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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt2112293 | The Comedy | Swanson (Tim Heidecker) is an upper class New Yorker who alternately feels apathy and resentment to his surroundings. He lives on a boat and spends his time partying and wandering around the city with his hipster friends, humorlessly lampooning and mocking various strangers they encounter. As of the beginning of the film, Swanson's father is comatose, and he is set to inherit his estate, as his brother is in rehab. The film has no clear narrative, instead showing individual scenes of Swanson's behavior as he improvises in situations to make strangers and acquaintances uncomfortable. Swanson and his friends ridicule one man, Cargill (Jeff Jensen), who shows vulnerability while saying they are important to him. Cargill continues hanging out with them regardless. Swanson takes a girl onto his boat from a party, and becomes fascinated with pulling on her eyelids later when she is sleeping. He visits a bar in a poor neighborhood with a primarily African American customer base, flaunts his wealth, and eagerly predicts the bar will soon be gentrified. At one point, Swanson pays a cab driver 400 dollars to let him drive, then speeds recklessly and harasses a woman from the driver's seat, leaving the cabbie to deal with the fallout. On a whim, Swanson takes a part-time job as a dishwasher. His extremely sarcastic sense of humor attracts a waitress, who he takes onto his boat. While undressing, she suffers a seizure, which Swanson observes with vague interest. Swanson's friend Van (Eric Wareheim) shows the group a slide show of photos from his childhood interspersed with pornographic images as a gag. Despite some initial laughs, the group falls silent and everyone appears saddened, including Van, who solemnly continues the slide show. In the final scene of the film, Swanson visits the beach, where he plays in the water with a young child, an activity he seems to genuinely enjoy. | comedy, depressing | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0058571 | Send Me No Flowers | George Kimball (Rock Hudson), a hypochondriac, lives with his wife Judy (Doris Day) in the suburbs. Judy learns from the milkman that their neighbors, the Bullards, are getting a divorce, and shares the news with George.
Over lunch, George is appalled as a bachelor acquaintance, Winston Burr (Hal March), gleefully describes how he contacts women who are getting divorced and pretends to console them, hoping to seduce them while they are vulnerable.
George visits his doctor after experiencing chest pains. He overhears his doctor, Ralph Morrissey (Edward Andrews), discussing a patient who has just a few weeks to live. George assumes that Morrissey is talking about him and is distraught. On the train home he tells his friend, Arnold Nash (Tony Randall), that he will die soon. He has decided not to tell Judy, knowing it will upset her. Arnold solemnly assures George that he will deliver the eulogy at his funeral.
That night, George dreams about Judy marrying Vito, an irresponsible young deliveryman more interested in her inheritance than love. He visits a funeral home operated by Mr. Akins (Paul Lynde) to buy a burial plot. He decides to find Judy a new husband and asks Arnold to help him.
On a golf outing, Judy's golf cart malfunctions and she is saved by her old college beau Bert Power (Clint Walker), now a Texas oil baron. George agrees with Arnold that Bert would be a great husband for Judy. During an evening out, George forces Judy to dance and talk with Bert. When George runs into the newly divorced Linda Bullard (Patricia Barry), who is there with Winston, he takes her to the coat room and warns her about Winston's intentions. She thanks him and kisses him in gratitude. When Judy sees them, she storms out, thinking that he is pushing her to spend time with Bert so that he can have an affair with Linda. George then tells Judy that he is dying.
Upset, Judy insists that George use a wheelchair. But when she sees Dr. Morrissey and he tells her that George is fine, she thinks George is lying to wriggle out of the consequences of his affair. She rolls him out of the house and locks him out, announcing her intention to divorce him. George spends the night at Arnold's house, during which time George's various demands and idiosyncrasies cause Arnold to strike, one by one, many of the complimentary remarks about George he had planned on making in his eulogy.
The next day Judy leaves to buy a train ticket. George follows her to the train station and insists that he really is dying and tells her he has bought a burial plot. Thinking this is another lie, she goes home to get her bags. But when Mr. Akins delivers the burial contracts, she realizes that George was sincere all the time and forgives him. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0043480 | Droopy's Double Trouble | Droopy is presented here as a manservant working for an unseen master, who is going away for a few days with the head butler, Mr. Theeves. As they are packing the master's clothes, Mr. Theeves requests that Droopy acquire someone to help him around the house while they are away, and the first person to come to Droopy's mind is his identical twin brother, Drippy. Droopy contacts Drippy at O'Brien's Gymnasium and explains the situation to him.
Drippy arrives later on and displays his superhuman strength by punching his way through the front door before greeting Droopy. Droopy introduces Drippy to Mr. Theeves, who is briefly astonished by Drippy's uncanny resemblance to Droopy, immediately startledly jumping up to the chandelier, thinking he was seeing double. However, Mr. Theeves is relieved enough to come down from the chandelier, and is also on the receiving end of Drippy's immense strength while shaking his hand. Mr. Theeves then explains Drippy's duties to him, and tells him that no matter what, no strangers are allowed on the premises.
However, while Droopy loads the master's suitcase into his limousine, Butch the Irish Dog, asks if Droopy can put him up for a little while, since he has had little to no good luck recently. Droopy reluctantly agrees and has Butch go to the back door, but forgets to inform Drippy. As Butch snidely muses about taking advantage of Droopy, the back door opens, but what Butch is unaware of is that it is Drippy who has answered. Butch promptly demands, "Let me have it, pal," and Drippy responds by punching Butch across the terrace, musing "No strangers". Butch gets caught in a veranda which swings him back into the door as Drippy closes it. Droopy then appears and lets a bewildered Butch inside, but as Droopy fetches some food, Drippy comes back into the kitchen and hits Butch outside with the kitchen table. Droopy, unaware, takes Spike's food outside, assuming Butch wanted to eat in the patio. As Droopy goes back for mustard, Drippy appears again and throws Butch down into the swimming pool, leaving him dazed. Droopy then rescues Butch, assuming he wanted to go for a swim, and takes him inside the house.
Droopy puts some dry clothes on Butch, but while he goes for some shoes, Drippy appears again and knocks Butch out cold. Droopy, assuming Butch was sleepy, tucks him in bed. Butch wakes up and begins to enjoy the comfort, but when he tries to call Droopy, Drippy responds instead and punches Butch into the bathroom, where Droopy is shaving. Butch accuses Droopy of assaulting him, but Droopy responds by recommending a cold shower for Butch. Strangely, Drippy goes for a shower as well and hits Butch out, stark naked. Droopy offers to get Butch some clothes, but this time Butch demands that he accompany Droopy. As Droopy enters a closet to get some clothes, Drippy appears from inside another right beside it and hits Butch with a baseball bat (referred to by Butch as a "shillelagh"). Butch angrily demands that Droopy hand it over, but Droopy denies having one, confusing Butch. Each time Butch puts Droopy in the closet, Drippy appears from the other and hits him. Now assuming that Droopy is responsible for hurting him, Butch demands that he stop, but Droopy denies having touched Butch all day. Now believing that Droopy may be going crazy, Butch discreetly calls for an ambulance.
When the ambulance arrives, Butch calls Droopy, but this time, both Droopy and Drippy answer. Shocked at the sight of two Droopys, Butch goes insane and got taken away by the ambulance. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | It's Enough To Drive An Irish Dog To Drink.
This is different in that we get two Droopy dogs: he and his twin brother "Drippy." In this story, Droopy is working for a butler in a big mansion and the butler is going to be away for a few days.
He needs a replacement and Droopy gets Drippy to handle the chores.
Drippy sounds like Droopy but is a lot more physical.
You can tell by the little derby on his head which tough guys apparently used to wear in the 30s and 40s.
You can also tell when Drippy enters the mansion by punching holes through the door!No stranger is allowed in the house is the rule number one, Drippy is told.
Guess who wants to hide in the house for a few days?
Yup, our old friend "Spike." My favorite bad guy-bulldog also has a derby and speaks with an Irish accent in this cartoon!
He made me laugh just listening to him.
He's always funny as it is but an Irish brogue, he's really good!
Spike's first plan is to hoodwink Drippy into giving him food.
He gets his answer quickly, belted a few hundred yards with Drippy's only remark being "no strangers."The gag for most of the cartoon is Drippy doing his job of making sure there are "no strangers" while Droopy being a nice guy and trying to help the big dog.
All the time, the poor bulldog has no idea Droopy has that slugger for a twin brother.
All he knows is that one minute everything is good, the next minute he's getting clobbered.
Whatever.....it's funny material and I actually felt sorry for poor, clueless Spike who takes some brutal (but laugh- out-loud) beatings!
p.s. His double-take at the end of the cartoon is one of the best I've seen..
Droopy gives Spike a bad case of double vision.
This short is an energetic little cartoon that introduces a twin brother of Droopy's for the first (and only) time to hilarious, if predictable effect.
Good effort that makes Droopy a more interesting character.
Well worth watching, even if it isn't one of Avery's best.
Recommended..
Double the Droopy fun..
It's double the fun as Droopy and his twin brother Drippy were tasked to watch over a very upscale mansion.
Droopy wants to invite Spike to stay over, who's hoping to filter off some food.
But, Drippy is abiding by a "no strangers allowed" policy and slaps and punches Spike around silly.There's some funny slapstick stuff and some surprises, especially since Spike doesn't realize Droopy has a twin.
A pretty good cartoon overall.Grade B+.
Spike sees double.
Love animation, it was a big part of my life as a child, particularly Disney, Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry, and still love it whether it's film, television or cartoons.Also have much admiration for Tex Avery, an animation genius whose best cartoons are animated masterpieces and some of the best he ever did.
Generally like the Droopy cartoons and the character himself a lot, his best cartoons are classics and among Avery's best.
'Droopy's Double Trouble' is another Droopy/Spike pairing, not one of their best but among their funniest.
It introduces Droopy's identical twin brother Drippy, a more anarchic and violent version of Droopy (and as can be expected he epitomises trouble) and a wildly entertaining one, his treatment of Spike here is brutal.Droopy, as usual, is so well established in personality and is high on the humour and charisma scale, though deliberately milder to usual, and Drippy adds to the conflict effortlessly.
Spike is even funnier and more interesting, if not given as much of a chance to show off his scheming and tricks, and one actually feels sorry for him with his brutal but admittedly hilarious treatment by Drippy.Typically, Avery does a wonderful job directing, with his unique, unlike-any-other visual and characteristic and incredibly distinctive wacky humour style all over it as can be expected.Once again there is nothing sadistic or repetitious about 'Droopy's Double Trouble'.
It's hilarious, imaginative content, mainly centring around the treatment of Spike, that has enough variety to stop it from being too predictable in the humour, even if the premise is even easier to foresee than most Droopy and Spike pairings.
Story-wise it is very obvious, pretty much the only thing not quite so good here.It is no surprise either that the animation is superb.
The character designs are unique, Avery always did have creative character designs, and suitably fluid.
The music, courtesy of Scott Bradley, is lushly and cleverly orchestrated, with lively and energetic rhythms and fits very well indeed.Can never fault the voice acting in the Droopy cartoons, Bill Thompson (who gets the lion's share of the material) and Daws Butler were always independently excellent voice actors.All in all, great if not quite one of my favourites.
9/10 Bethany Cox. Quit hittin' me with that shillelagh!.
Droopy is the butler at a very rich mansion.
His boss, Mr. Jeeves, wants him to find someone to look after the house while he is away, so who should Droopy call on but his twin brother Drippy, who happens to hang out at O'Brien's gymnasium.
In pops Spike, an Irish bulldog trying to put the squeeze on Droopy.
Unfortunately, Spike is a little too hasty in his eagerness, and fails to realize that there is another little dog in the mansion, with the explicit instructions of 'no strangers'.
This leads to a series of rapid-fire slapstick type gags, not the least of which is Spike getting hit over the head with a Louisville slugger, to which the Irish dog says: "Okay, gimme that shillelagh!" Haven't laughed this hard in years. |
tt0107692 | Jûbê ninpûchô | In Edo period-Japan, the Yamashiro clan mines gold in secret, and sends a shipment to the Toyotomi Shogun of the Dark as payment for his protection. The Shogun of the Dark intends to use the gold to buy advanced Spanish weaponry and overthrow the current government, the Tokugawa Shogunate. The ship runs aground onto Mochizuki territory in a storm, and the Eight Devils of Kimon, a ninja team with supernatural powers in the employ of the Yamashiro, kill the people of the nearby village of Shimoda to keep the gold shipment a secret.
While investigating the deaths, a Mochizuki Koga ninja team is massacred by the Devils. The sole survivor, Kagero, is captured by a Devil, Tessai, who molests her. She is rescued by Jubei Kibagami, a mercenary ex-Yamashiro ninja, who fights and eventually kills Tessai. Dakuan, a Tokugawa spy, blackmails Jubei into helping him kill the remaining Devils. To ensure his compliance, Dakuan stabs Jubei with a poisoned shuriken, and promises to give him an antidote once the mission is complete. Jubei learns from Dakuan that the leader of the Devils is Genma Himuro, the former Yamashiro ninja leader, who had ordered his team’s members to kill each other to cover up the location of the goldmine five years earlier. Jubei, who had been forced to kill his comrades to survive, decapitated Genma in revenge; Genma survived due to his immortality. Jubei is attacked by another Devil, Benisato, but he is saved by Kagero; before she can be questioned, Benisato is killed from afar by Yumimaru, Genma’s right-hand man, for failing her mission. Kagero agrees to work alongside Jubei and Dakuan, who informs Jubei that her body is infused with such deadly toxins that anyone who kisses or sleeps with her dies, which was why Jubei could kill Tessai.
The trio arrive in Shimoda, where they discover that the villagers died due to their water supply being poisoned, making it appear that they were killed by a plague. Jubei and Kagero fend attacks from three of the Devils – Mushizo, Zakuro and Mujuro Utsutsu; Jubei succeeds in killing Mushizo and Utsutsu. After finding the beached ship, Kagero deduces that the gold has been taken to Kashima Harbour, where it will be transported to the Shogun of the Dark in another ship.
