneliness of the long distance Runner, Billy Liar etc).Next came O Lucky Man, with Travis out of school and working as a coffee salesman.
I also think this film is very important with a extremely gifted cast including Arthur Lowe in several roles and Graham Crowden as a mad experimenting doctor.
The music by Alan Price greatly contributes to the film (lesser so Price's attempt to act!).Finally, the 80's and Britannia Hospital.
The major characters, bar Graham Crowden have little to do (McDowell, Rossiter, Hamill,) and i found myself feeling no empathy for anyone.
The pickets and protesters were annoying but were outdone by the upper class visitors to the hospital and as for Mick Travis, an ignoble end.
The idea that the Queen would be allowed to visit the hospital in such inhospitable(pardon the pun) times is ludicrous etc etc.But perhaps i am being to empirical about the film, what of the satire?
and O Lucky Man and if you are satisfied with the ending to the latter film, leave it at that..
I just wanted to correct a few things said already.Lindsay Anderson has stated (often) that the Mick Travis in each of the films is a different one.
School rebel (If...) and coffee salesman (O Lucky Man) Mick Travis is back, this time as a reporter checking out a government funded hospital which is about to receive a Royal visit from the Queen Mother.
The picture painted of UK society here is grim and mean and there is less of the cheeky fun of O Lucky Man here, making the film more successful as satire but less so as madcap comedy, although that is clearly it is clearly intended as both.
Worth a look for fans of O Lucky Man and social satire movies in general.
As a black comedy taking major swipes at the state of Britain's National Health Service, BRITANNIA HOSPITAL is a one of a kind film.
and O LUCKY MAN!, although it's nothing like those films, but it does feature Malcolm McDowell in a supporting role.The film is difficult to define and difficult to describe as well.
Meanwhile, an all-star British cast - including the likes of Graham Crowden, Leonard Rossiter, Robin Askwith, and Fulton Mackay - help breathe life into the thing and make it entertaining.
I've never seen a less convincing affair-de-coeur, Carry-on films included.Now, that would be an idea for a subtle satire: "Carry On Anderson".
you want to stay a Lucky Man, don't enter Britannia Hospital.
After I saw during the last week the first ("If...", 1968) and the final ("Britannia Hospital", 1982) films of Lindsay Anderson's satirical Mick Travis trilogy, I realized the whole scope and magnitude of his vision.
In his three films ("O Lucky Man", 1973, is a middle chapter), he had covered all aspects, politics, and institutions of British Society from 1968 to 1982 with its complex system of class and caste differences and privileges, including its public schools, its international politics, its law system, and its health care system, and he found out that something was rotten in the British Kingdom.
The third and final chapter of the trilogy, takes place almost entirely in the Britannia Hospital, one of the oldest and most respectable English medical centers in London that celebrates its 500th anniversary and expects the Queen Mother herself to attend.
Our old friend, Mick "Lucky Man" Travis (Malcolm McDowell) who had become investigative reporter arrives with his crew to cover the celebration but accidentally he becomes a witness and then an unwilling participant in the sinister human experiments that are conducted by Professor Millar.
Well, Mick is just about to find out if that is true.Very clever, very British, filled equally with dry humor and horrifying shocking sequences, "Britannia Hospital" ends the trilogy with the bang.
After all, Mick may not be a lucky man but we are the lucky viewers that have been following him on his crazy and unforgettable journey where Lindsay Anderson sent us..
I've been wanting to see this, the last part of the "Mick Travis" (Malcolm McDowell) trilogy, for over a decade, and not sure why I waited until now.
It's fitting, and not really surprising, that Travis should die as he attempts to report on the goings-on of mad scientist Professor Millar (Graham Crowden, in the most entertaining performance in the film), but what is surprising is how bland and dull his character is, how meaningless his end as he becomes something of a Frankenstein creature.
'If....' and 'O Lucky Man' were the extremely compelling first two instalments of the 'Mick Travis' trilogy, directed by Lindsay Anderson, and starring Malcolm McDowell as the eponymous hero.
Mad-as-a-March-Hare Professor Millar ( Graham Crowden, reprising his role from 'O Lucky Man' ) is conducting Frankenstein-style medical experiments.With the Winter of Discontent ( an industrial dispute that affected the entire country for several weeks in early 1979 ) still fresh in people's memories, David Sherwin's script has a lot to say on the so-called decline of Britain.
The Boulting Brothers' 'I'm All Right Jack' also made fun of trade unions, while Robin Askwith's ( how shocking must it have been then to see him in a movie where he kept his clothes on ) militant shop steward is not far removed from the Kenneth Cope character in 'Carry On At Your Convenience' ( 1971 )Leonard Rossiter amuses as the harassed 'Potter', and Anderson's stamp is on it, but for me this is an unfortunate end to the 'Mick Travis' series.
Mark Hamill ( yes, old 'Luke Skywalker' himself ) plays a pot-smoking member of Travis' television team.Like 'If....', the film ends in violent fashion as the protesters and the strikers smash through the gates and invade the hospital.
Not for the first time and almost certainly not the last I find that I have apparently been watching a different film to the majority of people who have posted comments here, all seemingly fully paid-up members of the Lindsay Anderson For President club.
Lindsay Anderson's best film by far in my opinion, this is a delightful social satire – but not for the thin-skinned, I might add – brilliantly played by an expertly chosen cast, led by Norman Rossiter.
This is a brief review of "If", "This Sporting Life", "Britannia Hospital" and "O, Lucky Man!", four films by director Lindsay Anderson.One of the defining films of the British New Wave, "Sporting Life" revolves around Frank Machin (Richard Harris), a short tempered guy who becomes a star on the rugby circuit.
He, like many Hollywood directors of the 1970s, essentially takes the sexy blood/violence of the European realists and new wavers, and then drops all political context.Scorsese has never spoken of "This Sporting Life", but in the late 1970s he did mention to David Sherwin that the name of his central character in "Taxi Driver", Travis Bickle, had been chosen as a homage to Mick Travis, Malcolm McDowell's character in Lindsay Anderson's "If".
He'd develop this style further in "Hotel Britannia" and "O, Lucky Man!", both of which feature the Mick Travis character.
Attempting to portray life in a capitalist society dominated by powerful mega corporations, "O, Lucky Man!" (1973) was the more popular of the two films.
The film's release coincided with the "Falklands War", and so was sunk by a rise in nationalistic fervour."This Sporting Life" – 8.5/10, "If" – 8.5/10, "O, Lucky Man!" – 7.5/10, "Britannia Hospital" – 7/10 |
tt0100046 | The Long Walk Home | The film was expanded as a feature.
Set in Montgomery, Alabama, United States, during the 1955 Montgomery Bus Boycott, it features Whoopi Goldberg as Odessa Cotter, an African-American woman who works as a maid/nanny for Miriam Thompson, a well-to-do white woman played by Sissy Spacek. Odessa and her family confront typical issues faced by African Americans in the South at the time: poverty, racism, segregation, and violence. The black community has begun a widespread boycott of the city-owned buses to end segregation; Odessa takes on a long walk both ways to work.
Miriam Thompson offers to give her a ride two days a week to ensure she gets to work on time and to lessen the fatigue her “long walk home” is causing. Around the city, some informal carpools and other systems are starting, but most of the blacks walk to work.
As the boycott continues, tensions rise in the city. Blacks had been the majority riders on the city-owned buses, and the system is suffering financially. Miriam's decision to support Odessa by giving her a ride becomes an issue with her husband, Norman Thompson (Dwight Schultz), and other prominent members of the white community who want the boycott to end. Miriam has to choose between what she believes is right or succumb to pressure from her husband and friends.
After a fight with her husband, Miriam decides to follow her heart. She becomes involved in a carpool group to help other black workers like Odessa. In the film's final scene, Miriam and her daughter Mary Catherine (Lexi Randall), who is the narrator of the story in flashback, join Odessa and the other protesters in standing against oppression. | violence | train | wikipedia | I saw this film by chance, was flipping through the movie channels one day and the description of it appealed to me.
Goldberg is absolutely superb in this powerful film showing what it was like for black people at that time in Montgomery, Alabama.
The real life, 1955, bus boycott in Montgomery, Alabama provides the backdrop for this fictional story about an upper middle class white homemaker named Miriam Thompson (Sissy Spacek) who gradually becomes disenchanted with racial segregation.
Her changed attitude comes about as a direct result of her Black maid, a woman of deep moral principles named Odessa Cotter (Whoopi Goldberg).Odessa normally would take the bus to work.
But she supports the boycott, and therefore chooses to walk the long distance from her shabby house to the manicured, suburban Thompson home.
Yet, despite several incidences wherein Southern whites display their hatred of the boycott and of Blacks in general, Odessa, with the support of her own family and her religious faith, maintains a respectful and thoughtful attitude toward Miriam and the Thompson family.
The story is told in retrospect, from the viewpoint of Miriam's daughter, Mary Catherine (Lexi Randall), who was seven years old at the time.There is nothing subtle about this slow paced story.
Whoopi Goldberg in particular gives a great performance, along with the always reliable Sissy Spacek.
"We're Marching To Zion" not only is a great gospel hymn; it's also the film's theme.Technically well made, "The Long Walk Home" has value mostly as historical perspective on an important contemporary social issue.
Though I feel this one is.I felt that Whoopi Goldberg and Sissy Spacek were the cornerstones of the film and deepened the work by providing three dimensional characters that had more to do than just worry about a cause.
They had lives to lead and families to raise and the film focuses on their daily living and how they lived it with this larger situation going on around them.This choice of direction brings us into the story much quicker because it focuses on the people and the impact the situation has on them.What stays with me is the subtlety and how small gestures can have a great impact.My favorite movies are about people.
This movie kept me interested.I bought this film on clearance and when I saw the $7.99 price tag I thought to myself - 'This is worth so much more' And it is!.
My teacher showed this film to us, and it excited me at first, 'cause I've always thought Whoopi Goldberg was awesome and I've always enjoyed her films.
My teacher showed the film in 40 minutes intervals, as this how long each class period is and we were always stuck in our seats after the bell rang, wanting to watch more.
Excellent way to introduce the Civil Right Movement to people to young to remember those days..
I think she was at the point of resentment and though my parents didn't like segregation my cousins and aunts and uncles thought it was the only acceptable way.
I find in sharing this movie with younger people today they are shocked at the behavior at the party and in the park.
Whoopie Goldberg got gypped in 1990, when she was nominated for, and won Best SUPPORTING actress for the movie "Ghost".
the film is a triumph of spirit and emotionally challenging to watch at times.
Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg are excellent in The Long Walk Home.
Taking place during the bus boycott of 1955 in Montgomery, Alabama, maid Odessa Cotter (Whoopi Goldberg) resolves to walk but her employer Miriam Thompson (Sissy Spacek) decides to drive her for at least a couple of days of the week to her house.
I mean, the way Miriam's husband Norman (Dwight Schultz) and his younger brother Tunker (Dylan Baker) felt threatened by the whole thing makes one wonder.
What gives one hope is not only the way Miriam and Odessa communicate with each other, but also the way the narration of the grown Thompson daughter Mary Catherine (voice of Mary Steenburgen, Lexi Randall as a child) assures us how poignantly inspiring the whole time was.
This movie is riveting...it is a classic docudrama (fiction mixed with fact) and, as I titled my commentary, "we are there." First there are two Oscar-winning actresses (Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg) and a versatile actor (Dwight Schultz of "The A-Team" proving there's life after that cult series).
The gradual mixture of fact (Rosa Parks, Dr. Martin Luther King, the boycott, etc.) mixed with fiction (the bonding between the two women, the way the wife stands up to the husband, etc.) makes this the quintessential docudrama...recommended (required?) viewing for anyone who went through that era!!
"The Long Walk Home" (1990): Sissy Spacek, Whoopi Goldberg, Dwight Schultz, Ving Rhames, and Dylan Baker star in this story about the 1955 Montgomery Alabama bus strike.
"The Long Walk Home" brings history back to life in reasonable and wonderfully detailed way.
Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg put on spectacular performances in this story of the relationship between an affluent woman and her maid in Montgomery, Alabama, during the bus boycott.
There's no glossing over the rabid racism of many of the people in Montgomery, some of whom believe the Civil Rights Movement to be a commie plot.There's a scene where we hear a suggestion that there might one day be a black person in a position of power.
Movies like "The Long Walk Home" will remain relevant as long as these problems continue.
I recommend the movie both as a look at the events of the era, and as a look at how these women of different socioeconomic backgrounds turned out to have more in common than they realized.Definitely worth seeing.
Watch for an early appearance by Ving Rhames (Marcellus in "Pulp Fiction") as Whoopi Goldberg's husband..
I was born in the fifties and I was a few years younger than Mary Catherine, but I remember vividly the hatred directed at black people.
I thought this movie accurately portrayed the irrational hatred toward the black race.The acting was superb.
This movie is truly inspirational and gives African Americans a sense of pride over how much people are willing to fight for their rights.the movie is played by actress Whoopi Goldberg but throughout the movie is known as Odessa carter she played the role with not only talent but is an icon to all those who can't stand up for themselves.this movie creates a sense of reality on the cold hard truth during this time and how serve African Americans were treated.
This movie makes people see how tough life was and instead of sugarcoat ting it or trying to play off such a controversial issue they display it for the world to see which is why I liked this movie so much..
Great movie to watch in light of the Paula Deen scandal!.
Watch this great movie in order to see how the word is so hurtful and scathing.
Both Whoopi Goldberg and Sissy Spacek are beautiful in this film.
The circumstances of this film happened not that long ago; but so many of us don't realize what it's like to not be able to sit where you want on the bus, or to drink from whatever fountain you please (fountains are dirty anyway!
Please watch this movie so that you can have more compassion for people, no matter what their background!.
Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg both give excellent performances - especially Sissy.
I was shocked at the facts displayed at the end of the movie, though I do remember reading of or watching the news about such things occurring a few years later.
A very good film and worth watching..
Blacks in the South during the 1950s start a strife-riddled boycott against the transit system after Rosa Parks is disciplined for not giving up her seat to a white person on the bus.
The white folk are all nasty bigots, except maid Whoopi Goldberg's proprietress--a saintly Sissy Spacek--who takes up the black community's cause.
While slightly outdated by today's movie terms, the film was well put together and gathered a plethora of feelings and issues that surrounded the black community during the time period.
The actors chosen (especially Goldberg and Spacek) did their jobs extremely well, and the movie contained the subtle comparison of black families to white ones.The film's plot, set during a Montgomery bus boycott led by none other then Martin Luther King Jr himself, is historically accurate and emotionally involving--at the end of the film the audience find themselves angry and confused and relieved all at the same time.
Overall, the movie, though not merited much by action scenes or intensely dramatic turbulence, is definitely worth seeing..
In eighth grade, my history teacher showed us a movie called "The Long Walk Home".
Usually, movies in history class could put you right to sleep.
It was an amazing movie that really helped us better understand what life was like during the bus boycott.
This movie really helped me understand a different time period.
When the bell rang to go to next period, most of the class stayed and lingered a few minutes to catch the end of the movie.
The long walk home (1990) is one of the most powerful films I've ever seen.
Whoopi Goldberg and Sissy Spacek are amazing here and why neither of them get nominated for academy awards or golden globes I'll never know.
Spacek plays a white housewife in 1950s Montgomery Alabama who has an African American maid (Whoopi Goldberg) that she begins to drive to work during the bus boycott.
I think the film holds up pretty well, as I doubt my hometown of Montgomery has changed in the years since.
Couple of things I notice, when her family gifts Odessa with a coat, it looks a lot like her old one and when the Cosby Show's Erika Alexander tries to escape rape in a park, she's taller than they are and maybe even than the black man who saves her.
After watching the Long Walk Home for the first time, I began a search to buy it for my personal collection.
I use this movie every year after the unit on the Civil Rights Movement.
regardless of the number of blisters on the feet or how early the walk had to begin.I am a big fan of Whoopi's, and while they did not seem to be two of her more popular movies, The Long Walk Home and Sarafina were two of her best.
While I was out on disability, my movie, The Long Walk Home, disappeared.
I Think Everyone Should Watch this Movie.
So many movies about the history of civil rights make everything so big and dramatic.
This movie shows how a person can wake up to the world around them and change.
I watched the movie "The Long Walk Home" in a class of mine.
At first I thought how boring this movie was going to be, but as I watched I found myself getting quite disgusted with how people acted.
After watching this movie I give more respect to African Americans then I had before.
It wasn't right for black people, to be treated, because they're different.
Whoopi Goldberg pulls off another amazing character with this film, she keeps you in full cycle of her role all the way through.I saw this movie on a movie channel today after been sick off work, it really got me hooked and gave me a good insight of what life was like back then and the big difference of white/black people.
I have always been bought up in mixed society and looked at everyone the same but to see this movie and see how people were treated was a real shock to the system.Direction/acting was all spot on and you really do feel for the cast in a lot of the scenes.Probably would not recommend this film to everyone, however i would class it as a worth see if you flick past it on the TV..
I don't how people could tolerate such brutality and quasi-fascism like Whoopi Goldberg's character had done in the movie.
In the Long Walk Home, you can feel the hell of the Black residents especially the maids and midwives right down to their aching feet.
You sense the burning hatred of white community ready to counteract the issue of Civil Rights and the bus boycott during Christmas dinner where the senior Mrs. Thompson clearly spewed her bigoted opinion at the table and at the very end of film not only that you felt like you were one of the protesters there on the scene, being taunted and insulted.
Spacek's character shows a glimmering sense of naiveté, intelligence, a sense of hope and influence that the resistance to segregation had on a growing number of whites at that time.
It's sad to see only the younger Mrs. Thompson and her daughter the only non-racist white people in the entire movie who bothered to question the segregationists.
Sometimes movies like these are too brutal for the senses.
Therefore, why couldn't the director add a little sour cream into this 7-alarm chili by adding a scene in which Mrs. Thompson is not the only non-racist by have other women and children explain why they do the racist taunts and bullying because they if they don't join in the bullying "festivities" then they'll become targets/victims just like Mrs. Thompson and the Cotters.The characters for the most part were very convincing three-dimensional people, not stereotypes, clichés, thrown into the mix to inform the audience: "You are in 1950's Alabama!" The dialog has a tendency to punch your face and grab hold while doing so, refusing to be politically correct and soothing.
This movie makes shocks you, intrigues, and makes you angry at all almost every other white person in the film.
Aside from "The Color Purple",this is one of Whoopi Goldbergs finest movies.She certainly should have gotten an Oscar for this role (which would have made more sense to me than winning from her smaller role in "Ghost").
That is where I saw this in 1991 and it was "the" best movie I saw in that kind of theatre (until Ray in Feb. 2005).The story of how Goldberg's character has to walk many miles from her home to her housekeeper's job across town,speaks volumes on how the times were in 1950s south.
Nearly 100 years after the civil-war had liberated them,blacks were still treated as second or third rate citizens.I agree this is a great movie for kids learning about the downsides in our country's history,as well as the positives.
Despite being one of a hundred or so black civil rights movements movies, I think this one did well in a few points that others like it have not.
The true story civil rights movement genre is prone to a lot of problems with being biased, unrealistic, and overly dramatic.
It isn't perfect, but there isn't too much to improve on.The primary thing that sets this apart from other black history movies is that it's character driven rather than event driven.
This was main thing that made this movie good instead of great for me, because the whole climatic scene felt pretty clichéd.
I know that it would have been a big deal and involved a lot of courage, but it still turned me off a bit.The two main characters are Odessa Cotter, the black maid, and her white employer Miriam Thompson.
Odessa joins the boycott by walking to work every day and doesn't go through any change, but remains a solid and believable character.
The way Miriam and Norman are written are what really set this movie apart for me.
I had kind of been thinking that the southern white population of the time would have a bigger reason for segregation than blind racism, and Miriam and Norman provided the answer.
Neither of them are really racist, but Norman's fear of the general white population pressures him into joining the anti-black movement.
I thought that was great, not only because it made for better characters, but also because it showed the white population's faults without completely demonizing them.
I don't know how historically accurate it was, but I doubt there are any inaccuracies that will make people mad.The movie doesn't make any huge anti-racism statements.
That said, I think most American's can agree that racial equality has and is becoming more prevalent.So if you want a civil rights movie, I would recommend this more highly than most.
The Long Walk Home is a movie principally geared for those who want to see a perspective of US history in the mid 19950s whereby Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat.
Yet, it takes the time to work out the characters' thoughts and feeling about the bus issue.
The movie held my attention and truly discusses differing viewpoints of the time.
Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg are always good to watch, together awesome.
Sissy Spacek and Whoopi Goldberg are always good to watch, together awesome.
I didn't live in Montgomery, Alabama, in 1955
.didn't know about the bus boycott at the time.
Shame on most of the white folks who are accurately portrayed in "The Long Walk Home," the racist citizens who complained at their dinner parties that "the ni__ers don't want to work" while their black maids were serving dinner.
And much too tardy and much too inadequate praise for the other white folks who are accurately portrayed, the ones who felt the injustice, a little bit or a lot, that framed their everyday lives, living with their black neighbors in Montgomery.
Good message, but not too realistic from a white 1950s housewife in Montgomery, Alabama.
But Sissy is the other strong character—Sissy is on the right side of the bus boycott, and she sticks her neck out a lot more than Whoopi's maid character does. |
tt0050903 | The River's Edge | The movie opens with a boy, Tim, throwing a doll into the water from a bridge. He hears a yell, and sees Samson/John sitting on the shore. The boy pedals off, and Samson smokes a cigarette by the naked corpse of Jamie. Samson leaves in a daze, and Tim spots him at a convenience store. While Samson haggles with the clerk because he has no ID to purchase beer, Tim steals two beers and leaves them for Samson. Tim asks Samson for dope, and gets in Samson's car. They drive to Feck's place for marijuana, but he's not home.
As Tim returns home, his brother Matt is arguing with his mother. His little sister Kim wants Matt's help for a funeral for her lost doll, and we learn that the family is dysfunctional. Layne arrives to pick up Matt, and Tim asks to come along. Layne refuses, and Tim bicycles off, despite his mother's complaint. Layne and Matt arrive at Feck's house, where Feck is playing saxophone for an inflatable doll. Layne gets marijuana from Feck, and Feck talks about the girl he had to kill. At school, Layne and Matt smoke pot with Clarissa, Maggie, and Tony. Samson/John arrives and takes them to see Jamie's body. Matt is nervous and leaves, and Layne starts planning how to get alibis.
Mr. Burkewaite teaches his class about radicals, and Clarissa flirts with him. The murder story starts to spread, and Layne tries to borrow Mike's truck. Mike refuses, but is willing to drive. They see the body, and Layne tells them to help bury her. No one is willing to help, including John. Clarissa is uncomfortable with the secret, but Layne threatens her. She's too scared to call the police, and later calls Matt, but Matt is too shy to talk. That night, Layne rolls Jamie's body into the river. John buys him beer, but doesn't seem to care that Layne is trying to protect him. At John's house, they see police cars. Layne panics, but John is calm. They go to Feck for help, and Layne leaves John with him. Feck recognizes a kindred spirit, and they begin to talk.
Matt brings detective Bennett to the place where the body was, and the cops fish her out of the river. Bennett grills Matt about the murder. Matt's mother picks him up from the police station, and he gets in a fight with her boyfriend Jim. Tim appears, and Matt chases him. Tim threatens Matt with telling Layne about Clarissa's phone call, and Matt hits him. Tim runs off, and meets up with his friend Moko. They borrow his father's car and head to Feck's.
Layne, Clarissa and Matt go to Tony's house to extract his confession, but Tony's father drives them off with a shotgun. Layne gets annoyed and kicks Clarissa out of his car. Matt gets out and walks with her On the way, they stop at the convenience store and bump into John and Feck, buying beer. Layne arrives at Feck's, and Tim/Moko hide. After Layne leaves, Tim and Moko enter and search for Feck's gun, but find his stash of marijuana instead. They get wasted at Feck's. Meanwhile, John and Feck break into a store and steal ammo. Matt confesses to Clarissa that he told the cops about Jamie. They begin to make out. John and Feck wind up at the river's edge, and John starts messing with Feck's doll. Feck realizes John is crazy, and tries to calm him down. John starts firing Feck's gun, and brags about his murder. Matt hears the gunshots, but doesn't stop making love to Clarissa. They fall asleep in the park.
Layne is cruising around, looking for John and popping pills. Feck muses about getting old, then fires a shot. When he comes home, Tim and Moko attack him and take his gun. In the morning, the police find Layne, passed out in his car, and take him to the station for questioning. Matt returns home, and his mother screams that she's leaving her kids. Reporters interview kids at the school, and Bennett questions Layne. In class, Burkewaite rails about morality, and that no one cares about Jamie. Clarissa is distraught. Tim watches Matt and Clarissa, holding Feck's gun. Layne calls Feck, and the police break in on Feck, so Layne hangs up. The kids go to the river's edge to skip school, and Matt sees Feck's doll in the river. Layne arrives and tries to attack Mike again. Matt intervenes and tells Layne that he turned John in. Layne runs off, then finds John, dead. Tim shows up and tries to shoot Matt for hitting him, but Matt talks him out of it. The police arrive and cart everyone off.
At the end, Feck is in the hospital, confessing to his original murder and to killing John. Later, at Jamie's funeral, the kids finally show emotion. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0050882 | Raintree County | In 1859, idealist John Wickliff Shawnessey (Montgomery Clift), a resident of Raintree County, Indiana, is distracted from his high school sweetheart Nell Gaither (Eva Marie Saint) by Susanna Drake (Elizabeth Taylor), a rich New Orleans girl. He has a brief and passionate affair with Susanna while she is visiting. Following her return to the South, she comes back to Indiana to tell Shawnessey she is pregnant with his child. John marries her out of honor and duty, leaving Nell heartbroken.
They move south to live with Susanna's family. He learns that Susanna's mother went insane and died in a suspicious fire, along with Susanna's father and a female slave implied as being the father's concubine. Susanna suspects that the slave may have been her biological mother. Gradually Susanna appears to be suffering from mental illness. She tells John that she faked pregnancy to trick him into marriage.
An abolitionist in the South, Shawnessey cannot fit in and they return to Freehaven in Raintree County before the outbreak of the Civil War. John works as a teacher and they have a child, Jimmy, born at the outbreak of the war. In the war's third year, Susanna develops severe paranoia and delusions. She flees Indiana with Jimmy and seeks refuge among her extended family in Georgia.
Shawnessey is determined to find her and recover his son. He enlists in the Union Army in hopes of encountering his wife and child. After fighting in terrible battles, he finds Jimmy at an old plantation and learns that Susanna has been placed in an insane asylum. He is wounded while carrying Jimmy back to Northern lines, and is discharged from the Union Army. Johnny searches for Susanna, finding her kept in terrible conditions at the asylum. He brings her back with him to Raintree County.
After the end of the war and President Abraham Lincoln's assassination, Shawnessey considers his future. Nell urges him to run for political office. Recognizing that Nell and John still love each other, Susanna sacrifices herself and deludedly enters the nearby swamp in the middle of the night to find the legendary raintree. Four-year-old Jimmy follows her. The search party eventually finds her body. John and Nell find Jimmy asleep and carry him out of the swamp, failing to see the tall raintree glowing in the sunlight. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | "Raintree" had a $5 million budget, the highest of any American film up to that time, so it was up to Schary to solve problems on the set or behind the scenes before they happened.Schary left the meetings believing Clift was sincere in his desire to straighten up and behave himself.
Greater than his pain had been the fear that his career was over.Montgomery Clift returned to work on "Raintree County" knowing that the picture was no better than when he left.
He returned knowing that audiences would come to see it to play a ghoulish game: they would try to spot him "before" and "after." He returned to the production numbed and dulled by painkillers and alcohol.Despite his horrific ordeal, despite the liquor and the pills that eased his pain and enabled him to complete the picture, I still believe Montgomery Clift's performance of Johnny Shawnessy to be one of his best.Clift had an unusual voice and unorthodox phrasing.
That summer of 1958, I sneaked into the Forest Park Drive-In to see Elizabeth Taylor, of whom I knew little, other than that she was a breath-taking beauty, and had been recently widowed when Michael Todd's chartered plane had crashed.The characters in the movie (when I was 15) were literal, if not visceral: the magnificence of Miss Taylor's satin gowns encased over crinoline, Lee Marvin's sharp, smart-alecky wit, the professor's lechery, Montgomery Clift's Yankee stoicism, Agnes Moorehead's curious detachment, were all primary colors.
Montgomery Clift's character is now a beautifully controlled young man who reflects his parents' stoicism, a young man whose intelligence and self control are at the core of the film, and upon whom all characters revolve.Originally, I thought that "Raintree County" was strictly Taylor's vehicle.
She is the burr under the saddle, the exquisite seductress that interfers with Clift's heretofore regulated, almost predestined lifestyle upon his college graduation.'Raintree' is an achingly beautiful film, and Miss Taylor, who is the most gifted in her portrayal of anguished characters, blesses the movie.
Liz is a disturbed New Orleans belle with a vision that she's part black
She's the beautiful femme fatale to Eva Marie Saint's inevitable cowardly heroine
As in "A Place in the Sun," Liz is used as the symbol of a particular social class and a particular kind of woman
She sets her mark on an idealistic young man John Wickliff Shawnessy (Montgomery Clift) who's looking for the mythical rain tree that contains the secret of the meaning of life
Trapping him into marriage with the lie that she's pregnant, and then proceeding to lose her hold on her sanity, Susanna detains the good and helpless John for eight years
He is released, able to return to his magnificent dream and to his pure childhood sweetheart, only after tragic events
Retaining the essence of Ross Lockridge, Jr. best-seller, the movie states the equality of the unhappy romance with the Civil War: the personal drama is therefore a reflection of the nation's wounds
According to the top-heavy symbolism, Susanna Drake represents the South, corrupting and dragging down the North; she's the Body contaminating the poet's Soul
Taylor plays Susanna Drake's character with an intensity that exceeds all her earlier work
Montgomery Clift as the unlucky poet and Eva Marie Saint as his high school sweetheart and true love are on the remote side, but the scenes with Liz strike fire in a wonderfully brilliant way
With its battles and its formal balls, its magnificent riverboats and decayed mansions, its bordellos and madhouses, its childbirth and deathbed scenes, and its evacuation of Atlanta, Edward Dmytryk's "Raintree County," like its source, has undeniable epic dimension.
Raintree County, MGM's attempt to make a picture that would faintly remind audiences of Gone With the Wind, did have two things in common with the earlier film: Technicolor and length.
Apparently, studio executives didn't see a problem with this, even though Johnny Shawnessy is continuously front and center in a film that originally ran for almost three hours, as it does again in the restored video version.Clift, one of the most gifted American film actors of the twentieth century, knew he was prostituting himself by appearing in Raintree.
Watch him as a clueless wannabe in a wonderful film like Pocket Money to see what he can do with a great comic role.) We watch as Lee challenges Monty first to a race (lots of grotesquely exaggerated, manly calisthenics at the starting line), then to see who can out-drink the other, while a dozen equally buffoonish male extras shout and yell on cue.
Happily for us, Patrick steals all of his scenes, impatiently bellowing at or comically insulting his young charges and generally pumping some desperately needed fire and energy into the film.After a very long time, something of major interest finally occurs: Elizabeth Taylor makes her entrance.
Idealistic Montgomery Clift (as John Shawnessy) is distracted by buxom Southern belle Elizabeth Taylor (as Susanna Drake), and marries her instead of pretty sweetheart Eva Marie Saint (as Nell Gaither).
Of course, Clift is on the winning side of the war - but, his personal search for happiness, in an Eden called "Raintree County", is a more difficult path to manage...Clearly, MGM was hoping for something approaching "Gone with the Wind" - and, they failed.
Viewing will require some degree of commitment, though; it's a long movie.Early in the filming, Clift left a visit with friends at Taylor's home, and drove his car into a telephone pole.
The eventual toll on his "looks" was mainly taken by a growing dependence on alcohol and painkillers.Taylor, who is credited with saving Clift's life, shows some of the sparkle that would quickly make her one of the best actresses in the business, especially during the film's second half.
And, Nat King Cole sings the Johnny Green title song, a minor hit, very sweetly.****** Raintree County (10/4/57) Edward Dmytryk ~ Montgomery Clift, Elizabeth Taylor, Eva Marie Saint.
Other comments on this site tell the sad story of miscasting, a seemingly unfocused script, apparently disinterested direction and the obvious tragedy of Montgomery Clift's catastrophic automobile accident during production and its effect on all the performances he was to give thereafter.Elizabeth Taylor is about the only central player who emerges relatively unscathed and her Academy Award nomination was deserved (and certainly more worthy of the Oscar she did win for "BUtterfield 8".)I bought reserved seat tickets for this before its initial engagement began and the reviewers' generally negative appraisals were available.
Not the costumes, the scenery, the pallid performances--the wooden behavior of Montgomery Clift--the syrupy Southern accent affected by Elizabeth Taylor--the pale performance of Eva Marie Saint.
And that end takes an excessively long time in coming without providing enough interesting plot ideas to keep one interested or even caring about the fate of these colorless characters.An awful bore--so bad that the only compliment I can give the film is its rich musical score by Johnny Green and the title tune which is sung by Nat King Cole with an attractive choral arrangement as backup.