Jubei, Kagero and Dakuan arrive at Kashima, which has been evacuated due to the townspeople’s fear of the plague. While Jubei battles another Devil, Shijima, Kagero sends a message to Hyobu Sakaki, the Mochizuki chamberlain, to bring his army to the harbour. She also learns from Dakuan that Jubei’s poisoning will only be cured if he copulates with her – the poisons in her body will counteract his. Kagero is captured by Shijima, and Jubei kills him, rescuing her once more. Kagero asks Jubei to sleep with her to cure himself. He considers doing so, but upon the arrival of the Shogun of the Dark's envoy in a ship, he leaves to prevent the gold reaching its destination.
Kagero arrives to meet Sakaki, but he stabs her, revealing himself to be Genma in disguise. Enraged, Jubei fights through waves of ninjas, but is nearly killed by Yumimaru. A gunpowder-rigged rat, left as a trap by Zakuro for Yumimaru for rejecting her advances, kills him, allowing Jubei to escape. He finds Kagero; mortally wounded, she admits her love for him and they kiss, curing Jubei’s poisoning. Before dying, Kagero gives Jubei her headband.
Jubei and Dakuan board the departing ship. On-board, Genma reveals his true intentions to the Shogun of the Dark’s envoy (who he kills) – he intends to use the gold to raise a ninja army to terrorize Japan, rather than serve as an ally to the Toyotomi. During an altercation with Zakuro, Jubei and Dakuan set the ship ablaze. As Jubei and Genma engage in a brutal fight, the gold becomes molten and engulfs Genma, who sinks to the bottom of the sea. Afterwards, Dakuan thanks Jubei, and expresses admiration for his and Kagero’s humanity. Deducing Dakuan’s intentions to kill him, the disgusted Jubei resumes his vagabond lifestyle, with Kagero’s headband tied around his sword’s hilt. | neo noir, cult, violence, flashback, good versus evil, psychedelic, tragedy, romantic | train | wikipedia | Ninja Scroll is easily one of my favorite anime movies.
Great animation (the minimal movement in Japanimation far superior to the over-produced Disney cloned animation style), great story and characters, a decent running time - it all works for me.Recently here in Australia, the movie has thankfully been re-released in the 10th Anniversary Uncut version.
A great movie to just sit back and enjoy, not in the mind set of Akira, Ghost in the Shell or Perfect Blue just a great all out action film.
One of the best anime's set around the time period of feudal Japan, although the main reason to see this film is for the characters.
Ninja Scroll is an Anime Classic which is usually mentioned in the same sentence as Vampire Hunter D or Fist of the North Star.
However, I believe that as a movie, Ninja Scroll has a wider appeal.The visuals are top-notch, and the action is fast and clean.
Ninja Scroll is a personal favorite of mine and I find many amazing aspects to this animated film.The story, ninja action and characters are amazing.
By movie's end, you are sure to have felt many emotions as you watched Jubei's tale unfold.Anyone who wants to write this off as low-class entertainment aimed at a skewed demographic must not have actually bothered to watch the film.
The story is pure brilliance, the animation is spectacular, and there are elements of superb well-crafted love-plot, action, and any other element a great story needs.
Ninja Scroll is one of the better action movies i have seen from Japan, and explosive anime action, that in times is daring, sexy and passionately beautiful, as it shows Japan in carnage.
This week I was fortunate to watch three fantastic animes(which I love from watching the likes of Studio Ghibli) in a row, Akira, Ghost in the Shell and this, Ninja Scroll.
Ninja Scroll captivated me from start to finish, with the ultra-violent scenes and gore it is perhaps not for all, but from an animation and storytelling perspective it is really one of the most engrossing animated films I have ever seen.
The storyline is interesting, and the relationships between the characters.The animation is terrific, and even though this film was made in 1993, it still captivates today.Fans of this genre will enjoy this movie, but so will people who aren't into animé.This is a terrific film, and one that you will be able to watch over and over again, if you love quality..
It is just the imagination of some men somewhere and they thought it was good enough to put on the screen and make money.To all of the people trying to disseminate the movie and peel out meaning, "What are you trying to prove?" There is blood, gore, some scenes not suitable for children and even some small-minded adults, and bad language, in general.
To all the people who want to sit down and see a well-executed anime movie with a plot with few holes and scenes that are unbelievable few and far between (even in the fantasy animation realm) while not have to think while watching - this is it.
All you have to do is enjoy.So if you haven't seen the movie and would like not a mind trip like Donnie Darko or 12 Monkeys, or not to have a moment that all is right for the character even though he went though garbage in the beginning like A Beautiful Mind or The Shawshank Redemption, or not to have a good cry like The Green Mile or Braveheart or not even to have to interpret your own meaning of what's really going on like Akira or Princess Mononoke, then just sit back and see how animation and that feeling that makes you wonder 'how did they think to put that in the movie' collides then watch Ninja Scroll.
If you go into it with an open mind then you will see why the action fans believe it one of the greatest anime movies ever made..
Ninja Scroll is memorable in that, for its intended audience, it's got a lot of very well animated violent sequences, some rough but sharply defined characterizations, and a journey/story that is not too hard to figure out.
Like my favorite 'cult' anime film, Fist of the North Star, Ninja Scroll has a story that needs a little paying attention to, but not by a lot.
After 5 years i saw more mangas and now i still think ninja scrolls is one of the top 5 mangas of all time.It's bloody action non stop the battles within the characters are the most spectacular i ever saw and believe me i saw many.I think it's the first movie a non manga fan should watch ,a manga fan has already seen it of course as it is considerated as a classic.It is not recommended for persons who don't like violence as some scenes are pretty gore bloody, but someone who likes blood it's an absolute must see here !!!
Anyone that knows me will tell you that watching Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust is like being with a little kid about to jump into a pool "Watch this, watch this, watch this, you're not looking!" Naturally I would eventually find Kawajiri's most respected work in time, Ninja Scroll.The animation is fantastic, even by today's standards.
If you keep in mind that everything was hand-drawn (including the endless number of killer bees and snakes), anyone will be most impressed.The plot is that a ninja for hire named Jubei is forced into doing a mission for a secret government spy after taking down one of the members of the Shogun Of The Dark, which happens to be led by his old enemy, Genma Himuro.The story is a mindless action/fantasy film but obviously still enjoyable.
It has a few scenes that aren't for the squeamish (the most well known is the rape scene) but if you've seen Wicked City, that film has more sexual content.Overall this is an anime that is obviously well worth a buy, if you know what you're in for but personally, I prefer Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust..
Ninja Scroll features a wicked cast of characters, extraordinary fight scenes and stunning animation from Yoshiaki Kawajiri and Madhouse Studios!
Ninja Scroll with it's sweet top of the line animation is truly a joy to watch every time.
Easily one of my top 10 favorite animes of all time.Ninja Scroll (1993) Review: 9/10.
The dialogue, which you initially think is too simple and silly, becomes richer and more hilarious the more you watch and listen.I haven't seen a lot of manga but I believe this film is a perfect introduction for a Western viewer in broaching the genre.
Wouldn't dream of it) are very well animated, and have that certain 'magic' to it.A love story somehow gets into the movie, and it's actually fairly well done, and not something that the producer just threw in for the sake of having romance.
Sure, sometimes it seems like their bodies were a geyser, or something, but it wasn't TOO extreme, compared to some other things I've seen.All in all, I'd recommend you see this movie, it's more of a Jackie Chan flick than a Matrix epic, but they're both good, so why not see some nice and fun action?
Leaving that crappy end of the year party was one of the best decisions I've made in my entire life.The story of Ninja Scroll focuses mainly around Jubei.
I was amazed how Manga animation took the term one step ahead of anything ever done in the past.Jûbei ninpôchô or Ninja Scroll is by far the best animated feature i've ever seen.
The incredible attention to detail and beautiful imagery in this movie are something truely profound.The story is very clever and the more times you watch it, the more details you discover, which makes the movie more enjoyable every time because you can enjoy the fighting scenes without having to think about the story-line all the time.I really recommend this film to everyone because it brings to life another era, another world which will leave you stunned, i guarantee it.After watching animation for 4-5 years, i have come to the conclusion ...
For awhile, I almost gave up on anime because a lot of it sucked(I don't care for the violent sex and super-intense gore that pervades through many of these movies).But I happened to come across Ninja Scroll.This movie is excellent.
So don't think of it as a great story, it's about character, situation and action.Animation is one of the best there is, though with the use of some flashing lights in backgrounds, (when in action shots,) looks a little cheap.
From my young teen day's I was a big Anime fan, but now only a few of these film really excite me, one of them would be Ninja Scroll.
I'd like to start off by saying that I am not a fan of anime, I actually only watched this movie because a friend recommended it to me and I remember it being really popular with computer geeks when I was in high school.
Just doesn't look right to me and doesn't strike me as very high quality entertainment or even very skilled animation.Ninja Scroll, however, while there are definitely plenty of examples of that, has a lot to offer beyond just an animated action/violence cartoon.
There is some serious violence here, but I think that a lot of the novelty is not just to see killing and blood but to marvel at the extent of what can be accomplished in an animated movie that can't be done in a live action film.
Luckily however this was one of the best, narrowly beaten Akira, I throughly enjoyed the excellent animation, the smoothness of the characters and the great story.
Even the big-name anime's will only get five cover boxes at the most, which all lie in the shadow of hundreds upon hundreds of NEMOS.NINJA SCROLL is very good, and you know, Sitney probably remembers our little visit and parts of the movie.
The good thing about Ninja Scroll, is that beside of it's wonderful plot, it makes you feel as though the film is real and you can identify with the characters' feelings.
I recommend to see this movie even to people who don't usually watch animated films..
Set in the times of feudal Japan, where samurai and ninjas battled to the death, this finely animated movie has everything you need to make an exciting story to watch.
If you like blood and gore in a movie with an excellent story line then Ninja Scroll is the movie of you!!!!.
I watched it on DVD with both English and Japaneese voice-actors, and the English dubbing was fit to the movie (compared to other anime I've seen).
The perfect plot and the fascinating characters make this the most thrilling animated ninja film of all times.
Great animated movie, cool action scenes.
First of all, I have only been watching a couple of anime movies before, among Ghost in shell and Akira.
Let your prejudices away and you will enjoy it as I eventually did.Anyway, this movie was both well animated and contained excited and bloody action scenes which made my expectation more than a dream.
sure, i loved the movie; stunning animation, great story and plot, but i think the best recommendation i can give for this movie is to tell you to look at the other comments.
If you are a fan of animated movies then you have to see this one, it has to be one of the all time classics..
In many instances - like the fireflies' ravine scene or the night battle in the beginning of the movie - the film is technically superb, far superseding anything that Disney or the Dreamworks ever came up with (or can be expected to come up with, considering their gravitation towards an 8-year old audience).
This movie is a must for anime fans as well as for those who want to be introduced to this genre - I'd highly recommend Ninja Scroll over Sailor Moon, if you know what I mean..
"Ninja Scroll" is an action/anime made in 1993 by Yoshiyaki Kawajiri.
Like the other three anime movies I mentioned, this film was also English dubbed, but not subbed in Norwegian.
Perhaps the best pure action anime film there is.
Yoshiaki Kawajiri's Ninja Scroll (1993) is a stunning, animated fantasy adventure, set during the feudal period of Japanese history, and focusing on a renegade assassin forced to take on a clan of mystical samurai warriors with supernatural, or indeed, superhuman abilities.
The world of Ninja Scroll could be seen as a direct continuation of the worlds of Wicked City and Hell City Shinjuku, with monsters and demons invading a seemingly naturalistic environment and subverting it, whilst simultaneously offering us a film rich in character, action and convincing period detail.The story is full of texture and information, while still managing to find room to pander to the genre's prevalent notions of sexual violence and gore; as limbs are hacked off in jet-streams of blood and characters engage in brilliantly rendered scenes of balletic swordplay, magic-tricks and martial arts.
Ninja Scroll is without a doubt one of the best anime's i've seen.
It's a good movie and that is true, its damn true!Watch it if you like anime, and you are older than 14..
From all the hype and good reviews I have heard various friends of mine tell me about Ninja Scroll, I was expecting something very astonishing along the lines of Akira or Laputa, but what I recieved was a blood bath, that some how had a love story weaved into it, and at least two other very altering scenes.
I thougth Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon had much better fights, so add this to great story, likeable characters and beautiful panoramas, there is no way I could possibly enjoy Ninja Scroll..
I'm totally fascinated about how the works of effects, and how they choose to tell the story during the action scenes, such as ninjas fighting.
It's for sure one of the best ninja animes out there that I've seen this far in my life.
But Ninja Scroll is a prime example of such film - you'll want to see it again & again & again, and then maybe a couple of times more.
this was one of the first anime movies i'd seen, maybe the first, so of course not knowing any better, i thought this was as good as they came.
they are all truly works of art, and are generally underappreciated by the public, largely in part to movies like ninja scroll.
ninja scroll is very entertaining, and the animation is very very good, its just not what im looking for anymore.
There are few animated movies that put it all together.Ninja Scroll intertwines a very compelling high action, violent story (which includes love), with absolutely magnificently detailed visual pictures.
If you have never seen anime or have no interest, I will bet you will enjoy this!Yoshiaki Kawajiri has many many great movies and they all have the same high quality art that Ninja Scroll is comprised of.Psychedelics go very well with this movie!
The movie is, really, just a series of fantastic fight scenes, but I kept coming back to the confusing plot.But there is only one reason why anybody watches "Ninja Scroll", and I'm aware it's not the plot.
"Ninja Scroll" is one of few animations I've seen that is sickening in its violence.
Some good action scenes, well animated with reasonable amount of intrigue.
Ninja Scroll is one of my favourite all time anime.
Best Anime film I've seen yet!.
Although I didn't really like Anime movies at first, I got the taste because of movies like Ninja Scroll.
While not considered one that raises consciencous "issues" like Akira, Ghost in the Shell, or Grave of the Fireflies, Ninja Scroll is absolutely guaranteed to entertain.This anime involves some of the best and bloodiest battle scenes ever seen, and the eight devils of Kumon are among the most memorable villains known to anime.
Ive seen a few Manga movies, and have found them visually stunning but lacking in character and plot development, this however cant be said about Ninja Scrolls, what a movie, I had intially seen this on TV late one night with a PG rating, I was surprised as I saw that the movie was highly unsuitable for kids under 18, that aside I was most impressed despite the violence level showing a story worth sharing and raving about, its basically about a young man called Jubei who finds himself intangled in a civil war of sorts, where he mets a variety of Good and not so Good(evil) characters, heaps of fast paced action scenes, a bit of romance, betrayal and of course MDK (Murder Death Kill) this is an above average, Good vs Evil type of story, a movie that can follow to its conclusion it made me laugh and cry, you wont regret watching it if you happen upon a copy..
if i had seen akira first (despite the fact that it is a good movie) i think i would have been like many of the people who don't like anime.