It also lacked emotional intensity and the storyline was telegraphed far in advance, not what you would expect from Dmytryk, the director of `The Caine Mutiny'.I understand Montgomery Clift (John Shawnessy) had a disfiguring accident during filming and thus he can be forgiven for looking a bit wooden in some scenes.
Lee Marvin and Rod Taylor both have parts as eager young men (which they were at the time) and are reasonably convincing, and the British actor Nigel Patrick has a good turn as one of those charismatic/charlatan `professors' who seem to inhabit 19th century American literature.The civil war and the battle against slavery get some screentime here, but the underlying theme is Shawnessy's search for personal meaning, for the Raintree of life.
Ross Lockridge, the original author, a resident of Indiana where most of the movie is set (though not filmed), wrote this single best seller before committing suicide in 1948, and was thus not around to tell the filmmakers what he intended, but Dmytryk at least seemed to realize the story was a rather personal one.
This soap opera really sprawls over the years before and after the Civil War. Montgomery Clift is a quiet homegrown college graduate in mutual love with pretty young Eva Marie Saint.
His quest for perfection became an obsession, and while it proved a asset to his film work, it rendered disaster to his private life.It seems, according to Bosworth, the man was unhappy most of the time.It's downright weird watching Clift in "Raintree County," in which his pre- and post-facial surgery persona appears unexpectedly in juxtaposed scenes.
For example, he might leave a scene with "wife" Elizabeth Taylor with his pre-accident face, then seconds later he's there with "old sweetheart" Eva Marie Saint in his post-accident countenance.
That's exactly what proceeds to transpire in the movie.This film is long on intention and short on realization, at the same time having a production design, costuming and sets that are quite professionally executed.As for "Clift" as subject, it is "natural" material for a biopic, as much as if not more compelling than that of a "counterpart," Rock Hudson.
Sprawling MGM production (the studio's attempt to outdo their own "Gone With the Wind"), based on Ross Lockridge Jr.'s book and featuring Elizabeth Taylor as a southern belle haunted by a family trauma.
Montgomery Clift plays an Indiana schoolteacher who chances to meets belle Taylor in his beloved Raintree County, leading to a pre-marital affair (and pregnancy); they marry, but he finds living in her neck of the woods undesirable, and she's not welcomed graciously among the Yankees.
Far too long and predictable, "Raintree County" still isn't bad, with terrific cinematography by Robert Surtees and a sumptuous, Oscar-nominated background score by Johnny Green.
I caught this film while watching TCM and in keeping with the analogy of the opening paragraph, I wish I had thrown it back.Raintree County is the story of an idealistic school teacher (Clift) and his decade long romance with high school sweetheart, Susanna a mentally unstable southern belle played by Elizabeth Taylor in full Mommie Dearest (1981) mode.
Bred from a well-to-do family in the plantation south, Susanna can't help but fall in love with Clift's rather plain John Shawnessy and shuttles up to Raintree County in Indiana just before he onset of the war.
The only real stand out really is Nigel Patrick whose roguish school master seems to have come out of a Neil Simon play just to slap the cardboard around.Raintree County is a perfect example of an old film that should be forgotten despite its caliber as Oscar-bait before there was such a thing.
Especially when dealing with the Civil War. I was born and raised in the South, but all my parents' relatives come from Indiana, so it was interesting to see a film centered in that part of the country.My biggest impression of this film is the beauty of the scenery, costumes, sets and the quality of the cinematography.
I found the sub-plot of the Professor wanting to pursue one of his young, but already married students, a little disturbing.In terms of the cast, Clift plays his part quite well - especially in light of the tragic accident that happened while filming.
I think a stand out performance is given by the bit part played by Lee Marvin as "Flash", the guy who challenges Clift to the race.I think perhaps the novel was just too big and complex to try to cut down to right the length for a movie, without harming the story or running too long.
Eva Marie Saint brings loveliness and dignity to a somewhat underwritten role, and the natural-born scene stealer Nigel Patrick (in a Golden Globe-nominated performance) is great fun as a school professor who is ahead of his time.
Considering the cast and that it is thought as having similarities with Gone With the Wind, Raintree County really did have potential to be a great film.
Raintree County is a wonderful-looking film, the photography has that epic sweep and the costumes and sets are sumptuous and colourful(just look at Elizabeth Taylor's gowns here).
Many people have savaged this film over the years, but like 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof' I have to watch 'Raintree County' every time it is on TCM.Considering the tragic accident that happened to Cliff during the filming, I am always in wonder that director Edward Dmytryk was able to make a film that holds together so well.
It's always nice to know when costars actually get along during the filming, so that gives all three of their movies an added bonus since they were lifelong friends.Raintree County was intended to repeat the glory of Gone with the Wind, but it ended up being a huge disappointment when comparing it to one of the universal favorite films of all time.
Elizabeth Taylor was cast as the Scarlett O'Hara type, a shallow, flirtatious Southern belle, and Eva Marie Saint played the meek Melanie character.
The film is perhaps best remembered for the car accident that disfigured Clift's good looks and shortened his career and life.
Such things happen a lot with really good books that get hacked up for the movie- like Hemingway's "Farewell To Arms." Still, it tries hard to capture the symbolism of the raintree, and by the way, the swamp did exist in the 1860's, though now it is just rich Indiana farmland.I give the movie the best review I can: I watch it every time it is on (I first saw the film late at night, in black and white, on TV).
So, having rewatched it again, this time on TCM, I find that it's truly a fantastic movie...great actors, particularly Montgomery Clift who was seriously injured during its filming in an off-set automobile accident -- the resulting injuries serving to affect his remaining life in a negative way.
Raintree County (1957) *** (out of 4) Northerner John Shawnessy (Montgomery Clift) is about to marry his sweetheart (Eva Marie Saint) and start his life as a teacher but he then meets Southern belle Susanna Drake (Elizabeth Taylor) who tricks him into marriage.
Once Clift is tricked into marriage the film really begins to focus in on Taylor and her mental illness, which plays a rather big part in the movie but it's also rather sloppy in a few scenes including one after the war when she's in a mental hospital and is visited by Clift and then the next time we see her it's as if nothing had happened.
The start of the film eats up much of the nearly three-hour running time and with the majority of the story taking place pre-war you wonder if the second half took the cuts.
Montgomery Cliff plays the role as John Shawnessy who is a graduating student who is a poet and teacher in Raintree County and he has a sweetheart named Nell Gasther, (Eva Marie Saint) who grew up together.
When MGM filmed Raintree County it had high hopes that it would be a second Gone With The Wind.
He's a sensitive soul with deep abolitionist convictions and no one was a more sensitive soul on the screen than Montgomery Clift.If all had gone well, Monty would have probably married the girl from home played by Eva Marie Saint.
Raintree County should be seen for that alone.Eva Marie Saint as the good girl from home does all right, but her character just doesn't have the depth that Liz's and Monty's do.
Eva Marie Saint plays the ultra-nice but rather bland sweetheart of Montgomery Clift when the movie begins.
The story opens in 1859, in rural Indiana, as John and Nell (Montgomery Clift, Eva Marie Saint) are graduating from school.
Though they've been in love for years, John is bewitched by the beautiful newcomer, Susanna (Elizabeth Taylor), a high-strung and unstable young woman.This 1957 film is an obvious attempt to match the grandeur of "Gone With the Wind" and it fails miserably.
Raintree County (1957): Starring Montgomery Clift, Elizabeth Taylor, Eva Marie Saint, Rod Taylor, Nigel Patrick, Myrna Hansen, Lee Marvin, Agnes Moorehead, Jarma Lewis, John Eldredge, Rosalind Hayes, Isabel Cooley, Walter Abel, Tom Drake, Rhys Williams, Russell Collins, DeForest Kelley, Ruth Attaway, Don Burnett, Oliver Blake, Michael Dante, Michael Dugan, Jack Daly, Dorothy Granger, James Griffith, Stacy Harris, Frank Millss, Bill Walker, Milicent Patrick, Robert Stevenson, Eileen Stevens....Director Edward Dmytyk...Screenplay Millard Kaufman.Based on the once popular novel by Ross Lockbridge Jr, director Edward Dmytryk's 1957 film "Raintree County" was MGM's attempt to create a lush epic picture about the Civil War which would equal or rival David O.
Shot in beautiful Technicolor, shot on beautiful locations in Indiana, Louisiana and a few Civil War sites, starring Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor and a cast of multiple, colorful characters, this film didn't stand a chance against the immortal success of "Gone With The Wind".
Both Clift and Taylor have good chemistry as the romantic pair who should, by the standards of the day, have nothing to do with each other; for one's from the North and the other from the South.Monty Clift portrays John Shawnessy, born in the enchanting Raintree County, a graduate and idealist/abolitionist with hopes of becoming a great writer.
Although upon graduation from Professor Jerusalem Webster's class in 1859, Jon hoped to marry his home-grown sweetheart Nel Gaither (Eva Marie Saint), along comes the new girl in town, a flirty and charming Louisiana-born Southern belle Susannah Drake (Liz Taylor) who steals John's heart.
I realize that Clift had a real-life trauma during the time of the movie's filming.
"Murder, My Sweet" director Edward Dmytryk's "Raintree County" is a tragic love story set against the American Civil War. Everything about this prestigious MGM production had tragedy attached to it.
Montgomery Clift plays Johnny, a sensitive school teacher in antebellum Indiana, Raintree County.
Johnny is in love with Nell (Eva Marie Saint) until southern belle Susanna (Liz Taylor) shows up to settle some estate matters. |
tt0103793 | Benny's Video | The film opens with a home video of the slaughter with a captive bolt pistol of a pig on a European farm. The video rewinds to play the slaughter in slow motion, which emphasizes the hand-held barrel against the pig's fore-skull and the cartridge explosion. A party centered on a game called Pilot and Passengers is broken up by Georg and Anna, when they return home while the party is in progress. The host of the party, Eva, is their daughter who lives in another part of town and who has, it turns out in questioning of Benny after the incident, taken advantage of the planned absence of Georg and Anna to host the impromptu party in their home. While watching a newscast, Georg and Anna discuss the money Eva won in the pyramid scheme she was promoting at the party. In a locker room at school, Benny encourages his friends to take positions in his own Pilot and Passengers game.
While his parents are away for the weekend, Benny invites a girl (Ingrid Stassner) he has seen outside the local video store to his home. He shows her the video of the pig slaughter, and they talk about the film. She: "Did you make this film? How was it, with the pig? I mean, have you ever seen a dead person--a real one, I mean?" Benny: "No. I once saw a TV program about the tricks they use in action films. It's all ketchup and plastic," and then he unveils and loads the slaughtering gun. He holds it against his chest, and dares the girl to discharge it. When she refuses, he calls her a coward (Feigling!). He holds it against her chest, and when he hesitates, she calls him a Feigling also. He fires the gun, and she falls. Her falling reveals a video monitor, on which we see her crawling away from Benny and completely out of frame, Benny running to reload the gun and returning to shoot her a second time, the girl crawling back partially into frame, Benny again reloading and firing, this time apparently at her head, and, finally, her body remaining still.
During a choir practice of the Bach motet "Trotz dem alten Drachen," Benny completes his pyramid scheme. Then at home again, with the weekend begun, Benny first covers the body, goes through her school bag, arranges an evening out with friends, eats snacks, moves the girl's body to a closet, and cleans up the blood. Some of the cleanup is seen through a video monitor, while Benny edits a video of the experience. Benny goes out to a dance club and stays overnight at his friend's home, and, on his way home, goes to a cinema, window shops, and gets his hair shorn to the scalp.
After his parents return, his father harangues Benny about his haircut, asking if Benny had any thought about how others would react to him now. Later on, while the family is watching the news in Benny's room, Benny switches the signal to the video he has made, to the game of dares and the ensuing three shots. Benny reveals the body in his closet, and Georg removes the videotape, asks if anyone else knows about this, and through careful grilling finds that there are no witnesses.
Clearly disturbed, the father and mother leave Benny's room, and Benny asks that the door be left open. In the living room, Georg lists—rather dispassionately—the options they have: either to alert the authorities, with a resulting judgment of parental neglect and placement of their son in a psychiatric institution, or to destroy the evidence. Anna urges—with understated passion after warnings from Georg not to fall apart—that any option chosen must be carefully followed to its end.
Anna takes Benny on vacation to Egypt, and the ever-present video camera captures them both in their hotel, in the village, touring ancient tombs, watching sail-gliders at the beach, even a private moment of Anna in the bathroom. There are several phone calls from a booth in the post office, with Benny and Anna separately taking the phone. Benny seems barely affected by any recent past, and he seems unable to fathom why his mother breaks down in sobs at one point during the vacation. When they return home after six days, the apartment is clean of any trace of the girl. Georg, who had stayed at home, succeeded in cutting the body into small enough pieces to be flushed down the toilet or otherwise inconspicuously removed. That evening, Georg asks Benny "Why did you do it?" and the reply is, "I don't know. ...I wanted to see what it's like, possibly." Benny has no answer to Georg's question, "And what was it like?"
On video, we see another Pilot and Passengers party, this time being hosted by Georg and Anna. In "life," we see Anna and Georg at a concert of the choir Benny is in. The choir sings: "Despite the ancient dragon, despite the gaping jaws of death, despite the constant fear, let the world rage and toss. I stand here and sing in perfect calm." On video, we see from the door of Benny's darkened bedroom, standing slightly ajar, and we hear faint voices discussing what to do. In life, a voice-over asks, "Why did you come to us now?" We see Benny being interviewed by policemen, and he answers merely, "Because." With no following questions, Benny asks, "Can I go now?" After the questioning, Benny meets Georg and Anna in the hall and, after a long moment, says merely, "Entschuldigung." (Excuse me, as it is used to apologize for brushing by a stranger in a crowded location.) | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | While I didn't enjoy Benny's Video as much as Funny Games on the whole, it is an overall more shocking film due to the youth of its main character and the matter-of-fact way that the story is presented.
It's not long before the slaughter gun is being put to use again, and the murder of the girl is caught on Benny's video camera.On the one hand, this is a dark and gritty portrayal of a situation that no one would want to be in, and at its strong points; Benny's Video is an emotionally involving and even tormenting film.
The best scene in the movie sees Benny's parents discussing what they do, and if the entire movie was as good as that scene; Haneke would have had a masterpiece on his hands.
Michael Haneke's direction is very 'no frills', as while he uses tricks such as cutting the film with video camera footage, it's all done very calmly...which ultimately benefits the film, as the sober atmosphere really allows the audience to be dragged in.
Overall, as mentioned; the film isn't as easy to get on with as the later 'Funny Games', but Benny's Video will no doubt appeal to those who enjoy dark and challenging films..
The central idea of Benny's Video is whether people in western society have become so desensitised to images of violence in film and the media that they become capable of committing acts of murder themselves.
Benny lives in an enclosed world of technology where he watches violent films and news feeds; it feels he was living a life that many others now do in the internet age.
Not that I personally think that the viewing of violent films makes a person violent themselves, I think the seed is in an individual irrespective of this but perhaps even Haneke thinks this too, as its quite obvious that Benny's parents are capable of repulsive acts while devoid of emotion.
Michael Haneke 's "Benny 's video" is one of the most terrifying movies ever made.The link between it and "der Siebente Kontinent" is obvious:the latter ends with an empty TV screen.The 1992 effort is another way of tackling total destruction.Resuming a subject which a lot of directors have already broached -incommunicability between a teenager and his folks-,Haneke pushes it to its absolute limits :particularly if you do not know Haneke at all,you will not believe your eyes.SPOILERS In this work,there's before and after.So harsh is Haneke's screenplay ,so incredibly devoid of humanity are his characters that the viewer is left panting for breath.
Benny films a lot a things ,his bedroom is full of TV screens -we could draw a parallel between "Benny" and the "Peeping Tom" s hero,whose apartment was full of screens as well;and although the latter was an English movie,the male lead,Karl Boehm ,was Austrian too.But Haneke 's got his own way to hoe ,so he does not stop here and goes where nobody dares.After murdering a girl (a senseless crime),Benny seems almost indifferent.By chance,the parents watch the horrible thing that happened on the video:a close shot of Angela Winkler shows her distraught face and her moist eyes.Then expect the unexpected:the parents want to conceal everything and to pick up the pieces as if nothing has occurred.
The movie does not lose steam towards the end ,as an user claims:the trip to Egypt ,with its trite and amateurish -Benny's camera?- sequences,the mother enjoying an ice cream or relaxing at the swimming-pool or these exotic landscapes, just highlights the bourgeoisie's selfishness ,pushing people out of their way,in a way only Bunuel dared.A legend (or is it Stephan Zweig?)tells that Vienna is ,par excellence , the capital of the blues and they say suicide rate is higher there than anywhere in Europa.At any rate,Austria has found a director who ,like Ozon in France,Dardenne in Belgium or Amenabar in Spain is making the most modern inventive European cinema..
Haneke wants to make discussions, and don't really care if he is controversial or even disgust people watching his films.Benny is a loner of a 14 year old boy, using so much time in his own room watching violent videos as well as making his own videos with his Video8 camera.
During a trip to the video store Benny meets a girl of his own age, and invites her home, to show her a video h has made about a pig being shot with a slaughter gun.
Arno Frisch is brilliantly portraying young Benny, as a boy who has lost his way due to some reason or another.After viewing this film the first time, back in 1993, we had one of the greatest discussions I ever experienced after a film.
The second film from the Austrian auteur Michael Haneke, Benny's Video is another look at the director's vision of our modern world and the societal problems he sees as rife within it.Benny's Video shows us a short period in the life of the eponymous character.
What follows is Haneke's take on the accustomisation of mankind to horrendous violence and the true capability of human cruelty.In many ways, not least of all Haneke's direct statement, Benny's Video acts as a spiritual successor to the earlier Der Siebente Kontinent, tackling much of the same thematic material and issues of morality.
Strong support comes from Angela Winkler and Ulrich Mühe as the parents, protective but no less horrified as we.Dark, disturbing and engaging, in Benny's Video Haneke again shows us the flaws of our species, effectively having us question what we never thought to before.
In a confusing blend of film and video images, Haneke creates a second level of reality, so to speak, where Benny's senseless "act" perfectly integrates in the horror pictures of the evening news and makes it open for question.
'Benny's Video' is a genuinely unsettling film whose premise concerns a scene that is particularly disturbing and visceral.
This film could have been compressed into a lot shorter of a movie and come off as a way better performance but as it was I just can't say i enjoyed it overall.I was glad when it was over, it had great promise and I can see why people enjoyed it but personally for myself I just couldn't take it.
I never have seen a scene like the senseless death of the young girl, which happens in this movie; Haneke almost shows nothing but it is the most heart-breakening situation I've ever watched in a movie although I'm really not inexperienced in touching as well as violence presenting movies!Nothing for tender-hearted characters!!!.
For the past thirteen years it has been impossible to get anything other than a crappy VHS copy of Michael Haneke's brilliant and disturbing "Benny's Video".
He doesn't even look outside, but has a camera set up to play a constant, live "view" of the outside world on one of his TVs.The plot essentially takes off when Benny invites a young girl (and possible love interest) back to his parents house while they are away."Benny's Video" is one of the great commentaries on violence in the media and social apathy.
Benny's Video is an early film from one of the juggernauts of modern european cinema, Michael Haneke, and it contains many familiar director-trademarks.
Benny's Video shows a maladjusted 14-year-old boy whose bedroom looks more like a television studio with cameras scattered about catching every possible angle both inside of his room and out.
When he acts out this fantasy on an unsuspecting girl his age, the audience is left shocked by his parent's decision to cover-up Benny's crime, leaving us to wonder how isolated the entire family is from the world in which they live.Michael Haneke makes a frank commentary through Benny's Video about the constant media reporting of violent images and how such reporting leaves the audience desensitized to those images.
Haneke was judicious to see that a 24-hour news cycle brought with it an oversaturation of violence leaving people unable to empathize with those they see through a screen, as they are constantly replaced by the next barrage of victims.In addition to the assessment on violent imagery, Benny's Video also delivers a heavy critique of the economic system, as well.
Just as in his debut feature, Haneke criticizes money and the value placed upon it as he shows Benny, who obviously belongs to a wealthy family, and the flippant way he spends whatever money he comes into.
All the rest is useless crap: a cup of coffee on a table filmed for about 10 seconds, 2 full minutes of annoying arabian music with mother and son on the bed without uttering a word, long, unbearably long scenes where NOTHING at all happens, unexisting dialogue, unexpressive characters, everything about this movie is pure bore, tedium, humdrum.The twist end doesn't save the failure of what could have been a good story, if only it were brought on film in a different way.
Benny's Video was the fifth Haneke's creation I watched after "The piano teacher", "Funny games", "The hour of the wolf" and "Cache".
It is strong,allegorical,cynical and plain.With an actor's expression or line it offers you many thoughts and directions.This movie made me understand why Haneke refuses to comment on the meaning of his films.You have to try and play his game.To decode his pictures and words which isn't so hard, trust me.The ending is also powerful and summarizes the whole picture.It was one of the best films I have ever seen.It is amazingly coordinated with our times even though it was filmed about 15 years ago.
I thought that Bennys Video was quite a disturbed film, and violent at times.
Bennys Mother (Angela Winkler) seems to only be available to fill the fridge with microwaveable food, Bennys parents spend much time away leaving Benny on his own which the young boy fills with watching a documentary film he made of a pig being slaughtered beginning with being shot in the head with a butchers gun.
Benny shows the girl the butchers gun that he stole when he made the video of the pig slaughter.
If you watched John McNaughton's "Henry" before, "Benny's Video" will disturb you as no other movie did before!
There's not that much explicit violence in "Benny's Video" but the true horror comes from the devilish appearance of the boy that lets Damien look like Bugs Bunny.
In order to escape the complete alienation from his wealthy family,14 year-old Benny finds an emotional substitute in the world of video.Anything recorded on videotape is inherently better and more real than what he can see with his naked eyes.Barely noticed by his professional parents,he spends most of his time either viewing wild and violent films or looking at the view outside his bedroom window through his video camera.Gradually,without the people around him noticing,his values and his sense of reality begin to change.One weekend,on a whim,he invites a girl of about his age over.His parents have gone to the country and he has the house himself.What begins as innocent,young love soon turns into a tragedy.He first let the young girl watch a home video he made of a pig being butchered.To show her how a slaughter-house pistol works he wounds her badly.When she screams,he kills her in front of his relentless video camera lens...In the second part of his trilogy,Haneke analyses the terror brought about by human,coldness and the normal morality of a bourgeois family,with his unique chilling,almost clinical cinematic approach..
Michael Haneke is dealing a important issue here as a teenager boy Benny watches violent films and murders a girl at the same age as a result.
Haneke's very realistic directing works well and the scene where Benny kills the girl is shown through a video screen is very effective.
Haneke tries to show here how Benny's parents tries to handle the situation after Benny has shown them the video where the killing happens.
Characters don't show any motions here (except in one scene on the end where Benny's mother breaks) and while it is parentally meant to be that way it's also a problem of the film.
Many scenes are shot through Benny's video camera and i think Haneke is trying to take the viewer into Benny's mind but he does not succeed there either.
Anyone that's seen any of Haneke's work knows that he typically leans towards confrontational and controversial subject matter, and BENNY'S VIDEO is no different.
When an "accident" in the apartment (which is inadvertently caught on Benny's video-camera)leaves the girl dead - Benny is at a loss for how to handle the situation - and decides to play the tape back for his parents to try to find a resolution to the situation.
Benny's mother and father then have a discussion as to how to handle the problem, and come up with a "solution" that may turn out to either save or destroy their family...Again, BENNY'S VIDEO didn't turn out to be quite the film that I expected it to be.
From what I had read, I thought that Benny (played by the same smarmy little bastard that played Paul in Haneke's FUNNY GAMES - though a few years younger in this film) was going to be some video-obsessed, anti-social nerd and that his family would be some sort of borderline-abusive emotional automatons - but that's really not the case here.
I think that the conversation that Benny's mother and father had after being made aware of the death of the girl held a lot of "truth" as to what lengths people will go to to protect themselves and their family, and Haneke's film shows one family's path in protecting themselves.
I won't say that I necessarily agree or disagree with the decision that Benny's parents made - but I can understand them "covering" for him as much as I could understand if they had turned him in.Technically, the film is good on all ends - the acting is all believable and strong, and the cinematography is appropriately "cold" and somewhat voyeuristic (as is necessary given the subject-matter).
My main gripe was with Benny's "change of heart" at the end - I feel personally that the film would have been stronger had the family just gotten on with their lives as though nothing happened.
Like FUNNY GAMES, I didn't find BENNY'S VIDEO particularly "disturbing" like many others apparently do - I found it to be a strong portrayal of cause-and-effect, actions-and-consequences, and a "case-study" of one family dealing with an "unfixable" situation.
Personally, I found FUNNY GAMES to revel more in it's "mean-spiritedness", where as BENNY'S VIDEO was a much more "realistic" film.
Michael Haneke's Benny's Video is a film with a lot to say.
The film is about a young boy named Benny who has an obsession with videos and violence.
Benny throughout the film continues to watch this video along with news clips of war and violent movies.
The film progresses as Benny meets a young girl at the video store and takes her to his home while his parents are away.
Instead Benny takes this as an opportunity to use the bolt pistol that he stole after he filmed the pig slaughter to kill the young girl.
Benny and his mother then go on holiday to the Red Sea, where Benny films everything.The films pans out to its end matter-of-factly with the family going off to bury the girl's body and Haneke makes a bold and sweeping statement simply by having us watching them through the bank of monitors that show what all the surveillance cameras dotted about the house show.Though Benny's Video was made exactly 20 years ago, it still is as important and pertinent now as it was then.
In "Benny's Video" director Michael Haneke argues about our hunger for violence, a hunger that seem to be everywhere, it follows us all the time and we can't deny our impression with it (that's why violent films are more popular than artistic films).
It's present in the films Benny rents, on the news he watches with his parents, everywhere.
And we could say that he could go on killing more people given the fact his parents haven't turned him to the police but he saw that what he did was too much.Played by an always impressive Arno Frisch (way before of making of us his accomplices with his disturbing and violent experiences in "Funny Games"), Benny is quite a figure and his deadly obsessions and the murder makes Macaulay Culkin's pranks in "The Good Son" something funny.
Not a single emotion appears right after that, except when they travel to Egypt (while the father arranges a way to disappear with the girl's body) the mother shows some reaction by crying but even that crying seems so doubtful, we can't know for sure why she's doing that.Haneke impresses us by showing how Benny committed the crime but without appealing to the Hollywood formula of gore, yet it is a disturbing moment.
Benny, an Austrian teenager likes to sit in his darkened room and watch videos.
A teenage boy (Arno Frisch) who watches violent videos brings a girl back to his parent's apartment whilst they are away and films his murder of her.
Michael Haneke's disturbing film suggests that violent videos may not only desensitize, but influence some to commit violent acts.
Would he murder a girl because he wanted to know how it feels?When Benny shows the video to their parents, they don't even flinch.
Another person had said: "Michael Haneke's disturbing film suggests that violent videos may not only desensitize, but influence some to commit violent acts"OK...
Isn't Benny's video (written and directed by Michael Haneke) a movie about a murder?
"Benny's Video" is an Austrain German-language movie from over 25 years ago written and directed by Michael Haneke.
As for "Benny's Video", it is the second installment from a trilogy by Haneke, called "Glaciation".
Benny invites her home and lets her view a film of a pig being led to slaughter; actually watching the swine fall dead with a squeal. |
tt0206357 | Toys | Kenneth Zevo, the owner of the Zevo Toy factory in Moscow, Idaho, is dying. He tells his assistant Owen Owens of his desire for the factory to be given to his brother, Lt. Gen. Leland Zevo instead of his son Leslie. Even Leland is unsure of this, pointing out how Leslie has been apprenticed at the toy factory most of his life. Kenneth agrees Leslie loves toys and his work, but his childlike demeanor would not help him to be a successful business leader. Kenneth had even gone to lengths to hire Gwen Tyler as a factory worker, believing Leslie would become attracted to her and she would help him to mature.
Kenneth passes away and Leland reluctantly takes control of the factory. Leland, who still aspires to meet his father's demands to be a 4-star General, allows Leslie and his childlike sister Alsatia continue designing new toys. However, Leland's interest is piqued when he hears about corporate secrets being leaked, and he hires his son Patrick, a soldier with covert military expertise, to manage security. From Patrick, Leland gets the idea of building war toys in the factory. Leslie points out that Zevo Toys has never made war toys.
Leland offers to drop the idea, but asks Leslie if he can portion off a small amount of the factory to develop toys of his own. He asks Leslie to stay out of the area for fear that his toys may not be good enough. Unknown to Leslie, Leland is using the space to develop miniature war machines that can be controlled remotely, aspiring to sell these to the military. However, the military leaders refuse to buy into his plan, and Leland, becoming unhinged by their refusal, moves ahead with his plan independently. He takes over more and more of the factory space and increases security on these areas. When Leslie sees children being led into one of Leland's secure areas, he finds a way to sneak into the space. Inside, he discovers Leland training the children to operate the miniature war machines with arcade-like interfaces so the children would not be aware they are actually operating real war equipment. Leslie flees before he is discovered, barely escaping the "Sea Swine" amphibious drone guarding an exit, and makes his way to Gwen's house to reveal what he saw. Leslie is unaware that Leland has seen his actions through spy toys monitoring the area, and prepares to defend his parts of the factory, becoming more demented and promoting himself to general of his own army. Patrick learns that Leland lied about the death of his mother, and quits to warn Leslie.
Leslie, Alsatia, Patrick, Gwen, and Owen go to the factory to fight against Leland, using the Zevo toys against Leland's war machines. Leslie manages to escape and disable Leland's control system for the toys. As Leslie and Patrick confront Leland, Alsatia is attacked by the Sea Swine, but she is revealed to be a robot built by Kenneth to be a companion for Leslie. As Leslie and Patrick tend to Alsatia, Leland tries to escape, but the Sea Swine stops and attacks him.
As Leland is hospitalized, Leslie takes control of the factory and continues his relationship with Gwen, while Alsatia is repaired. Patrick prepares to leave to take on further missions, but remains with Leslie and his friends long enough to attend a brief memorial to Kenneth. | anti war | train | wikipedia | You will never look at war toys the same way again.. Before there was Small Soldiers, there was this film that took something of same subject matter, but in a superior fashion.When the kids in the film see the toy soldiers in the display, the film presents them as a glamourous bunch with light music highlight how cool they are. However, when these toys come to life, the music suddenly stops and the whole atmosphere becomes foreboding as these soldiers go through the motions of their roles.When the fighting erupts, the violence displayed is horrific as it is run with rapid cuts and stark lighting. Nothing is untouched, there are scenes of explosions, hurled bodies, death spasms, soldiers being bayoneted and incessant gunfire. All of it is contributing to a terrifying mess of imagery and sound that is all carefully calculated to deglamorize war.All of this culminates with the sequence of one surviving soldier inspecting the area with all its sickening plastic carnage that seems so authentic in an abstract manner. Then the soldier is discovered and is hit with a flame throwing with a death scream. You will be chilled to the bone, even if they are dolls.To this day, I cannot see 12" inch figures without those lingering images, which is the precise point of the filmmakers who intended to show what the real purpose of soldiers and war.. Still one of the most remarkably powerful films. I first saw "Toys" in 1966 or maybe 1967; I was 8 or 9, and very fond of my original G.I. Joes (the toy of the title). I can still recall the frisson created by the flame-thrower scene, and the power of the whole film. I saw the film again about 7 or 8 years later, as part of a film studies class, and I was still in awe of the power of the piece. Today, teaching film and video to high school students, I use "Toys" as part of a unit on war films; students still react.The most remarkable thing is how short this short is. I fully expected, as an adult, for it to be in 15 - 20 minute range; it is a mere 8 minutes. Every second of the film is pregnant with potential; Grant Monroe did not waste a single shot in this NFB classic. The stop-action animation is very good -- right up there with some of the classic stop-action material of the 60s, and surprisingly "life like" considering the fixed facial expression of G.I. Joes, and their limited hand positions.I give this film one of the highest ratings I have ever given, and I feel it earns every single star. |
tt0075147 | Robin and Marian | An aging Robin Hood (Sean Connery) is a trusted captain fighting for King Richard the Lionheart (Harris) in France, the Crusades long over. Richard orders him to take a castle that is rumored to hold a gold statue. Discovering that it is defended by a solitary, one-eyed old man (Esmond Knight) who is sheltering harmless women and children, and convinced that there is no statue, Robin and his right-hand man, Little John (Nicol Williamson), refuse to attack. King Richard (Richard Harris), angry at their insubordination, orders the pair's execution, but before his orders can be carried out, he is mortally wounded by an arrow thrown by the old man. Richard has the helpless residents massacred, with the exception of the old man, because Richard likes his eye; it also turns out that there never was a gold statue. The King offers to let Robin beg for his life. When Robin refuses, Richard draws his sword, but lacks the strength to strike him and falls to the floor. Robin helps him, and moved by his loyalty, with his last words, Richard frees Robin and Little John.