But instead, here, it is a casual thing, without any explanations, just to get the plot together.Maybe, It's because of the movie's explicit sex scenes and blood, that others rate it so high, but I just can't find it satisfying enough.I really got disappointed from Ninja Scroll, because I had high expectations about it ( as I explained above ).
It has good action, sex, characters, and story.
If I suggested someone to watch an anime, Ninja Scroll would be on the bottom of the list..
Fans of this film often declare Ninja Scroll to be one of the best anime films of all time.
I'll tell you why = all the comments are from people who like action films regardless of plot or animation quality. |
tt0384908 | Deception | Timid accountant Jonathan McQuarry (Ewan McGregor) is an auditor working in New York. One night while working late in a boardroom he meets a charismatic lawyer, Wyatt Bose (Hugh Jackman), who befriends him over a joint. After a long conversation, Jonathan takes the subway home where he has a brief encounter with a blonde woman (Michelle Williams) while waiting for the train. Upon returning home he notices a pipe in his bedroom is leaking and leaving a stain.
Jonathan contacts Wyatt the next day and they play tennis after work. They meet again for lunch the next day and upon leaving, Wyatt takes Jonathan's mobile phone instead of his own, forcing a trade. He mentions he will be in London on business for the next few weeks. When Jonathan realizes the phones have been switched he attempts to contact Wyatt but does not reach him. He is soon contacted by a woman (Natasha Henstridge) who asks if he is free that night. He informs her that he is and agrees to meet her. When she arrives, they proceed directly to a hotel room upstairs and have sex. In the morning, Jonathan realizes that Wyatt must be on some type of exclusive sex club list.
When Wyatt calls the next day, he encourages Jonathan to stay on the list. Jonathan has an encounter with an older woman (Charlotte Rampling) who explains the list's rules: the initiator pays for the room, no names are exchanged, there is no rough play. Participants are always anonymous, although Jonathan later spots the older woman on the cover of Forbes. Over the next few weeks, he has anonymous encounters with several women.
One night after initiating another encounter, Jonathan is surprised to find that his partner is the blond woman he met while waiting for the train. He tells her that they have met once before, and instead of having sex, they order room service and talk for hours. The woman does not say her name, but Jonathan assumes that it begins with an "S" because of an S-shaped pendant on her handbag. The next day Jonathan rejects other callers from the list but when "S" calls again they agree to meet for dinner in Chinatown. They then proceed to a hotel where she requests some ice. When Jonathan returns to the room she is gone and there is blood on the bedsheets. Someone knocks him out from behind, and when he wakes up again the bed has been made. He contacts the police and explains to the Detective (Lisa Gay Hamilton) that "S" is missing but that he has little to no information about her. She doubts his story, thinking that he is delusional. Jonathan tries to trace Wyatt, but Wyatt's boss and landlady claim not to know him.
Upon returning home Jonathan is surprised to find Wyatt waiting for him and demanding that he steal $20 million from an investment firm he will begin to audit in a few days. Jonathan agrees to do so, fearing for the safety of "S". The following night at work, Jonathan receives a call asking if he is free. The woman calling is named Tina (Maggie Q), an investment banker who once introduced Wyatt to the exclusive sex club list. She reveals that Wyatt's real name is Jamie Getz, and that they met when he was attending a private corporate event as a guest of Rudolph Holloway, an investment banker with whom Getz played tennis. Jonathan finds out through research that Getz murdered Holloway, strangling him with tennis strings, and also served three years in prison for insurance fraud and arson. Jonathan is later notified by the detective that a blond woman matching his earlier description was discovered dead. When he comes in to identify her, he sees that it is actually the first woman who called him, and that she was also strangled by tennis strings.
Jonathan goes on to complete a wire transfer to a bank in Spain in his name, but secretly adds Wyatt's name as co-signer. When he returns home he notices that a picture Wyatt had sent of "S" being held captive was taken in his apartment before the pipe started leaking. He realizes that she must have been a conspirator and wisely avoids his apartment which explodes when the superintendent enters to fix the pipe.
Now in Madrid, Wyatt impersonates Jonathan and attempts to withdraw the funds from the bank, but he is denied access because of the co-signer. Jonathan approaches Wyatt outside the bank and agrees to help him withdraw the funds if Wyatt splits it with him. Swapping identities, Jonathan and Wyatt cash in the $20 million in two $10 million suitcases. (A deleted scene reveals that Jonathan encountered a black market operator in Chinatown, who offered a variety of items, including fake passports; Jonathan presumably obtained a passport with his image in the name of Wyatt Bose and used this in his scheme to obtain half of the money.) After the transaction is complete, Jonathan offers Wyatt half of his money if Wyatt tells him where "S" is. Wyatt pretends to agree and lures Jonathan to an uncrowded area where he draws a gun on Jonathan. Before he is able to shoot Jonathan, Wyatt is shot by "S" who leaves quickly. Jonathan pursues her, leaving a dying Wyatt and the money behind. He begs her to talk to him but she'd rather call it off, apologizing to him as she did not know Wyatt's intent to kill Jonathan. "S" gets into a cab and leaves as Jonathan watches her go.
In Madrid, Jonathan again crosses paths with "S" and they exchange smiles. The film ends as Jonathan walks to her and she stands waiting for him.
=== Alternate Ending ===
In the alternate ending of the film, Wyatt disappears right after they finish their business in the bank. Jonathan also disappears with his part of the money and finally, "S" is seen running away (that is the same scene shown in the theatrical version). At the end, Jonathan is seen walking around Madrid as he continues his desperate search for "S." | murder | train | wikipedia | The viewer is not deceived most of the time. This is a fairly routine but still entertaining made for TV murder mystery movie. Much of it is predictable but the writers have left room in the script for a few surprises, especially toward the end when Erin (Dina Meyer) begins to see the truth, or thinks she sees the truth. The story concerns a decoy who is on the payroll of a local private dick. Her job is to set up married men whose wives are clients who want to see their husbands in compromising positions for various reasons usually involving money. Erin feels cheap about her job but desperately needs the money. Along the way she falls for one of the married men who seeks to get back at her after he is exposed to his wife. In turn he falls for her. Added to this is a former cheating husband she exposed who is out to kill her. The acting is average to above average for a television flick. One part of the film bothered me. Why did Erin keep using the alley by the PI's office when she was nearly murdered there? Wasn't there another way out of the building that had more light and more security? And why did she always walk the alley alone? Oh, well, that's television land.. OK Lifetime woman-in-peril flick. Dina Meyer stars as a troubled decoy for a detective agency in DECEPTION, a 2003 Lifetime movie. She is sick of the job and ends up being threatened by a past client while yet another past client suddenly reappears in her life and claims to have strong feelings for her. Suddenly, a fellow decoy is slain, possibly by her boyfriend, and shortly thereafter Meyer and her roommate are both attacked. And then a second murder occurs, this time one of Meyer's fellow detective agency workers. The plot may keep you guessing for a bit, although the number of suspects is pretty thin. Meyer doffs her clothes three times, twice to have sex with the new boyfriend. I think it's probably in her contract. She is an amazingly beautiful woman, and she turns 40 this year. Bravo.. she's not even a bag of chips. Dina meyer is not all that beautiful in spite of buildups by her press corps but that doesn't bother me as much as having gary hudson in this film...this guy is a real zero and has the intelligence quotient of the dirt under a tomato plant...having him in a cast with women is disturbing indeed and makes your skin crawl like you have some incurable disease...being a decoy is scary enough...risking death is plain stupid....redo this script and make it more cogent |
tt0438575 | West Bank Story | The film begins with a scene in which the Palestinians and Jews are both snapping their fingers, similar to the opening scene of West Side Story. The two parties head to their own family-owned falafel stands (Hummus Hut and Kosher King) where they sing "Our People Must Be Fed/Our People Must Be Served". During the day, Hummus Hut employee Fatima and Kosher King relative David are daydreaming about each other (in the romantic duet, "When I See Him"). When Fatima rushes to give a customer his forgotten leftovers, she has a chance encounter with David, and they realize their mutual attraction.
Upon returning to the shop, Fatima's brother shows her that the Kosher King Jews have a machine that encroaches a few inches onto their property. The head of Hummus Hut throws a rock into the machine, making it malfuncton, provoking a standoff between the two families (resolved by David and Fatima). Ariel, head of the Kosher King, decides he is going to build a wall. After they leave, David and Fatima stay, and David plans to come to her balcony tonight.
The construction begins, and the Palestinians plan to end it abruptly ("We're Gonna Build It"). As such happens, David goes to Fatima's house ("This Moment Is All We Have"), wanting to kiss her, but Fatima refuses, saying it will only escalate the conflict. They head over to stop the fight. As they do, it is revealed to Fatima's family that they are in love. The following fight tips over a canister of gasoline, causing the entire stand to catch fire. David goes to warn the Israelis, who celebrate - until an ember reaches the Kosher King, which proceeds to catch on fire. As the Hummus Hut denizens celebrate, Fatima points out to everyone that they are only making their lives worse.
The next morning, expectant falafel customers are oblivious to the fire, and still want food. Ahmed and Ariel have nothing, but David and Fatima scrape together some of the remaining food, merging the two falafel stands. After the others are working, David and Fatima kiss. At the very end, Fatima asks what will happen if their families cannot stop fighting. David says he will "take you to a place called... Beverly Hills", alluding to the song "Somewhere" in West Side Story. | romantic | train | wikipedia | I saw West Bank Story yesterday at the opening of the Boston International Film Festival.
Despite being only 22 minutes in length, the director, Ari Sandel, brilliantly takes a parodistic approach to the movie-musical genre, but combines this with a satirical, yet poignant perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian dilemma.
All of this is woven together, even while honoring the original inspiration for the plot (Romeo and Juliet, and later, West Side Story).
Excellent, Hilarious Satire from Director to Watch.
I just saw this at the Boulder International Film Festival, and it was the highlight of the comedies.
West Bank Story is a ruthlessly funny send-up of everything from Middle East tension to Hollywood musicals.
I have no idea how much the filmmakers spent, but they went over the top for what appears to be a student film (USC).
Great casting, music including a complete orchestral score, writing, production design - this has it all, especially for a short.
(OK, IMDb is forcing me to write more, so I'll tell you the movie featured a camel, clever sets, etc.).
West Bank Story is a truly creative and original short film, retelling the tale of West Side Story in the context of the Middle East.
Specifically, two neighboring fast-food restaurants in the West Bank - one Jewish and one Arab.
But hey, it's a spoof, and social satire, and on both counts West Bank Story does really well.
The film does a great job of making fun of both "sides" equally.
The satire manages to be both good-natured and poignant, fearless yet never heavy.
There are many good in jokes that those who have spent time in the West Bank will appreciate if you watch closely, such as the green line separating the two sides in a split-screen moment...Yes, it's wall-to-wall stereotypes here, but...
And laughter has a healing power, so enjoy the good medicine in West Bank Story..
Although it lasts just 22 minutes, "West Bank Story" does a beautiful job of entertaining and educating the audience.
The backdrop of the West Bank is a perfect setting for this poignant, playful take on the traditional "Romeo and Juliet" story.
It is clear that all involved with this film paid great attention to detail; from the costumes to the cinematography to the conversations, every element is vividly and engagingly conveyed.
The satirical spins on Shakespeare, the musical genre, the ongoing political and ideological conflicts in the Middle East, and even the fast food industry make this a must-see.
I made sure I was one of the first in line to add this short to my collection when it was released on DVD!.
great little piece of film-making - political satire at its entertaining best.
I was fortunate to have seen this film at the Santa Cruz Film Festival this year and it was fantastic!!
Humor, political satire, song, what's not to love?
I was especially impressed with the quality of the writing - very sharp and funny- and the acting and film-making overall.
I expected to see some familiar names in the credits, say Spielberg or some such, but was surprised to learn it was a student film from USC.
The story line was so true to the Shakespearean plots in Romeo and Juliet (and West Side Story) but with a modern twist and sensibilities.
Very timely political spin on the tensions of the West Bank.
I will be looking for this on DVD as well as watching for new projects from this creative team.
Musical comedy revolving around the romance between an Israeli and a Jew. This film is hilarious!
I just returned from the Sundance Film Festival, which is where I saw the film, and it got a great response from everyone in the audience.
After this show, both of my supervisors were so impressed that they approached the director of this film to see if he would be willing to submit a film to our festival.
If you haven't seen this film yet, you are definitely missing out..
This parody of "West Side Story" has a fabulous opening which I suppose would be even more hilarious to anyone who is familiar with the 1961 movie.
Not ever watching that film, except for a few clips, I couldn't appreciate the parody in here.
However, humor is humor and good singing is good singing and there is a lot of both in this 21-minute short.
Considering the topic, it is not a shock it won the Academy Award for Best Short Film/Live Action in 2006.
Simply put, we have competing fast-food restaurants on the West Bank: one Jewish, one Arabic.
One would have to view this several times to get all the jokes in the first few minutes.Unfortunately, the rest of the film - the bulk of it - can't match that fantastic beginning.
Things settle down when the romantic songs start and the rest of the story is romance and "peace" between the two long-time enemies.
Brilliant--and this was a student film--not a studio production!.
Ari Sandel was a film student when he directed and co-wrote this amazing short film.
Despite this less than impressive pedigree, the film ended up winning the Oscar for Best Live Action Short Film for 2006 and is among the best shorts I have ever seen--and I've seen a lot!!
Considering the title, it wasn't too surprising that this film is a gentle and funny parody of WEST SIDE STORY.
However, instead of being set in New York, it's on the West Bank and instead of the Sharks and Jets, the two warring groups are Palestinians and Jews.
Despite the seriousness of the problems in Israel and the occupied territories, I was happily surprised that the film was NOT heavy-handed and it was in fact very, very funny.
It was a gentle spoof of the problems and hatreds and unless someone is a humorless idiot, there is a lot to love in the film.Of course there is a girl and a boy (just like in Romeo and Juliet) caught in the struggle--but instead of Capulettes and Montagues or Sharks and Jets, it's a struggle between rival fast food joints--the Kosher King and the Hummus Hut!
The hats, the dialog, the songs all work together perfectly to create the mood and pull the viewer into the film.Not at all surprisingly, this film won the Oscar but I also felt a bit sad for the losers that year, as HELMER & SON and ONE TOO MANY were also amazingly good (and funny) short films.My advice is to see all of these films--they are included in the DVD "A Collection of 2006 Academy Award Nominated Short Films"--a must-have for fans of the genre.
Also, keep your eye out for Ari Sandel--that guy is going places and I can't wait to see what he does next!
amiable enough skewering of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict with fast food and singing.
Strange that West Bank Story didn't live up completely to my expectations, but then again I only knew about the film- and anticipated it- from the five second clip shown during the Oscars (right before it won), with a high crane shot showing a bunch of Israelis and Palestinians dancing in the street.
It was something out of left field among the nominees, and it gave me and those watching the Oscars a big belly laugh.
Unfortunately the actual 22 minute short film only contains some scattered laughs, and doesn't go so much for outrageous political satire as much as lighter skewering of the two sides in a simple context: fast-food.
West Bank Story gives us the two chains- Hummus Hut and Kosher King- each with their own wacky decorum (Hummus Hut with their kebab-hats, and the one employee at Kosher King in a large menorah costume, the latter being maybe the funniest sight gag), and equal hatred for the other.A plot is hatched by Kosher King to build a wall ("Jews in construction?" is the Hummus Hut's response), while the other plots to simply burn down their opponent.
But meanwhile, the sister-employee of the head of Hummus Hut falls for an Israeli soldier, and the two of them try to get the two sides to stop fighting.
Sprinkled throughout this short are some funny moments of cultural lampooning, like hummus being confused with Hamas, and a split-screen during a musical number with Kosher King and Hummus Hut ending in an argument between which side is encroaching on the other.
But overall trhe only criticism, however a significant one, is that it's so brief that only so much can be done with the material, and yet the director Sandel and the writers only go after a few specific things, leaving out more scathing possibilities, ala Mel Brooks or other, to go for the jugular with a touchy topic.
It's a safe little comedy, but worth watching at least once, with some catchy songs and small winks to the original Wise/Robbins classic..
West Bank Story is a worthy Oscar-winning live-action short I watched on YouTube.
Just watched this Oscar-winning live-action short on YouTube.
In a parody of West Side Story, a Jewish soldier and a Palestinian young lady fall in love despite each families' rival fast food restaurants standing close to each other amid their hostilities.
There are plenty of funny gags that make fun of the two nationalities' customs and stereotypes but there's also some touching scenes between the couple as well as some satirical lines that cut through the sentimentality.
And, yes, some songs that parody the "Romeo and Juliet in New York" musical that provide some of the brightest moments.
All I can say now is, West Bank Story is well worth watching for anyone who loves seeing musical satire done with a sharp wit..
If "Kosher King: The Chosen Restaurant" is your idea of a fresh and funny joke, you will love this film.
It's packed with broad gags borrowed from the 1950s and 60s, with just a hint of modern, edgy humor to remind us of how daring this film could have been.
As it has been nominated for an Academy Award, I saw it on the same evening as the other 4 nominees, which did so much more on what seem to be much lower budgets.
IMDb wants me to write more, so in the film's defense, I will definitely give West Bank Story credit for being a spectacle for the eyes.
Lots of color, much activity, flashy pyrotechnics, a realistic-looking fake camel, hired chickens (so say the credits)...they definitely used their budget..
As a fellow young filmmaker whose credits up to this point have been mostly short films, it's hard for me to say this, but I was very disappointed by the much-hyped "West Bank Story".
After hearing so many good things about the short and watching it win the Best Live Action Short Oscar, I was intrigued, and managed to get a copy of it from an associate.
It must be said that "West Bank Story" has a great premise.
Unfortunately, the premise is really the only thing about it that's great.
The jokes, which could have been so much cleverer and sharper, are instead predictable, flat, and redundant, to the point where the movie just becomes tedious to watch.
The acting is fine, and it's easy to see that the filmmakers used their budget to a nice extent, but it just seems like so much for so little.
I have seen some of the other shorts that were up for the Oscar, and the fact that "West Bank Story" was the one that snagged the statue doesn't exactly flatter the Academy..
Tactless musical satire sinks fast..
This smug short subject Oscar winner made in the US is a clumsy piece of heavy handed satire that borders on being downright offensive.
Lacking in wit or originality the film parodies West Side Story in the comic environment of the Palestinian Israeli conflict (see Paradise Now).
Both Jews and Palestinians are reduced to buffoons as they battle for fast food supremacy from their respective eateries Kosher King and The Hummus Hut. Director Ari Sandel's less than inspired idea degrades even more upon fruition as he turns his characters into arch cliché (Menorah Mickey?)and seething ignoramus, wearing funny hats, singing to camels and joking about suicide bombers.
The choreography is lack lustre and the parody side of the music score falls flat on its face.
West Side Story is filled with identifiable melodies and ripe for satirical lyrics but Bank doesn't employ them and the concept defeats itself.
The slapstick, broad and over the top (ululating cashier firing an AK 47 into the ceiling as well as a fiddler on the roof) completes this sweeping failure of a satire that is overlong at twenty minutes.
After seeing that it won an Academy Award, I bought it and realized why it did.
It made fun of both equally, and at the same time, ended on a happy note with the two families working together.
I completely disagree with the reviewer who posted before me, who said that it was biased towards the Israelis, namely because he didn't see any Muslims in the credits.
Firstly, even if there were less Muslims in the credits, it doesn't mean that the Palestinian side wasn't shown.
For example, the first Israelis you see consist of an Orthodox Jew, and a guy with a big nose!
Very funny award-winning film short..
At only 18 minutes, it doesn't require much effort to see this small but fine film.
The setting is West Bank, Palestine, present day.
The beginning is an homage to West Side Story, with similar groups and choreography.
Thus the name, "West Bank Story." And, true to its inspiration, involves a budding love affair between a young man and a young woman from different backgrounds.The basic story involves competing fast-food stands, one Jewish and Kosher, the other Muslim.
Then, a mild altercation causes the Muslim hut to burn down, and while the Jews are watching and cheering, a spark floats over to burn the other down.
In the end, all the people are still hungry and need to be fed, so they end up combining whatever is salvaged and feed the people.True to its humor, at the end the girl worries that the Jews and the Muslims will not be able to get along.
He says, "If not, I will take you to a place where I hear Jews and Muslims live in harmony ...
Middle East Musical.
This is a 20-minute film from 2005 that won director and writer Ari Sandel an Academy Award.
Anyway, "West Bank Story" is as you may have guessed from the title a tale loosely based on the classic "West Side Story".
It takes place on the Middle East and focuses in a funny manner on the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Not much later, the girl from one stand falls in love with the boy from another.
He made this actually a pretty good musical with his singing.
She was still very young when "West Bank Story" was made.
Looks-wise she fit the character nicely, but her role did not really demand and great acting.
It's a witty creative tale on the whole Middle East Conflict that is pretty unique.
This film can also be an inspiration for young filmmakers that a smart idea and solid execution can be enough to even win an Oscar.
Exodus meets West Side Story.
This short won the Academy Award for Live Action Short.
There will be spoilers ahead: This is a comedic parody of West Side Story with the setting changed to Israel and the star crossed lovers being Israeli and Palestinian and the two "houses" being competing fast food places right next door to one another.The parallels to West Side Story are blatantly obvious.
This is funny and entertaining, but it tries too hard and is too over the top.
I enjoyed this, but the leads are too gorgeous by half, the two warring factions are too comical for words and it all comes off as a little too cute for its own good.I understand why it won the Oscar and it's by no means a bad choice.
But I would have preferred Helmer and Son or One Too Many myself.This short is available on DVD in more than one instance, most notably on a DVD/Blu-Ray combination compilation released by Shots International of Academy Award winning live action and animated shorts.
This short is worth watching and the DVD/Blu-Ray compilation is excellent.
When I saw the short film West Bank Story I didn't expect a Musical shortcut.
At the begging it was wonderful to see the differences about both cultures Israelis (Jewish) and Pakistanis (Muslim), from cloths, food, life style and ideals, even music and dance can be appreciate in this film.
The main actors in this film are two young persons a Pakistani Cashier Girl and a Israeli Soldier that are in love, the problem as you can expect is the rivalry between both cultures.
A great film to think about our own ideals and cultures..
Short semi-musical comedy about the Jewish/Palestinian crisis.
This movie left me feeling as if I'd tasted something more than a bit spoiled.
It was puerile, a circumstance which may be explained by the fact that it was part of a masters' project in a California film school.Quel surprise that the Hollywood pack would pick this movie over any of the others, all of which were foreign.
I waited for the credits with curiosity to see if there were many Muslim participants in its planning and execution.
There weren't.My own feelings about the Jewish/Palestinian question are very conflicted.
Overall, however, I know it is serious and I wonder if many Palestinians (or, for that matter, thoughtful Israelis, especially those whose sons are being carried home in body bags) would find this an amusing movie .
It was as if the film's makers chose to do a musical comedy featuring a seriously disabled person, using that individual's problems as pratfalls for cheap laughs. |
tt0088987 | Dance with a Stranger | A former nude model and prostitute, Ruth is manageress of a London drinking club frequented by racing drivers, living in a flat above with her illegitimate son Andy. Another child is in the custody of her estranged husband's family. In the club she meets David, an immature young man from a well-off family who wants to succeed in motor racing but suffers from lack of money and overuse of alcohol. Ruth falls for his looks and charm, but it is a doomed relationship. Without a job he cannot afford to marry her and his family would never accept her. When he makes a drunken scene in the club, she is fired and made homeless. A wealthy admirer secures a flat for her and her son but she still sees David. When she tells him she is pregnant, he does nothing about it and she miscarries. Distraught, she goes to a house in Hampstead where she believes David is at a party. He comes out and goes with a girl to a pub. Ruth waits outside the pub and, when he emerges, kills him with four shots. She is arrested, tried and hanged. | tragedy, revenge, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0024844 | L'Atalante | Jean, the captain of the canal barge L'Atalante, marries Juliette in her village. They decide to live aboard L'Atalante along with Jean's crew, Père Jules and the cabin boy.
The couple travel to Paris to deliver cargo, enjoying a makeshift honeymoon en route. Jules and the cabin boy are not used to the presence of a woman aboard. When Jean discovers Juliette and Jules talking in Jules's quarters, Jean flies into a jealous rage by smashing plates and by sending Jules's cats scattering.
Arriving in Paris, Jean promises Juliette a night out, but Jules and the cabin boy disembark to go see a fortune teller. This disappoints Juliette because Jean cannot leave the barge unattended.
Later, however, Jean takes Juliette to a dance hall. There, they meet a street peddler who flirts with Juliette, dances with her, and asks her to run off with him. This leads to a scuffle with Jean, after which he drags Juliette back to the barge. Juliette still wants to see the nightlife in Paris however, so she sneaks off the barge to go see the sights. When Jean discovers that she sneaked off the barge, he furiously casts off and leaves Juliette behind in Paris.
Unaware that Jean had already left, Juliette goes window shopping. When she returns to the barge and finds that it's gone, she tries to buy a train ticket home, but someone steals her purse before she is able to. She is forced to find a job so she can afford to find a place to stay in Paris.
Meanwhile, Jean comes to regret his decision, and slips into depression. He is summoned by his company's manager, but Jules manages to keep him from losing his job. Jean recalls a folk tale that Juliette once told him. She said that one can see the face of one's true love in the water. He attempts to recreate this by dunking his head in a bucket, and failing that, jumping into the river. Jules decides to leave and try to find Juliette. He finds her and they return to the barge where the couple reunites and happily embrace each other. | whimsical, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0193166 | The Flintstones Meet Rockula and Frankenstone | When Fred wins the big prize on the "Make A Deal or Don't" game show, he and Wilma plan a vacation with Barney and Betty to Count Rockula's spooky castle in Rocksylvania which has now been turned into a tourist resort. Unfortunately, during the trip, Fred and Barney accidentally stumble across Rockula's old laboratory, where his unfinished Frankenstone monster sleeps, and forget to close the window when they leave the lab. Lightning subsequently strikes the machines in the lab, and provide Frankenstone with life. Frankenstone awakens Count Rockula (who has been asleep for the past five hundred years, thus explaining his disappearance) from his secret crypt, and the two scare everyone out of the hotel, except for the Flintstones and the Rubbles, who had gone to bed early due to jet lag.
Rockula and Frankenstone eventually discover the Flintstones and Rubbles, and Rockula mistakes Wilma for his long-lost bride and vows to make her his, even if it means killing Fred. On a comedic note, Wilma mistakes Rockula for the hotel manager, Mr. Silika, who had dressed up as Rockula, for quite some time until Rockula turns into a bat in front of her. A long cat-and-mouse chase ensues all over the castle, and eventually the Flintstones and Rubbles are cornered inside the Rubbles' room. Fred challenges Rockula to a fight, using a bat statuette as a weapon, but the statuette turns out to actually be the switch for the trapdoor to Rockula's laboratory, which Rockula and Frankenstone were unknowingly standing on. As Fred raises the statuette to strike, both Rockula and Frankenstone fall through the trapdoor, and the Flintstones and Rubbles escape and return to Bedrock. Wilma invites Betty and Barney to stay for dinner and leaves the three of them in the living room while she goes into the kitchen to cook.
Unbeknownst to them, Count Rockula has flown (in the form of a bat) all the way from Rocksylvania to Bedrock. Flying through the kitchen window, he transforms into a vampire, begging Wilma to be his bride. Winking at Fred, Barney, and Betty (watching surreptitiously from the doorway) Wilma agrees to consider marrying Rockula, then immediately begins nagging him about chores, upkeep of the house, and his bad habits. Aghast, Count Rockula changes back into a bat and flies off, claiming to need another 500 years of rest. Barney laughs and lauds Wilma for telling Count Rockula "the truth about marriage".