After Richard's death, Robin and Little John return to England and are reunited with old friends Will Scarlet (Denholm Elliott) and Friar Tuck (Ronnie Barker) in Sherwood Forest. When Robin casually inquires about Maid Marian (Audrey Hepburn), they tell him she has become an abbess. When he goes to see her, she finds him as impossible as ever. He learns that his old nemesis, the Sheriff of Nottingham (Robert Shaw), has ordered her arrest in response to the King's order to expel senior leaders of the Roman Catholic Church from England. Marian wants no trouble, but Robin rescues her against her will, injuring Sir Ranulf (Kenneth Haigh), the Sheriff's arrogant guest, in the process. Ignoring the Sheriff's warnings, Sir Ranulf pursues Robin into the forest. His men are ambushed and devastated by arrows; Sir Ranulf is left unharmed only because Robin orders him spared. When the news of Robin's return spreads, old comrades and new recruits rally once more to him. Sir Ranulf asks King John (Ian Holm) for 200 soldiers to deal with Robin.
The Sheriff waits in the open fields beyond the Forest, knowing Robin will attack. When Robin does, he proposes that he and the Sheriff duel to settle the issue, despite the protests of Sir Ranulf. Despite Robin appearing to have superior skills at the start of the fight, it soon becomes clear that the Sheriff is surprisingly in fact far superior to Robin, and more than a match for Robin. More agile and resistant, the Sheriff begins dominating Robin in the fight. Eventually the Sheriff has the wounded Robin at his mercy and demands his surrender. Refusing, Robin manages to kill the Sheriff with the last of his strength. Led by Sir Ranulf, the soldiers attack and scatter Robin's ragtag band, many of whom are captured or killed. Little John swiftly kills Sir Ranulf. Then he and Marian take Robin to her abbey, where she keeps her medicine.
Robin believes he will recover to win future battles. Little John stands guard outside while Marian tends to Robin's wounds. Marian prepares a draft and takes a drink of it herself before giving it to Robin. He drinks the medicine and notes that the pain has gone away and his legs have gone numb. Then, realizing that she has poisoned them both, he cries out for Little John. However, he comes to understand that Marian has acted out of love because he would never be the same man again. She tells him:
I love you. More than all you know. I love you more than children. More than fields I've planted with my hands. I love you more than morning prayers or peace or food to eat. I love you more than sunlight, more than flesh or joy, or one more day. I love you...more than God.
Robin and Marian try to touch each other's hands as Little John crashes through the door and weeps at Robin's bedside. Robin asks Little John for his bow and shoots an arrow from his deathbed through the open window, and tells him to bury them both where it lands. The arrow soars out of the window into the distance, while decaying apples next to the same window are seen. | tragedy, violence, action, murder, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | Audiences brought up on "The Adventures of Robin Hood" simply could not accept seeing these two beautiful star-crossed lovers ravaged by time, even if they were portrayed by the likes of Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn.However like the Flynn film, "Robin and Marian" boasts a superb cast.
When Marian asks Robin why he followed Richard during all the years of terrible carnage, Connery sums up his life with a simplicity that is breathtaking; "He was my King..." The film is wonderfully elegiac and the melancholic sense of time irretrievably lost is heartrending.
I would take one of these any day than a bad remake like Robin Hood Prince of Thieves.Sean Connery is great as a weary Robing Hood back from the crusades who suddenly is rejeunivated when he meets up with Marian and the Sheriff of Nottingham.Robert Shaw is as usual, perfect in his role as the sheriff.
You love to hate him.Nicol Williamson is a very good Little John, who is Robin's constant companion.Richard Harris is perfect as malevolent King Richard.Of course only Audrey Hepburn's Marian could play opposite Connery's Robin without coming off as slight.
The supporting cast is a virtual Who's Who of fine British character actors of the time, but Robert Shaw stands out as the most menacing Sheriff Of Nottingham on film.There is much in this film that is immensely touching, especially when Robin and Marian start resuming their romance which supposedly ended 18 years previously.
The film picks up the Robin Hood legend some twenty years after with Robin and his sidekick Little John return to their old Sherwood Forest embittered by King Richard, by the Crusades and their sickening brutality
They're informed by former friends Friar Tuck and Will that the lovely Maid Marian now lives nearby, where she has become the abbess
And the sheriff is as powerful as ever and rules the country
Marian greets Robin's return with mixed feelings, and tells him that, in the passed two decades, she worked hard studying herbs and medicines, and she loves her life and she won't give it up
Of course, after the return of Robin, Marian could not imagine herself living in the world again, or even wanting to
But after he rescues her from his long time enemy, the Sheriff of Nottingham, who tries to arrest her on religious grounds, the two become lovers once again
As Robin, Connery is a little bit in love with death
He flirts, he teases, he challenges his strong enemy to a single combat to the death...
Sherwood forest 20 years later , Robin Hood (Sean Connery , he was the oldest actor to play him up to that point) along with Little John (Nicol Williamson) , aging none too gracefully , return exhausted from the Crusades , a land of mud and grime .
However, after his close friend, actor Roy Kinnear died during the shooting , Lester seemed to lose heart with the movie-making business , he has not directed another film.Other versions about this famous personage are the followings : ¨Robin Hood price of thieves (1991) ¨ by Kevin Reynolds with Kevin Costner , Alan Rickman and Morgan Freenan , the same year was exhibited ¨Robin Hood¨ by John Irvin with Patrick Bergin and Uma Thurman but was a flop though the critics considered best adaptation .
It's a shame, because ROBIN AND MARIAN manages to open up the legend in fascinating ways while still showing a great deal of affection for Robin Hood and the heroic vision that so many, both in the 13th century and today, need to believe in.Still, great jobs by Connery, Hepburn (truly the template for a beautiful mature woman), Williamson, Shaw, Holm, Barker, Elliot, Harris and the rest of the actors.
Robin Hood (played in a straightforward manner by Sean Connery) is still battling the Sheriff of Nottingham, and he's loved again by Maid Marian, who has since become an abbess.
Robert Shaw plays the Sheriff in a vile-spewing manner, with death to all; he's well cast, and his final battle with Connery (his nemesis in "From Russia with Love") is staged for a rousing effect, yet by this point the movie has pretty much imploded.
In fact that part of the story is where we begin with Sean Connery and Nicol Williamson as Robin Hood and Little John with Richard I after he died of blood poisoning from a wound taken besieging a castle.Remember the bloodthirsty Anthony Hopkins as Prince Richard in The Lion in Winter?
Harris gives a remarkable performance, the best in the film.Anyway after his death in the French part of the Plantagenet empire, Connery and Williamson return and find Audrey Hepburn as Maid Marian having taken the vows.
Their love now has the maturity of an old couple, and there is no denying there is real chemistry between Connery and Hepburn, which allows the characters to rise above the material.The Sheriff is played by Robert Shaw, resuming his adversarial role against Connery that commenced in the 1963 Bond film "From Russia with Love." Shaw is grim, but sympathetic, as the Sheriff of Nottingham, and is the best Sheriff of any Robin Hood film."Robin and Marian" is a fun film.
This is about as gruesome as the filmmakers could get considering the PG rating (this was before PG-13 was created).Unlike the most recent Hollywood Robin Hood film, this one doesn't pretend so much to be historically accurate, so I won't complain about historical inaccuracies such as Kings Richard and John speaking English, rather than French, or Robin Hood speaking in a thick Scottish accent.Movie connections: Sean Connery would go on to play King Richard in "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves," as well as appear with Ian Holm in "Time Bandits"--another film with the Robin Hood character.
Audrey and Sean and good, and you will like them as they are the sole positive thing about this film, but the ending is so incredibly WRONG both for the part of Marian and for the Story as a whole that it ends on a note so BAD that what little good is sadly wiped away.I give it a 5, and that is begrudgingly for the few decent moments..
Robin returns from the Crusades to England after King Richard's death just in time to see the Sheriff of Nottingham come to arrest Marian.
I was about to say that you'd never in a million years get a Hollywood Studio today to make a movie about Robin Hood, Little John and Maid Marian in late middle age, twenty years after their youthful adventures, but then I thought, "Oh, no, you'd still sell it - it's got Sean Connery attached!" Not far short of thirty years on, he has scarcely changed in the interim and could easily take the same part at the age of 73.
In the scene when he first meets Robin after the latter's return from the wars, he makes it clear that he has to take Marian, but he says, "God go with you." Nowadays, it's almost shocking to see Robin almost casually killing the guards who have been sent to attack him, but then Shaw's Sheriff views the dead bodies and gives them their due as soldiers: "Take up their limbs and bury them." Shaw does most of his acting with his eyes, and you can see the whole life of regret, valueless death and his own lost advancement, in them.The love story is beautifully handled, but it has to be said that the chief and most memorable relationship in the movie is that between Robin and Little John.The opening of the movie is something else that would never survive a modern cut: an entire sequence set at the time of the crusades with an incredible cameo by Richard Harris as his namesake, the Lionheart, along with other British stalwarts like Esmond Knight, Bill Maynard and Peter Butterworth.
Check this out for a cast :Sean Connery - Scotland's greatest ever movie star Audrey Hepburn - An iconic actress Nicol Williamson - Many critics choice as Scotland's greatest ever actorRobert Shaw - Perhaps one of cinema's most overlooked actors when it comes to playing convincing bad guys Richard Harris - Another screen legend Ian Holm - In an early screen role .
If I remember correctly this is something that spoiled his collabarition with Connery in CUBA , another movie that mixes action and romance with slight off beat humour Having pointed out these criticisms there's nothing much else wrong with ROBIN AND MARION , it's just that when you've got a bunch of butch men in a forest who dabble in swordplay in 2004 you're instantly reminded in some small way of a certain film trilogy that was released at the turn of the century which does spoil the positive aspects of this movie when watching it today .
Put Sean Connery, Audrey Hepburn, Richard Harris, Ian Holme, Robert Shaw, Nicol Williamson, and Denholm Elliott together in a film about Robin Hood and you've got a winner, right?
I love Richard Lester's films - I love Audrey Hepburn - I like Sean Connery,Nicol Williamson, Ronnie Barker, Denholm Elliott, Robert Shaw and Richard Harris.
I'm not going to say that this is exactly the type of movie that I constantly want to see, but when I get the chance to watch a movie with famous actors like Sean Connery, Audrey Hepburn, Robert Shaw and Richard Harris, I'll certainly not let it pass without watching it.As I already said in the previous paragraph, this movie tells the story of Robin Hood and Lady Marian.
Robin Hood is an old man when he returns with his best friend Little John to England after the crusades and Marian has become a nun.
Sean Connery is a very worthy Robin Hood, Audrey Hepburn did an excellent job with her role as Maid Marian and Robert Shaw was very nice to watch as the Sheriff of Nothingham.As a conclusion I would like to add that all the fans of the Robin Hood movies who aren't afraid to see their hero as an old man, should give this movie a try.
Aging Robin Hood (Sean Connery) and Little John (Nicol Williamson) return home to England after twenty years fighting in the Crusades.
Robin Hood (Sean Connery) and Little John (Nicol Williamson) are searching for a treasure for King Richard the Lionheart (Richard Harris).
Connery and Hepburn are outstanding in this wonderful telling of the last days of Robin Hood and his final Showdown with the disillusioned Sheriff of Nottingham (brilliantly played by Robert Shaw in one of his last roles.) Richard Harris is memorable in the opening scenes as the dying and driven King Richard Coer de Lion,finally an acurate portrayal of the bloodthirsty king!
Despite its stellar cast, this is clearly a product of 1970s film-making, when even a tale of the legendary childhood hero has to have a gritty, realistic approach with a downbeat ending.Younger viewers are saying things like "if you liked the Kevin Costner version, you won't like this." They ought to start their point of reference with the 1938 classic starring Errol Flynn, Olivia de Havilland, Basil Rathbone and Claude Rains instead, because that is the definitive version of the Robin Hood legend and this film in no way is a fitting sequel to that sort of storytelling.Instead of calling itself ROBIN AND MARIAN, deceptively luring lovers of the old legend to see the film, it should have been titled something more appropriately dealing with two bittersweet, faded lovers who bear no resemblance to the legendary outlaw and his lady love.
And the supporting cast are particularly fine: Robert Shaw is the Sheriff, battling Connery again years on from From Russia with Love; Nicol Williamson is an imposing Little John; Denholm Elliott and Ronnie Barker make up the Merry Men; Richard Harris is Richard the Lionheart; Ian Holm Prince John, and there's a brief but wonderful cameo from Peter Butterworth in the opening scenes.The action scenes are over the top and rather silly, as in THE THREE MUSKETEERS, but the script is better.
The characters are the same but the great catch here is that they're middle aged now and almost powerless, starting to lose strength and many other skills, and even becoming more philosophical and having more ethical feelings.Sean Connery plays an middle aged Robin Hood who after 20 years fighting in the Crusades and the death of the insane King (Richard Harris) decides, along with his friend Little John (Nicol Williamson) to return to the forest of Sherwood to rejoin Lady Marian (Audrey Hepburn) and marry with her.
The last picture is one of the most beautiful ideas of the cinema of the seventies.Richard Lester ,a director the Beatles' lovers know well,found the perfect way to tell his audience that legendary hearts are still living ,their hearts are still beating.It was Audrey Hepburn's comeback (almost 10 years after the suspenseful "wait until dark" which earned her an AA nomination) and we can consider it her swansong ,unless the disastrous " Bloodline" and the five-minute presence in Spielberg's "Always" count.And it is a wonderful swansong:Audrey Hepburn is no longer the young maid portrayed by Olivia De Havilland in Curtiz's classic ;she has become a nun .The same goes for Connery's Robin who is no longer a dashing Errol Flynn but a faded jaded hero.Both actors are superb but they are matched every step of the way by Robert Shaw as the sheriff.Richard Lester had renewed the hackneyed subject of Dumas' three musketeers ;he did the same for Robin Hood..
Connery is an ageing Robin, returning to England from the crusades with all-weather companion Little John (Williamson) in toe, ready to re-kindle his romance with Marian (Hepburn) now living as a nun.
Connery is superb as a perpetually immature Robin; Hepburn lovely and believable as the nun by default; Williamson brilliant in one of his finest roles and worth seeing if only for the line "If I'd not met you..."; Shaw shines as the Sheriff; while Ian Holm raises the quality of any film.
One of the best love films ever made, with two of the best and good-looking actor and actress in the history of cinema, Sean Connery and Audrey Hepburn.
Very good film -- interesting love story about Robin Hood and Maid Marian in their later (for the time, anyway) years.
Even if you aren't a fan of Robin Hood movies or are just burnt out on them, I encourage you to see Robin and Marian (1976), simply to see the elegance of the beautiful graceful Audrey Hepburn and the charasmatic noble Sean Connery work together..
This movie provides an opportunity to view what it would be like seeing Robin Hood and the love of his life - Maid Marian toward the end of their lives.
Richard Harris is energetic in the role of Richard, and it is interesting to see a darker portrayal of the character.Sean Connery plays Robin Hood, now past his prime and trying to return to his old life.
Almost every Robin Hood movie ends with Richard the Lionheart returning to England and Robin the hero, set to live happily ever after with Maid Marian.
Aging Robin Hood returns back to Sherwood from the Crusades.Lady Marian, the woman Robin once loved and still does, has become an abbess.He wants to win back her love.The Sheriff of Nottingham is causing some trouble again.He wants to arrest Marian on religious grounds.Robin and Marian (1976) is a really nice Robin Hood adventure from Richard Lester.To see Sean Connery as Robin Hood and Audrey Hepburn as Marian really makes this movie worthwhile.Other actors also do their jobs very well.Robert Shaw is the Sheriff of Nottingham.Richard Harris plays Richard the Lionheart.Nicol Williamson plays Little John.Denholm Elliott is Will Scarlett.Friar Tuck is played by Ronnie Barker.Kenneth Haigh plays Sir Ranulf.Ian Holm plays the part of King John while Victoria Abril is Queen Isabella.In this movie both the romance and the adventure works.What this movie offers is not some puppy love of a couple of teenagers, but mature love of two people who have lived a little.The battle scene between Robin and the Sheriff is really something.The ending is...quite shocking.It's the kind of ending some people like and some people hate.I myself have a little mixed feelings on that.It's not really the ending I wanted to see, but I can accept it.Maybe it had to end that way, who knows..
Everyone is at the top of their game in the movie; Sean Connery at his wry, world-weary most heroic - Audrey Hepburn as the only woman on earth capable of being loved by such a figure; Robert Shaw, Nicole Williamson, and Richard Harris -- all wonderful in terrifically drawn characters.There's a beautiful, elegiac score by John Barry.
Of course, the storyline is obvious: Robin Hood (Sean Connery) fights with the Sheriff of Nottingham (Robert Shaw) to win back Maid Marian (Audrey Hepburn) and live happily ever after.
Sean Connery is excellent as the ageing hero Robin, a type of character that he would later revisit in the unofficial Bond film "Never Say Never Again", while Audrey Hepburn delivers a charming and wonderfully understated performance as Marian.
The storyline is very strong and the supporting cast is excellent, particularly Robert Shaw as the Sheriff of Nottingham, Richard Harris as Richard the Lionheart (who is depicted much more realistically than in any other Robin Hood film that I've seen) and Nicol Williamson as Little John.
The real focus of the film kicks in once the two return to England, after the death of King Richard.The movie's real strength, I think, is in its actors -- the thing is packed to the rim with fine actors the likes of Sean Connery, Audrey Hepburn, Richard Harris, Denholm Elliot, Ronnie Barker, Robert Shaw, and more.
Basically this is set 20 years after most other versions of the story, Robin Hood (Sir Sean Connery) and all other merry men, including Little John (The Wind in the Willows' Nicol Williamson), Will Scarlett (Denholm Elliott ) and Friar Tuck (Ronnie Barker) are ageing, and have returned from the Crusades. |
tt0085706 | I Am the Cheese | The novel opens with Protagonist Adam Farmer biking from his home in the fictional town of Monument, Massachusetts (based on Cormier's home town of Leominster, Massachusetts) to visit his father in Rutterburg, Vermont. The story alternates with transcripts of tapes between a "subject" and Brint. The subject receives psychotherapy and is interrogated by Brint.
As the book continues, it is revealed that Adam is the subject, who was formerly Paul Delmonte of a small New York town. His father, "David Farmer", was a newspaper reporter who was enrolled in the Witness Protection Program (WPP). The family moved the Monument and escaped several close calls with their identities, but the parents are killed in the penultimate chapter in a car collision. Adam/Paul survives, and is taken to a government mental asylum. The last chapter implies that WPP agents killed the family, and reveals that Paul is regularly interrogated on the topic. Each time, Paul is unable to handle his realizations of his past and embarks on his delusion bike ride across the ground of the facility. At the end of the last tape, Brint recommends authorization to kill Adam. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt2510434 | Alien Abduction | The film begins with a group of carefree teenagers on a camping trip. As they spend the night drinking and hanging out, a light appears overhead.
Jean is the first to notice something wrong when she videotapes a UFO overhead. At first her friends do not believe her and are not convinced about the tape. That night while they are sitting around the campfire the aliens attack. Four flee for their lives, Jean still clutching the camera, but cannot escape and they are suddenly abducted by a UFO. They wake up in a cell on the ship. Jean uses the camera's night vision to explore the alien glyphs and passages. They eventually rounded up and pushed into a room where they are tied down and vivisected.
Jean awakens in a hospital, suffering from terrible flashbacks. That night a shadowy figure sneaks into her room and staples something into the back of her neck, causing the flashbacks to stop and leaving Jean with no memory of the abduction.
Jean is questioned by a staff psychiatrist, Dr. Booker, who reveals that she is in a special facility for UFO abductees. She has to remain there until they are certain that she can resume a normal life. The military attache, Commander Shakti, wants her lobotomized. Jean breaks into another wing of the hospital to find her friends and discovers that part of the hospital is reserved for mutants, the insane and the lobotomized. She sees a woman having her skull drilled. Jean is then captured by Shakti and given electric shock therapy until she is unconscious. When she wakes up, Shakti interrogates her and then sends her to an execution room. Jean lobotomizes the nurse instead and disguises the nurse as herself, by covering her with gore. She wanders around the basement, looking for a way out through the vents, until she finds an empty storage room. She explores the area, eventually finding her things in a box labelled with her name. She also finds her video camera with the tape missing, but still with its memory stick. She replays the video and is shocked to see the entire abduction on tape. She escapes the storage room, killing a guard on the way. She also sees and tapes a scientist tending alien larvae in a lab and a scientist masturbating the aliens' genitals to extract sperm.
Jean breaks into a worker's locker room and disguises herself. There she runs into her doctor Thomas. She finds out the aliens have escaped and are infecting the facility.
When the infected are killed alien larva cracks out of their skulls and escape. Jean and Thomas try to save her friends but they are a mess and Todd barely remembers Jean. Jean just gets them to safety when Todd turns on them. Thomas shows Jean the way out and reveals that the hospital is actually part of the alien ship. Todd kills Britney and Thomas and an alien larva bursts out of Thomas' head just as he dies. Jean is captured by an adult alien, but she shoots it in the throat.
Later, Jean finds herself in another lab, looking at a series of human clones of her and her friends. Shakti explains that Jean died in the abduction and she was a clone. Jean, furiously kills her clone by pulling out its umbilical cord. Dr. Brooks fakes removing Jean's memory suppression chip, used to keep her memory erased before returning her home. Shakti orders the clones of her friends be resurrected as well. However, since Dr. Brooks faked the procedure Jean's memory was never erased.
Jean, Todd, Bud and Britney suddenly find themselves hiking in the woods on a sunny day, when a search and rescue helicopter spots them. They tell rescue team that they are fine. An army officer asks Jean: "Where have you been for the last two weeks?" The movie ends with Jean giving him a look. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1602613 | Only God Forgives | Julian is an American expatriate who runs a Muay Thai club in Bangkok, Thailand as a front for drug dealing. His older brother Billy rapes and kills an underage sex worker and is cornered by Thai police. Lieutenant Chang allows the girl's father, Choi Yan Lee, to beat Billy to death in the same room Billy killed the girl. Chang then cuts off the father's forearm for allowing his daughter to be a sex worker.
Julian also engages in aberrant sexual practices. He prefers to be bonded as he watches his favorite prostitute, Mai, masturbate. Upon discovering his brother has been murdered, Julian and his crew go to Choi's kiosk to confront him. He decides to spare Choi's life after hearing about Chang's involvement. When Julian's mother, Crystal, arrives in Bangkok to identify Billy's corpse, she demands Julian find and kill the men responsible for Billy's death. He refuses—believing Choi was justified in avenging the death of his daughter—infuriating Crystal. Fascinated by his sense of justice, Julian imagines meeting Chang in a dark room, where Chang cuts Julian's hands off.
Julian brings Mai to meet Crystal, posing as his girlfriend. Crystal sees through the ruse, insulting Mai and demeaning Julian, pronouncing him to be sexually inferior to his dead brother. Julian is passive to Crystal's verbal abuse, but his aggravation results in him viciously humiliating Mai afterwards. At Crystal's request, one of the fighters at Julian's boxing club assassinates Choi. Later, the police arrive at Julian's club, but Chang concludes that Julian is not Choi's killer. Julian recognises Chang from his visions and follows him from the boxing club, but Chang seems to disappear into thin air.
After learning that Chang was involved in Billy's death, Crystal meets with an associate, Byron, to arrange Chang's assassination. Three gunmen on motorbikes are sent to kill Chang at a restaurant, which results in several customers and two of Chang's men being killed in a shoot-out. Chang kills two of the gunmen, follows the third on foot, and beats him with a frying pan. The surviving gunman leads Chang to his boss, Li Po, who has resorted to arranging assassination contracts as a means of providing for his crippled son. Chang then kills the gunman but spares Li Po after seeing his affection for his son. Li Po points Chang to Byron, who ordered the hit. Chang finds Byron in a club and tortures him to reveal the reasoning behind the hit.
Julian confronts Chang and challenges him to a fight at Julian's boxing venue. Chang, an experienced boxer, quickly beats Julian, who does not land a single blow. Afterwards, Crystal tells Julian that Chang has figured out she ordered the hits. Fearful for her life, she pleads with Julian to kill Chang, the same way she asked Julian to kill his own father for her. She promises that after Julian kills Chang, they will go back home, and she will be a true mother to him.
With his associate Charlie Ling, Julian infiltrates Chang's home after shooting Chang's guard dead, intent on ambushing Chang when he returns. Charlie informs Julian that Crystal instructed him to execute Chang's entire family. Charlie murders the nanny of Chang's daughter as she enters the home, but Julian kills Charlie before he can murder Chang's young daughter.
Chang and a police officer find Crystal in the hotel where she is staying. She explains how Julian killed his father with his bare hands, asserting to Chang that Julian is violent and deranged, blaming him for the violent crimes committed in the family's name. Chang decides to punish her by cutting her throat. Later, Julian returns to the hotel and finds his mother's corpse. In silence, he approaches her body and cuts open her abdomen before placing his hand inside of the wound.
Julian is later shown standing in a field with Chang, who appears to cut off both of Julian's hands with his sword. Finally Chang is singing at a karaoke bar to an audience of attentive police officers. | comedy, neo noir, murder, violence, psychedelic, revenge | train | wikipedia | Lots of violent, strange et slow films have been presented at the Cannes film festival since its creation but yet every time a film pushes the boundaries of violence while keeping its own style, most critics go mad and sometimes shout at the screening, even leaving the theater before the end and calling it "outrageous".
If you know Nicolas Winding Refn's style and like it then you'll enjoy this movie but if you've only seen Drive and believe this is going to be in the same style (because of the same actor, similar cinematography, same musical style...) believe me you'll be disappointed.
Here Refn feels a lot more philosophical, and comes back to his original style in directing films such as Valhalla Rising : great visuals, slow-pasted action, scenes that seem a bit detached from one-another, deep character development, little dialogue, extreme violence mixed with soft and/or trance-electro music...
all of which are here to deal with philosophical, deep, hard subjects like revenge, good and bad, mother/son relationship etc...When it comes to the acting Gosling does not disappoints however this time Refn wanted to do the opposite that he did in Drive : showing the weakness of his character.
He completely understood the movie's atmosphere and makes his character feel mysterious and fascinating.To sum-up this is a very atmospheric, deep movie with great actors/actresses and dealing with difficult and serious themes, with some philosophical analysis possible, but definitely not in the same style as Drive, even though it has some similarities with it..
That message really depends on how you interpret the film, and differentiates from person to person.For instance, Vithaya Pansringarm's character can be perceived in a variety of ways - a silent angel out to balance the injustices of his city, a delusional man who thinks of himself as God, or a vengeful cop who is simply out to do his job.
I don't expect everyone to like this film - it is certainly not for fans of Hollywood blockbusters and those who start their reviews with statements similar to 'I went to see this movie because I like Ryan Gosling/Kristin Scott Thomas' render all further comments null and void - their opinions are simply worthless and cannot be taken seriously.The cinematography is excellent and the acting superb.
Drive had a pretty brisk pace, good dialogue, a plot that went somewhere, and a likable character.Only God Forgives had none of that.
Even the characters move and turn slowly.The plot, such as it is, you would probably find worth watching, but Nicolas Winding Refn peppers it with pseudo-dream sequences and many pointless scenes that drag on for ever, so that the plot becomes hard to stay interested in.Now, some things you might care about.The acting.
It is extremely difficult to get yourself to care for any of them, including Gosling's, who is arguably the protagonist here.Aside from Scott Thomas' acting, the only other redeeming quality of this film is the excellent way in which most scenes are set up and shot.
Expecting something along the likes of Drive, which was a great cinematic experience in my opinion, I got to see something which had similarities in execution and style but turned out to be a very different movie from the latter.
Just the story of a lost man who seeks his way, other side a cop who thinks he is God. It's to the spectator to find the morals of the story.The music (electro-pop) and Vithaya's interpretations are in total agreement with the progression of the story and the pictures.The actors succeed in transmitting the feelings and impressions of the characters with simple glances.We leave the room completely disturbed, while being posed full with questions, trying to assimilate all the asked questions by the artist, but completely fascinated and excited !It is simple either one loves, or one hates this film.
I do understand why people hate it, that also means that I understand why people love it because I am one of them.This movie was shot by cinematographer Larry Smith who also worked with Kubrick on 'Eyes wide shut', he made an extraordinary job shooting this picture because it was mesmerizing and beautiful to watch from the beginning to the end.
He doesn't have anything to prove on that point because he already showed us that he can do it if he wants to, and I think once you let go of that then it will be a lot more easier to enjoy and experience this movie because it is a movie that is based on ideas which is clearly what Nicolas Winding Refn is focusing on rather than having a moving plot or story.The atmosphere in this movie was really something, it was almost as if you were a part of it thanks to this movie being very slow paced, and that's why I've always been a big fan of slow-paced movies.
And I loved the fact that our protagonist got beaten down to a point where we couldn't see his normal face, and I liked the relationship that Julian (Ryan Gosling) and Crystal had (Kristen Thomas) because I could feel that strange mother-to-son love type of relationship even though it was very tense, that probably has to do with good chemistry between the two actors.
I guess if David Lynch were to make an extremely violent movie, I think it would look something like this, there were indeed some Lynch-moments in there and some Kubrick shots which I absolutely loved.
I think Refn at one point called this a Thai-western about a man who is fighting against god, and I couldn't stop thinking about that whilst I was watching it because that's exactly what it is.People can trash this movie all they want, we even had two people walking out of the theater.
I liked the subtext behind the whole relationship between Chang (who in is own ways has a twisted God complex) and Julian's character.In the end it makes me a little sad, i think with a little more time put into working with the actors, it could've elevated the movie to another level, also without spoiling anything, i think the out of the box scenes could've been pushed a little more!!
The neon-lit cinematography is simply stunning and quite often disguises the senselessness of what is actually going on, whilst the ballsy performance from Kristen Scott Thomas as Gosling's reprehensible white-trash mother is a terrific display of her versatility and deserving of a much better movie.
Nicolas Winding Refn's new feature, Only God Forgives is a good film, his best offering I've seen so far.
Drive, the previous movie from director Nicholas Winding Refn and actor Ryan Gosling, utilised a deliberate and rather stilted style that not only resulted in a unique air of cool but which also had the effect of making the movie's explosive scenes of violence more impactful.
Time eventually loses all meaning.Even the film's few scenes of brutal violence are shot in such a way as to render them totally boring.Art-house types will love the film (or at least pretend to), finding hidden meaning and symbolism in its languorous plot and mind-bogglingly dull execution, but most right-minded people will quite rightly dismiss this for the utter garbage that it is..
This in turn brings about a spiralling circle of violence, when their mother Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas) attempts to induce vengeful retribution on those responsible, despite the half-hearted opposition of the quietly numb younger sibling Julian (an ever-distant Ryan Gosling).With "Drive" as a reference point, Refn seemingly intended to push the envelope further down the road, replacing the withdrawn anti-hero with a tirade of depraved villains, offering only two characters: Chang and Julian any sort of moral code, however skewed and lopsided it may be.
OK let me tell you, I really enjoyed Bronson as a film, however, both Drive and Only God Forgives are nothing more than beautiful women with lots of make up on them but without any brain.It seems to me like Nicholas Windin Refn got spoiled and lost his mind with the expensive filming toys and A class actors from Hollywood.
OK, I get that the incredibly slow pace -- the characters pose like statues, and everyone stares into space for half a minute or so before delivering a line -- is intentional, that this director thinks he's the second coming of Stanley Kubrick.
More, it's not necessarily the fact that Kristin Scott Thomas gives a bad performance, she just gives one that feels misplaced and too blunt for a film clearly trying to maintain a minimalist charisma about its ways.Two things are slightly mesmerizing about Only God Forgives - that is - until redundancy breeds contempt.
I look at films like Only God Forgives and am astonished they could even stand from the ground up on the thin material they're crafted on.Writer/director Nicholas Winding Refn finally received some mainstream attention and credibility when his film Drive took people by surprise in 2011.
As someone who has made a priority out of seeking out lesser-known films over the years, I find Only God Forgives nearly impossible to believe on an impressionistic, independent frontier, and inconceivably brooding (like its character) when trying to exist on Hollywood ground.
Knowing what a film like this can do to a Thai person who has had no contact with foreigners and already heard from stories that foreigners are all bad people, makes you sick to your stomach.Watch it or don't watch it, but if you're a Thai person, I hope you know better than to think that this movie is an accurate depiction of how foreign people think and act.And Ryan Gosling...
Before you get your kink on, that's not a good thing.So you like - no you LOVE - the movie "Drive" and you think, "hey this other movie was written and directed by the same bloke, sounds promising!" - and then you find out you were dead wrong.Great direction and cinematography, yawner senseless story.
I think he manages about 6 lines of dialogue in the entire film, the rest he just stares at the camera.The characters were completely bizarre, not much of anything made much sense at all, when the film finished I thought to myself, well that's an hour and a half of my life I wont be getting back.It looked pretty, I suppose - lots of neon colours, but cinematography is not enough.I think it's high time Gosling and Refn part ways..
Moody lighting and long camera shots don't make up for a lack of story.And all that staring - I felt like I was watching one of those bad daytime soaps.Under no circumstances pay money to see this movie - it's not even worth seeing for free..
Stylish but astoundingly insubstantial, this film is visually stunning throughout, but was completely doomed by Refn's decision to eliminate all but around nine or ten lines of dialogue to allow more time for lingering shots of Gosling staring blankly into the middle-distance.The torture scenes are more painful for the audience than the recipients of said torture, but they do nothing to elicit an emotional response from the audience - or even build any momentum or tension.By the time the final act of a film arrives, the viewer must have made some kind of emotional investment in AT LEAST ONE of the characters to be interested in how things turn out.
However in this case, there wasn't a single character whom I actually cared about, they were all entirely superficial and obnoxious.I know some people feel as strongly positive about Only God Forgives as I do negative - some films are designed to be divisive.
Visually, I consider Only God Forgives as a piece of art, the way the director expresses the feel of the movie with the help of a great cinematography and lights it's just breathtaking sometimes.In terms of the movie personally I consider the story not as good as Drive, and although is not the intention, is impossible no to do the comparison due to the way Drive drove my mind away with the acting of Ryan Gosling.My point of view is that the movie is intended completely in other way as Drive was, and it's purpose gets well done with the tension that's created by the director with all the shots specially prepare to declare a certain feeling without much movement.
The cinematography is astonishing, the way the DP works playing the lights and reflections, makes it a colorful movie with a message each time the colors of the background and the actors change, depending on the place and situation.It is a slow movie but definitely a recommendation for its visual impact.
A distressed Julian doesn't know how to handle the situation and matters get worse when his mother (Kristin Scott Thomas) flies into town to deal with the death of her first son.Ultimately the story is about a man who thinks he's God (Officer Chang) clashing forces with a man on a spiritual journey of self-discovery, avoiding violent behavior and questioning his morality, and the morality of those around him.
I give her plenty of credit though I'm sure it's difficult to work off silence, which she does throughout the entire movie.No matter how you feel about the acting or plot, even the negative reviews have to admit how beautiful this film looks and sounds.
Cliff Martinez continues his streak of brilliance; following Spring Breakers with this striking electronic score that can only be described as haunting.If you know anything about Refn you know he's afraid to do the same thing twice, so in order to ensure he wasn't duplicating Drive (which he originally planned to do AFTER Only God Forgives) he made this film as tonally different as possible.
With Drive, we got a compelling story with heart and soul, but with Refn's new film, we only get the flash.Only God Forgives is a treat for the senses.
It would be an understatement to say that I had been looking forward to the release of Only God Forgives from Danish-born film director and writer Nicolas Winding Refn, teaming up once more with Ryan Gosling.
She is pitted against Lt Chang, a police officer complicit in Billy's death.The film was a strange mix of ultra violent set pieces, interspersed with surreal dream-like episodes and two very odd scenes where Lt Chang, a clinically efficient killer, singing karaoke – the point of these scenes escaped me.There was little dialogue in this movie which at only 90 minutes long had far too many ponderous scenes with long silences punctuated by taciturn and non-convincing conversation.
A good few of the actors - including Ryan Gosling, who is usually note-perfect - seem curiously stilted and out of place a lot of the time, perhaps this is just the result of filming in so foreign a clime.Having said that, though, there are some fine, haunting moments along the way, and Kristen Scott Thomas is in fine fettle throughout as the slightly incestuous (but still damn foxy) mother.
As for Refn, using an actor like Ryan Gosling was a genius move since it will probably put backsides in the seats, but that is clearly what the entire budget went to because the story will put everyone to sleep.There is a lot of violence, blood and guts stuff, much like "Vahalla Rising," but beyond that this movie is just dumb.
The acting is actually solid enough for this weird movie, but overall everything in it is just very confusing and bizarre in the "wtf" kind of way all the way through till' the end, and you're like: "What did i just watch" This 90 minute flick wasn't a total waste of time though.
If you like movies that will just waste your time - "only God forgive" can provide.This is for sure the last movie made by Nicolas Refn I will ever see, and THank GOD for that!" I will never give this so called Director/writer a chance again and if I see him here in Thailand or in COpenhagen I will tell him in person that he should change carrier path to something that has nothing to do with entertainment!
Perhaps this says something for the lack of truly awful films the person has actually seen, but if you are familiar with the reference to the Lynch directed masterpiece, or in fact David Lynch at all, you are already most of the way towards knowing whether you can sit through the hour and a half that is 'Only God Forgives'.Nicolas Winding Refn's second collaboration with Ryan Gosling was not going to be a Gosling film at all; it was only due to the dropping out of a fairly unknown British actor, for a role in 'The Hobbit', and Gosling's desire to help his best buddy director, that lead to where we are now.
Overall i would go see this movie, if you can take some violence, there are some really bloody and gory scenes, if you liked drive, there is a big chance you are going to like Only god forgives..
But this movie is just so incredibly dull and boring you don't care about anything that is happening on the screen, you don't care about any of the characters, you don't care about any of the subtext because it's all just so damn DULL and emotionless.Films like mulholland drive and the fountain are examples of artistic films done well, because even if you don't follow these mind bending stories, they still provide the audience with an incredibly deep and powerful experience.
I will never watch a movie if I know it has been directed by this director, named Refn, either.If you are not a Ryan Gosling fan or a Kristan Scott Thomas fan, you might like to watch their careers go down a notch after making this film. |
tt0989851 | Ouija | Debbie Galardi recalls playing Ouija with her best friend Laine Morris as children. In present day, Debbie throws her Ouija board into the fire, burning it. Debbie implies to Laine that something strange happened with the Ouija board. After Laine leaves, the Ouija board reappears in Debbie's bedroom. Debbie becomes possessed and hangs herself.
The next day, Laine attends Debbie's wake with her boyfriend Trevor, younger sister Sarah, friend Isabelle, and Debbie's boyfriend Pete. The five friends meet at Debbie's house and use her Ouija board to try communicating with her. Strange things happen, and a presence smashes Pete's head into a mirror. Later, the friends start finding the phrase "hi friend" (a message communicated during the Ouija board session) written in different places, like Isabelle's car window, a tunnel wall, Pete's desk, and Laine's computer. Thinking Deb is trying to communicate with them, the group has another Ouija session. They then discover that they are actually in contact not with Debbie but with a spirit calling itself "DZ." Laine sees the image of a little girl with her mouth sewn shut. The girl warns them to run because her mother is coming. Laine sees an old woman, and everyone flees. Laine later learns that Deb found the Ouija board in her attic and played alone.
Isabelle is possessed and killed by being smashed into her bathroom sink and cracking her skull open. Laine and Pete search Deb's attic and find a box of old photographs that belonged to the previous residents. While researching the previous family's history, they learn of a little girl named Doris Zander who went missing, and whose mother was suspected in her disappearance. Laine visits Doris's sister, an old woman named Paulina, who is now committed to a psychiatric hospital. Paulina explains that her mother was a medium and used Doris as a vessel for the dead to speak through. Their mother went mad and sewed Doris's mouth shut before killing her. She tells Laine that there is a secret room in the house where Laine must find Doris's hidden body and unstitch her mouth in order for the girl to banish their mother. The remaining friends go back to the Galardi house, where Laine finds Doris's corpse and cuts the stitches on her mouth. Doris's spirit appears and chases away the ghost of her mother. Pete becomes possessed and is killed in his home, appearing as a soulless ghost with his mouth stitched up.
Laine revisits Paulina and realizes that the old woman intentionally lied. Doris was the evil entity all along and her mother was trying to stop the friends from summoning her. The Morris's grandmother, Nona, advises the sisters to destroy Doris's body and the Ouija board at the same time. Doris's ghost throws Trevor into a swimming pool filled with plastic wrappings, trapping and drowning him. Laine and Sarah return to the Galardi house cellar, where Doris captures Sarah and prepares to sew her mouth shut. Laine plays the Ouija board alone to draw the spirit's attention. Doris starts possessing Laine, but Deb's ghost appears to help Laine defeat Doris. Sarah throws Doris's body into the furnace, and Laine throws the Ouija board. The paranormal activity stops. Later, Laine finds that the planchette has mysteriously appeared back at her home in her bedroom, and as she sees through the planchette and the film ends. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0043072 | Tripoli | The USS Essex is maintaining a blockade of the port of Tripoli. General William Eaton (Herbert Heyes) comes on board to recruit a commando squad for a secret mission. Lt. Presley O'Bannon (John Payne) and Lt. Tripp (Lowell Gilmore) are selected for a raid on Derna, with the aid of native forces. Hamet Karamanly (Phillip Reed), former pasha of Derna supplies men in exchange for being restored to his throne. Countess Sheila D’Areneau (Maureen O'Hara) stays with the Pasha and everyone presumes she is his mistress, while she angles into persuading him to marry her. O'Bannon recruits a native force. O'Bannon and Countess D’Arneau meet and are attracted to each other, but both refuse to admit it to themselves.
Countess D’Arneau convinces Hamet that the USA plans to turn him over to his brother, but O’Bannon gets him to change his mind. Countess D’Arneau defies O’Bannon and accompanies the expedition, but he forces her to travel with the camp followers. After a waterhole is poisoned, the expedition has to cross a dune sea to reach the next waterhole ahead of the poisoners. O’Bannon kisses the Countess and the force has to endure a sandstorm. Hamet’s brother offers him a deal, half the kingdom in return for getting rid of the Americans. They reach the coast twelve days late and the navy is not there. There is almost a mutiny before the navy arrives. Hamet tells his brother the plan of attack on Derna. When the Countess learns of this, she rides to warn O’Bannon. He leads a surprise attack on the city and captures it. O’Bannon and the Countess become a couple. | historical fiction | train | wikipedia | Entertaining and Solid; an Intelligent Script and Good Cast Plus Action Scenes.
This is a strongly-scripted and well-made adventure film, with solid stars in Maureen O'Hara, John Payne and Howard da Silva .
The story told herein is of a mission featuring a force of US marines sent to combat the 18005 activities of the "Barbary Pirates", North African corsairs who were stopping the ships of other nations and robbing them or worse.
The Marine's Hymn refers in the line "to the shores of Tripoli", to this same action.
Maureen O'Hara, lovely and talented as ever, plays a French countess inexplicably betrothed to a local bigwig; Da Silva is humorous and excellent as a Greek mercenary hired to help Payne's marines find and destroy the pirates and their stronghold.
Much of the film's footage concerns desert treks, during which the male-female conflict between Payne and O'Hara turns into something much more than mere instant dislike.
James Wong Howe did the cinematography, Winston Miller and Price the script, Yvonne Wood the costumes, Alfred Kegerris the sets and Howard Pine the action and second- unit footage, which is far-above average.
Those actors who contributed to this fast-moping and unusually-intelligent film included Philip Reed as the Countess's nefarious pursuer, Grant Withers, Connie Gilchrist, Alan Napier, Herbert Heyes, Lowell Gilmore, Grandon Rhodes and Rose Turich.
Favorite line: Greek da Silva modestly replying to US brass's thanks by saying, "Always glad to help a young country get started." A favorite film of mine, for several reasons; this is more than just a vehicle for the stars; it has dialogue, lovely scenic values and very good blocking, acting and overall production qualities..
I've seen this film a number of times on TV and caught it in the theaters over a half-century ago and loved it.
As a kid, it had great appeal to me and lots of action, fun and, of course, the lovely Maureen O'Hara, who was always worth the price of admission.
John Payne was an underused, underrated actor who always turned in solid, albeit low key, performance.
This film, which is a yarn based on the military action of the US Marines against the Tripoli pirates basically spins fight scenes between the bad guys and a coalition of good guys, including veteran character actor Howard Da Silva as a Greek mercenary.
The good guys win, of course and Payne gets the girl (but we knew that anyway, didn't we?) and this is a film that if it pops up on the late show (no video or DVD listed), is certainly worth checking out for some good, solid escapism..
In 1805 a force of U.S. Marines is sent to North Africa to put a stop to a collection of seagoing bandits known as the Barbary Pirates, who were preying on American and other nations' merchant vessels.
John Payne is the officer in charge of the expeditionary force, Maureen O'Hara a French countess and Howard Da Silva a Greek mercenary hired to help the Marines find and destroy the pirates.
Payne has always been an underrated actor, and it took several dark, gritty little thrillers with director Phil Karlson in the mid-'50s to show people what he was capable of.
O'Hara, aka the Queen of Technicolor, was married to director Will Price at the time, which explains why he got to direct this.
He only directed two other films, neither of them particularly good--in fact, one of them, "Rock, Rock, Rock" from 1957, was downright awful--and his direction here is workmanlike (action scenes are almost always shot by second-unit directors).
It's still an enjoyable little actioner, though; the Technicolor photography is good, and unlike many films of its type it doesn't come to a dead stop between action scenes (well, for the most part).
Maureen O'Hara and John Payne fighting each other again more than the war..
This is the realistic part of the film, and it is the more interesting for taking place in 1805 - the war in question is that against Napoleon, which is never mentioned.
Maureen O'Hara is a stranded countess courted by a local prince, John Payne runs into her by chance and gets trouble with her from the start, so it seems he just seeks her out to have someone to quarrel with.
Their quarrel and nagging goes on throughout the film until it's time for them to focus their interest on more important matters, like a navy which doesn't want to take orders from John Payne.
The military battle in the end is just the usual tearing down the whole city stone by stone after first demolishing the interiors of every palace worth some sight-seeing.
Howard de Silva saves the show as an intrepid Greek captain with a company of his own, and hardly anyone of the Americans would have survived without his contribution.
Although Tripoli is never reached, this film is the story of the US Marines hoisting the American flag for the first time over foreign soil at the port city of Derna in Libya.
Our capture of that city forced a negotiated peace on the Sultan of Tripoli and ended our war there which began against the Barbary States and the pirate ships they employed for plunder and ransom.Now how Maureen O'Hara as an exiled French countess in the court of the exiled Sultan figured in these events is something left to the writers of this film.
At least her flaming red hair was explained somewhat in this particular potboiler.In her memoirs O'Hara thought her casting in these films was as ridiculous as anyone else, but she thought that just keep working, take anything they give you and the better roles will eventually come.John Payne plays the real life Lieutenant O'Bannion who with his squad of US Marines led the land action while the Navy bombarded the guns guarding Derna from sea attack.
This flag waver of a film was an ironic twist in DaSilva's career, he went on the blacklist shortly afterward.Philip Reed is the exiled Sultan who lives pretty good for a guy in exile and he's the diplomatic catspaw the United States used.
In any event the Sultan of Tripoli stopped seizing our ships and that's what we wanted.What is an interesting if not often told tale of American history is reduced to the Saturday matinée kiddie potboiler of the pulp fiction variety.
This is a classic 1940s/50s lightweight action adventure piece, with all the classic elements: a historical tie-in, small-unit military action, horses, an expedition through a wilderness, a leading man in a classic romanticized leadership mold (here, a U.S. Marine), and of course the love story of two people who get the hots for each other but can't figure out what to do about it except circle and maybe even hiss at each other until a sudden dramatic kiss seals their engagement in the last five seconds of the film.
(There was also a certain amount of comic relief, centered in large part around a comic actor or two brought in just for that purpose, as Howard Da Silva, Connie Gilchrist, Grant Withers, and even Lowell Gilmore are here.) It's essentially a formula that was followed countless times during the period, and while the producers could move the setting to anywhere from Louisiana (see, e.g., THE FIGHTING KENTUCKIAN, John Wayne, 1949) to, well, the Shores of Tripoli, for variety, most of them were just westerns, usually set in the Southwestern United States.
And for Hollywood in those days, any classic romanticized villain would do, whether it was the Barbary pirates, the staid British Empire in the Battle of New Orleans, or even crooked home-grown American land speculators ready to cheat whoever had money and was handy.
As others have observed, the production values and especially the location shooting are excellent for the day, and if you like the late Maureen O'Hara (may she R.I.P.) and John Payne, so much the better.
What surprises me is how many of the reviewers on here seem to have no experience with this kind of thing and instead try to analyze it as if it were something made in a much more recent era.I might also add that until the modern (i.e., very modern) era of post-World-War-Two (that means, after 1945, less than 100 years ago) strife broke out in the middle east, there was no particular prejudice against or hatred for Moslems in America or Western Europe generally (at least not for several hundred years, at any rate), who were rather typically regarded as merely different, if not actually exotic or even fascinating.
Indeed, as another, especially clever reviewer of this movie on the IMDb suggested, Europeans thought enough of Arabs to adopt their system of numerals (i.e., 1,2,3,4,5, etc., not mention the whole concept of "zero") from them, along with algebra, averages, algorithms (for you computer junkies out there), the name of every star in the sky you could see without a telescope that was worth naming (e.g., Aldebaran, Altair, Deneb, Fomalhaut, etc., etc.) along with any number of words (alcohol, alchemy, admiral, alcove, alfalfa, albatross, azure .
) and certainly, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962), an extravaganza about an Englishman who practically tried to turn himself into an Arab during World War One would never have been the immense hit that it was only about 50 years ago.
(Unfortunately for theses propagandists, too many of us live in a fact-based world, and know that the .001% of the world's 1+ billion Moslems that are terrorists are only a minority of a minority of a minority at best), but then there are always the gullible, the fearful, the paranoid, the hateful, the low, the trashy, and the stupid who will believe anything in order to indulge their appetite for enjoying getting angry.) That kind of mentality had nothing to do with this movie when it came out in 1950..
That of course I am talking about the incredibly annoying character Countess D'Arneau played by Maureen O'Hara.
The character of the Countess D'Arneau seems like it was written for a different movie, or every other action was written for a different movie.
It is very possible to re-cut the film and take out every scene with Maureen O'Hara.
This would leave us with a dandy little historical war film (although short).
Obviously this left me very disappointed because there are so few films about the time and subject and when one is as good as this it gets ruined by Hollywoods need to put a leading lady into every film.Bottom line...
The audience gets jipped out of seeing an interesting film because Hollywood is too busy writing checks for unnecessary production values that cost the studio a small mint.See the oxen, camels, and fake palm trees as John Payne runs around trying not to look too embarrassed wearing his marching band hat.
Meanwhile, Maureen O'Hara does her spitting and grunting shtick as she scowls through the whole flick (as usual).
Mostly boring with few script directions.Hollywood put a lot of effort into these silly costume adventures because the producers are all deadheads with a penchant for wasting time and money..
kenneth roberts deserves credit as the author of a book made into two separate movies: (a) Lydia Baily a serious movie which explores the racial conflict in the haitian rebellion when Afro-French (Haitians) claimed the rights of Frenchmen to Liberte Egalite et Fraternite and (b) regrettably Tripoli, america's war with certain peoples of a near eastern background, the radicals of their time belonging to a certain religious grouping.the movie is nerdy in its presentation of american fighting men confronting the culture of the exotic near east.
particularly the movie makes LT O'Bannon into a sexually repressed nerd, unable to speak in the presence of beveiled women.I gave this movie a six instead of the zero it deserves because the young american republic is so poorly represented in the cinema..
Neither one of them is very good, but they are quite different.Tripoli takes place in the early 1800s.
Pirates in Libya fight against the Marines, and the subsequent march through the desert and battle show audiences why the first line of the USMC theme song starts the way it does.
However, the movie is pretty boring, and without the forced romance between John and Maureen, it might have put me to sleep.
She starts the movie involved with Phillip Reed, and it's clear she has no real feelings for him but is only after his money and his title.
There's really no suspense, and it's no surprise that she falls for the first white guy she meets.Unless this part of history or battle in particular really interests you, find yourself another war movie.
This film dramatizes a significant historical event for the still young United States, in which the US Navy and marines, along with a small army of Egyptian Arabs and Greeks banded together for a combined assault on the Libyan port of Derma, in 1805.
This marked the virtual end of the first Barbary pirate war, in which North Africans were taking over American trade ships, taking the cargo and holding the crew as captives for ransom.Lt. O'Bannon(John Payne),"General" Eaton(Herbert Heyes) and exiled former pasha of Libya, Hamet Karamanly(Phillip Reed)retain their historic names.
French countess Sheila D'Arneau(Maureen O'Hara)is purely fictional, if a welcomed complication.The land forces did march about 600 miles through Egyptian and Libyan desert, although historically, they began at Alexandria instead of farther up the Nile, as portrayed.
Hamet is portrayed as accompanying the ragtag army, which provides an excuse for including dancing girls and the countess on the trip.
Before beginning the trip, there is an agreement that the Americans will back the reestablishment of Hamet as pasha, if he helps recruit mercenary Arabs for the army.
However, during the march, agents of his brother, Yusuf, the ruling pasha, infiltrate the army and bring an offer of sharing the rule of Libya 50-50,if Hamet will renege on the support of the Americans.
In turn, the countess learns of Hamet's treachery, and rides to warn O'Bannon.
In turn, O'Bannon warns the naval ships of Yusuf's move, by semaphore.
Later, after he sees the success of the attack, Hamet changes his mind again, and supports the Americans, whom he hopes will win him the entire kingdom of Libya.
Historically, although the Americans took Derma, Hamet never got reinstated.
The countess supported Hamet's politics, until he turned traitor to the Americans.
Through most of the film, she hated O'Bannon, who had insulted her a number of times.
The way he beat off the interfering Arabs outside and inside the palace reminded me of John Wayne at the Alamo, or Errol Flynn as Robin Hood: cartoonish.
Historically, it's reported that O'Bannon fought bravely.Incidentally, the Americans never did take Tripoli in this war, which is where Yusuf actually was.
Yusuf actually sent reinforcements to Derma, that arrived too late to prevent its fall, but these troops nearly recaptured the city.All in all, not a bad viewing experience, with a mix of negotiating, action, humor, and flag waving, in a reasonably historically accurate portrayal.
As expected, Maureen was a definite plus, both on her own, and in her confrontations with Payne.Available at YouTube..
President Jefferson decides to put a stop to it by barricading their port and sends a few naval ships and a detachment of US Marines to the shores of Tripoli.
John Payne is picked to lead the group.
Their uniforms are splashy enough to coagulate your eyeballs.So is Maureen O'Hara as the fiancée of the local sheik from whom Marine Lieutenant John Payne must recruit mercenaries to attack the outpost at Derne, overlooking Tripoli.
Her comic sidekick is Connie Gilchrest, whose haimische New York accent no one tried to fix, thank God. Lieutenant Payne has the requisite earthy sergeant, Grant Withers, but it's the Victor McLaughlin role and Grant Withers looks and acts like he's been holding hands with a bottle for the past thirty years.Maureen O'Hara, outstanding in a few movies, including "Our Man in Havana," overacts outrageously, but then the director appears to have ordered everyone to overact, so the obviousness assumes a style of its own.
If O'Hara is voicing an opinion that sounds suspicious and underhanded to Payne, he doesn't merely glance at her.
If it isn't John Wayne it's John Payne.O'Hara's figure is fictional, delightfully so, but Presley O'Bannon was real, and so was the commander of the detachment, William Eaton, whose title was Naval Agent to the Barbary States.
As in history, Payne hires a hundred or so mercenaries who turn out to be a mixed bag of Arabs and Greeks who don't like each other much.Situation report.
Half way through the movie, John Payne is leading this motley of Arabs, Greek mercenaries, and ten Marines across the sand dunes of north Africa, with the intention of deposing the miserable wretch who is pirating our ships in the Mediterranean.
Maureen O'Hara has her eyes on the wealthy Arab leader but Payne doesn't want her along and has forced her to travel with the "dancing girls." Payne and O'Hara hate each other but the discerning viewer knows how it will work out.
The model work and special effects are quite good too for the period.The ragtag army finally reaches the sea and gratefully draws supplies from the ships of the US Navy.
The plan is to bombard the fort at Derna into submission, then have Payne and his unit charge into the rubble and mop things up.
(They invented soap in the Middle Ages, but also algebra, an Arabic word, a dirty trick for which they can never be forgiven.) And here, just as the enemy seems about to lose Derna to the Marines, the Arabs break out thousands of hand grenades based on NUCLEAR FISSION and they blow Payne and his attackers to pieces, the disjecta membra thrown into the sea.
And when the Arabs are done ravishing Maureen O'Hara, and event that has left her incandescent with pleasure, she too is flung off a cliff to the waiting Kraken. |
tt0279627 | The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones: Tales of Innocence | The world of Innocence is divided between the "divine" world of Devaloka (divided between the regions of Sensus and Ratio) and the lower human world of Naraka. As Devaloka needed human souls to survive, the Sensus general Asura decided to use the Manifest, an artifact created by the ancient Primordial Giant, to merge Devaloka and Naraka. This plan was opposed by many, leading to war between Sensus and Ratio. Asura was aided by the Devalokans Inanna, Orifiel and Sakuya; his sentient sword Durandal; and his dragon companion Vrtra. Asura eventually won, defeating the Ratio general Hypnos in battle. Before he could use the Manifest, Inanna betrayed and stabbed him with Durandal. He kills her before he dies, leaving the unification of Devaloka and Naraka unfinished. Most of Devaloka's population is killed in the process, with the others eventually dying years later. In the present, Naraka is governed by the imperial capital of Regnum and the western country of Garam, who are in a state of war. Added to this is the emergence of "avatars", Devalokans reincarnated in human form who hold supernatural powers. They are hunted and inducted into Regnum's military and used for experimentation or as front line troops in the war.
The story begins when Luca Milda, the reincarnation of Asura, encounters another avatar Illia Animi, an avatar of Inanna. She is being chased by agents of Regnum. Luca decides to protect her, awakening his supernatural powers. The two are eventually captured and forced to become fighters on the front lines along with swordsman Spada Belforma, the reincarnation of Durandal.
During their time as prisoners, Luca develops a relationship with Chitose Cxarma, who is a reincarnation of Sakuya and retains her former self's deep love for Asura. Luca, Illia and Spada eventually escape, briefly encountering the mercenary Ricardo Soldato, who is a reincarnation of Hypnos. The three are eventually joined by Ricardo, along with Ange Serena and Hermana Larmo, the respective reincarnations of Orifiel and Vrtra.
As they travel across the war-torn land, they are confronted by avatars in the service of multiple nations, and Arca - a cult made up of avatars led by a woman known as Mathias. Chitose joins Arca to further their cause of a utopia for avatars, and tries to persuade Luca to join, causing a rift between them. The conflicts between the groups is further inflamed as more people regain their memories as warriors of Sensus or Ratio, sparking old conflicts.
In their adventures, the group works to end the fighting and learn about their past lives. When the full truth is revealed, they decide to fulfill Asura's wishes and unite the two worlds. This brings them into conflict with Mathias, who is revealed to be the incarnation of Asura's wrath at being betrayed, and now wishes to destroy both Devaloka and Naraka.
Chitose, consumed by Sakuya's love for Asura, helps Mathias in her task. The party confront Mathias and Chitose in Devaloka's ruined capital, where the Manifest is hidden. They defeat Mathias, and Chitose kills herself in a fit of despair. Luca then proceeds to use the Manifest to merge Devaloka and Naraka, nullifying the avatars' powers and lessening the chance of future conflicts. The group then returns to their normal lives.
Innocence R mostly preserves the story of Innocence, while adding two further characters: a spearwoman named QQ Selezneva, and a spellcaster named Kongwai Tao. These two belong to different worlds, and enter the world of Innocence through the so-called "Triverse Gate". Kongwai came to "save" two souls (Chitose and the antagonist Hasta Ekstermi, a reincarnation of the demonic spear Gaebolg), while QQ is an archeologist who comes to investigate the world of Innocence.
Each enters and leaves the world while leaving the main events mostly unaltered. While they appear to be on friendly terms, a second playthrough reveals that they are bitter enemies who have been playing a "friendship game" while in the world of Innocence. As they return to their world, they part ways, with QQ swearing to kill Kongwai the next time they meet.
=== Characters ===
Luca Milda (ルカ・ミルダ, Ruka Miruda) is a merchant's son living in the capital city of Regnum. A student with high school grades, he is naturally shy and often teased by his classmates. He is the reincarnation of the Devalokan Asura (アスラ), general of the Sensus army. Luca is voiced by Akiko Kimura, and Asura is voiced by Rikiya Koyama.
Iria Animi (イリア・アニーミ, Iria Anīmi) is an honest and independent village girl who was forced to flee from the Regnum authorities after her powers awaken. She is accompanied by Coda, one of a race called "Myusu" who follows her in order to eat nice food. Illia is the reincarnation of Inanna (イナンナ), a former ally of Asura. Illia is voiced by Yuko Sasamoto, and Inanna is voiced by Atsuko Tanaka.
Spada Belforma (スパーダ・ベルフォルマ, Supāda Beruforuma) is a swordsman from Regnam, a former noble who was rejected by his family. Spada is the reincarnation of Asura's sentient sword and companion Durandal (デュランダル). Both characters are voiced by Yuji Ueda.
Ricardo Soldato (リカルド・ソルダト, Rikarudo Sorudato) is a marksman and mercenary who is initially forced to fight Luca, Illia and Spada. Raised in the middle of war, he is a professional type who takes his job seriously. He is the reincarnation of the Ratio general Hypnos (ヒュプノス). Both characters are voiced by Hiroaki Hirata.
Ange Serena (アンジュ・セレナ, Anju Serena) is a priestess who takes in and cares for avatars, using her powers to heal the sick and wounded, earning the nickname of "saint". She acts as an older sister figure to Luca. She is the reincarnation of Orifiel (オリフィエル), a strategist who defected from Ratio to Sensus. Agne is voiced by Kaori Nazuka, and Orifiel is voiced by Tomokazu Sugita.
Hermana Larmo (エルマーナ・ラルモ, Erumāna Rarumo) is a street urchin who looks after war orphans in Regnum's sewers. Despite her deprived upbringing, she holds a positive outlook on life. She is the reincarnation of Vrtra (ヴリトラ), an ancient dragon who raised Asura. Both characters are voiced by Yuki Matsuoka.
QQ Selezneva (キュキュ・セレツネワ, Kyukyu Seretsunewa) and Kongwai Tao (コンウェイ・タウ, Konwei Tao) are two characters introduced in Innocence R. Both traveled from other worlds. While Kongwai is a reserved spellcaster on a secretive mission, QQ is an outgoing, self-proclaimed archeologist fascinated by the technology of Innocence's world. Kongwai is voiced by Kenji Nojima, and QQ is voiced by Saki Fujita. | violence | train | wikipedia | Engrossing, entertaining, surprisingly accurate. The first episode, in northern Italy, is light, romantic fare (Young Indy, what else?)delightful comedy. Indy does something heroic, but the main plot takes place in town, competing for Giuletta's attention. The second part, in Morocco, is back to James Bondian adventure, and is very well done. Indy, as an intelligence officer, discovers dirty doings in the Foreign Legion. Coincidentally, he romances Edith Wharton a la "40 Carats" (See it. You'll love it!) Some women, perhaps twentysomethings, may not like (or understand) the "May/December" romance of a twentysomething Indy for a fortysomething Edith, but it's truly moving. This is Episode 16. What can 17 hold in store?. Mixed bag of an episode. This next adventure in the exploits of a young Indiana Jones (played by the always watchable Sean Patrick Flanery) is something of a mixed bag.In the first segment, Indy is posted to the mountains of North Italy where, between smuggling German deserters across the battlefield, he finds time to compete with none other than Ernest Hemingway (Jay Underwood), for the affections of a young woman. The supposed comedy in this segment is excruciating, and Jay Underwood's playing of Hemingway comes off as nothing but smug.Much better is the second segment, where Indy is sent to Morocco where his French superiors are faced with an uprising from their enemies among the natives, who are being supplying with arms from a mysterious source. Indy meets the writers Edith Wharton (Clare Higgins) and Lowell Thomas (Evan Richards), who are well-played and have a good scene where they debate the virtues of writing fiction (Wharton) as opposed to journalism (Thomas). It's nice to see Roshan Seth (who played one of the villains in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom") pop up here as the more benign Sheikh Kamal, and British actor David Haig is good fun as a treacherous Colonel.If you can skip the mishap of the first segment, the intrigue and adventure of the second part more than make up for it. |
tt0087062 | City Heat | In Kansas City, 1933, near the end of Prohibition, a police lieutenant known by his last name, Speer (Eastwood), is acquainted with a former cop turned private eye named Mike Murphy (Reynolds). Speer and Murphy were once good friends, which changed after Murphy left the force.
On a rainy night, Speer comes to a diner for coffee. Two goons arrive, looking for Murphy. They pounce the minute Murphy arrives, starting a fistfight. Speer, no fan of Murphy's, ignores the fight until a goon causes him to spill his coffee. Both goons are thrown through the front door. Murphy sarcastically thanks Speer for saving his life.
The two rivals have eyes for Murphy's secretary Addy (Jane Alexander). She loves both and proves it when, after tenderly kissing Murphy goodbye, goes on a date with Speer. Murphy does have a new romantic interest, a rich socialite named Caroline Howley (Madeline Kahn), but finds himself unable to commit.
Speer and Addy go to a boxing match at which the mob boss Primo Pitt (Rip Torn) is present. Murphy's partner Dehl Swift (Richard Roundtree) is also there, and seems to be in cahoots with Pitt and his gang. Swift is in possession of a briefcase whose contents, secret accounting records of rival gang boss Leon Coll's operations, are the target of both Pitt's and Coll's gangs.