Images of the once again-vacant Rocksylvania hotel are shown during the end credits. | alternate history | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0129992 | High Voltage | The film begins with a bus driving along a snow-covered roadway in the Sierra Nevada between Nevada City, California, and Reno, Nevada. Soon the vehicle gets hopelessly stuck in deep snow forty miles from the nearest town. Needing shelter, the driver "Gus" (Billy Bevan) and his four passengers find refuge in an isolated one-room log church. The passengers include "Billie" (Carole Lombard), who is an escaped criminal being escorted back to jail in New York by a deputy sheriff, "Dan Egan" (Owen Moore); a young woman, "The Kid," (Diane Ellis) on her way to Chicago to meet her boyfriend; and "Hickerson," a pompous, ill-tempered banker. In the church the group finds "Bill" (William Boyd), a self-described "hobo," who had found shelter there earlier. Tensions quickly arise in the group over their general plight, petty jealousies, and concerns about how six people are going to share the small supply of food that Bill had brought with him.
After a few days being stranded, the group sees a passing mail plane high in the sky. They try to attract the pilot's attention, but he is too far away to see them. More days pass, and the group continues to ration their dwindling supplies and battle the subfreezing temperatures. To keep warm they begin to break up the church's pews and other furnishings to use as firewood in the room's potbelly stove. The group's desperation intensifies, as does a romance between Bill and Billie. Soon Bill confides to her that he too is a wanted criminal, a fugitive from Saint Paul, Minnesota. As conditions worsen, The Kid collapses from hunger and become delirious; and the church's interior becomes almost bare as more furnishings--even the church's pulpit and pump organ--are consigned to the stove. Bill and Billie finally commit to leaving to avoid being imprisoned if the group is somehow rescued. They quietly depart during the night, hoping to reach a ranger station ten miles away. Everyone else is sleeping except Dan, the deputy sheriff, who sees the two leaving; but he does nothing to stop them. After walking a short distance through snowdrifts, Bill and Billie hear and then see a search plane slowly circling overhead at low altitude. Realizing that the others inside the church will not hear the plane's engine, they rush back and awaken them. The group hurriedly builds a signal fire, which the plane's pilot sees. He parachutes a box of provisions to them with a note saying that help will be sent immediately.
The next day the group sees a rescue party heading toward the church. While awaiting their rescuers, Dan observes Bill and Billie sitting together on the floor. From his coat pocket Dan pulls out Billie's extradition papers and a "wanted" notice that includes a photograph of Bill and information about his being a fugitive from Saint Paul. Dan walks over to the stove, now cold from no fires, and tosses both papers into it. Bill and Billie see him discard the papers, and they look at one another. Bill then gets up, retrieves the papers from the stove, gives them back to Dan, and asks him to drop him off in Saint Paul on his way back to New York with Billie. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | really good action.
Although the plot is really transparent action and cast made this movie look better.
Acrobatic fights and shooting are nicely done, you can watch them over and over again.
This is type of movie to relax after long day.I like this one and I recommend it to anyone who like well done action and tired for the day of thinking.Just sit back relax and enjoy the show.
I gave it 8 out of 10.
Not Bad John Woo Style Action Film With Good Performances and Plenty of Action That Overcome A Weak Script.
It's kind of a weak film, but it's rather entertaining and the late night crowd in the mood for a fast and fun actioner should enjoy it.
I thought the cast did a fine job, Antonio Sabato Jr., is a cool action hero and I was glad to see the great, rising young star Lochlyn Munroe (Dead Man On Campus, A Night At The Roxbury) in it as one of Sabato's members who may or may not be a bad guy.
Shannon Lee (Bruce's daughter) and some famous Hong Kong stars also turn in good performances.
Done in the style of John Woo, this has lots of fast paced shoot outs, good surprises and twists, and a cool "Pulp Fiction" like score in the background.
The story is cliched at times and it gets a bit melodramatic when it comes to the end, but I still enjoyed this film and it should please ones looking for a good way to kill 90 minutes..
Excellent John Woo Style Action Movie..
This movie is really good, especially for a direct to video movie.
The gunfights are cool and the fights are well executed.
Lots of action to keep people happy.
The theme song is awesome!
I saw this movie almost a year ago and I still find myself humming the theme from time to time!
A sure bet for action fans!.
An excellent film that was totally under rated.
An excellent film that was totally under rated.
the film comes across as having a very "pulp Fiction" feel to it, and yet it delivers a lot of fun action!!
. "High Voltage" really marked the action debut of Shannon Lee , alongside Antonio Sabato Jr looking the most impressive martial arts wise he's ever looked..
Excellent!!!.
An Excellent yet underrated actioner, with a "Pulp Fiction" feel.
that never got the respect it deserved.
Sabato has a star quality.
good action, good humor and good drama.
No wonder this film became a cult movie to Martial Arts/action fans..
This movie reaches all time lows in the Awful Cheesy Kung Fu Movie genre..
I laughed so hard watching this movie I nearly killed myself.
It is so unbelievably bad and so completely unaware of how bad it is that you can't help staring in shocked disbelief.
The dialogue is horrible, the acting sucks (save for a pretty OK performance by Monroe), and the directing is a textbook of cheesy bad timing.
But what really makes the film worth watching is the action sequences.
These little cut rate gems rival even the worst overseas, badly dubbed monstrosities.
Examples: A guy dies from a gunshot wound to the shoulder; people jump off walls and fly 20 feet in the air; Every time somebody turns quickly or reaches for something, you get the ever popular "whoosh" sound effect.
This movie is horrible, but it's a great late night choice if you want to see just how bad bad film making can be..
I love this movie.
This is the only time in my life I'll ever be able to say this but I love this movie because my friend, Ivan Visali, made this movie.
Haven't seen him in 18 years but we programmed together in LA for about a year and became friends.
Very talented individual.So looked at from that perspective, I looked at it for where he was in his movie making.
This was his first movie so you have to look at it from that perspective too.Was this a great movie.
No. But you should know something.
He wrote a script for 4 years and got all the funding lined up and guess what, those idiots with the money thought they knew more about writing a script than he did (well my friend and his co-writer).So he said they basically gutted what they wrote.
Would have loved to see HIS movie made.What's totally cool is that Amy Smart got her first movie credit in this movie!
How awesome is that!
Not sure how that happened.
Ivan, if you read this, get back in the game buddy.
I believe in you!.
Horrible..
Basically, most of the actors rush their lines, and except for the two Antonios (Lochlyn Munro somewhat OK), the acting basically sucked, which means the directing also sucked.
Weak story, weak writing.
Worst of all was the music.
It's also funny that the writer (Mike Mains, the worst actor in the film) wrote himself the part of having the first primary relationship in the film.
The interaction between the two of them is about as exciting as that between a turtle and a rock.The positive reviews here are a joke.
It is however, an adequate film for those who want to get high and laugh at how awful this film is..
embarrassing to view.
Some guy...
RUGBY15 or something was talking about how awful this movie is.
Well let me tell you he is dead wrong...Sort of.Yes. The movie is bad in all those ways he mentions, but what's worse is the music.
A character can't even remove a pair of sunglasses without some ridiculous cymbal crash or something.
The soundscape is so ludicrous that it reaches a point of being grotesque.I could not turn this piece of solid waste off, it seriously was the most embarrassingly hackneyed pile of sh** in the world.
In one of the last gunfights, the entire shootout comes to a dead halt as a character named Bulldog rides through a door on his motorcycle with a chick wrapped in a leather bra.I have a little hint here to filmmakers -- simply standing behind a wooden door or desk, or an upolstered armchair will not be enough to stop a bullet.This movie has a lot of characters jumping through the air sideways and in slow motion as they fire off two guns at once while they have at least a dozen gun battles with the Vietamese mafia (yes, you heard right...
It's those god**** Vietamese again...only now they are in a mafia apparently).This film looks as though it were directed, shot and written by really uncreative and possibly mentally retarded 12 year old whit-e-trash orphans.Here's a sample of some brilliant dialogue in an exchange between Bulldog and Johnny: "Go to hell Johnny!" "...No." "Yes. That's where you're going.
To hell.
Because you'll be dead." "You're the one whose gonna be going to hell and be dead mother f****r."I felt physically embarrassed watching this..
I rented this because of Koichi Sakamoto......
....and I have to say this movie SUCKS.
I loved Sakamoto's stunt coordination of his other movie "Drive" which featured some of the best martial arts choreography way before "Matrix." After watching "High Voltage" though, I was left with a bad taste in my mouth.
The script was beyond incoherent and don't get me started with the acting.
Well what else can one expect from a B-movie.
The action was obviously contrived from the numerous Gun-Fu, John Woo style movies and the director doesn't even add his own touch to it which leaves the action scenes bland.
It is a shame for the guns was the reason why I rented the movie.
I have to say to all those who want to kill time, you can do something much better, like read a book or go for a drive.
By the way, I highly recommend you people rent "Drive" instead.
Yeah, it has a bad script and mediocre acting but it far surpasses the fizzle known as "High Voltage."The Movie 0 out **** The action scenes * out of ****.
Move over "Plan Nine From Outer Space" ....
a new "worst film ever made" has arrived.
This thing should be shown to every aspiring actor, director, writer and producer, to show them how really bad "bad" can be.
Why it's not billed as a comedy is the big question.
Everyone involved should hang their heads in shame, or better yet, they should all be drummed-out of whatever guild or union they belong to.
I have to admit I watched it from beginning to end, sort of like watching a terrible train wreck.But the real puzzle here is why any of the other reviewers would say they enjoyed it.
The fact that these people are living among us, walking around in public, and worse yet, driving on our streets, panics the hell outta me. |
tt0239395 | Cats & Dogs | Mrs. Carolyn Brody (Elizabeth Perkins) and her son Scotty (Alexander Pollock) return home, and the family's Bloodhound Buddy starts chasing a cat, a chase which ends with Buddy's capture by other cats in an ambush.
This is witnessed by an Anatolian Shepherd dog named Butch (voiced by Alec Baldwin) who reports Buddy's capture to his superiors. The head dog then orders the best canine agents to complete the mission by preventing all (cats) from achieving their favorite goal: to make all humans allergic to dogs.
Meanwhile, at a farm, a handful of Beagle puppies make fun of a younger puppy (voiced by Tobey Maguire), who wants to be free. The younger puppy tries an escape, but he fails. A group of young black Doberman puppies, all of them trained dog agents, led by a large Doberman Pinscher appear, round up the Beagle puppies and force them into hiding underground. Mrs. Brody comes into the puppy pen and she selects the younger puppy who was forgotten by the Dobermanns. She decides to adopt him and takes him home, naming him Lou after Scotty sarcastically suggests the name "Loser".
Lou goes near an explosive trap set by the cats but Butch comes out and detonates it harmlessly. Butch then shows Lou the network that dog agents use, then takes him to meet some more agents: Peek (voiced by Joe Pantoliano) is a Chinese Crested Dog who works in an underground tube and has surveillance and communications equipment and Sam (voiced by Michael Clarke Duncan) who is an Old English Sheepdog. Having mistaken Lou for a trained dog agent, Butch raises his concerns to his superiors, but is told that there is no time to send a replacement. Lou is then briefed on the origins of the war between cats and dogs, which apparently dates all the way back to Ancient Egypt. Butch also mentions that Buddy managed to escape from the cats and retired from the spy business, living life in a condominium.
Meanwhile, Mr. Tinkles (voiced by Sean Hayes), a white Persian cat, plans to conquer the world by making all humans allergic to dogs with Professor Charles Brody's (Jeff Goldblum) research on a cure for dog allergies. He is briefly interrupted by Sophie the Maid (Miriam Margolyes) who needs to dress him upon seeing the comatose Mr. Mason (Myron Natwick). Tinkles then tells his sidekick Calico (voiced by Jon Lovitz), an Exotic Shorthair, to send in the ninja cats (voiced by Danny Mann and Billy West) he hired to steal the research. He sends in the Devon Rex ninjas but Lou manages to prevent the theft. Lou then meets a former agent and Butch's ex-sweetheart and girlfriend named Ivy (voiced by Susan Sarandon), a Saluki who belly scratches him. Disappointed that the ninja cats failed him, Mr. Tinkles then orders Calico to send a Russian Blue mercenary, whose name is Diemitir Kennelkoff, (voiced by Glenn Ficarra) to steal the research. Kennelkoff frames Lou for defecating in the house with a ball containing fake dog feces, causing Lou to be confined outside, then places a bomb on the lab door. Butch and Lou manage to get into the house through the window, but Peek and Sam are trapped outside after Lou knocks the window prop away. Kennelkoff fires a series of boomerangs around the Brodys' house causing serious damage and which break several vases and knock a lamp over; the boomerangs also cause the curtain pole to break. Lou then distracts the Russian while Butch tries to disable the bomb, but Kennelkoff turns his attention on Butch and tries to kill him. Butch gets caught in a telephone wire, then Mrs Brody comes home looking for her cell phone and surprisingly does not notice her wrecked living room. Although he suspects that dogs can see in black and white, Butch manages to escape and disables the bomb, but Kennelkoff holds out a remote that will detonate the bomb and laughs until the lab door opens and hits him. Kennelkoff is then captured and interrogated. The agent tells the gang that they pumped a few things out of Kennelkoff's stomach, including a note written by Mr. Tinkles.
After an incident involving Lou playing with Scotty, Professor Brody's machine finally gets the positive combinations for the formula. As Mr. Tinkles and Calico overhear the call between Professor Brody and a doctor, they decide to spring a trap for Dr. Brody and his family. First, Mr. Tinkles makes his sinister and talking side known to Sophie, causing her to faint, then he and his cats take Mr Mason's comatose body to Mason's Christmas tree flocking plant, where Tinkles passes his voice off as Mr Mason to send the employees home and commandeer the factory for the next plot. The cats send soccer tickets to an exhibition game between Uruguay and Chad to the Brody family, obviously a ruse. The cats make a fake entry and when the Brody family pulls up, the cats throw a gas bomb into their car, which goes off in a tremendous explosion and leaves the family unconscious.