Swift, tailed by Speer and Addy, is confronted by Pitt's thugs at his apartment with Ginny Lee (Irene Cara) taken hostage. Ginny Lee manages to escape but Swift is shot and killed during a struggle with Pitt. A thug opens the briefcase but there's nothing inside. He picks up Swift's body and throws it out the window, where it lands on the roof of Speer's parked car (which is occupied by the horrified Addy, who waits after Speer goes to investigate in the apartment).
Murphy vows revenge on Pitt for killing his partner. He asks Speer for assistance and they form a reluctant alliance. After meeting with Murphy at a movie, Ginny is confronted by Pitt's thugs outside the theatre. As she tries to escape, she is hit by a car and seriously injured.
Murphy and Speer vow to avenge her and also to rescue Caroline, who has been kidnapped by Pitt's gang to force Murphy to hand over the missing records. A final showdown with Pitt and his gang occurs in a warehouse (where Speer continuously and humorously keeps pulling out weapons larger than Murphy's) and in a bordello (where Murphy shows up in costume to rescue Caroline).
As what's left of Pitt's gang are hauled off by police, Coll shows up holding Addy at gunpoint and demanding his records. Murphy and Speer hand over the briefcase in exchange for Addy, but the case is booby-trapped. Coll's car is blown up with Coll in it. In the end, the rivals have become friends again, at least until a casual remark leads to another all-out fight in a nightclub and ends with Speer and Murphy stepping outside and bickering, face to face. | neo noir, cult, humor, depressing, murder | train | wikipedia | By most accounts, Clint Eastwood hijacked his long-awaited teaming with fellow superstar Burt Reynolds and the credits bear this out.
After showing writer-director Blake Edwards the door, Eastwood recruited the more malleable Richard Benjamin to direct (in his autobiography, Reynolds said Benjamin was "terrified" of Eastwood), ordered Edwards' script be given a rewrite by Joseph Stinson whose only other credit was the previous year's Dirty Harry film, "Sudden Impact," brought in key players from his Malpaso crew (notably Fritz Manes as producer and Lennie Niehaus as composer), and even dumped Edwards' title, "Kansas City Jazz," in favor of the equally imaginative (I'm kidding) "City Heat."Despite Dirty Harry's takeover, "City Heat" emerges as a showcase for Reynolds.
If "City Heat" had been made that year, it would have been a superblockbuster.But by 1984, Reynolds' career was already declining (too many insipid "Cannonball Run" movies.) Eastwood -- who after "Dirty Harry" never worked with major co-stars -- may have finally said "yes" to co-starring with Reynolds because he was clearly the bigger star in 1984.
But even Eastwood was starting to age.All the problems others have related here are true, plus one more: Reynolds was hit in the face by a stunt man with a real chair while filming the opening diner fight scene.
Reynolds was a trouper and finished the movie (he is quite funny in it), but one of the reasons the movie is so short and incoherent is that the injured Reynolds couldn't work very long in the film (notice: in the final fight, "Reynolds" is wearing a wolf mask -- because that's not Reynolds.)"City Heat" opened at Xmas against "Beverly Hills Cop" and new star Eddie Murphy cleaned the clocks of old stars Eastwood and Reynolds .
We know this much; Mike Murphy (Burt Reynolds) and Lieutenant Speer (Clint Eastwood) are acquaintances on some level.
The weight of expectation for City Heat was massive, two iconic Hollywood actors together in a buddy buddy cop movie, one with nods and homages to film noir and old school gangster movies, it wasn't unreasonable to expect a movie to sit with the best on Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynold's then CV's circa 1984.
Lots of fun here, though, as Clint and Burt, one a cop, the other an ex-cop turned PI, reluctantly team up to cut a swathe through the gangsters ruling the roost in prohibition era Kansas City.Eastwood does his straight backed machismo act, throwing awesome punches along the way, while Reynolds is wonderfully cheerful as a tough guy who all things considered, would rather not get hurt!
This is one of the only times that Clint Eastwood & Burt Reynolds got together.
Richard Benjamin, a funny man directed, and I am surprised he didn't do better with it as he knows what good comedy is.While the movie is fun, it is not funny enough.
When a rival gang boss goes after the missing records, he is forced to team up with his ex-partner cop Lieutenant Speer (Clint Eastwood) to fight both gangs before KC erupts in a mob war.From a Blake Edwards story, this takes place when both Burt Reynold and Clint Eastwood was hitting a slow patch after being red hot.
This doesn't deserve all the hate it gets.If the finished film doesn't quite come together as it should,it comes down to the fact that the shooting was a troubled production.Two actresses quitting their roles,a director been replaced and Burt Reynolds suffering an injury that caused him to become addicted to painkillers and becoming increasingly difficult to work with,and forcing Clint Eastwood to handle a lot of the tension amongst the cast and director.Bearing all that in mind,this is still far from been the worst of it's kind.Set in the 30's,former police partners Eastwood and Reynolds are caught in the crossfire between two rival gangs when Reynolds' sidekick Richard Roundtree (Shaft)tries to con the local Mr.Big.The plot is a little confusing at first but by the halfway point everything makes sense and sets up the film's action-packed second half.There's plenty to enjoy here.Eastwood and Reynolds' banter (despite his difficulties during,Reynolds still does quite well)the settings,and the shootouts.One of the best things about the shootouts is the lack of intrusive music on the soundtrack which for me ruins a lot of movies.This is a surprisingly pleasing combination of comedy and film noir thriller,with Eastwood in particular sending up his own macho image at every opportunity..
When made back in 1984, it seemed like a great idea of having two of Hollywood's biggest moneymaking actors back then (Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds) starring together in an action/comedy that takes place during the 1930s.
Roger Ebert made a memorable take on "City Heat" saying quote: "Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds are stuck in one of the biggest bombs of the year, an incomprehensible mess disguised as a period gangster picture".
"City Heat" was so bad to most people that this was the first and last time Eastwood and Reynolds starred in a movie together.
However, inexplicably, the film isn't particularly good and I would go so far as to say it is a pretty full picture overall...which is odd for a gangster movie.Mike Murphy (Reynolds) is a private eye who used to be a cop.
At the same time, a tough but laconic cop, Lt. Speer (Eastwood) just happens to be hanging out and eventually gets involved as well.The biggest problem with the film is the lack of chemistry between Eastwood and Reynolds.
He survived on a liquid diet and popping A LOT of pills, he says it was about 50 a day (this led to Reynolds becoming addicted to painkillers) and lost over thirty pounds by the time the film wrapped (leading to rumours he had AIDS) This accident had dire consequences for Reynolds career, which he would never recover from.Plot In A Paragraph: A slick private eye (Reynolds) and tough police lieutenant (Eastwood) once best friends and partners, now bitter rivals reluctantly team up to investigate a murder.I love the opening of this movie, in the first of several neat period touches, City Heat opens with a black and white version of Warner Bros famous WB logo, this immediately sets the right feel for the era.City Heat's opening credits appear in an old time Broadway style font.
With Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood in the starring roles, we all excepted a really entertaining, good movie.
City Heat (1984) 1/2 (out of 4) Horrendous film about a cop (Clint Eastwood) and private eye (Burt Reynolds) who are investigating the same case.
You would think that with Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood this would be a solid gangster comedy, if not great, but you'd be wrong.The opening scene where Reynolds gets in a brawl in a diner while Eastwood coolly sits nearby keys off that "City Heat" is not meant to be taken seriously; in fact, it's downright goofy.
Detectives Speer (Clint Eastwood) and Mike Murphy (Burt Reynolds) were very good friends but the lack of discipline and a certain involvement with bad companies from the part of Murphy made these two guys not get along very well.
In the middle of all this there's plenty of mob godfathers (played by Tony LoBianco and Rip Torn) looking for something that Mike's partner hide.The whole plot is confusing and there's not enough space for incredible action scenes but at least writer Blake Edwards made a very funny movie.
So that kind of Eastwood by Eastwood condition, which would have him completely later, left its early bad effects on this poor movie !#_(Burt Reynolds) broke his jaw while he was shooting his first scene, the first scene of the movie also, then he got too many medicines along with painkillers, hence the lively star lost 20 KG in no time, and maybe they changed some parts in the script to handle that carefully.
Despite some action comedy and little funny lines, the script looked so disassembled, Eastwood's comedy looked fabricated and tasteless, the time that the 2 stars shared on screen was less than 15 minutes, and then there was that scene where (Reynolds) was talking about the greatness and the difficulty of being a cop; like we're in a serious movie or wannabe one!
Basically we didn't even know the reason why (Reynolds)'s character left the force and turned into detective !!I think that the movie's last line is the fairest review it can get : (You'll always be "shorty" to me) as it failed in fulfilling its main promise concerning 2 great icons in one hot action comedy, or making anything perfect anyway.
There is nothing spoof about the rest of the script, its just a straightforward hardboiled noir imitation.So this movie does two incompetent things: directly appropriates plot elements and scenes from previous and better noirs, and performs them in a way that isn't spoof enough to laugh, and isn't serious enough to be taken seriously.You can tell this is right by watching the two leads.
There is nothing spoof about the rest of the script, its just a straightforward hardboiled noir imitation.So this movie does two incompetent things: directly appropriates plot elements and scenes from previous and better noirs, and performs them in a way that isn't spoof enough to laugh, and isn't serious enough to be taken seriously.You can tell this is right by watching the two leads.
CITY HEAT is a decent action/comedy starring Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood.
There are some funny moments throughout the film, mostly from Eastwood and Reynolds, but some of the scene's went on longer than they should have, especially the shootout's and fistfights.
CITY HEAT (1984) ** Burt Reynolds, Clint Eastwood, Jane Alexander, Madeline Kahn, Rip Torn, Tony Lo Bianco, Irene Cara.
So-so shoot'em up set in Kansas City circa 1930s with former cop duo Burt and Clint up against the usual each trying to out spoof their tough guy images with mixed results..
Despite starring two great actors in Clint eastwood and Burt Reynolds City Heat falters all through its running time.
I really enjoyed watching Clint Eastwood and the late Burt Reynolds in their only teaming in City Heat.
After Burt Reynolds died recently, I looked for many of his films online, including this one which was released 34 years ago and turned out to be the only teaming of Burt and Clint Eastwood during the time they were the two biggest box office stars in the country.
"City Heat" pairs two macho screen icons, Clint "Dirty Harry" Eastwood and Burt "The Bandit" Reynolds, in an average cops & gangsters saga set in 1933 Kansas City.
They must work together when Mikes' partner Dehl Swift (Richard "Shaft" Roundtree) buys a whole lot of trouble by getting mixed up with competing gangsters Primo Pitt (Rip Torn) and Leon Coll (Tony Lo Bianco), and a stolen set of ledgers.There are some interesting behind-the-scenes stories that are, in truth, more amusing than the tale being spun in the movie.
When Burt Reynold's career took a nose dive after making stupid movies like Cannonball Run, I thought this might be a comeback but only to succeed by driving another nail in the coffin for Mr. Reynolds.Reynolds plays detective Mike Murphy an irresponsible smart ass who was partners with Lieutenant Speer (Clint Eastwood).
That Clint Eastwood, Burt Reynolds, Richard Benjamin and Blake Edwards just didn't say know to the whole thing..
We're left with Eastwood calling Reynolds short.** City Heat (12/5/84) Richard Benjamin ~ Clint Eastwood, Burt Reynolds, Jane Alexander, Madeline Kahn.
Eastwood and Reynolds seem to almost sleepwalk through their roles, and the supporting players like Madeline Kahn and Irene Cara are forced to rely on characters that stereotype characters we might have seen in another movie.
At first I was very excited to watch this movie because Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds (two of my favorite personalities but not actors) would make a good team and the theatrical trailer looked funny.
Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood detonate everything in " City Heat "!!!.
Two consecrated stars, an efficient direction and a story loaded with action and tension: those are the ingredients of "City Heat", a comic adventure that happens in the decade of forty, starring the movie-stars Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood.
" City Heat " is a quality amusement, a film that entertains and makes us to give good laughs!by narrating the story of two rivals who have to team-up and face a powerful gangster, the director Richard Benjamin tries to offer his best work: he seems determined to build the sceneries with an extreme precision of details, he counted with an excellent picture and he extracted of his cast the best interpretation!at the same time comfortable in doing comic and delicious scenes, Benjamin also comes out well in orchestrating thrilling action scenes, as the final sequence, of the explosion of the car...
It has been a long time since Burt and Clint, two great friends, planned to work together and both, as choosing " City Heat " did very well.
The film facilitates and impels the two thoroughly to explore their characteristics and interpretation methods: Burt shows once again, in the character Mike Murphy, the cynic, charming and funny adventurer, like the Bandit, of " Smokey and The Bandit ", whom the public knows so well, and Clint is a hard and implacable cop who never takes a shot but he gets to kill all his enemies, as his character Dirty Harry...
"City Heat" will show everything !beyond of being one of the best films of Burt Reynolds's career, it is a memorable and exciting work!this is a proof that two consecrated stars, a competent direction and a good story always constitute an excellent show!don't forget the popcorn, call the friends and relax: get ready to embark in a hallucinating day!!!.
Pitt's men kidnap Murphy's girlfriend and Murphy teams up with Speer and the two work to find the books, rescue Murphy's girlfriend and bring down the gangsters.Given that this film stars both Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds, both major stars when it was made, it is rather surprising that these days it seems totally forgotten.
The teaming up of Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds in City Heat could have been a box office success, however this turned out to be a complete disappointment.
The lukewarm story and the desperate grab for laughs didn't help either.Set in Kansas City, 1933 where the Prohibition era ruled the streets, Police Lieutenant Speer (Clint Eastwood) and Private Investigator Mike Murphy (Burt Reynolds) are former friends turned bitter enemies who find themselves reluctantly forming an uneasy alliance again after the death of Murphy's partner Swift (Richard Roundtree) after attempting to blackmail mobster Primo Pitt (Rip Torn) with Leon Coll's (Tony Lo Bianco) accounting records, another rival mobster.
Speer and Murphy must investigate Swift's murder as well as prevent an all out mobster war which threatens to erupt in the middle of Kansas City.Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds are two actors who could do no harm no matter which movie they are involved in.
The story must work otherwise it is a waste of time and effort, and City Heat failed dismally.Unless you are a fan of Clint Eastwood or Burt Reynolds, this is not worth it.4/10..
Casting Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds together in an action comedy sounds good when one begins to think about it but it doesn't work when it actually happens.
Many reviewers have missed the mark when judging "City Heat" starring Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds.
This movie has some rawness and grit, interesting story line, plot, and sub-plots, with Eastwood as a tough no-nonsense detective, Speer, and Reynolds as an ex-cop and Private Eye, Murphy, who butt heads with each other, in Prohibition-era 1933 (last year of Prohibition, in fact), but team up to investigate mob murder and corruption.
The plot also calls for rescuing Alexander who Eastwood fancies, Madeline Kahn who's Burt's girlfriend and chanteuse Irene Cara.City Heat is not at the top of the list of films by Eastwood and Reynolds.
It had the two biggest stars in the world at the time, together, in what should have been a fun romp.But while there are a couple of good scenes ( the opening fight, and the shoot out ), the film makes no sense whatsoever, and becomes boring, very very quickly.Eastwood appears to be on autopilot, seemingly knowing that this could be the biggest film of his career, and Reynolds, is over the top wacky, but in a really annoying way.The sets are authentic, but it appears that all the action takes place on one street, and every situation concludes in the same apartment.Its a shame, because the opening has so much potential, but falters very soon after.A huge disappointment....
There are frequent gun fights, but hardly anyone is hurt.It might have been an attraction to pair the two stars, Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds, who were at the top of their craft to star in "City Heat", but their characters do not make much sense.
Cop comedy with Eastwood and Reynolds, done in film noir style..
Then he becomes a fighting machine.Burt Reynolds is his friend and investigator Mike Murphy, who is constantly the butt of "short" jokes next to Eastwood.Other notables include Jane Alexander, Madeline Kahn, and Rip Torn.
A Film that Grows on You. In the first hour of City Heat I was beginning to ask myself why I liked Eastwood so much.
Burt Reynolds is really the star and main character playing tough guy private detective Mike Murphy who seems to always be getting himself into trouble.
Clint Eastwood makes more of a cameo appearance as Lieutenant Speer, who is in the movie enough but he's just kind of there.
Richard Roundtree also does an admirable job if not brief as Dehl Swift.I really think City Heat would appeal far more to the older movie going crowd who would appreciate it's gritty detective setting and Reynolds and Eastwood in their equally gritty, dry humor performances. |
tt0094155 | Tin Men | Set in the year 1963, Ernest Tilley (Danny DeVito) and Bill "BB" Babowsky (Richard Dreyfuss) are two very different door-to-door aluminum siding salesmen in Baltimore, Maryland. Working for different companies, the "tin men" are prepared to do almost anything—legal or illegal—to close a sale.
Their first meeting is in the opening scene when BB buys a new Cadillac and almost immediately crashes into another Cadillac driven by Tilley. The accident is caused by BB, as he reverses into the street from the dealer's forecourt. Tilley, though distracted, clearly has the right of way. Both BB and Tilley blame each other for the car accident and declare war.
After they smash glass on each other's cars (BB smashes Tilley's headlights, and Tilley smashes BB's car windows in return), BB takes it a step further. He sets out to seduce Tilley's wife Nora (Barbara Hershey) as an act of revenge. When he calls Tilley immediately after having sex with her to hear his reaction, Tilley tells BB to keep Nora; he wants to be rid of her.
In between their personal war, the two tin men's personal lives are shown over the course of the film; BB is a smooth-talking con-artist who scams naive and comely young women with his sales pitches. BB soon does some soul searching for himself when his much older partner and mentor Moe Adamson (John Mahoney) is hospitalized with a serious heart condition. In contrast to BB, Tilley is a hapless loser who can't make a sale no matter how hard he honestly (or dishonestly) tries. Tilley also has a serious gambling problem and squanders what little money he makes on horse race bets which creates a rift between him and his long-suffering wife Nora. Because of Tilley's addiction to gambling, he is heavily in debt to various creditors and the IRS. Nora, who works as a local secretary, is frustrated by Tilley's indifference to his gambling addiction as well as his irresponsibility to pay house bills and indifference to life in general. Also, Tilley finds his life falling apart when the IRS begins confiscating his possessions for unpaid property taxes which include his house and, at the end of the film, his own car.
Exhausted by their rivalry, the two men decide to play a game of pool to decide who should get Nora in order to end to their personal war. BB loses, but he does not honor the bet. He has fallen in love for the first time, and Nora has moved in with BB to make a future with him.
The climax of the film is set at the newly formed Maryland Home Improvement Commission which is charged with uprooting corrupt sales practices in the home-improvement industry, which subpoenas both men. After Tilley, and then BB, give testimony about their sales practices, the commission takes away both of their sales licenses. While Tilley gives up his license reluctantly, BB does so willingly as part of his outlook on his life's new direction. In the final scene, BB, seeing that Tilley has lost everything including his car, takes pity on him and gives him a ride in his. Having lost their jobs and reconciled to their fate of being unemployed, Tilley and BB begin sharing ideas for a new business they can create for themselves. | revenge | train | wikipedia | 'Tin Men' is about two aluminum siding salesmen (working for competing companies) who get into a car accident, and both believing the other is to blame, decide to get revenge on one another.
But the more I think about it, I believe it may be true: Like most great movies that are under-appreciated, they aren't trying to impress us.
Much in the tradition of other great American works of art that examine the trade of salesman (Death of a Salesman, etc.), Tin Men is an indepth (and very funny) portrait of their psychological and social world.
Most people remember the dialogue, seemingly ad-libbed during the diner scenes by the cast (Danny DeVito, Jackie Gayle, Bruno Kirby)--and that looks like the same diner that Barry Levinson used for his first movie.
But the characters and their quirks are totally fleshed out before the conflict (DeVito's stiff neck, Dreyfuss's ladies' man schtick), making for a few truly hilarious lines and scenes (Gayle talking to DeVito about what a great dancer Dreyfuss is comes to mind).
The movie really has a sad story underneath about very unhappy people who delight in the misfortunes of others, until Barbara Hershey's character realizes what's going on.
Tin Men is one of my favorite movies of all time.
The thing that always strikes me whenever I watch this movie is that while the characters of Richard Dreyfuss and Danny DeVito are seemingly feuding non-stop throughout the movie, in reality they are actually kindred spirits.
I love the diner dialog which is reminiscent of Barry Levinson's previous film "Diner." The background scenes of Baltimore landscape add to the realistic atmosphere of the movie.
Diner vs Rain Man. You can tell when you are watching a movie made by Barry Levinson.
Diner, Tin Men and Rain Man all have a similar touch, even though they are different movies, they are made by the same artist.
DeVito with his extremely limited range, again lands himself in a movie that totally welcomes his character.You would like to have seen just how Fraziers dad (Mahoney) injured his leg, but for some reason it is not detailed here.
TIN MEN is certainly among the dozen or so movies that I have watched more than a dozen or so times, so I have no claim to being objective about critiquing it.
Beyond the obvious praise it's due for its period detail and its terrific supporting comedic cast and the balancing act Levinson achieves between its overall tragic arc and its genuinely funny script, what keeps me coming back to this movie time after time are its many "perfect" moments, most of which come courtesy of Barbara Hershey.
Certainly more--a lot more--is needed for a great movie, and whether Tin Men has all the other elements in place is a question I'll leave to the professional critics.
Tin Men. Rival aluminum-siding salesman declare war in another of director Levinson's returns to his hometown Baltimore, with Dreyfuss and DeVito playing the two feuding parties who constantly try to one up one another in a series of silly and childish gags.
We are shown Sales techniques that we all suspected existed, and the Home Improvement Commission is also interested in these guys, but not in a good way.Mix into the fray of these questionable business practices the intense and violent personal feud between BB Babowsky and Ernest Tillie and the never-ending personal waterloos for the latter, and you have a recipe for hilarity.
Although this is a drama of days long gone, Director Barry Levinson instills a brilliant sense of comedy here, tragic comedy of life."Tinmen" is the term for aluminum siding film-flam salesmen, there are some fun scenes at the beginning with John Mahoney, showing how they gain a customers trust before selling them on aluminum siding which they don't need.Richard Dreyfus is B.B. Babowsky, who runs Gibraltar Aluminum.
The costumes and sets are funny and kitsch, way before "Mad Men" was a popular show.Danny DeVito as Tilly steals the show at the latter part of the film, he is being stalked by the IRS as well as the "Home Improvement Commission", which seems a take on the McCarthy era of censorship.Set in Baltimore, this film is really a forgotten gem from the late 80's.
Dealing with the funny rivalry between two aluminum-siding salesmen, "Tin Men" (as what these men are called in their business) excels itself in just being an ordinary comedy, it also paints a portrait of a decade with a updated look at it; the current 1980's seemed to shape a model for these characters and the situations they've been through.
One of the films of the 'Baltimore quadrilogy' (the other films being "Diner", "Avalon" and "Liberty Heights"), all directed by Barry Levinson, who lived in the area, this film looks back at the city of the 1960's, most precisely in 1963, where an simple automobile accident between two tin men started a small but funny war between them.
On one side we have the energetic Bill 'BB' Babowski (Richard Dreyfuss), who recently acquired a new Cadillac but within five minutes of getting inside of it his car was hit by the too agitated for his height and size Ernest Tilley (Danny DeVito).
And that goes on, with smashing cars, fist fights that will never happen, one trying to score higher than the other until BB makes the smart move of going out with Ernest's wife (Barbara Hershey) and that might backfire in a surprising way for both of these guys.It's not all about rivalry between these two but it's also about how they guarantee their work (through hilarious scams selling aluminum-siding for houses, pretending to be part of Life magazine quoting that it will make the house look better in the magazine's photos and others scams too).
The premise, despite some lack of originality, perfectly works; the movie is warmly funny, not only in the arguments between DeVito and Dreyfuss but also in the talks they have with their friends (played by John Mahoney, Bruno Kirby, Richard Portnow, Seymour Cassel and others), one of these talks concerning about the irrealism during the cowboys talks in "Bonanza" (again, a contemporary look of the past, people wouldn't notice back then these kind of problems in the TV show).
Notice the great soundtrack made by one of the groups of the moment, the Fine Young Cannibals, who appear in the film as band members of a nightclub often visited by both groups of tin men.
The idea of a film depicting the cutthroat antagonism between two aluminum siding salesmen must have been alarming to the people at Touchstone Pictures, who no doubt insisted on certain commercial concessions, including a strictly gratuitous appearance by the pop group Fine Young Cannibals (out of place in the early '60s setting), and the casting of two high-profile names in the title roles (an allusion to the heartless hero of Oz).
Danny DeVito and Richard Dreyfuss portray the disreputable rival salesmen who become mortal enemies after a minor fender bender dings their new Cadillacs.
Tin Men is a funny film that really focuses on the theme of man vs.
However, the movie felt just a tad long despite it being under two hours.This film, which is directed by Barry Levinson, is about two tin men who are both aluminum-panel sellers.
After a fender-bender, these two men becomes ultimate rivals and do anything to create havoc with each other.This film is well-acted thanks to the strong leads by Danny DeVito and Richard Dreyfuss.
Personally, I felt the film is at it's best when we see problem after problem occurring to DeVito's character, whose life goes sharply downhill over the course of the film.Overall, Tin Men is a solid film that talks about what happens when fate pit two rivals against each other.
Danny Devito and Richard Dreyfuss are both very good in their roles, and they manage to be both funny and believable at the same time.
Dreyfuss, the real eager vengeful beaver, ups the revenge, when he makes a move on Devito's wife, Nora (the always great Hershey, who like her co stars and some others were enjoying the fruits of their careers thanks to Touchstone video) Of course, he falls in love with her, and as for Devito's reaction, you could say it was like that of Ruthless People.
This is the second of Levinson's Baltimore trilogy.The term "tin men" referred to aluminum siding salesmen who were just a cut under car salesmen and just above con artists.
Barry Levinson thrusts us into the middle of a rivalry between two of the more devious of aluminum siding salesmen, played by two of the most nervous-angst actors in the business: Danny DeVito and Richard Dreyfus.
(Of course the biggest mystery of the film is how Hershey ended up with DeVito in the first place but that could be the subject of a PhD dissertation.) The cars owned by the salesmen are important enough to also be characters.
But looming in the background is the US Housing Commission who are starting to become wise to their practices.A very enjoyable film overall, completely unpredictable, with fantastic performances by the three leads DeVito, Dreyfus, and Hershey.
Richard Dreyfuss and Danny De Vito, who work for two different aluminum siding companies as salesman, like to "run into" each other, and are very proud of their respective Cadillacs.Each are unscrupulous salesmen, and would do anything to achieve their goals, and I mean anything.
This movie dialogue is great, the scams they pull and the scams Dreyfuss pulls on DeVito's wife are so funny.
By far an underrated comedy with a slight accent of dark humor, DeVito don't need any introducing such greatness career as comedian, those smart lines are already recognized by the viewers even when we talking to himself, in opposite tendency by Richard Dreyfuss an serious actor, none the less a smart screemplay suggest an attractive and endless possibilities to create a dense atmosphere to the picture to evolve by in own means, leting us to an pleasant journey with, a wise plot and sub plot with many secondary characters with the same amount, pity is a forgotten gem from the real cinephile, which deserves a second chance.Resume:First watch: 1993 / How many: 2 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7.5.
Rival aluminum-siding salesmen find themselves an increasingly hostile tit-for-tat feud spurred on by an automobile accident this Barry Levinson movie.
One of two films that Levinson made in 1987, 'Tin Men' never quite found the same audience as 'Good Morning, Vietnam', which is a shame as it is arguably better, even if its lack of appeal to some is understandable.
Add in some genuinely funny moments (Dreyfuss realising that DeVito actually doesn't love his wife) and 'Tin Men' is a flawed film that still works surprisingly well.
I'm not a particular fan of any of the players, and I never have liked Barbara Hershey, but they all fill their parts beautifully here - especially Danny DeVito, whose pitch-perfect Baltimore accent has never been equaled on film, not even a Waters film.
Director Barry Levinson returns to his beloved Baltimore with 'Tim Men', a film about two salesmen at war in the early 1960s.
Thinking about it this is a good movie to show to aliens who are interested in what it`s like to be human* It`s not as crazy as it sounds after all everyone is motivated by if not love then at least a need for a sexual partner , everyone is motivated by greed , and alas everyone can be motivated by hate , without doubt the most destructive impulse within the human condition
Who wants to watch a movie about TIN salesmen?
I don't think Richard Dreyfuss or Danny DeVito are that funny.
As for Danny DeVito: he plays the same role each time and is good at those kinds of roles, but he's missing humor..
This movie did prove one thing, Richard Dreyfuss and Danny DeVito cannot act.
TIN MEN (1987) **1/2 Richard Dreyfuss, Danny De Vito, Barbara Hershey, John Mahoney, Michael Tucker, Jackie Gayle, Seymour Cassel, Matt Craven, Bruno Kirby.
Second in filmmaker Barry Levinson's affectionately nostalgic 'Baltimore Trilogy circa 1964, about two feuding aluminum siding salesmen (the film's title is their trade's nickname) Dreyfuss and De Vito in a grudge war after a fender bender involving their Cadillacs, leading to De Vito's wife, Hershey, being used as a sexual pawn in their immature fracas.Fine period detail and production values, a game cast, and witty repartee especially by Gayle and his constant bewilderment on the tv series 'Bonanza'..
Classic levinson film, about 2 men, who want to do get something more out of themselves and life as they know it.
it was so much fun for me to check out a barry levinson film (diner, rain man, good morning vietnam, sleepers) that i have never seen before!
this is a story about two middle aged men, who played by richard dreyfuss, and danny devito wonderfully, who unexepectedly meet up, when there car's crash into eachother.
great movie if you love dreyfuss and devito..
It's not the wackiness or the dark humor, there's an oppressive tone to this movie that doesn't quite fit with the story.That said, I loved Barbara Hershey in her role as DeVito's unhappy wife.
Tin Men is one of my favourite movies for 6 reasons: 1 It's set in a small world inhabited by Aluminium siding salesmen trying to sell cladding to cover up the characteristic Baltimore brick Clook and with the backdrop of a 'Home Improvement Commission' set to break all of the salesmen's scams.
1963 Baltimore is perfect and Richard Dreyfus, Danny deVito, and Barbara Hershey as the leads are perfection.
The Fine Young Cannibals, heading by the unmistakable voice of Roland Gift singing 'Good Thing' is also brilliant.Things to watch - when Tilly (deVito) has made what he thinks is his comeback sale and they go to the bar and FTC are singing,- the atmosphere shots in the bar of all the punters is one of my favourite movie moments.
- The sales scene near the beginning of the film where we learn about the industry - the growing feud between the two main protagonists - Tilly appearing before the commission - the diner lunches that Tilly's team have when they keep going on about TV (Bonanza and other shows).I think this is Barry Levinson's best work..
Oddball, retro films like this never make the all-time top 100 lists like one of its characters, "Tin Men" comes across as a bit of a small guy, not one of life's winners.
Scenes such as those in the diner where the rival groups of tin men chew the fat in their own unique and entertaining ways, show pale imitators how it's done: shame on all modern Hollywood scripts that pad out a weak story by having actors babble a great deal of nonsense, very fast (Lethal Weapon 4, anyone?).I hate films about salesmen: that isn't what this is.
"Tin Men" has rounded characters in a believably drawn world (in which a man's car might just come higher up the list than his wife) and a story that's really just about human beings who laugh, fail, make mistakes and don't always triumph at the end shot and scripted with a light touch.
Tin Men (Barry Levinson, 1987) is a nifty examination of the American Dream, focusing on a pair of aluminum-siding salesmen in early-'60s Baltimore who engage in an escalating campaign of retribution after their Cadillacs collide.
It flirts with the hustlers' romanticised image of themselves, but also shows the reality: they're just a bunch of fraudsters, flogging the American Dream.Tin Men is a subtle, masterfully-crafted little film, boosted by strong performances from the leads (rough edges and fluffed lines intact), nice supporting turns - including Barbara Hershey as DeVito's put-upon wife - and writer-director Barry Levinson's terrific ear for dialogue.
His script is realistic but finely-honed and, years before Tarantino provided his own post-modern take on eatery conversation (and some five years after Levinson's own Diner), offers several servings of pop-culture-savvy squabbling that complement the movie's more ambitious elements.There's one excellent exchange in which DeVito tells his friends he'd never seen Dreyfuss before the crash, only to find that pal Stanley Brock won't let it lie.
Herein, after buying a brand new Cadillac, Richard Dreyfuss (as Bill "BB" Babowsky) backs his car into Danny DeVito (as Ernest Tilley).
Fighting over Barbara Hershey (as Nora) is complicated because she and DeVito were initially nearing divorce, and Dreyfuss decides he likes her more than he thought.
The setting is very well done, but the story is not engaging.****** Tin Men (3/6/87) Barry Levinson ~ Richard Dreyfuss, Danny DeVito, Barbara Hershey, John Mahoney.
So, I was not surprised at all, when the Fine Young Cannibals CD, "The Raw and the Cooked" released after this film- went all the way to the top (it contained 2 songs from this film) That said, I LOVE the storyline, the acting, Richard Dreyfuss is adorable, looks wise and character wise.
If you wanna kick back, relax, and really have a great laugh, this is the movie for you.Set around 1962, the title, Tin Men, refers to aluminum siding salesmen.
A wonderfully funny movie, Dreyfuss and De Vito play their parts so well, taking two fairly unscrupulous characters and making them somewhat likable.
Overall, terrific performances by Barbara Hershey, Richard Drefus, Danny De Vito and, above all, the British-born actor, John Mahoney, make this film a treat at every viewing.
These boys (which is what they are) even in this time frame, Richard Dreyfuss and Dann DeVito (who usually are unbearable, even then) are American saps, which makes this film quite enjoyable.
Best performance = Hershey, Dreyfuss, or DeVito.
Tin Men. A bit of weird film when I think about it, just about two guys having a bit of a fight but not actually doing much except seeing each other.
Basically Richard Dreyfuss as Bill 'BB' Babowsky and Danny DeVito as Ernest Tilley accidentally crash into each others cars. |
tt0089280 | Hobgoblins | The film opens with a security guard named Dennis investigating a deserted film vault at an old movie studio. While inside, his fantasy of being a rock star comes to life, but he dies while performing on stage. His boss, Mr. McCreedy (Jeffrey Culver), closes the door upon discovering the body.
A young man named Kevin (Tom Bartlett) takes the vacant job so that he can impress his girlfriend Amy (Paige Sullivan). After his first shift, he drives home to Amy, finding that his two friends, the sex-crazed Daphne (Kelley Palmer) and the dorky Kyle (Steven Boggs), waiting for him, and Daphne's Army boyfriend Nick (Billy Frank) arrives. Nick and Kevin spar with rakes in a long, protracted, repetitive scene. After Kevin loses horribly, Amy berates him for his weaknesses while Daphne and Nick have sex in Nick's van in the background of the scene.
While in pursuit of a burglar the next evening, Kevin stumbles across the vault, which contains a small group of hairy, demonic little aliens — the hobgoblins. They escape, leaving Kevin stunned. His boss, the elderly Mr. McCreedy, explains that the hobgoblins crash landed on the studio lot decades earlier, and he has been closely guarding them ever since. The hobgoblins have the hypnotic power to make a person's wildest fantasies come true; however, they also kill their victims in the process when people's fantasies turn against them.
The hobgoblins go straight to Kevin's house, where his friends are partying, as they are attracted by the bright lights. The hobgoblins quickly make their fantasies come true, but with dire consequences. The quiet, prudish Amy's fantasy leads her to the sleazy nightclub Club Scum. Kevin and the others follow her there. It turns out that Amy's deepest fantasy is to lose her sexual inhibitions and be a stripper.
The nightclub erupts into chaos while Kevin and his friends try to kill the rampaging hobgoblins. Nick is given a fantasy in which he leads a commando raid. In the melee, Nick is set on fire by a hand grenade thrown by his commanding officer and is apparently killed (again, his fantasy goes to extremes and turns against him), though he returns later in the movie, bandaged and on crutches, but otherwise unharmed. Kevin kills the hobgoblin in control of Amy before she can have sex with the scruffy bouncer Roadrash (Duane Whitaker). Although Amy is restored to her original personality, her experience leaves her less sexually repressed than she was before.
Thinking that all the hobgoblins are dead, Kevin, Amy, Kyle, and Daphne return to the lot to report back to Mr. McCreedy. Kevin is confronted by the burglar from earlier that night and beats him in a fight, finally proving his bravery to Amy. Kevin's victory is short lived as the burglar (yet another phantom created by the hobgoblins) pulls a gun from an ankle holster and aims it at Kevin. Just as the burglar is about to fire, McCreedy shoots the alien, thus saving Kevin's life. The remaining hobgoblins run back into the vault, which McCreedy has filled with explosives. The hobgoblins are then blown to pieces. Amy promises to have sex with Kevin, Nick returns to have sex with Daphne, and Kyle, odd man out, asks to use McCreedy's phone, presumably for more phone sex. | cult | train | wikipedia | No matter how you look at this movie, it is just awful.If you view it as a horror, then it is an unscary movie with the monsters being hand puppets.If you look at it as a comedy, then you will notice most of the humor falls flat and is just lame.If it is a romance you will wonder why a guy would stay with such a B**ch!If you look at it as an action you can't really pull for the whiny hero.As you can see this movie just fails to deliver anything remotely entertaining.
The acting (and I am using this term loosely) is atrocious, the Hobgoblins are some of the worst puppets you will ever see, and the garden tool fight has to be seen to be believed.
Before watching this movie I thought Manos: Hands of Fate was the worse piece of crap I ever saw, but at least Manos moves so slowly you might fall asleep, thereby rescuing your eyes from the pain it will suffer.
The greatest tragedy of this movie is that the old man that keeps the Hobgoblins "locked" up makes it to the final scene.
A creature that makes fantasies with disastrous results, rather than the cliché Worst Nightmare and the overdone Twisted Wish, is a truly fascinating film idea.Thought: The reason why hobgoblins need to be killed before day is that they are attracted to bright lights.
During the day, bright lights don't show up well, so they could go anywhere.Count the Hobgoblins: Four hobgoblins drive out of the film studio, and yet at least nine of the pernicious plush-toys are killed throughout the course of the movie.Discussion Question: If you had a frigid, demanding, unappreciative girlfriend, would you enter garden-tool-combat with a military chunkhead?
Unfortunately Hobgoblins lacks some of the key ingredients of Gremlins, notably the likable characters, plot, credibility and effects, and Gremlins was quite funny in places whereas Hobgoblins just isn't.In fiction good writers try hard to make you like the main character, that's how fiction has worked ever since some Greek guy put a mask on and pretended to be someone else.
His friends include a rake-fighting military tough guy, some weedy gay guy in red shorts and a girl so sexual that the mere sound of her boyfriends car horn causes her to lift her skirt up in anticipation.The film has one good idea, basically these hobgoblins can bring your every fantasy to life.
HOBGOBLINS is without a doubt the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life.The story is stupid, so I won't go into much detail.
A loser named Kevin (Tom Bartlett) is trying to make his annoying and non-supportive girlfriend proud of him, so he takes a job as a security guard and unleashes a band of stupid-looking puppets called Hobgoblins, who kill people by giving them what they really want.
The hobgoblins themselves are the most fake looking puppets I have ever seen.Unless in MST3K, this movie should be avoided at all costs.
Meddling kids track down gremlin-like creatures from movie lot before they kill people by projecting their fantasies.
But no, "Hobgoblins" it is and it is bad - bad like your grandparents' wallpaper, bad as pink flamingos on your lawn, bad like underwear that says "Home of the Whopper"...and I think we'll stop there.Well, Mike and the robots fight valiantly but try as they might, they can do only so much with "Hobgoblins" before they realize that, yes, the director DOES need kicked in the shin.Real, real hard.One star for "Hobgoblins", seven stars for the MST3K version..
I can watch a piece of crap like "The Bloodwaters of Dr. Z" (aka "Zaat") over and over and over with hardly any ill effects (I like it in fact- btw, it will be on TCM later this month- October, 2009) but "Hobgoblins" is a whole 'nother ballgame.The worst part of it all may be that it's now about 12 hours after the movie ended, I had a good night's sleep, some coffee and some dry toast, my medications, and yet the ersatz "New Wave" dance music that Amy, Red Shorts, and Laraine Newman were frolicking to in the living room is STILL RUNNING THROUGH MY HEAD.
To explain just how bad this movie is, I need to tell a story of the second time I saw it with a group of people, in the spring of 2000.
They implored me to just give them a few minutes to recover, to which I responded, "Oh, well I know it's bad, but I guess I may be a little desensitized since..." Now these people were close friends with whom I had shared much, like confessing attractions to various cartoon characters as 3:00 AM, and my most bizarre substitute for toilet paper I've ever resorted to story.
Wow, I just finally managed, after several attempts, to finish watching this god awful movie, only to learn that Rick Sloane and his production team have completed a straight-to-video sequel this year.Of all movies reviewed by MST3K--and they truly dig from the bottom of the barrel, screening the reputationally bad 'Manos,' 'Werewolf,' 'The Incredibly Strange,' and the lesser know disasters like 'Laserblast,' 'Zombie Nightmare,' and 'Time Chasers,'--this certainly has to be the absolute biggest pile of garbage they'd ever shown (which makes it perfect for riffing).
Very simple, the movie is about a bunch of Munchies-like gremlins on the loose, exploiting people's desires for fame, fortune, prowess, and of course, sex in ways that end up with people getting killed.
But this is the kind of movie where the acting is so ridiculous (a test of machismo, for example, is illustrated by two guys who battle in the front yard with garden tools), the writing is so forced (such as the oft-described scene of a gremlin hanging on the arm of one girl who would notice it, if only she turned her head a quarter to the left...
A group of extremely unlikable A-holes are tormented by lame puppets that some elderly douche bag night-watchman has kept locked away in a film vault for twenty years for no reason whatsoever.Many people know this film merely from MST3K's spot-on ribbing of the flick.
From the one of the most awful 'fight' scenes I've ever witnessed to the stuffed toy 'aliens' that suffer from a lack of motion (I had a My Pet Monster that was scarier) right up to the atrocious acting (I had a My Pet Monster that was more charismatic) However, that being said Rick Sloan's "Vice Academy" films are somehow, and trust me I have no earthly idea how, much worse.
In this film, a night security guard watching some random warehouse doesn't listen to the senior guard and accidentally releases some poor looking, cat-like, puppet hobgoblins.
Well, because this is one of the worst movies that has ever been produced, right up there with other stinkers such as Manos: The Hands of Fate, The Wild World of Batwoman and Red Zone Cuba.A few things that make this movie bad, the Hobgoblins themselves, wish, like one of them mention, its just a plush toy, another thing, the characters, ugh, just ugh.
One of thems a slut, another one, a rigid girl friend, the third, a nerd obessed with phone sex, and a sex crazed military guy whose the boyfriend to the slut.The next and most horrible thing about this movie, the Club Scum scene where the military guy, after getting a load of hand gernades from his Sargent (who the hell just hands out hand gernades in the first place?) starts just chunking them over his shoulder blowing them up.These are just a few of the most horrible things about this movie, beware unless watching the MST3K version..
An old man, his sidekick and a group of friends must take on these monsters, when they're not too busy listening to Wang Chung.This film isn't really good, unless you enjoy laughing at bad cinema and possibly getting drunk while doing so.
Hobgoblins has one flat-liner of a story, some hilariously awful 'special effects', stupid attempts at juvenile humor, a painfully bad cast, and not a bit of talent in sight.
However, as bad as it was, I don't believe that this was the worst film that MST has ever featured, or the worst movie of all time period.
In my opinion, "Manos: the Hands of Fate" holds the title for worst film ever, with "Attack of the the Eye Creatures"(that's really the way the title goes!) coming in second.
But the most hilariously bad part of the film are the hobgoblins which are nothing more than cheap puppets--not much more realistic than ones kids might get from Toys R Us!
And I just found out that there apparently is a sequel to this abysmal movie; but again, I have no interest in watching that, not after having seen enough of part one to see what it was.I can't find any reason for why anyone should take the time to sit down and watch "Hobgoblins", much less actually invest any money or time in doing so..
Hobgoblins currently sits as the 30th worst movie ever made on IMDb and lets be clear it's terrible.........pee poor stuff that makes the average cheesy 80's movie look artistic.In a cross between Critters, Gremlins & an ounce of Wishmaster this creature feature doesn't deserve its place on that list and I'm baffled why it's there.
Movies on that list are usually there because of an actor/actress (Paris Hilton) because it's got a gimmick or an angle that upsets people or non-existent production values.Hobgoblins isn't worth your time but one of the worst films ever made?
At first a held certain reservations against watching a film with what appears to be a no-brainer title for a film about the very same beasts, but sometimes the direct option is the best.Starring Tom Bartlett as Kevin, a young and brave assistant security guard, and Jeffrey Culver as McCreedy, the wizened old security guard who has seen too much, "HOBGOBLINS" takes us on a horrifying journey to the realm of the darker aspects of human consciousness made flesh.
The whiny hero to his non-supportive girlfriend to the nerdy pervert to the over-sexed floozy that is called Daphne;each actor is annoying in their own way.Even the creatures weren't even scary or even cute,like the ones in Gremlins,but it doesn't matter..If you're curious about seeing this,please,please see the Mst3k version and that's it,OK??
This film rips me back to the very late 1980's/early 1990's, when Letterman used to be the end of NBC's broadcasting every night, and the only thing worth watching after 12 midnight was USA's UP...All Night, starring Gilbert Gottfried and later the blonde trampy ho whose name I can't recall, introing really dreadful movies that a 12-year-old like me used to later esspy the video boxes of, in their town's local Food Happy Mart.I recently bought this as part of MST's DVD Vol 8, but I keep watching it, because *something* about it keeps triggering a repressed memory in me.
This flick hardly even tries to hide the fact that it's a ripoff of Joe Dante's infinitely superior "Gremlins", and combined with the inane plot, cheesy dialogue, inexperienced actors, bad special effects, and lame music, it's no wonder that "Mystery Science Theater 3000" sunk their claws into this one for Experiment 907.So, these little puppets that have the ability to grant you your fondest wish and then kill you escape from their vault at a movie studio and wreak havoc on the populace (hey, maybe this is where "Animaniacs" came from...or maybe not).
Their chosen victims are Kevin (a total puss who still knows how to fire a gun blindly into the air to scare off burglars), Amy (Kevin's ice cube of a girlfriend who remains unimpressed with everything he does), Daphne (a slut outlined in spandex who refuses to watch any movie without a XXX rating), Nick (the jerky military brat trained in garden tool warfare), and Kyle (the lovable pervert hopelessly addicted to phone sex).
After a rousing performance of the punk rock hit "Pig Sticker", Amy takes the stage, only to have her big night decimated by Nick's delusional war fantasy involving comically weak hand grenades and people that turn their own tables over in order to save the explosions some work...and then some other stuff happens, but by this time I had wandered off in desperation for human contact.This is one of those cases where you know the director made this movie for the sole purpose of putting in nude scenes.
This film is about some Hobgoblins let loose from a factory - (Hobgoblins locked in a vault in a film warehouse!) - and then they wreak havoc through town, by making peoples fantasies come true, but they turn them bad in some way.
She mistakes this furry little Hobgoblin for her best friend, Amy, remarking "Amy, would you quit breathing all over me!" This was the most laughably bad line, but the film contains millions more...
As the sticker states, at the beginning of the MST3K version of this movie, "HOBGOBLINS: May cause blindness or death." Yes!
OK, I only saw this movie as a "Mystery Science Theater" episode, and it's wonderful in it's badness, but I don't know if it would be easy to watch in it's duration without the MST3K running commentary.
These creatures, which are the "hobgoblins" that the title refers to, look like the rejects for a "Critters" film.
The first time i saw this movie was the great tv show MST3K,and i love the part when Cro says "the movie was so bad even the car wanted to get out of it"(after the car was falling off the cliff)I do not remember the names of the horrible actors in this movie,but one guy i think hade a granade in his hands but it blew up in his pants.And at the end of the movie(SPOIL) he comes back ALIVE and not that hurt.
"Hobgoblins" is about as bad as they come, but unlike other stuffed-animals-on-rampages movies ("Pod People", etc.), its tongue is planted firmly in cheek.
You all know about this movie: the disgustingly stupid and unfunny sex jokes, the huge door system with no locks, the puppets (and puppeteer arms), the club scum groupies tipping their own table, "the rake scene" (don't even make that puzzled look.
Cheep effects, bad acting, unfunny, UN-scary, and disgusting.Don't even watch this movie if you see it on MST3K!!
However, watch it on Mystery Science Theater 3000 and it becomes one of the best!There's more MST3K material in this one movie than an Alan Smithee film festival, and Mike & co don't miss a chance to rip it to shreds.
If you want every single thing that makes a bad movie bad, look no further than Hobgoblins.
"Wait it gets better" The director obviously couldn't figure out how to make these little creatures actually move/run/walk and film at the same time so how you know they get from here to there.
But making fun of this movie is like pooping on poop, it should not be attempted.HOBGOBLINS (1988) Review: ½/10.
Now, it is up to Kevin to kill the creatures before they can do serious harm to his (utterly idiotic) friends or anyone else...From the moment you first see the Hobgoblins, you know that this flick is nothing more than a cheap rip-off of 80s hits like "Gremlins" or "Critters", and to be fair, this could have worked and provided us with mindless low-budget fun.
Take for example the scene in the house where the main characters first encounter the hobgoblins: They don't even try to pretend that they are actually being attacked, instead simply hold the puppets while delivering their lines dead pan.It took me some time to work out how to classify this uniquely unenjoyable experience but in the end I came to the conclusion that it isn't actually a movie.
I think the people that made this movie have done a very great job making it look like an original 1950s horror classic like "The Blob!" Who can remember that drive-in classic about what else but...a blob!
"Hobgoblins" is, without a doubt in my mind, the worst movie ever made (yes, it is worse than "Manos").
Plenty of badly-acted, ridiculous-looking fighting with monsters that could get killed with nothing more than a feather tap on the head runs through the whole mess.MST3K did this movie, but not even the wit of Mike, Crow and Servo could save this piece of trash.
Only if you watch this movie alone can you fully understand the horror that is "Hobgoblins." Worst.
This so-called film makes all the "Chuckie" movies look like Oscar-winning masterpieces..
Well back to the actors, which from the get go seem to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would get a little amount of money together and try to make a movie that would be a great horror film.
Hobgoblins was Sloane's second work as a director and maybe one of the worst films of all time.
Really bad, but funny, with the worst puppets in a movie--ever.
There's nothing wrong with the truly bad film that makes for a good time.
(and I'm an MST3K fan so I've seen a lot of bad movies) The story is the worst in recent memory, the directing is AWFUL, the special effects look like sock puppets made by a first-grader, and the acting would have been better had the entire cast been replaced by golden retrievers!The film is about a security guard who accidentally releases one of the illigitimate sons of the gremlins (called hobgoblins in this movie) which proceed to head for his 80s-driven friends and kill them with their fantasies.
That's right, this movie did not come from hell (though it feels like it), but from stupid people "film makers". |
tt0110167 | It Could Happen to You | NYPD officer Charlie Lang (Nicolas Cage) is a kind and generous man who loves his job in Queens, New York, where he lives. His wife, Muriel (Rosie Perez), works at a hair salon and, unlike him, is greedy, materialistic, and selfish, constantly complaining about their situation in life. Waitress Yvonne Biasi (Bridget Fonda) is bankrupt because her husband, Eddie (Stanley Tucci), whom she could not yet afford to divorce, emptied their joint checking account without her permission, while also leaving her with over $12,000 in credit card debt. Charlie meets her when she waits on him at the diner where she works. Since he doesn't have enough money to pay the tip, he promises to give her either double the tip or half of his prospective lottery winnings the next day. He wins $4 million ($6.5 million today) in the lottery the next day and keeps his promise, despite Muriel's protests.
He and Yvonne become stars almost immediately. She buys the diner and sets up a table with his name at which people who can't afford a meal can eat for free. In another development, he becomes a hero for foiling an attempted robbery at a grocery store but gets wounded in the process, forcing him to take a leave of absence from the police force. Meanwhile, Muriel goes on a shopping spree, and also contracts for disruptive renovations to their apartment without consulting him.
At a gathering on a chartered boat for the lottery winners and other members of high society, Muriel meets the newly rich Jack Gross. She flirts with him, listens to his advice on financial investments, and develops a strong liking for him, which is mutual. Meanwhile, Charlie and Yvonne, accidentally left behind on the pier, spend a lot of time together, on one occasion paying for the train journeys of subway passengers, and on another treating the neighborhood children to a day out at Yankee Stadium, about which the media report. Muriel gets fed up with his constant donations and overall simplicity and throws him out of their apartment, asking for a divorce. That same evening, Yvonne leaves her apartment after Eddie shows up and threatens to stay until he gets $50,000 from her. Quite innocently, she and Charlie run into each other at the Plaza Hotel and, unintentionally, end up spending the night together.
During divorce proceedings between Muriel and Charlie, she demands all the money that he won for herself. He doesn't mind giving his share of it but she also wants the amount he gave Yvonne, and his steadfast unwillingness to do so causes her to take the case to court. The jury decides in her favor. Yvonne, feeling guilty at costing him all his money, runs out in tears and tries to keep away from him. But he, by now hopelessly in love with her, finds her at the diner and tells her that the money means nothing to him, and they declare their love for each other. While ruminating about their future at the diner and considering a possible move to Buffalo, they graciously provide a hungry and poor customer with some soup, which he eats at the special table. He is none other than the disguised Angel Dupree, who takes photos of them and in the next day's newspapers publicly eulogises their willingness to feed a hungry and poor man even in their darkest hour. Just as they are moving out of town, the citizens of New York City, touched by their generosity, send them thousands of letters with tips totaling over $600,000 ($970,000 today), enough to help pay their debts.
After Muriel gets remarried, her new husband, Jack Gross, flees the country with all the money from their checking account, revealing himself to be a con man. She then has no option but to move in with her mother in the Bronx and go back to her old manicure job. Eddie, now divorced from Yvonne, can only get a job as a taxi driver. Charlie happily returns to the NYC police force and Yvonne reclaims the diner. At the film's end, they get married and begin their honeymoon by taking off from Central Park in a hot air balloon that bears the New York Post headline "Cop Weds Waitress", just before the closing credits roll. | romantic, comedy, feel-good | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5351818 | Rock'n Roll | Rock N' Roll tells the story of Chandramouli (Mohanlal), a composer and drummer, of his return to Chennai from South Africa for a brief visit, and of the incidents happening in that short span.
Gunasekharan (Siddique), a leading music composer, is busy with his composition for the latest film directed by Lal Jose. He feels, it would be better, if he gets the help of his old friend Chandramouli, who is now busy with his international concerts. But Mouli, a fun loving and jovial musician, makes a surprise landing in Chennai and helps Guna in his work.
Mouli accidentally falls in love with Daya Sreenivasan (Lakshmi Rai), the female playback singer, who is also an ardent fan of Mouli. But because of the compulsions from her parents and fiancé, Vivek (Anoop Menon), she moves back to Mumbai.
Mouli plots a plan with his friend Thabala Balu (Harisree Ashokan) to bring her back to Chennai. He makes Daya believe that he is now composing a dozen songs for a film and wants Daya to sing it.
Daya, who comes back to Chennai, is not impressed by Mouli's tunes. When she openly expresses her unhappiness over the tune, Mouli takes it as a prestige issue and composes a song entirely dedicated to her. However, Daya is unable to attend the studio on that particular date as she is getting married to Vivek, whom she feels is too arrogant and sophisticated for her.
Mouli enters the marriage venue and takes Daya to the studio for 30 minutes despite the opposition from her family members. Daya, who within time is fully in love with Mouli, realizes his love for her and opens her mind to him.
The film ends with Mouli relaxing at a beach with Daya, but his old habits of carefree nature and passion for girls still not gone. | romantic | train | wikipedia | A look at the French film industry from an insider.
I had the good fortune of having a tiny speaking part in this movie, a first for me.
The Director and Star of the movie, Mr Guillaume Canet, is a charming and very gracious person and made us all feel comfortable and welcome.
The movie is about an actor who fears he is no longer at his peak at only the age of about 43 and all the drastic measures he takes to recreate himself in a younger image.
I think all people at a certain age can relate to this, but especially film actors.
His cast is made up of several famous French actors and actresses playing themselves, including the director's real life partner Marion Cottilard.
This is a comedy and there are some really funny moments but it is also full of pathos as you see the man go through near hell to try to become physically younger and ruin his looks and nearly ruin his marriage.
Great performance from Mr Canet who co-wrote the script.
And he surrounded himself with actor friends and even a few family members to make the film even more personal.
it was a marvelous experience for me and i think the film is a great way to spend 2 hours and enjoy seeing the inside of the French cinema world..
great piece of self-irony.
the movie "Rock'n Roll" shot by Guillaume Canet is quite entertaining yet disclosing film of what it's like to be an actor in modern day.
characters have their real names, action happens on a daily basis and that gives movie documentary esthetic.
Marion Cotillard plays her role in an extremely good way as always.the movie is full of funny scenes.All in all it show how over-commercialized is film industry and how it destroys your identity and the way of living..
Tres amusant.
I went into this film in Sydney with very little in the way of expectations.
I found it extremely funny, and Canet is extremely self depreciating throughout the film as he looks as his life as an elder statesman of French cinema.
The film is very funny, and excels in revealing the nuances of French cinema through Canet and his wife Marion Cotillard.
I felt that it definitely could have been about half an hour shorter, so could have done with tighter editing perhaps.
However, if you want a feel-good film look no further.
Allez Canet..
still funny and pathetic the second time.
Weldone to the all crew to have been able to kept a straight face for 2 hours.
knowing the all story started from a real interview like at the start of the movie....so many inside joke i am surprised he didn t had more viewing.
thanks,definitly part of my collection.
and really good to see this couple in real life being so complice on the screen.
an inside joke?.
This film although funny in parts sounds more like an inside joke than anything else.
Two ace actors seemingly playing at acting and around the craft of acting; like watching Jimi Hendrix playing before a gig; warming up.
The storyline is pitiful and could only resonate with 40-something actors.
I am a huge fan of both actors here and rate Tell No One (Ne le dis à personne) as one of the best movies of the last 20 years; but this here I shall say it again seems like an inside joke; something you dreamt up and or thought of doing but should probably not have allowed to get a real airing ...
At times you seriously question the sanity of the endeavour.
Maybe therapeutic :)
Shame.
Still: watch it if you like Canet and Cotillard..
Very bad movie.
Guillaume Canet had shown us films much more interesting.This one is really bad.
Neither the scenario, nor the image, nor the sound are good.What is the meaning of this film?
Making Money Easily by Taking Guillaume Canet and Marion Cottilard in the casting.It's really a movie to avoid.
In the jargon: a turnip..
Super funny film!.
I'm surprised that the rating isn't higher because this is one of the best French films I've watched!
I'm Canadian and my husband is French and there are plenty of jokes that made me appreciate the film.
You'll know what I'm talking about if you actually watch the film.
I don't want to spoil it for the audience.
Both Guillaume Canet and Marion Cotillard did a fabulous job poking fun at themselves and their careers.
They kept the film light yet not cheesy. |
tt0023101 | Kongo | "Deadlegs" Flint, an embittered paraplegic who lives in the Kongo, controls the natives by using cheap tricks that appear to be magical. Assisting him with his magic tricks are his fiance Tula, two thugs, Hogan and Cookie, and a loyal native, Fuzzy.
Flint has spent the last eighteen years planning revenge against a man named Gregg who stole his wife and took her away from the jungle. Flint has built a sixty-mile, fortified encirclement of his compound that prevents anyone from entering or leaving without Flint's consent.
Having seen to it that Gregg's daughter Ann is brought up innocently by nuns in a convent in Cape Town, Flint sends Hogan to bring her to his compound. In Cape Town, Hogan, dressed as a missionary, is able to convince Ann to go with him into the Kongo by saying that he will take her to her father.
When she arrives at Flint's compound, Ann is held as a prisoner. After spending months confined to a brothel in Zanzibar, Ann has become a hardened alcoholic, who does Flint's bidding for whiskey, and has no idea why he has brought her to his camp and degraded her.
When a cynical, drug-addicted doctor named Kingsland arrives at the camp, he and Ann fall in love. Flint, who needs Kingsland to be free from drugs in order to perform an operation on his legs, places the doctor in the swamp so that leeches can suck all of the drugs' poison out of his system. Flint also tolerates Ann's relationship with the doctor and its purifying effect, even while he ridicules her.
Some time after the operation, Gregg arrives at the camp, summoned by Flint, who has stolen a large shipment of his rival's ivory. Flint hopes to have the ultimate revenge against Gregg by showing him his now degraded daughter, then having him killed, and having Ann burned as the sacrifice in the natives' burial ceremony. Flint taunts Gregg until Gregg finally recognizes Flint for the man he once knew as Rutledge. Years before, when Gregg was known as Whitehall, he ran away with Flint's wife after kicking Flint in the back, paralyzing him, and leaving him for dead. From that time, Flint has plotted his revenge against Gregg and the girl who he thought was Gregg's daughter.
When Gregg proves, however, that Ann is actually Flint's own daughter, Flint is stunned, and begs Gregg not to leave the compound or he will be killed (Flint had earlier ordered Fuzzy to shoot Gregg if he tried to leave the compound). Gregg does not listen to his old enemy and leaves, and Fuzzy kills him.
Now desperate to save Ann from the natives' sacrificial fire, Flint arranges for her and Kingsland to escape though a tunnel in the swamp that only Fuzzy knows. Just before Flint dies trying to keep the natives at bay, he prays that Ann will get away safely with Kingsland. Some time later, Kingsland and Ann are on a boat sailing away from Africa, about to be married by the ship's captain. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | Every time I show it to people their jaws drop, I burned a TCM showing onto DVD but would love to see an official MGM release.There is no comparison to the original, "West of Zanzibar".
This pre-Code tale of revenge, sex, brutality, and, ultimately, redemption was one of Walter Huston's best performances (not that he was capable of a bad one).
Walter Huston steps into Lon Chaney's wheelchair to play the evil crippled magician commanding a "juju" cult of natives who burn women alive.
Anyway, KONGO is not really a horror film but, with the accent being on sadism and degradation, it certainly makes the most of the liberal Pre-Code attitude of the time.
Besides, you can almost feel the humid jungle atmosphere: actually, apart from a few of the Chaney films and this one, MGM did several other African-set adventures during this time including TRADER HORN (1931), RED DUST (1932) and the Johnny Weissmuller/Maureen O'Sullivan "Tarzan" films (1932-42).
Henry Gordon' role, replacing Lionel Barrymore from the original, is brief but pivotal) including, surprisingly, the 'romantic' leads (Virginia Bruce and Conrad Nagel) though that's because their roles are complex rather than insipid, as was the norm during this time.
As for Lupe Velez who had been Chaney's daughter in WHERE EAST IS EAST (1929) the passage of just 3 years has seen her relegated to 'other woman' types and, despite receiving second billing, her role is basically a supporting one (especially since Velez practically disappears during the latter stages of the film).The film drags in spots and is perhaps overlong for its purpose; however, there's an abrupt passage of time in which we never get to see Bruce's descent to the skids at Huston's hands which confused me at first into thinking that she was actually her own mother!
Huston exerts his grip on the fearsome, gullible natives by the use of magic tricks (including, ironically, the decapitation routine I had seen only a couple of days earlier in Browning's THE SHOW [1927]!; could this have been used in WEST OF ZANZIBAR, too?) and a lot of rather silly chanting of mumbo-jumbo.
While I knew of the plot revelation, it's still very effectively handled; indeed, given Cowen's non-reputation, I have to wonder how this film compares scene by scene with the original, i.e. whether the director here consciously copied Browning and that's why KONGO is so powerful!
Curiously, Huston's comeuppance at the hands of the natives he had exploited for so long is strikingly similar to that of ISLAND OF LOST SOULS (1933) though it's considerably less graphic (also because here we're not told what really happened to him {is it the same with WEST OF ZANZIBAR?}, whereas we know what Dr. Moreau's fate is going to be without having to actually witness it).I doubt that the film's reputation is solid enough to justify a stand-alone (and most probably bare-bones) DVD release from Warners and, despite the obvious connection, I would think it'd be out of place on an eventual second set of Lon Chaney vehicles; still, I would very much like to have an official DVD edition of this one, also because my copy froze for an instant during a crucial scene.
KONGO, starring Walter Huston, is a 1932 talkie remake of Tod Browning's silent WEST OF ZANZIBAR(1928)that had starred Lon Chaney which in itself was based on the 1926 Broadway play "Kongo" that starred Walter Huston.
Sexy Virginia Bruce replaces sexy Mary Nolan from the silent WoZ as Chaney's long lost, convent protected and later jungle defiled daughter.
Conrad Nagel, is an actor I've never understood the appeal of, but he was a popular silent era leading man appearing in numerous dramas and costume films.
Both Lupe Velez and Virginia Bruce provide ample doses of 'cheesecake' which in this film seems to have been more of the intent compared to the silent version WoZ.
Superior remake of the silent film West of Zanzibar, which starred Lon Chaney.
The plot's about a crippled white man named 'Dead Legs' Flint who lives in the Kongo with his henchmen and mistress.
He keeps the restless natives at bay with some magic tricks while he plots revenge against the man who crippled him and stole his wife eighteen years prior.I can't think of a better actor from this period to step into Chaney's shoes than Walter Huston, who starred in a wide variety of exceptional movies, usually with interesting characters and daring subject matter.
Mitchell Harris and Forrester Harvey are good as Flint's dirty, sweaty underlings.It's a fascinating and disturbing Pre-Code movie with great performances all around.
Flint (Walter Huston) is a grizzled, twisted paraplegic holed up in the African jungle where he lords it over a tribe that mistakes his cheap vaudeville magic tricks for supernatural powers and provide him a living by running trade missions from which he profits handsomely.