While trying to decipher Mr. Tinkles's location, the dogs are obviously unaware that the Brodys have been led into a trap and are kidnapped by the said cat. After receiving a video from the cat demanding Mr. Brody's research as a ransom, the dogs from around the world assemble at a meeting (like the United Nations General Assembly) run by the Mastiff (voiced by Charlton Heston). When the dogs are unable to give up the formula after the meeting of the world's dogs, Lou angrily confronts Butch for not helping him. Butch then explains that when his owner went to college, he left him with his grandmother and storms off, cutting off all of Lou's communications with Peek and the others, so Lou would not seek help to save his family. Lou gives in and brings Mr. Tinkles the research, and is betrayed. Butch manages to find the depressed Lou and, along with Ivy, the two stage an ambush of Mr. Tinkles's factory where the latter plans to use mice to spread the now mass-produced allergy to dogs. While Butch, Ivy, Peek and Sam fight Tinkles's cat forces, Lou frees the Brodys and Calico (who was betrayed by Tinkles), revealing he can speak in the process. Lou defeats Tinkles and rescues Butch, but the claw of the excavator hits his head and a flocking tank, causing an explosion that destroys the factory. Butch manages to save Lou and he tells him he was right about everything, but the puppy is unresponsive and seems to be dead. After a few hurtful moments of sadness and sorrow, Lou suddenly awakens, and all rejoice. Lou decides to be a normal canine and not a secret agent yet, but one day he will be when he is a full-grown beagle.
Meanwhile, Mr. Tinkles is sent to live with Sophie and her three sisters, who dress him in hilariously ridiculous girly outfits as punishment. | stupid | train | wikipedia | The housekeeper/nurse makes Mr. Twiggles' life a horror by continually dressing him in feminine outfits which he hates.Another favorite is Lou, the beagle puppy who is adopted by the Brody family and is drafted as a secret agent in the war against cats.I gave this movie 8 stars..
This was a pretty clever film mixing live characters and human voices for the dogs and cats.
(Forget an original story, I just wanted a marginally good one.) I wanted the animals to be real characters, treated with respect and earning our emotional reactions, instead of being used as props - hurt, tossed around, put into scary situations - to manipulate our emotions.That it's a "kid's movie" is no excuse.
Movies have to be dumbed down for the kid audience??If you can handle watching a disturbing, strange, disconnected family (and not in a good/funny way), a squirmingly bad kid actor, some very ugly cats, sloppy editing, and as many cliches as you could ever want, then go see this movie.
However with Mr Tinkles chasing the formula and Lou growing near to his family - can the formula be protected?This had great potential - a good plot, a really strong cast and a good opportunity for children and adult jokes alike.
For children there are some fart jokes and plenty of cat and dog slapstick but there are almost no jokes for adults that other films such as Shrek and Toy Story had in spades.Given the cast this is very surprising - Jon Lovitz is a great voice but is hardly used at all, the character of Mr Tinkles could have been a great Dr Evil character, but even he is wasted.
It won't go down in history as a classic, but it certainly puts you in a good mood and keeps you there!I love dogs, especially beagles, and the one in this movie ("Lou") is just adorable!
I have to say Lou(voiced with earnest conviction by Tobey Maguire) is adorable for a dog, and while you certainly don't want to mess with villainous feline Mr Tinkles (Sean Hayes seems to having a whale of a time here), though he is cute to look at.
"Cats & Dogs" thinks its concepts are funny and entertaining enough, which is probably why it puts so little thought into the story..
I found Shrek to be one of the funniest movies I have seen all year, this wasn't.It was full of childish humor, and really had nothing at all to give to people who are over the age of 10, except celebrity voices and a few funny covert spy lines.
That said, this film would probably be enjoyed more by those of you who prefer canine company to the company of felines.There isn't much for adults, and I think children will be a little bit lost in some of the technology and dialogue.
That's why I give Cats and Dogs it's rating here because this is the type of family film that more often than not can work for the whole family because while the kids can laugh at the pratfalls the dogs and cats encounter, adults will find humor in the ninja cats, the dictator-like-boss cat and other small things.
Imagine my dissappointment then, upon seeing the film, when I realised that all the best jokes were the ones already included in the trailer.Cats and Dogs isn't an awful film, it's just not a particularly good one.
The storyline is uninspired (and in my opinion, a little too complex for the very young), the sentimentality is sickening, and even the much-hyped CG effects are painfully bad in places.There's solid voicework from the actors, with Tobey Maguire on excellent form as wannabe secret agent Lou, but the human actors (Geoff Goldblum, take a bow) play it straight when they should have gone for laughs.
Hmm. I thought this movie had an interesting premise to work off of- the enmity between cats and dogs.
Cats and Dogs is a great comedy action film that stars Jeff Goldblum, Elizabeth Perkins, Alexander Pollock, Miriam Margolyes, Tobey Maguire, Alec Baldwin, Sean Hayes, Susan Sarandon, Michael Clarke Duncan, Jon Lovitz, Joe Pantoliano, and Charlton Heston!
Jeff Goldblum was annoying (wasn't his fault, he was pretty much the same as always; the script ruined it), Elizabeth Perkins looked good, nothing else, I hated the kid and the story lacked good ideas.Also, why did they have the lights on in the trailer when it comes to the Matrix cats, but had the lights OFF in the film, so you could hardly see anything?Again, I have to say this: the trailers nowadays take too much away.What I like about the movie:Little.
But I'm glad I did so anyway.Admittedly, a spy film about talking cats and dogs is likely not going to be the best in cinematography since Casablanca, but for its intended audience it's a very funny and well-made film.The star of the film is Mr. Tinkles, a beautiful and megalomaniac white Persian cat, who wants to take over the world.
Boy what a pitch that must have been " It`s about the pussy revolution that`s under way " The cats are taking over and only the canine commadoes can save us " Man I bet a few Hollywood shrinks had an emergency call at that sales pitch , but it`s nice to know that some producer managed to stop laughing long enough to consider making this film because CATS AND DOGS is a very entertaining family film .
This is absolutely pure kid's movie, plain & simple plot, although the animation on speech is quite real, but some animation is like 1980's robot movement (they actually use robot i presume), nothing interest me from the start to end...
When a movie like this comes out and does something that hasn't been done before (in this case, mixing live-action and animation to tell a story with talking and ninja-fighting animals), it makes a big splash.
Cats and Dogs is a movie that is fun for the little ones.
The effects are fantastic, and there are some certain scenes that are quite amusing, however, overall, it is a film for small children.Dr. Brody (played by Jeff Goldblum) is a scientist, who in his basement, is working on a formula to fight allergies to dogs.
After this one is done, watch Shrek, a film that will appeal to both you and your kids, as Cats and Dogs certainly does not..
But twas not meant to be because I saw a film that great moments of genius (those ninja cats)but a lousy whole.It had its highlights - Mr Tinkle was a fantastic character and as a whole the cats had more character than the dogs.
Today, I've seen a lot of animated movie (I really like this kind of film).
The animal voices executed by Tobey Maguire, Alec Baldwin, Susan Sarandon, Jon Lovitz, and Sean Hayes were good enough for me to fetch on to this film again.
Once in a great while, Hollywood will actually make a movie for the sole purpose of entertainment, and this film is one of them.I don't see this as a cruel movie in regards to animals, but it's more like a live action cartoon.
Hey, I own two cats and two dogs, I love them all, and a true animal lover will love this film.
When watching this, I am reminded of my childhood memories, such as the lines that I used to quote in this movie ("No, I think not, Sophie!").Basically, the plot is that Professor Brody, played by Jeff Goldblum, is trying to find a cure for Dog allergies.
Mr. Tinkles (voiced by Sean Hayes), the antagonist in the film, needs the research, as he wants to take over the world, by making everybody allergic to dogs.
If I was a cat, I'd be jealous of that for sure.The acting in front of the character is great (Goldblum is good at pretty much everything he does), but if anything, it's the voice acting that's the best thing about this movie.
"Cats & Dogs" is the latest to join an elite list including "Atlantis: The Lost Empire," "Dr. Dolittle 2," "Spy Kids," "See Spot Run" and "Shrek;" proves family oriented films will entertain all ages."Cats & Dogs" is one of the most unique adventure films I have seen because it combines humor, intelligence and the technical savvy to call itself a box-office hit.
The combination of live actors with voices of actors with incredible special effects immediately elevated "Cats & Dogs" to a new level of greatness.
The movie takes an incredible look inside a top-secret, high-tech espionage war between cats and dogs, which their owners are completely unaware.
I knew "Cats & Dogs" was going to be a smash hit; however, I didn't realize how much fun I could have watching the movie.The combination of live actors with voice over actors made "Cats & Dogs" more interesting because it was an element that makes the film more unique.
For example, other films like "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" and "See Spot Run" are great in their own special way; however, when you add this added element, movie patrons are guaranteed to be entertained because of the unique and rarity of the occurrences.Instant credibility came to the movie the moment I heard the voices of Baldwin and Heston because these are among the best actors in Hollywood; however, everyone involved with this movie made it a success.
"Cats & Dogs" has my vote for the movie that will make people have the most fun.
Elizabeth Perkins seems to be tailor made for her role as mother; furthermore, she is extremely talented, I can't wait to see her next film.In a summer that has contained animated and live action inventive family films, 2001 has added another with "Cats & Dogs." There is one piece of advice I must give to everyone, which is to watch everyone of the family films and share in the enjoyment..
It would have been great if all the human characters were cut out of the movie.The Cats-- Mr. Tinkles, Russian Blue ("I might look cute, but inside?
I like the ninja cats dropping from the sky, the russian's gadgets, the dog equipment, the animation and puppetry for most of the cats....Overall i enjoyed the movie.
If you are expecting a side-splitting comedy, a solid plot and character development, then "Cats & Dogs" might be a mild disappointment, especially for adults.Children, however, will be thoroughly entertained.
Except for the evil Persian Mr. Tinkles (Sean Hayes), a cat owned by a comatose Christmas tree tycoon, and his lackey Calico (Jon Lovitz), plus a briefly-seen, humorous Russian Blue "assassin" (voiced by Glenn Ficarra, who co-wrote the script), the other Cats are pretty much faceless minions.The much-publicized Mr. Tinkles winds up with only about half the screen time of Lou and Butch, which left little room for character development among the Cats.But this movie is by no means chopped liver.
There is a priceless scene in the beginning when Mrs. Brody chooses Lou over a litter of militaristic Doberman puppies.Plus, it has just been discovered that Cats can indeed drive limousines ("This isn't NASCAR!").This film's most interesting aspect is that the conclusion takes place in a Christmas tree flocking factory, a line of work hardly explored in the movies.
Her opinion: "It was GREAT" (and believe me, she can be quite picky)I was especially humored by the "Russian," a cat in serious need of an attitude adjustment.The special effects were just a tad hoaky, but it suited the spirit of the comedy perfectly.If your children liked "Spy Kids," they will thoroughly enjoy this movie.
O.K., much of it is silly, but if you have pets like I do (7 cats, 1 dog, etc.), then you'll probably get a kick out of the movie.
Though many of the animals are mechanical (animatronics?), there are still plenty of good old warm-blooded cats and dogs to melt your heart.Sure, this is not going to win any academy awards, but it's great to see a film with some truly funny moments that doesn't rely on foul language or bathroom humor.
Crouching Cat, Hidden Dog. This film was tailor made for the Ailurophobe: if you believe that cats have a hidden agenda and possibly even a secret plan to take over the world then you really cannot miss this movie.One of the worst insults hurled at one of the main characters is `Dog lover.' There are quite a few chuckles and some real laugh-out-loud jokes but primarily this is one sight gag after another.Sean Hayes (Will and Grace, Billy's Hollywood Screen Kiss) is great as the nefarious `Mr. Tinkles,' the leader of the underground cat society, whose biggest threat is the maid of the house in which he resides.Susan Sarandon and Jon Lovitz turned in their usual great performances as the voices of Ivy' and Calico,' respectively.Jeff Goldblum makes a great nerd.
Compare him to his sexy persona in `Earth Girls Are Easy' and many of his other films and you can see what a multi-dimensional actor he really is.The sound track by John Debney is perfect
shades of John Williams without being overbearing or detracting from the action on the screen.While this is primarily a kid's movie there are some adult jokes: the word play on the substance being manufactured by Mr. Tinkles owner, as an example.This is good summer escapist fare especially if the theater is air-conditioned and you are not looking for great art.
Yes, Cats and Dogs probably will not make any critic's top ten list for this year but sometimes you need to take a break from these type of movies and settle in for some obtuse, mindless fun.
I was sort of disappointed that the cats weren't the good animals, then I realized why the dog is always referred to as "man's best friend".
However, I would urge anyone who enjoys family comedies to watch this film, especially if you are an animal lover!The story is about an on-going war between cats and dogs, with the ultimate aim of being the best friends of humans.
The rest of the film follows Lou meeting up with other neighbouring dogs (also agents) and then them fighting Mr Twinkles and his evil cat friends.This film really made me laugh in several places and the animals are very cute.
Also, the movements look extremely realistic - for example, when Lou is fighting the Ninja cats!Mr Twinkles (voiced by Sean Hayes) is the best character in the film - he must be one of the best movie villains in recent years.
The cats and dogs are by far the biggest stars of the film, but the Brody family and other humans are just plain annoying (especially the kid and the mother!).
And what the hell is jeff goldblum doing sluming it as a bofin who descovers a cure for dogie odder.(or something like that,i lost interest by then) The novelty of seeing cats and dogs walk,talk and fight wears off after two minutes,so whatch the trailer instead.
First, the ads con all cat-lovers like myself into seeing the movie, thinking that both cats and dogs will have an equal chance in the film.
Cats and Dogs is a great movie for kids and adults.
So it is up to one old spy dog Butch(Alec Baaldwin)and a pup named Lou(tobey Maguire) to stop Mr. Tinkles plans of foiling the formula.This movie was a lot better than I thought it would be.
(The closest thing was a tired reference to the slow-mo karate sequences of _The Matrix_.) Most of the time, the film relies on kid jokes and slapstick (which for some reason just isn't funny with animals).
i Hatee spy dog movies.And why are the cats evil.
Cats and Dogs is one of those films that are silly,but at the same time hilarious.The first time I watched it,I really laughed because I laughed at the general silliness of it.The second time some bits were not so funny,but it was still hilarious.
I saw this movie and I thought it was a cute film for people of all ages to watch.
Kids will enjoy it yes, but the script ensures that it is best appreciated by adults - one's preferably with either a cat or dog!
I'm sure the Cats & Dogs will love watching this movie hehe....
Even though the whole thing was quite expensive with fifteen bucks for a movie of one and a half hour with a couple of mediocre special effects and a rather ordinary story line, I think that the follow-up is somewhat underrated because it has many funny characters, a couple of really good jokes and is overall very dynamical.
The dog Sam and the Russian cat are two amusing sidekicks but the rest of the animal cast is rather boring.In the end, one shouldn't be too severe with this movie as it is simply done to entertain a young public and surely succeeds from that point of view.
The parents will be able to watch it with their children without hating it too much and some younger people that have cats or dogs at home might also like the concept.
For a kids' film, "Cats & Dogs" has good production and an exciting plot.
So all in all, Cats & Dogs is a good movie to show kids when babysitting or at camp, but it's not so original or funny that it will be remembered years from now.
"Cats and Dogs"fight in terrible movie..
I went in to Cats and Dog expecting something along the lines as that the movie would be about the two fighting,for whatever reasons.Then comes in the sideplot with the professor and of course they were going to have a conflict.
I'm sure when most of us were kids we probably had vision at one point or another that Cats and Dogs had this huge rivary, and this movies intentions were to bring that to life in a new way. |
tt1741273 | Secret in Their Eyes | In Los Angeles, in early 2002, not long after New York City's 9/11 attack, FBI counter-terrorism investigator Ray Kasten (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Los Angeles district attorney's investigator Jessica "Jess" Cobb (Julia Roberts) go about their day in the office.
Newly hired assistant DA Claire Sloan (Nicole Kidman), an attractive Harvard graduate, is getting Ray's attention. Jess is pushing Ray to ask Claire out, to Ray's disapproval, since Claire recently became engaged to a guy named Ellis (Ross Partridge).
While Jess and Ray bicker, they receive a call about an unknown female's body found in a dumpster near the Al-Ankara mosque. Ray and his colleagues have been investigating the Al-Ankara mosque for possible terrorist links.
Arriving on the scene, Ray takes the first look at the body, and he's deeply shocked that it's Jess's 18-year-old daughter, Carolyn (Zoe Graham) -- she was raped, brutally killed, and bleached inside and out so there would be no DNA evidence. Jess is utterly devastated.
Ray feels guilt-ridden about what happened to Carolyn -- he and Carolyn were planning a surprise birthday party for Jess, and they were supposed to meet at a bakery, but Ray was unable to show up because of his job. Two hours after they were supposed to meet, Carolyn's body was found. She was last seen outside the bakery.
During the investigation, Jess feels the increasing need to move away from the city. While helping Jess pack, Ray notices pictures from the police station's picnic day, and a young man staring at Carolyn in all the photos.
After Ray finds no leads with the police officers for the identity of the young man, causing intense frustration, he begins scanning the system for a matching photo. He finds a match.
Ray tells D.A. Martin Morales (Alfred Molina) that Anzor Marzin (Joe Cole), the man in the picture, is the killer, but Morales is reluctant to go after Marzin. Morales is desperate to nail the sleeper cell that they're after at the mosque so Los Angeles won't have its own 9/11 attack. Morales sees Marzin as important to making a case against the terrorists.
Morales says that the counter-terrorism work that they're doing comes before anything else, and then fellow cop Reggie Siefert (Michael Kelly) says that he has brought in a suspect named Aban Ghazala (Amir Malaklou). Ray interviews Ghazala, and realizes that he's not the killer.
A furious Ray heads to the weight room where Siefert is working out, and forces him to admit that the main in the pictures is Marzin. Siefert had brought Ghazala in to throw Ray off of Marzin's trail, because Marzin is Siefert's snitch at the mosque.
Ray realizes that Detective Guerrero, the detective assigned to the case, knew that Marzin is the killer, and didn't do anything, because Guerrero knows that Marzin is an informant. Before leaving the weight room, Ray ends up punching Siefert.
Ray gets Detective Bumpy Willis (Dean Norris) to help him investigate. At Marzin's home, the two find and recover a suspicious-looking comic book, within which they find a pattern that reveals Marzin's location -- he goes to Los Angeles Dodgers games.
Marzin is tracked down at Dodger Stadium, and arrested. Bumpy ends up with a knee injury in the chase. Claire argues with Ray over his methods, citing the evidence as inadmissible because of improper protocol and conflict of interest.
Claire almost releases Marzin during his interrogation, but hesitates and changes her mind when she catches Marzin attempting to look under her blouse. Claire taunts Marzin, leading him to unzip his pants, expose himself, and attack Claire, while saying things that prove that he's the man who raped and killed Carolyn. Ray beats Marzin, who is let go by Morales because of his status as an informant against the terrorists.
Jess, Claire, and Ray argue with Morales, who refuses to pursue the case because he doesn't want to lose an informant who can help him nail the terrorists. After his release, Marzin's van is found burned, destroying all evidence against him. Jess, Claire, and Ray know that Morales had the van torched so he could keep Marzin as an informant.
With the loss of her daughter, Jess becomes a tormented shell of who she was, and she regresses into anti-social behavior. Ray vows to never stop looking for Marzin, but he transfers to the private sector, and gets a job in security.
Now, thirteen years later, Ray, who now works as head of security for the New York Mets, returns to Los Angeles. Ray and Claire are reunited once again, their attraction now obvious. Claire is now the D.A., and Jess, who is still a shell of who she once was, is Claire's top investigator.
Ray has uncovered a new lead on Marzin that he feels can permanently resolve the case. Ray has found a man named Clay Beckwith (Joe Cole), who looks a lot like Marzin. He thinks Beckwith is Marzin using a false name. Jess insists that the matter is closed.
The investigation, which includes a few chases, leads Ray to Beckwith, and a shootout with Beckwith leads to Siefert getting killed. Beckwith and his men are arrested, and Jess says that Beckwith is not Marzin. Ray says that Siefert needed to answer to Carolyn for trying to protect Marzin 13 years ago.
When Ray and Claire pay a visit to Jess's isolated farmhouse, Jess says that she found and killed Marzin 13 years ago, just a couple of months after Ray left. Jess says that after Morales had Marzin's van torched and the evidence in it destroyed, she knew that Morales would not ever let Marzin go down for killing Carolyn.
When Ray later follows Jess to her barn, he discovers that her claim that she killed Marzin was intended to cover up the fact that, for the past 13 years, she has been holding Marzin in a cage in the barn. For the past 13 years, Jess has been making Marzin suffer for what he did to Carolyn.
Marzin begs Ray to ask Jess to talk to him. Ray, who sympathizes with Jess, pulls out his gun, and leaves it with Jess, as he goes outside and starts digging a grave. Ray hears Jess firing a shot that kills Marzin, and Jess walks outside the barn, and gives Ray a look of relief, while Claire officially closes Carolyn's case. | murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | Especially in this case, I think that keeping some of the core material and turning other parts completely around could have made for a fascinating narrative, unfortunately the American remake, with the exception of maybe two or three ides, doesn't improve, explore or further the original in anyway and sometimes even edges the shot-by-shot remake treatment.Look, this isn't a terrible thriller, but the emotional beats you are carried through are just the same of the original, it really seemed to be watching a cheap version of it.
The score is something that positively sticks out and probably the purest good thing to come out of the film.In the end we are treated to a fine thriller that doesn't live up to its potential and only manages to justify its length thanks to memories of the original and the same emotions instead of relevant improvement and originality..
I have it on my list to watch but in my opinion, if you like thrillers and movies with some twists and turns and want to be entertained I recommend giving it a chance..
And once you have realised the error of your ways we will watch the original and realise that having to read and watch a film isn't the end of the world and even better, opens you up to the idea that the action, the great stories, the films that treat the viewer as an adult, generally, don't come out of Hollywood anymore.
Kept my interest the whole time, all the leads were strong and believable, never a big Julia Roberts fan, she was outstanding in this, I certainly don't agree with the reviewers that said Nicole Kidman was miscast, I thought she was excellent, you don't get to be an A grade Academy Award winner by being a bad actress!
When I saw the cast list, which includes Julia Roberts, Nicole Kidman and the brilliant Chiwetel Ejiofor I thought I was in for ninety minutes of sheer quality, you can forgive me for thinking that, when you take into account the number of awards shared by the stars, the budget, and the pedigree of the original movie.
I haven't seen the original so I can't compare the two movies but knowing Hollywood's track record with remakes, the Argentinian version would have been a superior production.In 2002, a team of FBI investigators including Ray (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Jess (Julia Roberts) along with a newly arrived district attorney, Claire (Nicole Kidman), are based in Los Angeles to prevent terrorists from inflicting more damage to the American way of life after 9/11 the previous year.
With a cast of prominent Oscar winners involved, 'Secret in their Eyes' should have been much more than what it ended up being - a struggling thriller that failed to boil.I must admit that I am not familiar with the 2009 release of the Argentinian Oscar winning film, 'El secreto de sus ojos' so it would be unfair of me to directly compare the two but by all reports it is a thoroughly recommended thriller worthy of the accolades that it received at the time of its release.
Ray is now in private security, Jess is still with the Fed's and Claire is now the District Attorney of L.A. The events of the past have haunted all three but with Ray's determination, he relentlessly pursues the case that had such a disastrous affect on him personally, hoping for justice and to right the wrongs of the past.'Secret in their Eyes' had such potential but it was let down by a story that cannot keep a constant flow.
Billy Ray gives the audience too much credit in thinking that they are following the events presented to them and on many occasions you could be forgiven for being confused about which time line the film is actually in.Roberts and Ejiofor are quite brilliant in their delivery of characters that are torn apart by a tragic event.
The film stars Chiwetel Ejiofor, Julia Roberts, Nicole Kidman and Dean Norris.
I saw the original movie, and it's a much better film!Two FBI agents, Ray (Ejiofor) and Jess (Roberts), are investigating the scene of a murder, when they discover that Jess's daughter (Zoe Graham) is the victim.
He comes back to Los Angeles, after leaving the FBI, and asks his old supervisor (Kidman), who he's also long had feelings for, to reopen the case.The original Argentine film was fantastic; I gave it 4.5 stars (out of 5), back when I first saw it (in 2010).
Secret in their eyes (2015) is a pretty well made film, it's definitely well acted, great performances by all the cast including: Julie Roberts, Chiwetel, and Nicole Kidman, they all have very real powerful performances.
If there was ever a prime example of a harmless yet utterly pointless Hollywood remake of a much better yet underseen foreign film it's Billy Ray's Secret in Their Eyes, a thriller that crashed and burned upon release late last year in the midst of a barely there marketing campaign and reviews that were middling at best, despite an awards friendly named cast and a story that should've been exhilarating only to end up as a sporadically intriguing mystery.Before delving any further into the occasional virtues of Ray's film (who's never really gone the next step from his breakout Shattered Glass from 2003), those that've never seen Juan José Campanella's Academy Award winning 2009 film of the same name from Spain should stop reading right now and seek it out as it's one of the finest thrillers of the modern era with its standout out scripting, frenetic action scenes (a soccer stadium chase is breathtaking in its design), outstanding cast and final reveal that will leave jaws dropping on floors.This Hollywood update of the original try's to relive many of the originals past glories like the incendiary final reveal and even the stadium foot chase, this time transported to a disappointing baseball stadium setting, but the film feels somewhat lethargic overall and revelations and confronting situations that simmered in the 2009 film merely fizzle here despite the best effort of its loaded cast.Filling in the role that was once earmarked for Denzel Washington, Chiwetel Ejiofor is the films anchor as determined investigator Ray Kastan and he acquits himself well to a fairly intense role but struggles to draw out sufficient chemistry with his female co-stars Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts, who continue on with their recent forgettable efforts with turns that required their experienced skill sets to do a little more with what they were given even though Ray's plotting of the storyline leaves much to be desired with its flash back structure, even the films big finish is somewhat hampered by some sloppy editing that intrudes on the present moment.At its heart, Secret in Their Eyes has an extremely appealing narrative that helps cover up many of this particular incarnation's left wanting deliveries but it can't help override the fact that this unnecessary remake isn't even a patch on its foreign forefather and quite clearly wasn't as appealing to western audiences as the studio obviously thought it would've been.2 ½ limping Hank's out of 5.
Ejiofor plays Ray, an FBI agent determined to find the killer, and he plays it dark with touches of light humor, that allows us to like the character more, even as he juggles his obsession with the case with his attraction to the new DA, Claire played by Nicole Kidman.
Ejiofor also showcases this balance as he investigates the case with Bumpy Willis, played by Dean Norris of Breaking Bad fame.Julia Roberts gave a great performance in the film as the mother whose daughter was murdered and also happens to be a fellow FBI investigator.
The biggest Mystery in this Movie is how an A-Lister, a Remake of an Oscar Winning Film (Best Foreign Film 2009), with two Oscar Winning Actresses on board (Nicole Kidman, Julia Roberts), a Director, Oscar Nominee Billy Ray, and an intense Leading Man (Chiwetel Ejiofor) also an Oscar Nominee, can produce such a Dull Movie.
The transitions of scenes are horrible, Julia Roberts looked and Nicole kidman looked the same as if they didn't really age in 13yrs.The story itself is suspenseful, however it leads to a pretty crappy ending.
I can't help but wonder how much of this type of opinion has gone into 'The Secret in Their Eyes', or are people just seeing it for what it really is - a subpar movie.I'd neither seen, nor even heard of the original version before seeing this one so I went in with no preconceived notions or ideas of how the story would play out.
The story itself is interesting enough to pull it through though and the star power of Julie Roberts, Nicole Kidman and Chiwetel Ejiofor is enough to cover up a lot of the faults.However, you can tell the movie is depending a lot on its "twist" to win viewers over.
So in all, Secret in Their Eyes isn't a bad film, it just ultimately ended up being a forgettable one.+Ejiofor+Flashbacks prove effective-Story never popped-Romance5.3/10.
After watching it, the next day when I returned the film, he handed me a recent American remake of the same movie by Billy Ray, staring Chiwetel Ejiofor, Nicole Kidman, and Julia Roberts.
Other than knowing that the movie was a remake/adaptation of the 2009 Academy Award winner for Foreign Film, I was not familiar with the story or plot line before seeing "Secret In Their Eyes" last Saturday, nor had I seen the 2009 Argentinian film.
(By the way, my vote for the worst American remake/adaptation of a foreign film goes to 1993's "The Vanishing", which not only utterly fails to approach the dread and suspense of the 1988 Dutch original but also wastes a cast that includes Jeff Bridges, Kiefer Sutherland, and Sandra Bullock, in an early role.).