Huston also played this role in the original Broadway stage version of this piece in 1926 and clearly has an actor's field day, dragging his limp limbs across the stage, hoisting himself into a wheelchair, scowling with his scarred face and permanently squinting eyes and breaking into demented peals of laughter as he abuses poor Virginia Bruce.
As pre-Code as they get, and very un-MGM-like for 1932, this stage success and remake of "West of Zanzibar" is both hilariously racist and quite creepy, with nightmarish imagery and lots of sadism.
He's surrounded by some MGM players at the modest peaks of their careers: Conrad Nagel as a drug-addicted doctor, Lupe Velez as Huston's two-timing mistress, and most memorably, Virginia Bruce (without makeup, very unusual for the time, and emoting affectingly) as a convent school girl driven into prostitution and drink.
***SPOILERS*** Living among the natives in the jungles of Zanzibar Big Boss-man Flint, Walter Huston,has taken over the leadership of the Voodoo worshiping people.
It took Boss-Man Flint all these years to find out that the revenge that he was planning for Whitehall's daughter would in the end not only boomerang and bring him back to sanity; It would also give him the humanity and courage that he lost so long ago in the madness of the steaming and disease infested African jungle..
Kongo (1932) *** (out of 4) Remake of the 1928 Tod Browning/Lon Chaney film West of Zanzibar pretty much follows the same story.
A paralyzed madman (Walter Huston) rules a colony in Africa and plans on getting revenge on the man who crippled him by torturing his daughter (Virginia Bruce).
This is certainly a very strong film for its time but I'd recommend watching the Chaney version first.
Once the Viewer allows for the Movie to Begin there is No Going Back.Sucked into this World that is a World Away, but too Close for Comfort, the Audience is Taken into a Host of Horrors in a Primitive Land resembling Eden After the Fall, or more Accurately the Hell that Awaits Any who Stray from the Path of the Godly.The Natives Dress Up in Scary, Monstrous, Demon Masks and Perform Unspeakable Rituals Hopped Up on who knows what and the Whites are Definitely "On Something" or another too.
Walter Huston is a Crippled, Sadistic, Insane, Overlord Dishing Out Demented Punishment and Enjoying every minute as He Laughs like a Maniac.Lupe Velez Wears Nothing more than a Towel and Displays some Pre-Code Skin and Delights in Debauched Pre-Code Behavior Enjoying Ample Amounts of Sex and Drugs.
Note...This is a remake of a Silent Film, West of Zanzibar (1928), starring Lon Chaney and Directed by Tod Browning..
I'm not sure if it's a guilty pleasure, if I was mesmerized by Walter Huston's fantastic performance, or if it was just how far it pushed pre-Code boundaries; probably all of the above.
When the movie opens he's already been in a jungle camp for 18 years, slowly plotting his revenge, and in the meantime, exerting absolute control over the natives via magic tricks, a semblance of their voodoo, and understanding their language.
The original film, Tod Browning's 'West of Zanzibar' (1928) is frankly the better told tale - clean and taut, and avoiding several of the more lascivious aspects here (the drug use, tongue pulling, leech burial, at least some of the racial overtones, and Velez's character entirely) in order to give us the story from the beginning.
Walter Huston got to recreate his stage role of 'Deadlegs' Flint when Kongo was done as a sound film in 1932.
The original production ran for 135 performances and then a silent version entitled West Of Zanzibar was done by MGM that starred Lon Chaney.
So for those of you who marveled at Chaney's compelling performance in West Of Zanzibar, be advised that Huston actually created the part on Broadway.The jungle sets used for Trader Horn's interiors and later for the Tarzan films are put to good use in Kongo.
The rest of it revolves around Walter Huston's equally compelling performance as a crippled degenerate paraplegic who rules a jungle kingdom with some equally degenerate associates and who keep the natives in line with some old magician's tricks.
That and a knowledge of the narcotic effect of some of the jungle plants.Huston lives for only one reason to exact a terrible vengeance on another white overlord of some jungle turf, the man who crippled him and stole his wife at the same time, C.
The instrument of his revenge will be Virginia Bruce who is Gordon's convent raised daughter who Huston lures into his jungle domain.Lupe Velez is on hand as Huston's mistress of undetermined racial origin since she certainly doesn't look like any of the natives.
It systematically manages to remove all of the punch of the original film.Not everyone can handle silent movies, and many people will like "Kongo" better, just because it's a talkie.
It certainly couldn't have been an attempt to outdo the quality of the original.Every powerful moment or sequence in "West of Zanzibar" is either missing or ruined in "Kongo." First, while Houston tries to be abhorrent in the role of Dead Legs Flint, he doesn't arouse anywhere near the repugnance that Lon Chaney does with his Dead Legs Phroso character.
I didn't feel anything similar for Houston, or maybe the ghost of a feeling.And the sacrifice Phroso makes at the end of WOZ is also either missing or so downplayed that I failed to catch it in "Kongo," once again removing one of the major points of the movie.The only character who at least equals his counterpart in the original is Conrad Nagel, who does a fine job in all phases of his role, from deranged dope fiend to caring lover, far better than what Warner Baxter ("Crime Doctor" (1943)) does in WOZ.Lupe Velez is also a delight, although she doesn't have much on-screen time.For those who can relate to the silent movie genre, there is no point in wasting any time on the etiolated "Kongo." Watch the Real Thing: "West of Zanzibar.".
A remake of West of Zanzibar (1928), Kongo stars Walter Huston as reprehensible, crippled ivory trader Flint Rutledge, who seeks revenge on Gregg Whitehall (C.
Henry Gordon), the man who stole his wife and put him in a wheelchair; this he does by kidnapping, degrading and humiliating Whitehall's daughter Ann (Virginia Bruce).I decided to watch Kongo based on the reviews here on IMDb, which made it sound like an unmissable piece of 'anything goes' pre-code Hollywood depravity; but while it certainly deals with some very sordid subject matters—drug addiction, alcoholism, sadism, murder, prostitution, and rape—I found the film as a whole far less exploitative than I had imagined.The violence is suggested rather than shown, and barring a brief nip slip from Lupe Velez as jungle tramp Tula and a blink-and-you'll-miss-it flash of boob from Virginia Bruce there was no nudity.
That this is a Pre-Code film there is no doubt from the very start and the movie proceeds to assault us with the grubby and the disgusting; physical and sexual violence and, inevitably given the jungle setting, all manner of non-pc attitudes and behaviour.
A girl is stolen from a convent and sent to a "house" (we all know what kind of house) before being taken deep into the jungle and degraded and turned into an alcoholic (Virginia Bruce), and Lupe Velez almost has her tongue cut out, literally ...
Salinger must have seen this movie to come up with the title for his famous short story, which is nothing like this movie.This movie is the epitome of squalor.It's based on a tale of jungle revenge from a hideous white man against another hideous white man.The squalor is not just in the way the people live, which the setting does a great job of showing, but in the characters, top to bottom.The hero and heroine might be said to have originally developed the term "anti hero".
While watching this film, I kept asking myself if I'd seen it before, but then it struck me that this was a talkie remake of Tod Browning's outrageous "West of Zanzibar," which had been made only four years before.
Walter Huston plays a conniving wheelchair bound magician in the jungles of Africa who frightens and manipulates the natives with his carnie magic tricks, though most of the film is spent on Huston cruelly treating the daughter of the man he holds responsible for crippling him.
The film does manage to be just about as over-the-top as Browning's original film, although it unfortunately also retains the racist portals of native people, but overall I still prefer Browning's silent version that featured the great Lon Chaney in the Huston role..
Although this pre-code movie could easily play on prime time television today without any edits, you have to realize that this was hot stuff more than eighty years ago.
When Ann (Virginia Bruce) comes by, Flint keeps her captive and repeatedly tortures her, believing that she is the daughter of the man who paralyzed him.
Henry Gordon) arrives with a shocking secret that provides the twist ending of the film.I suppose the movie isn't for all tastes, but I certainly like it.
Keeping Houston close company is Lupe Velez as his Portugese(?) mistress, Conrad Nagel as a drug ravaged physician and Virginia Bruce as the daughter (or not) of his sworn enemy.
Bruce, plays without make-up which adds to her interpretation as she is transformed into an abused, drug addicted whore and she is in a word....fantastic.I have only touched on the essential plot of this film.
since Huston played the part of Dead Legs on the stage prior to Lon Chaney starring in "West of Zanzibar" in 1928.
In spite of that I think I still prefer "West of Zanzibar" for reasons that have nothing to do with either Huston or Chaney - they both did great in their respective interpretations of the role of "Dead Legs"."West of Zanzibar" was shorter and more to the point and it also did a better job of adding some scenes that were missing from "Kongo".
Nearly 20 years before John Huston took his crew to the Congo to film his masterpiece with Humphrey Bogart and Katharine Hepburn, his father Walter was on the MGM lot filming this terrific sound remake of Lon Chaney Sr.'s silent, "West of Zanzibar".
This is a film you won't forget, with its exotic setting, crippled leading character (quite the villain!), a drugged out ingenue, and natives involved in human sacrifice.
There's a lot in this film that will drop your jaw, but you won't turn away, even if disgusted, by the aura of this dark and creepy jungle film where revenge takes a vile turn, yet with some last minute twists that will keep you on the edge of your seat.The fantastic Walter Huston had played this part on stage long before Chaney took it to the screen, so with Chaney's death in 1930, who would be better to do the sound version?
Huston plays the wheelchair bound mad man living in the jungle and stirring up trouble with the natives, vowing revenge on C.
Within a few seconds within the film, you see Bruce go from virginal beauty to drug and alcohol addicted prostitute, a far cry from the glamorous roles that Bruce (best known for being on the top of that huge cake set piece in "The Great Ziegfeld") played during her long tenure at MGM.
Conrad Nagel plays an embittered young man who sobers up long enough to attempt to rescue Bruce from the evil Huston and the eager natives, wearing hideous costumes that imply all sorts of beastly activities.
The plot tells it all--Walter Huston gets revenge on the man who crippled him by kidnapping the man's virginal daughter from a convent, shipping her to a Zanzibar brothel then caging her in his jungle hut for two years and addicting her to brandy.
The acting is out-of-this-world, including Walter Huston as "dead legs" the wheelchair bound, scar-faced revenge-seeker; Virginia Bruce as the captive; Lupe Velez as Huston (and everyone else's) jungle playmate; and Conrad Nagel as a drug-addled doctor who is "cured" of his addiction by Huston using a neat little detox technique that includes using swamp leeches to "purify" his blood.
Power, racism, prostitution, rape, murder, insanity, alcoholism, and drug addiction are all addressed as every character in the film suffers from, or suffers by, one of these things.
This is a remake of the Lon Chaney film, WEST OF ZANZIBAR--a silent film that was made just a few years earlier.
However, this and its strong Pre-Code sensibilities make it a fascinating film because of its excess--and that's pretty much the same way I felt about WEST OF ZANZIBAR.
He tricks Whitehall, the man who ran off with Huston's wife, into coming to this isolated kingdom in the African jungle. |
tt0042033 | The Walking Hills | One day in contemporary Mexicali, a poker game in the back room of a cantina includes horse breeder Jim Carey, cowboys Shep and Johnny, a prospector called Old Willy, a stranger in town named Frazee and a drifter, Chalk. Guitar player Josh and bartender Bibbs are kibbitzing. Conversation turns to a legendary wagon train carrying gold bars worth $5 million lost 100 years ago in the Walking Hills, a huge area of shifting dunes across the border in the United States. Johnny, not paying attention, casually mentions how his horse recently tripped over an old wagon wheel in the hills. To keep the discovery a secret, they agree that all of them including Jim's man Cleve must join the search for the wagon train.
The nine reach the apparent site but all the dunes have shifted since Johnny was there. Bibbs discovers an ox skull and Old Willy an oxen yoke and they begin digging. The group is joined by Chris Jackson, a woman who followed them from Calexico, where she works in a diner. Shep is really former rodeo rider Dave Wilson with whom Chris, herself a rodeo performer, fell in love at a rodeo in Denver, breaking off her engagement to Jim. Dave abruptly disappeared and Chris saw him again in Calexico after he showed up there as Shep, heading for the border.
It turns out that Dave Wilson had fled because he accidentally killed a gambler who accused him of cheating at cards. The man's father, King, hired a detective who turns out to be Frazee, and who has been sending signals to King and a posse with a heliograph. Johnny, Chalk and Cleve are also on the run and each believes Frazee is after him. Frazee shoots Johnny during a fight. Jim, told by Johnny that he would rather die than go to prison, has Cleve hide the horses to keep Johnny from being found out if someone goes for help.
A wagon is uncovered and tempers flare when no gold is found. Johnny dies right after Frazee admits he watched Chris as "hangman's bait," waiting for Dave to show up. A terrible sand storm develops, and Chalk tries to stampede the horses, killing Frazee with his own gun. Jim kills Chalk as he tries to escape. The storm uncovers the entire wagon train. Old Willy finds it, but it's empty. Dave decides to turn himself in to the law and Chris, still in love with Dave, rides after him. Jim has a hunch, meanwhile, that the wagons weren't entirely empty when Old Willy found it. He is right. | intrigue, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0061391 | Bedazzled | Stanley Moon (Moore) works in a Wimpy's restaurant and is infatuated with the waitress Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron). In despair he attempts suicide but is interrupted by the Devil, incarnated as George Spiggott (Cook). ("Mr Spiggott" had previously been one of the characters in the sketch One Leg Too Few).
Spiggott is in a game with God, trying to be the first to gather 100 billion souls. If he achieves this first, he will be readmitted to Heaven. He is also busy with minor acts of vandalism and spite, helped by his staff of the seven deadly sins, notably Lust (Raquel Welch) and Envy (Barry Humphries).
In return for his soul, Spiggott offers Stanley seven wishes. Stanley uses these trying to satisfy his love for Margaret, but Spiggott twists his words to frustrate him.
Stanley wishes to be more "articulate". George turns him into a talkative and pretentious intellectual with a strong Welsh accent. Margaret becomes an equally pretentious character, who enthusiastically agrees with all of Stanley's beliefs. Stanley stresses the importance of breaking free from one's social and moral constraints. When Stanley makes his move, however, she is horrified and starts screaming "rape".
In this wish, Stanley is a "multi-millionaire" and Margaret is his "very physical" wife, but it turns out she is "very physical" with anyone except him ... including George.
In the third wish, Stanley is a rock star. However, his fame is short lived, and is usurped by a new band whose lead singer (George) speaks flatly about his lack of interest in anyone except himself. Margaret is a vapid and excitable groupie, as happy to admire one as the other.
Stanley comments that he wishes he was "a fly on the wall" and George seizes on the opportunity to use up one of Stanley's wishes. They become flies on the wall in a morgue, where the inspector is showing Margaret various dead bodies, hoping that she will identify one as Stanley.
George promises Stanley a wish where he has a quiet life in the countryside, with children, and Margaret making the anniversary dinner. It soon becomes apparent, however, that Margaret is actually George's wife. While deeply in love, even the attempt to consummate their affection drives both Stanley and Margaret into emotional agony.
Stanley attempts to frame a wish that George cannot ruin: He wishes that he and Margaret loved one another, lived away from the big city, and would always be together. However, George turns him into a nun of the Order of Saint Beryl, or the Leaping Beryllians, who glorify their founder by jumping on trampolines (expanding on a sketch that appeared in Cook and Moore's Not Only... But Also). Margaret is also a nun in the order, but refuses to consummate their love as they are both women.
When Stanley tries to use his seventh wish, George reveals he has already used it: Before signing the contract, George offers him something to prove he is the Devil, and Stanley asked for a raspberry ice lolly. Stanley was unaware that this counted as a wish until he is unable to escape his sixth wish.
Ultimately, Spiggott spares Stanley eternal damnation because he has exceeded his quota of 100 billion and can afford to be generous. Stanley is returned to his old job and life, wiser and more clear-sighted. Spiggott goes to Heaven to meet God, but is rejected again; St Peter (Lockwood West) explains that when he gave Stanley back his soul, Spiggott did the right thing, but with the wrong motive.
In the closing scene, Stanley and Margaret are back in the restaurant. Stanley finally asks her out but she says she's already doing something, though she does suggest perhaps another night. Stanley smiles, happy that he has found the courage to talk to her. Spiggott tries to entice Stanley again, but Stanley turns him down. Spiggott leaves and threatens revenge on God by unleashing all the tawdry and shallow technological curses of the modern age:
"All right, you great git, you've asked for it. I'll cover the world in Tastee-Freez and Wimpy Burgers. I'll fill it full of concrete runways, motorways, aircraft, television and automobiles, advertising, plastic flowers and frozen food, supersonic bangs. I'll make it so noisy and disgusting that even you'll be ashamed of yourself. No wonder you've so few friends — you're unbelievable!" | romantic, alternate reality, satire, prank | train | wikipedia | Stanley Donen was brought in a director, Cook toiled over the witty script, Moore did the perky score."Bedazzled" is slightly dated and is quite an uncommercial product overall, but its still a clever and interesting film.
There's funny one-liners ("Yes, Irving Moses-the fruitier etc), totally original ideas (the animated fly sequence, Raquel Welsh as Lust), slapstick stuff and a top pop parody with Cook as the indifferent "Drimble Wedge".The pathos and sadness underpinning the movie is perhaps best summed up with the conned old lady's "Goodbye" as the Eyewash men leave.
Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore), a down-and-out Londoner who has a miserable job at the local Wimpy Burgers and has the hots for a beautiful waitress named Margaret Spencer, tries to hang himself, but then the Devil has to come in and save him.
Cooke and Moore were possibly the finest comedians the UK has ever produced before Python and others followed Pete and Dud were the undisputed kings of the new cutting edge of comedy/satire in the UK.But always just under the surface (and later out in the open) there was a sadness and dis-satisfaction to both Peter Cooke and Dudley Moore and I think some of that shows up in this film.
Also part of the film seems to be dealing with the moral flexibility of people given their circumstance.Stanley Moon (Moore) has limited opportunities as a short order cook all he desires is the love of Margaret one of the waitresses at the Wimpy he works in.
But he is a good person, when after a botched suicide attempt he sells his soul to the devil (Cooke) he has all the opportunities in the world but it is easier for the devil to corrupt him.Throughout the seven wishes (in accordance with 7 the mystic number, 7 days of the week, 7 deadly sins, 7 brides for 7 brothers..)Stanley can only think of his own needs and perhaps this is why they fail to make him happy.
On his one opportunity to give a wish away to stop one of the devils petty tricks (sending a swarm of bee's to harass some flower children) he refuses saying 'Their mine and iv'e only got four left!' The other main theme of this film is more to the forefront dealing with Cooke and Moores attitudes towards religion and it's place in what at the time was the modern world.
Cooke's genius was non-conformity and the movie is full of it, trampolining Nuns, a hypnotically haunting Pop song, thought controlled pigeons, unforgivable abuse of kind old ladies and all captured in a cinematographic magic as were "the Prisoner" and "The Avengers" and which can never be recreated by a sequel.There are so many great asides, lines and scenes, that to mention one or the other does not do justice; it is the wealth of colourful detail in the scenes, the events, the characters and the script.
I have not seen the 2000 remake of Bedazzled for the same reason I never did see the Psycho remake - why mess with something so good?Dudley Moore as a short-order cook leading a life of quiet desperation and Peter Cooke as the Devil team-up to deliver an extremely funny movie with surprisingly deep theological commentary.
Peter Cook and Dudley Moore, an already famous comedy team brought their expertise to this film, a reworking of the Faust legend.Moore plays Stanley Moon, a grill cook at the Whimpy Burger, who is in love with Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron), a waitress there.
When his attempt to go and ask for a date is thrarted by his own hesitation, he decides to end it all.Enter George Spiggot a.k.a. The Devil (Peter Cook) who tells Stanley that he can be with Margaret, in exchange for his soul.
Bron is wonderful as Margaret, and Stanley Donen's direction only accents the well written script.The only other big name in the supporting cast, Raquel Welch, projects sheer sexuality as Lilian Lust, the sexpot of the Seven Deadly Sins.Concerning the remake, I wish it were more like the plotline of the original, because I think that Liz Hurley would have made a terrific Lilian Lust.
through its segments relating to Stanley's wishes (the 'sophistate', the millionaire, the pop star, the fly on the wall, the leaping nun ...) it scores points on every level, as well as reflecting the time - the pop star segment is very Ready, Steady, Go, George Spiggott's club (like Cook's in real life but hopefully the real one was less sleazy), and of course, the depressing town street burger bar.
Definitely the finest fruit of Peter Cook and Dudley Moore's comedy partnership, one of the funniest films ever made, and one of my all-time favourite films ever.
So it was made on the cheap, so the production values are utterly 60s generic, so the sets were banged together with spit and sawdust - who cares when Peter Cook is just the best devil you could ever imagine, when the jokes are that thick and fast and that good, when Dudley Moore is the perfect hapless foil, when his music is so memorable, when Raquel Welch is such a good sport as Lillian Lust ("pick yer clothes up Lily, you're due down at the Foreign Office").Now to complete my joy, they have to withdraw and destroy all copies and prints of the hideous Liz Hurley re-make which must NEVER, EVER be confused with this timeless gem which has given me and so many friends and acquaintances so much pleasure for so many years.Watch it and when you've finished laughing (and thinking - after all, it is a perfectly plausible version of the Faust legend) raise a glass to the genius that was Peter Cook at his best (and this IS Peter Cook at his best) and to the beauty of his absurdly unlikely partnership with a sharp witted, sad-faced jazz piano player who was half his size and who went on to be perhaps the unlikeliest Hollywood movie star of them all.
Now that I have finally seen it, I just wanted to make some comments.In its plus column, Peter Cooke and Dudley Moore are a great comedy team, and while their acting is a little bit more stilted in a film than it was in their television or stage shows, their interplay is still excellent.
This leads to a fun, funny, at times surreal farce packed with great dialog and a twist (and twisted) ending involving nuns on trampolines.The wish sequences, which place Moore in various situations and personas that eventually end up in Cook's favor, are little more than sketches that poke fun at intellectuals, the upper class, pop culture fads, and other social mores.
But as it stands this interesting tale becomes just another subplot that doesn't quite come off, just like the pointless scenes concerning a dotty police officer investigating Moore's attempted suicide.So while "Bedazzled" may not be a flawless piece of movie making, it is still a great, one-of-a-kind comedy that stands as one of the funniest movies ever made.
However, in the future, I will continue to dig out my videotape of Bedazzled a couple times a year, and wish that someone today would make funny, intelligent movies like this (actually, "Dogma" is pretty good, too.
I watched the Peter Cook and Dudley Moore comedy series on television in London as a teenager.I saw the film when it first came out.I saw it again recently at home on DVD.It is a time capsule.
But Also...", when they made this comic take on the Faust legend.Dudley Moore is Stanley Moon, a short order cook hopelessly in love with the oblivious Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron).
After a suicide attempt, Moon encounters the Devil, in the form of George Spiggott (Peter Cook) who offers him seven wishes in exchange for his soul.The film is, at times, very funny and Moore and Cook have genuine charisma in their parts, however the film is overlong and some episodes outstay their welcome.
Penned by the late, great Peter Cook, and co-starring his long-time partner, Dudley Moore (they performed together in `Beyond the Fringe,' `Not Only
But Also,' and later, `Derek and Clive'), this film was made two years before that wacky, irreverent Python gang made their first BBC TV appearance as `Monty Python's Flying Circus' in 1969.
George persuades dim-witted Wimpy Burger fry cook Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) to sell him his soul, for the price of seven granted wishes.
The interaction between Cook and Moore, the Margaret-obsessed wishes that Stanley makes and the ways that George always thwarts them, the trivial but `wicked' things the Devil has to do on a daily basis (`it's my job'), and the sheer irreverence of it all, will have you rolling on the floor with laughter!Just remember, when everything seems to be going wrong, just blow a `raspberry'!.
Having had my view of what comedy is revolutionised by Peter Cook and Dudley Moore via the immortal Derek and Clive, I could not wait to check them out together in a film.
When I finally got the chance to see Bedazzled, I was incredibly excited to see what the most ingeniously funny duo ever could offer in a cinematic medium.Moore plays Stanley Moon, a depressively lonely cook with a secret attraction to the waitress who rarely notices him.
Bedazzled finds Dudley Moore as a short order cook at a Wimpy's in London trying his best to score with the lovely Eleanore Bron who comes in every day for an order.
He'll do just about any old thing to make it with her and when you say that, you know that old Scratch will come up from the bowels of the earth to offer you a deal for your soul.But Moore doesn't give up that easy in fact he worms seven different chances with this girl and as the devil his partner Peter Cook comes up with a loophole every time.
For those who want a look at London back in the day, Bedazzled is definitely the film for you.The only other American on this film besides director Stanley Donen is Raquel Welch who plays the deadly sin of lust personified.
And I can't think of anyone better for that time period.There is some physical comedy in Bedazzled, but the real treat is watching Moore and Cook fence for Moore's soul.
A wonderfully funny take-off on "Faust", with Peter Cook as an affable, more than generous Devil, giving poor Dudley Moore every opportunity to find happiness, only to thwart him each time.
Granted, Moore's pretty much the deadpan comic relief (and his constant, "You just can't stop, can you?" gets pretty monotonous after a while), but the diatribes on God, religion, the Devil, sin, etc., are pretty funny.The movie itself is pretty basic, though, and the scenes with Dudley Moore getting his wishes seem to drag on a bit (someone else noted the first one with 15 minutes of psuedo-intellectual dialogue by the score).
Moore is perfect for the role of Stanley Moon (a/k/a "Sister Luna"), who matures from mousy whining to thoughtful self-acceptance, but the real gem performance is that of Peter Cook as the Devil.
The Prince of Darkness is shown to be a mere beggar at the door after all.---But this makes it sound like a comedy version of the "Prophecy" films, with which it has only a little in common (notably the idea that the fallen angels' deepest longing is for reunion with God, also seen in "Dogma"), and ignores the many parts of the movie that are just plain funny.
Most of the jokes work really well, it's just too bad that some of the sketches are dragging on for too long and the movie itself feels a bit long.Man oh man, let me start of by saying that Peter Cook and Dudley Moore are horrible actors.
I loved this film cos i love Peter Cook and Dudley Moore,If they usually make you giggle then you should like this film.Dudley plays a lonely fella who works as a short order cook at Whimpeys.He sells his soul to the devil (Peter) in exchange for a number of wishes which he uses to try and get the girl he's in love with( the waitress at Wimpeys).He becomes a pop star, an intellectual, a nun and a fly amongst others and each time he fails to get her because the devil ruins it for him in one way or another.Dudley Moore and Peter Cook play there parts perfectly and the sound track acompanies it well too.I think dudley composed some of the music.All in all ,a charmingly funny film..
Bedazzled is a 1967 film written by and starring Peter Cook along with the gorgeous Raquel Welch and Dudley Moore, retelling the Faust legend in the Swinging London of the 1960s.
Sounded a little poufy to me.")put it when Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) complained about George Spiggot's ("...another one of my earthly pseudonyms") meddling with his wishes.One of my all-time favorite movies.
Soberb British humor made by Peter Cook and Dudley Moore,this movie l watched in 2011 for the first time and l found it weird but funny mainly if compare to American remake,the movie is a little dated by now but still shines,clever and social criticism on sixties,Peter Cook is a misleading Devil who make a agreement with poor unhappy man called Moon (Dudley Moore) who was in love to a girl,seven wishes in exchange of his soul,but each wish end up in a nightmare....the Devil deceive the foolish man every time...really fantastic black humor comedy helped by unmistakable British accent...in time a little appearance of the astonishing Raquel Welch as Lust...Gorgeous ever!!!.
A hapless loser (Dudley Moore) sells his soul to the Devil (Peter Cook) in exchange for seven wishes, but has trouble winning over the girl of his dreams (Eleanor Bron).An extremely influential figure in modern British comedy, Cook is regarded as the leading light of the British satire boom of the 1960s.
But "Bedazzled" isn't the kind of comedy one laughs at; it's more the kind that one smiles at and thinks to himself "that's funny." In the beginning, there's Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore), a fry cook who can't quite get the nerve to ask out a waitress, Margaret, whom he's developed a rather large crush on.
I grant you that PETER COOK and DUDLEY MOORE are two very talented British performers but even their kind of talent needs a better than average script to overcome the tired gags conjured up to give a new spin to the Faust legend.Cook is a dim-witted short order cook who gets to realize some of his wishes (but always with a hex on all of them) from devil Cook, and the film is a series of jokes with Cook's best laid plans always going amok as he struggles to find and conquer his true love.DUDLEY MOORE completely nails his Stanley Moon characterization, as does PETER COOK with his sharp and snotty comments as the Devil, always up to no good.
The usually less-than-dependable Dudley Moore does a good job here as Stanley Moon, a short order cook leading a go-nowhere life but always eyeing waitress Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron, whom you may recognize from "Help!").
It's 1967, Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) has a dead end job as a Wimpy's cook and is hopelessly in love with waitress Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron).
Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) is a short order cook secretly infatuated with waitress Margaret (Eleanor Bron).
While I consciously had never bothered with the recent remake, I did miss the original a couple of times in the past on Cable TV; now that I have finally caught up with it, I'd say it's a curious, with-it updating of the Faustian legend for the Swinging Sixties crowd which, in spite of frequently hitting its various targets, is rather patchy overall, thus rendering its cult status slightly overrated.The three leads – Dudley Moore (as the timid cook hero), Peter Cook (as Mr. Spiggott alias The Horned One) and Eleanor Bron (Moore's co-worker and object of desire) – are very appealing, although the film is perhaps best-remembered today for Raquel Welch's steamy, scene-stealing cameo as one of Spiggott's cohorts, Lilian Lust.
A wily devil named George Spiggot, who has seven wishes to grant, targets the soul of a short-order cook at Wimpy's in "Bedazzled," Stanley Donen's stylish take on Faust.
There is a touch of genius about Peter Cook and Dudley Moore's "Bedazzled".In order to buy his soul, the very low rent Devil, George Spiggott (Peter Cook), grants hapless Wimpy short order chef Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) seven wishes.
Even though in real life Raquel already had 2 kids, she became that desire for a long time before and after this film.The strength of the film is Peter Cook's way in his role as the devil.
Moore is good natured here and keeps getting out witted by Cook's devil.Donlan produces some very 1960's looks down to the scene coloring of the film as there are times the color are psychedelic..
So Moore sells his soul to the devil, Peter Cook, in return for seven wishes involving his waitress.Surprise -- the wishes go wrong.
This, the original version from 1967 blends classic British comedy with pre-Pythonesque humour.Peter Cook tries to swindle Dudley Moore out of his soul by giving him seven wishes.
Peter Cook and Dudley Moore worked together in a variety of media for a long time.
The film is great enough with Peter Cook and Dudley Moore.
It is exactly the same premise, a guy - Stanley Moon (Dudley Moore) - wants to be with a girl - Margaret Spencer (Eleanor Bron) - and along comes The Devil, aka George Spiggott (Peter Cook), and the guy signs a contract for seven wishes in exchange for his soul. |
tt0414078 | Halloweentown High | Two years after the previous movie, 17-year-old Marnie Piper (Kimberly J. Brown) prepares to begin a new school year. She asks the Halloweentown Council to work toward openness between Halloweentown and the mortal world. She proposes bringing a group of Halloweentown students to her own high school in the mortal world. The Council is initially apprehensive, mostly due to the legend of the Knights of the Iron Dagger: a fanatical knighthood who wanted to destroy all things magical. The Halloweentown Witches' Council, however, agrees to accept the plan after Marnie mistakenly bets "all the Cromwell magic" that her plan will work. If she does not prove she is right by midnight on Halloween, then her entire family will lose their magical abilities. Marnie, regretting what she said to the Council, wants to cancel the program she has made, but her grandmother Aggie (Debbie Reynolds) opposes, saying that they have nothing to fear.
The Halloweentown students arrive and are magically given human appearances to disguise their true non-human natures. School begins with Marnie acting as a tour guide for the exchange group, claiming they are from Canada. Aggie substitute teaches so she can be available in case of need. Cody (Finn Wittrock), a new student, shows a romantic interest in Marnie.
While Aggie proves unable to teach any subject effectively, the Halloweentown students keep to themselves, hiding in the refuge that Aggie magically creates for them in a remote student locker. Marnie gradually encourages the students to join sports teams, school activities, and to make new friends.
Marnie's progress is interrupted by a warning that appears to be from the Knights of the Iron Dagger, then by a magical incident at the mall that results in the Halloweentown students assuming their natural appearances in public. This is followed by a break-in at the secret magical locker and the disappearance of one of the students.
Meanwhile, Marnie's developing relationship with Cody parallels an unexpected romance beginning between Aggie and the school's principal, Phil Flannigan (Clifton Davis). Aggie suspects Cody of being the cause of the trouble, and tries to convince Marnie to halt their relationship, but Marnie in turn suspects Flannigan. They eventually discover that Flannigan is the Knight in question; he was told prior to the students' arrival that he was the last of the Order.
Edgar Dalloway (Michael Flynn), head of the Witches' Council and father of one of the students, is the real root of their problems. He wants to keep Halloweentown isolated from the mortal world, and used Flannigan to ensure the failure of Marnie's project. This, he hoped, would cause a negative reaction in Halloweentown and keep the portal between Halloweentown and the mortal world closed.
The Halloweentown students use the school's Halloween carnival to improve mortal attitudes toward magical folk. Their haunted house depicts the ordinary lives of creatures that have typically been seen as monsters in the mortal world, including displays like the "Monster Tea Party" and ogres "picnicking in their natural setting", which winds up boring the carnival goers. Meanwhile, Marnie's mother, Gwen (Judith Hoag), uses a Witch's Glass to hunt down the missing student imprisoned by Dalloway.
At the school carnival, Dalloway launches magical attacks against the mortal students by bringing the inanimate monsters in the haunted house to life. The ensuing panic spirals beyond Marnie's and Aggie's ability to contain the monsters. Flannigan incites a mob to corner the Halloweentown students. Cody shames the crowd, the students reveal themselves, and the crowd accepts them for who they are. Flannigan also renounces being a knight and accepts Aggie.
Dalloway claims the Cromwell magic, and explains that his son Ethan (Lucas Grabeel) helped with most of the things that happened, but Gwen has shown the evening's events to the Witches' Council. They return the Cromwell magic, Gwen returns with the imprisoned student, and the Council imprisons Dalloway in another Witch's Glass.
The portal between Halloweentown and the mortal world opens inside the haunted house, and crowds of children from Halloweentown cross over to enjoy the carnival together with children of the mortal world. Marnie flies off for a romantic broom ride with Cody. While flying over the carnival, they kiss. | horror | train | wikipedia | This Halloween Town was again worth the time.
Lucas Grabeel stood out in this debut as Ethan, a warlock worth watching.
He has much to offer the acting world and is going to go places in Hollywood and his newest release, High School Musical may be the launching pad.
The show was fun and the Disney audience loved it.
The Halloween Town High premise of creatures disguising themselves as high school students and trying to fit in when their peers find it hard to fit in themselves is a refreshing twist from the other roles available.
Disney once again found a new vehicle for some talented young actors.
Halloweentown High, just premiering last week on the Disney Channel was a lighthearted family feature.
Watching it, anyone would realize that this film was not out to grab a best picture nomination at the Oscars.
However, for what it's supposed to be, Halloweentown High proves to be a film that children will enjoy to watch.
With a wide fan base of children of all ages from the first two films, you can see why the Disney Channel is playing the movie several times all month.
While I read over a few of the comments made on the movie, I was perplexed at how some young girls went completely crazy over it, while others took out enough time to write a full essay on how horrible it was.
As a movie for children, it's supposed to be cheesy; so expect that and you will find yourself pleasantly surprised..
I watched this movie knowing how much of a chance it had to be awful.
The most recent Disney Channel original movies have been complete crap (case and point, The Cheetah Girls).
And this movie is the third of two great movies already, and I was shocked to find that it was actually good!
Brown) and her grandmother Aggie (Debbie Reynolds) are planning to bring kids from Halloweentown, disguise them as humans and have them attend a high school in the mortal world, to prove monsters that live in Halloweentown aren't dangerous.
But of course, there is a problem, if Marnie can't prove to the humans that the monsters are harmless, she, and her family will lose all their powers.When the monsters start attending the school, they all stick together and aren't interacting with their fellow human schoolmates, so Marnie suggests they do different extra curricular activities.
Then, they sign up to make a haunted house for their school Halloween Carnival, but they make it so it is a wax museum with wax monsters sitting, drinking tea, and eating cookies trying to how that monsters mean no harm.
This Disney Channel movie has surprisingly good computer special effects.
Considering their latest effects-laden original movie, Zenon: Z3, had the worst computer effects I've ever seen.
Another thing great about this movie is that Disney seems to have a knack for getting the same actors back for their sequels to their original movies.
Brown, Debbie Reynolds, Judith Hoag, Joey Zimmerman, and Emily Roeske are all back, and have been in all three Halloweentown movies.
If you haven't seen the original Halloweentown movie and its sequel, I would see those first, because there are some things that might not make sense.
All in all, this is the best original movie Disney Channel has produced in quite a while.
Good movies!.
I really enjoy all three Halloweentown movies though the only thing missing from Halloween High was Marnie's friend Luke.
Maybe he's too old to be in High School anymore but that doesn't mean he couldn't have come over to give some moral support.
;-) These movies maybe intended for kids but I really enjoyed them!
A Halloween movie that's not at all scary is something I enjoy.
:o)I am having someone I know who lives in the U.S. pick up a copy of each movie for me and mail it to me.
Though I'm the only with a VCR copy of Halloween High and one day hope to pass the third installment onto all of my neighbourhood kids since I know they enjoyed both Halloweentown one and two..
I love all the Halloweentown movies because of their plots!
In every Halloweentown movie, there is a new villain.
It had more characters i.e. Cassie, Natalie, Chester, Pete, Ethan and more, they are all students from Halloweentown come to the mortal world to see what it's like to live like a human.
Lucas Grabeel is such a good actor, and this was his first acting job ever, and he was excellent.
We were also joined by Cody, a new student at Marnie's high school, who happens to like her, she likes him too!
It's a real cool movie, the best one out of all, so check it out!.
Halloweentown III: Halloween High, though not a stunning piece of cinema, held much more talent and savvy than that of the first two.
Brown has grown into a beautiful and talented young actresses.
If Disney continues to make them like this...I'll keep watching with my Daughter.
this movie is a must for any Disney fan, especially if you (as i am) a fan of High School Musical, some of the cast choices were not as you expected but they all shine, a brilliant story line and is very unpredictable, some corny lines but if you love Lucas Grabeel you will melt, as they are all said by him a very well used budget for a DCOM and use of sets effectively.
the special effects are very amateur but it was never going to be a blockbuster, high earnings movie, which is probably appealed to me.
i cannot wait until i see the next installment of the movie, and any others in the future.
I love this movie, must watch it every October.
Those three generations of Cromwell women, Debbie Reynolds, Judith Hoag, and Kimberly Brown are once again fighting some evil forces that are trying to keep the world of Halloween away from the human world.
This time it's a world exchange program that's at stake.Young Kimberly Brown has the bright idea to have some Halloweentown kids come to the human world incognito as humans, the better not to instantly shock people to foster greater understanding.
Of course the powers that be in Halloweentown remembering their experiences with humankind before are very skeptical.But Kimberly believes so much in the project that she bets the family magic powers on it.
The Magic Kingdom has developed its own nice little franchise in the Halloweentown movies to go along with the various incarnations of High School Musical.
Debbie Reynolds and the rest of the cast are as enjoyable as they were in the first Halloweentown film.
And Lucas Grabeel of the High School Musical films is also part of this cast as one of the Halloweentown transfer kids.Halloweentown High is good viewing during goblin season..
I was never a huge fan of the first two Halloweentown films - the first one felt clumsy and choppy, and the second was just plain dull.
I actually prefer Halloweentown High over the others.
First of all, the plot is executed without any awkward dragging bits (think about the long time travel sequence in Halloweentown II, or the anticlimactic ending of the first film).
The Halloweentown setting is a good idea that was not used to its full potential in the previous movies.
Brown delivers another fabulous performance, and I wish she could have been in the fourth movie as well.
Lucas Grabeel, of High School Musical fame, steals his scenes (although I laugh whenever I see his cowboy costume) as the troubled and somewhat annoying Ethan.
Many critics of this movie have pointed out inconsistencies such as Gwen using magic, or their last name changing.
To set things straight, Piper is the last name of Marnie's human father, so she and her siblings bear that name.
All in all, I enjoyed this movie a lot.
The film was really good.
I think "Halloween Town High" was really good.
I have all the Halloween Town movies recored.
I look forward to the Next Halloween Town movie.
These movies are very good movies for kids to watch.I am a very big fan of Kimberly J.
I hope Disney keeps on putting these movies on.
I really hope they make a Halloween Town 4.
These are the kinds of movies that I love to watch.
If people would watch the movies very carefully they would realize that these Haloween Town movies are good for kids to watch.
It's rare that sequels are better than the original, and this movie proves that in many words.
Halloweentown was a blast to watch, and I knew at once that the other 2 sequels would be good, but I was wrong.
The entire movie is like repeating one scene over and over and over and over with different lines, it's not exciting at all.
A lot of the Halloweentown citizens aren't as believable as they were in the first, they look more like costumes had just been slapped on them.
It just seems like it's an entirely new movie and not a sequel.
I loved this movie, I watched all 3 of them over Halloween last year I now have them on order although there could of been a better script I have equally enjoyed all of the movies & Finn Witrock who plays Cody is absolutely GORGEOUS.I would of liked it to of contained some of the cast from the other movies but nether the less it was still enjoyable to watch it was a mild horror movie for children & they (my kids) enjoyed it very very much & they can not wait to see if the next one comes out.
i just wish that they did movies like this for adults as I am not overly keen on adult horror films.
Halloweentown High is terrible, not nearly as good as the first or even the second one.
For the first hour and a half of the movie absolutely nothing happens.
By the end I didn't even care about this movie, The one thing it did have was good special effects, for a Disney movie.
My advice skip this movie, unless you have absolutely nothing to do and there is nothing on the television,and you want to watch this movie to see if it's really as bad as my review says.2/10.
This movie was awful it had no story.
I mean Halloween town wasn't even in the movie why name it Halloween town high when Halloween town is not even in the movie.
O.k. it was in the movie but only that council room thing with those guys.
But i mean there was no point to the movie.
But other then that, really bad movie i don't know why they keep on making sequels with different directors kinda stupid don't you think.
All the monsters that come from Halloween town was retarded they all stunk at acting.
I don't want to be harsh but if you make a good movie don't make a bad sequel that kills the whole series the second one was o.k. but the first one was good see what Disney does to movies.
Name changes in Movie.
In the next movie Return to HalloweenTown, they are now known as Pipers and they got rid of Kimberly J.
Brown in Return to Halloweentown.
Also, the movie changed Halloween Town dramatically.
So many people that got rid of in this movie.
In halloween Town High...
A third movie with the Halloweentown name does not a trilogy make (Spoilers included).
As both a fan of the first two Halloweentown movies and a student of Communication Arts, I was very much looking forward to the third movie in the Halloweentown series, especially since said series is supposed to end as a trilogy.
However, the movie's narrative proved that this is not the case.The first problem one encounters is that the flow of the story doesn't match up with that of the previous two movies.
Sure, the flow of the trilogy goes from a childish good and evil narrative in the first move, through a revenge plot in the second movie that fits Marnie's status as teenager, into a reasonably adult diversification theme that metatexturally speaks of Marnie's selfishness.
The problem, however, lies in the fact that our young protagonist goes about this in a way that is not structured in the exchange students' best interests.SPOILERS BELOW!Furthermore, Gwen, Marnie's mother, uses magic.
This may not seem like a big thing to a first-time watcher, but throughout both earlier movies, it has been proven that Gwen actively *chooses* not to use her powers, especially while in the human world.
The frivolous use of magic in a scene where Gwen and Marnie interact isn't only odd, it's actively confusing.
The only times Gwen used spells in previous movies was as self-defense.Also, certain characters who had a strong presence in the first two movies were noticeably absent.
One can understand the under-use of Emily Roeske's Sophie, because the character is noticeably younger than her siblings and therefore probably still in middle school, but the absolute absence of Luke is inexcusable.
This is a character that not only plays a major role in the first two films and is a fan favorite, but also the character who throughout the first two movies was positioned as having a crush on Marnie and, in the second movie, being her friend.
While one can understand that contract negotiations and so on may have prevented Phillip Van Dyke from appearing in the movie, to completely forget the character's presence and importance is unforgivable.
That would have explained why the parents and other more sophisticated viewers of DCOM didn't get any sort of triangle between Marnie, Luke, and Marnie's human boyfriend, which would have been infinitely preferable to the plot we were presented.In conclusion, while the story is good enough on its own, and the costumes and special effects are magnificent, the movie's shortcomings handicap its impact.
The movie is skewed, and appears to have nothing to do with Halloweentown so much as Marnie's selfishness in particular.
This is, by far, the weakest of the three movies, while it had the potential to be the best.
The name of this film is misleading by make it seem like the high school is in Halloweentown.
the plot does not make sense and this seem out of tune with the other films in series .
Where in the world is Halloweens town?.
This movie is no were near as good as the rest of the series.
Now, right away they start talking about Marnie's "punishment" for opening the halloweentown portal, this is impossible since it happens almost two years after.
Lastly not going to halloweentown or having a big magical confrontation killed the fun of this world for my friends and family.
In the story Marnie had to "fight this magical knight, they never fought and the story had almost nothing to do with halloweentown.
But after Halloweentown II, I expected more, more magic, more kalbar or evil warlock/witch things.
I must say that this third installment of Halloweentown was a huge disappointment.
I loved the first one, and enjoyed the second, but Halloweentown High doesn't even come close.
This makes no sense because she made it clear in the earlier movies that she chooses to live as a mortal.
They even show her using magic for stupid mundane things like making hot chocolate.
Sophie, who played such a major part in the two earlier movies, is almost nowhere to be seen in this film.
Also noticeably missing is Luke, Marnie's best friend from Halloweentown who helped her deal with the villains of both earlier movies.
Overall,though, I think that the writers lost track of what made the first movie so enjoyable - Halloweentown itself.
Like Narnia, like Diagon Alley and Hogwarts - the fun of stepping through to a magical, adventurous world so near to our own and the potential that it represents is what keeps me coming back to the first movie for more..
My daughter and I loved the first three Halloweentown movies.
They have become a tradition with my household, and being born on Halloween I look forward to the creativity without the pure evil that is often in other theme based movies.
After this many movies, the characters should have stayed consistent at all costs!!!!Shame on your company for leaving these winning actresses out of the fourth movie.
This movie was horrible.I really liked the first two halloweentown movies and I was exited when another one was coming out but this had to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen.
It was just a huge waste on a good movie.
Nobody would just accept monsters into the world so easily.The movie tries to hard for laughs and tries to be scary when it is definitely not.Unlike the other two movies they do not show halloweentown all they show is a courtroom and that is another bad thing about it.
I would not recommend this movie to anyone because they should not waste an hour and a half of their lives to see this..
This movie was awful.
OK, so why did they call it Halloweentown High?
The school is not in Halloweentown, its in our world.
And then with the whole knight thing, that doesn't make sense, and with the sappy ending where "everyone lives in peace with the freaks" was so stupid.
There is countless things about this movie that are stupid, including the principle and the grandmothers love affair, and Marnies and that boys love affair, and brothers and the trolls love affair, and the statement at the end where the grandma says something about "who heard of football(or some other sport) without flying monkeys?) What?
In the earlier movies, there was NOTHING about "flying monkeys" thats just stupid.
the other movies were stupid, but this is horrendously dumb. |
tt0113247 | La haine | The film depicts approximately 19 consecutive hours in the lives of three friends in their early twenties from immigrant families living in an impoverished multi-ethnic French housing project (a ZUP – zone d'urbanisation prioritaire) in the suburbs of Paris, in the aftermath of a riot. Vinz (Vincent Cassel), who is Jewish, is filled with rage. He sees himself as a gangster ready to win respect by killing a cop, manically practising the role of Travis Bickle from the film Taxi Driver in the mirror secretly. His attitude towards police, for instance, is a simplified, stylized blanket condemnation, even to individual policemen who make an effort to steer the trio clear of troublesome situations. Hubert (Hubert Koundé) is an Afro-French boxer and small-time drug dealer, the most mature of the three, whose gymnasium was burned in the riots. The quietest, most thoughtful and wisest of the three, he sadly contemplates the ghetto and the hate around him. He expresses the wish to simply leave this world of violence and hate behind him, but does not know how since he lacks the means to do so. Saïd – Sayid in some English subtitles – (Saïd Taghmaoui) is an Arab Maghrebi who inhabits the middle ground between his two friends' responses to their place in life.
A friend of theirs, Abdel Ichaha, has been brutalized by the police shortly before the riot and lies in a coma. Vinz finds a policeman's .44 Magnum revolver, lost in the riot. He vows that if their friend dies from his injuries, he will use it to kill a cop, and when he hears of Abdel's death he fantasizes carrying out his vengeance.
The three go through an aimless daily routine and struggle to entertain themselves, frequently finding themselves under police scrutiny. After Vinz nearly shoots a riot policeman and the group narrowly escapes, they take a train to Paris but encounter many of the same frustrations, and their responses to interactions with both benign and malicious Parisians cause several situations to degenerate to dangerous hostility. A run-in with sadistic plainclothes policemen, during which Saïd and Hubert are humiliated and racially as well as physically abused, results in their missing the last train home and spending the night on the streets. They sleep in a shopping mall and wake to a news broadcast informing them that Abdel is dead. They later travel to a roof-top from which they insult skinheads and policemen, before later encountering the same group of racist anti-immigrant skinheads who begin to beat Saïd and Hubert savagely, now that the balance of power has shifted. Vinz suddenly arrives, and his gun allows him to break up the fight; all the skinheads flee except one (portrayed by Kassovitz himself) whom Vinz is about to execute in cold blood. His dream of revenge is thwarted by his reluctance to go through with the deed, and, cleverly goaded by Hubert, he is forced to confront the fact that his true nature is not the heartless gangster he poses as, and he lets the skinhead flee.
Early in the morning, the trio returns to the banlieue and split up to their separate homes, and Vinz turns the gun over to Hubert. However, Vinz and Saïd encounter a plainclothes policeman, whom Vinz had insulted earlier in the day whilst with his friends on a local rooftop. The policeman grabs and threatens Vinz, making reference to the earlier incident on the roof. Hubert rushes to their aid, but as the policeman holding Vinz taunts him with a loaded gun held to Vinz's head, the gun accidentally goes off, killing Vinz instantly. Hubert and the policeman slowly and deliberately point their guns at each other, and as the film cuts to Saïd closing his eyes and cuts to black, a shot is heard on the soundtrack, with no indication of who fired or who may have been hit. This stand-off is underlined by a voice-over of Hubert's slightly modified opening lines ("It's about a society in free fall..."), underlining the fact that, as the lines say, jusqu'ici tout va bien (so far so good); i.e. all seems to be going relatively well until Vinz is killed, and from there no one knows what will happen, a microcosm of French society's descent through hostility into pointless violence. | bleak, revenge, cult, realism, violence | train | wikipedia | As much a realistic portrayal of a torn society as it is an artistic achievement, 'La Haine' is essential viewing.My vote: 10 out of 10Favorite films: http://www.IMDb.com/list/mkjOKvqlSBs/Lesser-known Masterpieces: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls070242495/Favorite Low-Budget and B-movies: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls054808375/Favorite TV-Shows reviewed: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls075552387/.
Reminiscent of Costas-Gavras' film Z with its rapid-fire dialogue and staccato rhythms, La Haine (Hate) directed by 28 year-old Mathieu Kassovitz, is a passionate look at racial tensions at a Paris housing project.
It's rare that a film like this is considered both genuine and a good example of it's art but La Haine is both.The plotline is compelling and realistic and neatly shows the way that inner city life has gone in the big cities in France as well as proving that despite the romance of Paris, it suffers from the same problems as any other major city.The characters are above all believable and the cast did a great job.
The quality of acting is simply stunning from several actors and it would be a shame if it was simply dismissed as "just another foreign art-house movie" by audiences outside France.Above all the film whilst showing the influences of American films and society has a very clear sense of it's own identity and at no time does it feel like another US Ghetto film transposed to France.
La Haine aka Hate is a story about three friends living near Paris in France (one Jew, one Arab and one black) who have nothing special in their lives and try to live a day at a time by drinking and having a good time and also working (at least the black character, who owns a boxing hall).
This makes the youth gangs in city including the three protagonists start a war against the police and authorities for the horrible wrongs they and their friend have suffered, and suddenly they notice the whole society is collapsing, and all there is is hate and need to revenge...Violence and mayhem is almost everywhere, including authorities which should do nothing but fight against it..This film is powerful and grim.
La Haine is that kind of a film that it should be seen by police and youths as well, because there are still possibilities to prevent things to go too far in our life and world we live in.The camera techniques used in this film are magnificent.
With La Haine, young director Mathieu Kassovitz took the flipside of this and gave an illustration of the awfulness of life in the depressed blue-collar areas of ParisLa Haine (Hate') begins after a night of rioting on a dismal housing estate on the northern outskirts of Paris and focuses on 24 hours in the lives of three close friends aged around 20.
L'Avenir c'est nous (We Are the Future) is the ironic slogan on the estate's playground, but this is a film about people who believe they have no future.The quality of the performances from the 3 main actors, their conviction, the way they interact with one another and the vigour and fluency of Kassovitz's script and direction make this a very special movie indeed.
he sees the relationship between hubert and vinz, his 2 best friend, deteriorate, but doesn't know who to side with, or what to do about it.Mathieu Kassovitz made this film in a way that you feel for both the police and the the 3 friends.
The end shocked me and I couldn't really think anything else then "I got to watch this movie again", and the day after I bought a DVD of it.The movie tells the story of a black, Arab and Jewish guy who live in a housing project near Paris, the kind of neighborhood where most of the people don't have a job, where the youth bores itself and flirts with criminal behavior, where drugs are being sold and where an occasional riot starts (this happened from the 80's until recently from time to time).
With Vinz - not being the most stable nor the most smart and relaxed person - having a gun on him the three come in some hard situations, but also without the police gun they have enough problems during the 24 hours....I ain't gonna spoil anything, but this should be enough to make you wanting to watch this movie.After watching it a couple of times I realized that this was a story, I always thought it was a documentary, which is a big compliment to the whole crew I think.
The best thing is the end, which sets the movie mostly apart and makes it more recognizable for the European crowd (I'm not gonna spoil it, but if it ended differently the movie wouldn't been so great) The way it is shot in black and white makes it look realer, makes it grimier, it portrays the banlieues as a place without an exit.
But what really sets this movie apart is the Cutkiller scene, this scene only made me wanted to get a set of SL1200's...The way the tension is build in the movie is great, most of the time the characters don't do anything, but you still feel the tension building, the hate growing, and when you maybe bored watching some scenes the first time (the "candit-camera" scene for instance and the "eiffeltower" scene), but afterwards they're like pieces of a puzzle falling into it's place.
watch this movie and you'r hooked for life haha :).the ending is so powerful that you think: this movie is just to good to be true.i know my comment isn't very helpfull, but i wanted to give you all my opinion about the film..
On the end of the long night, tragedy happens.The awarded "La Haine" is an impressive French movie that follows along 24 hours, the lives of three idle friends from a poor suburb of Paris that belong to a lost generation.
I saw this movie in the 90's and today I have decided to see it again to compare the situations shown in the movie with what is recently happening in Brazil with several riots and it is amazing the similarities: lost youths with neither instruction nor job; unprepared and brutal police force; low quality of life in the slums or ghettos in the outskirts of the big cities (in Brazil, there are several slums also in the noble areas).
Black and white, one great freaking soundtrack, amazing amateur acting, a very real script, and just a blazing atmosphere set this movie apart from almost every indie film in the last 20 years.
I like the acting by Vincent Cassel and other actors, like the movie is recorded in black and white, but something is missing, there is no deepness in the movie, director didn't show the real reasons why the people are living in that hard conditions, we only see how they kill their time in the hood and some of their small committed crimes, and of course there is constant animosity between people from the hood and police, but maybe that's it, the feeling of emptiness is similar to hate.
So far so good." There must be conviction in such words and the characters in "La Haine" seem to know they're in such dire circumstances, which are presented to us as almost inescapable for them.The french film, which took home the César Award for Best Film in 1995, succeeds in its sense of realism, almost appearing as a documentary with incredibly subtle camera-work that allows us to, not so much participate in but rather, feel shameful for unobtrusively playing witness to the crimes.
The atmosphere's harsh lighting and expressionist style of cinematography bears a striking similarity to the classic noir film, "The Third Man", where the surroundings are so vibrant that they nearly become a character in itself.Director Kassovitz, in only his second feature, demonstrates a masterful understanding of space and shadows, creating feelings of distress, at times claustrophobia, and a general sense of uneasiness.
There are much better French films than this pretentious attempt.Sure lighting and black/white photography was great, direction great, actors superb but there was no really original story or insight.
The acting and direction is terrific, the story is very good (we follow the three main characters for only 24 hours) and especially the black-and-white cinematography is great.
Despite some really funny moments (a dealer named Asterix, Cassel doing a Taxi Driver impression, the Tarantinoesque discussion about Tom & Jerry), this black and white milestone of French movie industry remains a very serious, brutal, unflinching film.
The bleak ending is just the definitive proof of what the entire movie is trying to teach us: hate and violence will only cause more violence (this aspect makes La Haine quite similar to Spike Lee's Do The Right Thing).This movie should be shown to everyone, so that people can understand what doesn't work in our society.Films with a strong message keep being important even 20 years after their release.
Flawless storytelling, intense acting and mastery in directing this film by Mathieu Kassovitz is truly a modern masterpiece which value, i am sure, will grow as the years go by like a vintage wine.Unique storytelling also remembers to end the story well, this is often neglected in modern movies.
This is used to give the viewer a real understanding of why these people are constantly rioting against the police because they feel trapped in this urban jungle and that the police actually keep them down rather than help them.There is another shot where Vince and Hubert are standing on a raised level with the streets of Paris behind them.
Filmed in a stark black and white, Kassovitz takes away the glory, wealth, and American-ized culture of project life (see Baltimore's "The Wire") and allows us to experience one day in the life of these boys and their discovery of a gun.Like von Trier's "Dear Wendy", "La Haine" focuses on the gun, a rarity within the youth of the French projects, and builds this momentum that the unknown will eventually happen.
Mathieu Kassovitz's 'La Haine' is a film that deals with the major social concerns present in the French banlieues or suburbs, where social fragmentation in the society and hatred to a system that rejects the inhabitants have resulted in gangs of multi-ethnic youths.
The film acts as a way of showing the serious issues in a way that prevents the government from just ignoring that they exist, which is what they had been doing, although Kassovitz said that he wasn't making a political movie.The film follows three youths, Vinz, an explosive Jew, Hubert, a thoughtful powerful black and Said, a streetwise Arab who represent the different cultures brought together by location and class.
Then we see a policeman throw a missile at the demonstrators kicking off the violent riot, so the police are shown by Kassovitz as being the perpetrators of the violence in the film.Mathieu uses the conflict between the police and the youths of the banlieues as a pointer to people in authority across the globe, as similar problems occur in most if not all major cities in one degree or another so the film is very relevant.
I guess I won't be able to say everything that's great about this film, but surely I will try.Mathieu Kassovitz is showing us one day in the life of three violent young men.
24 hours in the lives of three young friends from the French suburbs after a violent riot the day before.Extremely advisable to all teenagers and young adults (and not only), because although the film does not have a conventional story line, being more a series of events over 24 hours, those events are things that could happen to anyone, to with which we can identify, and has a final with a deep message.It is true that the film offers no solution to the violence and problems it depicts on disadvantaged minorities and social classes, and the characters sometimes do not seem at all pleasant, but it does provide a glimpse into the human condition in how "the social environment and behavior shape matching behavior".I believe this is a movie that can touch the soul, a movie to reflect upon feelings and prejudices that have to be overcome if we are to have a more just and peaceful society.Truly recommendable watch.
Inspired by other masterpieces such as, Do the Right Thing and Mean Streets, La Haine is a French film taking influence from American, urban cinema.
Not only this, but I quickly realised I had watched one of the most poignant social-commentaries to hit modern cinema, a film which was so honest and reminiscent for today's society.Set within the space of a day, La Haine places the viewer inside the French ghettos.
I am studying this film for my exams in January, i was a little downhearted to begin with as I'm not world cinemas biggest fan, and wasn't looking forward to watching it.How mistaken could i be, this film has the gritty realism that reminds me of films like Trainspotting, with the style of guy Ritchie, but under this hides a very important statement about french life.the film follows three friends through a day, a day which started with their friend in intensive care following riots during the night, where he was beaten by the police.The start of the film was great, the shots taken seemed as if they were real footage from riots, and was accompanied by a great Bob Marley song 'Burnin and Looting' The three characters are all visually introduced then you see them cause trouble, and be obnoxious, Vincent Cassell plays the part of Vinz, a lad who had found a cops gun in the riots, and has an obsession with using it,Hubert Koundé plays Hubert, Hubert and Vinz don't see eye to eye in the film and seem to have very different outlooks on the present situation, but start to become closer as the film progresses Said Taghmaoui plays Said, not as a strong character as the other two but is very important as the film gives the impression it through his eyes, as it opens with his eyes opening and closes with, yes you guessed it, his eyes closing.I wont tell you the end, i heard an absolutely ridiculous comment about this film from a film critic who labelled the film as predictable!!
While at the same time this societal statement is made there's a real story going on about three young friends (Vincent Cassell, Hubert Kounde, Said Taghmaoui, all named with their characters), one of which carrying a gun he 'found' from one cop who lost it during a riot, and their travels and adventures over a day trying to get money, drugs, or just getting by the haze of bewilderment over their friend dying in a hospital from cops beating and Vinz's demand for revenge *if* he dies.La Haine is an impression of just a part of a city, as much as one can grab in a day's length of time in 'movie-time', but as well as comparisons to Mean Streets may lie there's also one perhaps for Do the Right Thing.
Kassovitz isn't afraid to take a current event and turn it into the stuff of rousing character-driven drama with some semblance of plot (in this case the old 'if the gun is used in act then one act five' logic), but like Lee or Scorsese his black and white cinematography that follows these guys around with the verve to keep on a tracking shot or a specific close-up (in a half-ironic close-up Cassel talks to the mirror ala Travis Bickle, a little inspired through a whole other perspective) that speaks so much.
Sometimes it's docu-realistic, but then Kassovitz will throw that stylistic curve-ball reminding us this is in-your-face and with an attitude that would make the Clash raise an eyebrow or two.And along with Kassovitz hitting it way out of the park intellectually and emotionally as a filmmaker, his actors are all lock-in-step wonderful for their characters: Taghmaoui, who you might remember from Three Kings or Traitor, as the uppity and bad-joke telling Arab who has attitude to spare but is like a rough puppy at best; Kounde as the one with probably the most common sense as a guy who lost his gym to the riot and gets by smoking hash and trying to get (or talk) Cassel out of trouble; Cassel as the hot-head with something to prove to himself, or so he thinks, carrying the gun and not really knowing its implications.
The current President of France considers the minorities in France to be "scum." This is the story of three of these minority youth and 24 hours in their life after another was murdered by a French policeman.Mathieu Kassovitz (Crimson Rivers, Gothika) has directed a masterpiece showing the youth that are alienated from their parents with their love of rap music and American films, and a culture that is alienated from those in society that are consumed with their incomes, and cars, and fancy houses.The film stars three fantastic actors: Vincent Cassel (Ocean's Twelve & Thirteen, Crimson Rivers, Brotherhood of the Wolf), Hubert Koundé (The Constant Gardener), and Saïd Taghmaoui (The Kite Runner, Hildago).
"This is the story about a guy who falls off the top of a 50 storey building(or the Eiffel Tower)," recounts one of the film's heros."As he is falling, he is telling himself,'So far, everything is fine....so far, everything is fine' But in the end he has to land." Kassovitz tells the story of that descent through 24 hours in the lives of three friends, a symbolic trio of Black, Arab and Jew. Hubert, Said and Vinz are homeboys for whom home is one of the countless suberbs outside Paris, The housing estates, shoe boxes or pigeon holes if you ask me.
La Haine, like all great films should be, is a work of art, written and directed by a man who'd decided that he wants to make every shot as good as it can be. |
tt0109125 | Angel of Destruction | A controversial rock star Delilah, is hoping her new upcoming album will give her success after a previous two failed albums. After a topless cabaret/glam-metal performance at a local S&M club, she finds a finger with a ring in a box left for her within the dressing room. The sender is a psychotic fan Robert Kell, a sexual predator/mercenary/ex-military man in town, who has returned to the area to seek revenge on various underworld mobsters who "left his men to die in Angola", during the Angolan War of Independence.
This situation leads Delilah, and her lover/co-conspirator Reena, to seek a female bodyguard for protection. She has a dislike of the police, as her father was a cop, and he had once raped her. They seek undercover cop Brit Alwood, who agrees to take the case. However moments after the pair leaving Alwood's office, Brit is killed by Kell.
When Brit's kid sister Jo finds out about the crime, she sets out for revenge and agrees to protect Delilah, assisted by her lover Aaron Sayles, who is a detective. Jo is pulled into the dark, erotic world of sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll, and is forced to confront the crazed mind of a vicious serial killer. The two scour the town, interrogating Vietnam veterans that might know Kell's whereabouts.
At the same time Danny Marcus, Delilah's manager and abusive lover, starts causing problems for the talent when her record label owner Sonny Luso wants her to change her bad girl image. Sonny stands to lose $2 million if she won't change her image and the new album fails. He could collect $1.5 million on an insurance policy if she winds up dead – which leads to an assassination attempt that is thwarted by both Jo and Kell, who she believes is trying to save Delilah for a sick and twisted fantasy finale. | cult | train | wikipedia | null |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.