This remake brings the story to US audiences with some changes to make it more relatable.I'm not one who wants to give away spoilers, but I will say you've never seen Julia Roberts in a role quite like this one.
The remake is written and directed by Billy Ray. The film stars Chewital Ejifor, Nicole Kidman, Julia Roberts and Dean Norris.
It took me a long time to get up the interest to watch The Secret in Their Eyes.I just figured it wouldn't be any good.But I also didn't realize has this all star cast.When i found out Julia Roberts,Nicole Kidman and Chiwetel Ejiofor were in it,I decided to watch it.I started out hesitating to believe it would be any good.It took me five minutes to get hooked.Julia Roberts outright stunned me with her performance.I've always liked her but i've never seen her this intense.She devoured her character and spit it out with audacity.I felt for her every step of they way,feeling every emotion,understanding every nuance of her multi dimensional real world personality.Nicole Kidman is as beautiful as ever,although I have always preferred Julia Roberts unique features.Kidman captivates with her solid yet somehow fragmented personality.she seemed not whole...some fire inside that died long ago.Its very clear why by the end.Chiwetel Ejiofor is a favorite of mine anyways but his performance in this in my opinion puts him in the big leagues.The ending is so awesome I will not ever forget it.I've never seen the original movie so i had no idea what to expect.I finished the movie with a feeling of great satisfaction.
for once, i agree with my fellow reviewers;Secrets is full of good stuff, Julia Roberts is fantastic (in some scenes, and not so much in some others, due to how much her character changes halfway through the film), Chiwetel Ejiofor does a great job, Nicole Kidman does the same thing she does in every film she's ever been in, and even the production is great.But unfortunately, as Yahtzee says, this film flows like a river of bricks.
When something happens, it's masterfully done, but the other half of the film should have been cut out and left on the cutting room floor.note that i did not see the original and i am valuing this film exclusively on its own merits.I would still recommend Secret In Their Eyes, but my advice is, you will come out thinking this could have been so much better; imho, a solid rewrite based on Julia Roberts could have won her an Oscar.My vote: 7/10 - so much good stuff, watered down..
Julia Roberts' acting in this is incredible and one of the best performances I have seen by her but I really didn't feel a connection to this movie for some reason.
FBI investigators Ray (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Jess (Julia Roberts), along with District Attorney Claire (Nicole Kidman) are suddenly torn apart when Jess' teenage daughter Carolyn (Zoe Graham) is brutally murdered.
The idea behind the plot isn't too overly complex as it involves Ray (Ejiofor) and Claire (Kidman) trying to find Jess' (Roberts) daughter's killer and bringing them to justice.
Julia Roberts had the best performance in this movie in my opinion, the most difficult one and she did a great job, while Chiwetel Ejiofor was reliable as usual and Dean Norris was just another reincarnation of Hank Schrader - i miss that guy.
His chemistry with Nicole Kidman was also on point and every time they were on screen together, I was waiting for sparks to fly.If you like thrillers, mixed with a little drama and an ending with a helluva payoff (it's all about the facial expressions in those last minutes) I highly recommend checking out Secret in Their Eyes..
Hum, I wondered after all the years she kept him alive, did she allow him to wash himself up, change his clothes once in a while otherwise he would stink so bad that she would not be able to stay near him.I liked tension and sexual chemistry between Chiwetel Ejiofor {Ray} and Nicole Kidman {Claire}.
Julia Roberts proves she is more than just a pretty face and Kidman gives an understated performance and allows the cast to take front and centre.I scored it 8 as I thought the pace a little too slow and the backwards and forwards in time , so beloved by some directors, didn't quite work for me.
Nevertheless Secret in Their Eyes is a good movie but like I said almost completely the same as the Argentinian version.
Writer/director Billy Ray assumed a threatening role when he set about to re-write and direct the superb Argentine film "El secreto de sus ojos" – the tense script by Juan José Campanella and Eduardo Sacheri - and though the stories do not compare, the film is a strong one, largely due to a cast and cinematographer that would be difficult to improve.2002: Ray Kasten (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Jess Cooper (Julia Roberts) are two investigators in a private police unit led by the DA.
No chemistry between actors, feels like a typical American run-of-the mill police movie whereas the original is much much more (Argentinian 70's era, love-story, human condition, ...).
Chiwetel Ejiofor is a retired counter terrorism expert obsessed with a cold case from 2002 just after the post 9/11 hysteria which involved the brutal murder of the daughter of his colleague Jess (Julia Roberts.)He returns 13 years later and meets up with the District Attorney of LA, Claire (Nicole Kidman) a woman who he was smitten with many years earlier and both of whom thought they had captured the main suspect but he was released as the authorities felt he was needed to fight domestic terrorism.Jess on the other hand has been worn down all these years, losing her daughter and knowing the likely suspect is protected.
Review: I really enjoyed this emotional movie, mainly because of the great performances by the whole cast, and the suspense throughout the film.
Its quite an intelligent suspense/thriller with some brilliant performances from Julia Roberts and Chiwetel Ejiofor, and the dark setting of the film, set the tone for the emotional events that touched each of the investigators.
Enjoyable!Round-Up: I'm surprised that this movie made such a small profit at the box office, because there were some top actors in the cast and the original Secret in Their Eyes won an Oscar for best foreign film.
Whilst making the movie, Julia Roberts mother died, so a lot of the feelings towards her character from the cast, was real.
Now, 13 years later, the FBI agent on the team believes he has tracked down the killer, and intends to settle the score.A remake of the 2009 Spanish movie "The Secret in Their Eyes" (original title: "El secreto de sus ojos").
The sentimentality feels superficial, the characters one-dimensional and the relationships contrived.All-star cast (Julia Roberts, Nicole Kidman, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Dean Norris, Alfred Molina, Michael Kelly) all seem subdued in their roles, as if director Billy Ray was figuring less-is-more in terms of creating intrigue.
Even though it was not a bad film, I somewhat enjoyed, maybe because I haven't seen the other version.The actors were great, but it was Chiwetel Ejiofor's film, He dominated the screenspace, and Nicole Kidman and Julia Roberts were slightly disappointed with their small roles.
In 2002, Ray Kasten (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and Jessica Cobb (Julia Roberts) are investigators in L.A. Claire Sloane (Nicole Kidman) is the new lawyer in the D.A.'s office.
Like many a dull screenplay, there's no significant action (that tells us why we'll want to watch this story) prior to the plot kicking in....The film left me with a few thoughts...how brave it was for Julia Roberts to look so dowdy and how Nicole Kidman can actually be okay when she plays herself (being a flirty muse).
Secret in Their Eyes is a remake of a well drawn out Argentinian film known as El secreto de sus ojos, so a lack of originality is apparent, but only to those who're aware of it.
Jess (Ms. Roberts) is an investigator who works with FBI Agent Ray (Chiwetel Ejiofor), Assistant District Attorney Claire (Nicole Kidman), and a blustering District Attorney played by Alfred Molina.
Yesterday I have watched the movie " secret in their eyes " starring Julia Roberts and nicole kidman. |
tt0073045 | Giliap | A man arrives in a Swedish small town to work as a waiter at the run-down Hotel Busarewski (a play on the Swedish word "buse" - "crook"). He is installed in a small room, and soon begins to serve customers under the supervision of a strict, wheelchair-using manager suffering from an exaggerated self image.
The man befriends two co-workers: the talkative Gustav "The Count" Svensson and the beautiful waitress Anna. Anna says that she is only there working temporarily, just like the man himself, and that she will soon move on to work at a seaside hotel.
After work one day Anna takes the man to her borrowed apartment and tries to persuade him to go away with her somewhere. She tries to hug him but he is reluctant and returns to his room. There The Count visits him and reveals a plan he has that would bring them both lots of money. But in order to realize it they will first have to free a friend of The Count who happens to be in jail. The Count gives the man the code name "Giliap" to use during the operation.
Later Anna tries to have a talk with Giliap about feelings. She thinks he is mysterious, but Giliap claims that his secret is that he doesn't have any secrets. Anna says that she fears that he is going to take all her feelings and then just disappear.
The rescue operation for The Count's friend fails because of poor preparation and ends in confusion. After fleeing, The Count becomes seriously ill, and lying in his bed surrounded by colleagues he asks for Anna - who is at first reluctant but eventually appears, to The Count's satisfaction.
Later Giliap has bought a flower bouquet for Anna, but arriving at her apartment he is greeted by The Count who tells him she has left for that seaside hotel. Giliap goes there, finds her and embraces her. She starts to cry and they share dinner in a room she is sharing with another girl working at the same hotel.
The Count arrives at the seaside hotel and asks for whiskey. In the morning Anna once again tries to persuade Giliap to go away with her, before leaving for work. Outside she runs into The Count, who shows her lots of money, but she dismisses him. He then brings out a gun and shoots her.
Giliap and Anna's roommate walk out and find the money shattered all over the beach and start to collect it, before discovering Anna's body in the sand. Afterwards Anna's friends leaves on a train, leaving Giliap alone. | psychedelic, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | Pictures to remember. I was about 17 when I saw Giliap for the first time. Now I'm 41 years old and it have never left me. It's a poetic tale about dreams in a gray and joyless world. It's epic in a way you almost never see, a slow tempo and very carefully chosen pictures. Giliap is a forerunner for Roy Andersson's "Sånger från andra våningen (2000) If you like that, I recommend this one too.. Magical. I remember how this film feels - vividly. I watched it at age 14 or 15 and was completely overwhelmed by it. Slowmoving, yes, magisterial, but brimming with sensibility and content. After being condemned to the periphery of the film industry after the commercial failure of 'Giliap', director Andersson had a belated and very much deserved international comeback with 'Songs from the Second Floor' and 'You the Living'.Since then 'Giliap' is among a handful of films that I have been clamoring for on DVD, alongside Resnais' 'Providence', Stroheim's 'Greed', the original 'Island of Lost Souls' etc. etc. And alongside the great masterworks of Swedish director Bo Widerberg. So far, no luck ... Please, give us 'Giliap' on DVD, it remains - I sincerely believe - among the most magical of European films.. A job at the Doom Hotel. Arriving at the dreary Busarewsky Hotel (the name, to Swedes, sounds both vaguely Central European and like a pun on 'busar', "goons") the young waiter Giliap soon finds himself in a maze of silent rules, gossip, violence and budding, pathetic revolt. But who can he trust? The film appears to be both absurd and over-the-top serious, and watching it you'll find yourself asking just where is it dead serious and where does satire or (self-)parody start? The slow tempo and long, brooding silences before sometimes outrageously weighted lines, the gloomy lighting and the sudden hysterical swings of the people in the film - all of this was certainly intended, but the purpose of the film is by no means clear, so the viewer has to decide for himself just what enemy Giliap is fighting or what he is searching.If you've seen "Songs from the Second Floor" you'll recognize some of the style - the long, slow shots, the blunt, searching or unresponsive dialog lines, the dreary, somehow naked and unprotected facial expressions. This is the antithesis of "Beverly Hills 90210", but a very rewarding and sometimes weirdly funny movie experience.. The reason it took twenty years before we got to see another movie from Roy Andersson.. The first thing that strikes you after watching this movie, is that you've wasted two hours of your precious time. This is because the plot is extremely slowly paced: I usually don't mind watching pictures where there's not a lot of action, but then I want content! There also seems to be no connection between the ending and the rest of the movie, something which ought to disturb most viewers. Taking all this into consideration, there's really no wonder that the revenues from this movie only covered about 1/20 of the budget! |
tt0142242 | Doragon bôru Z: Moetsukiro!! Nessen ressen chô-gekisen | Dragon Ball Z picks up five years after the end of the Dragon Ball anime, with Son Goku as a young adult and father to his son Gohan. A humanoid alien named Raditz arrives on Earth in a spacecraft and tracks down Goku, revealing to him that he is his long-lost big brother and that they are members of a nearly extinct extraterrestrial race called the Saiyans (サイヤ人, Saiya-jin). The Saiyans had sent Goku (originally named "Kakarrot") to Earth as an infant to conquer the planet for them, but he suffered a severe head injury soon after his arrival and lost all memory of his mission, as well as his blood-thirsty Saiyan nature. Goku refuses to help Raditz continue the mission, which results in Raditz kidnapping Gohan. Goku decides to team up with his former enemy Piccolo in order to defeat Raditz and save his son, while sacrificing his own life in the process. In the afterlife, Goku trains under Kaiō-sama until he is revived by the Dragon Balls a year later in order to save the Earth from Raditz' comrades; Nappa and the Saiyan prince Vegeta. During the battle Piccolo is killed, along with Goku's allies Yamcha, Tenshinhan and Chaozu, and the Dragon Balls cease to exist because of Piccolo's death. Goku arrives at the battlefield late, but avenges his fallen friends by defeating Nappa with his new level of power. Vegeta himself enters into the battle with Goku and after numerous clashes Goku manages to defeat him as well, with the help of Gohan and his best friend Kuririn. At Goku's request, they spare Vegeta's life and allow him to escape Earth. During the battle, Kuririn overhears Vegeta mentioning the original set of Dragon Balls from Piccolo's home planet Namek (ナメック星, Namekku-sei). While Goku recovers from his injuries at the hospital, Gohan, Kuririn and Goku's oldest friend Bulma depart for Namek in order to use these Dragon Balls to revive their dead friends. However, they discover that Vegeta's superior, the galactic tyrant Lord Freeza, is already there, seeking the Dragon Balls to be granted eternal life. A fully healed Vegeta arrives on Namek as well, seeking the Dragon Balls for himself, which leads to several battles between him and Freeza's henchmen. Realizing he is overpowered, Vegeta teams up with Gohan and Kuririn to fight the Ginyu Force, a team of mercenaries summoned by Freeza. After Goku finally arrives on Namek, the epic battle with Freeza himself comes to a close when Goku transforms into a fabled Super Saiyan (超サイヤ人, Sūpā Saiya-jin) and defeats him.
Upon his return to Earth a year later, Goku encounters a time traveler named Trunks, the future son of Bulma and Vegeta, who warns Goku that two Artificial Humans (人造人間, Jinzōningen, lit. "Artificial Humans") will appear three years later, seeking revenge against Goku for destroying the Red Ribbon Army when he was a child. During this time, an evil life form called Cell emerges and after absorbing two of the Artificial Humans to achieve his "perfect form," holds his own fighting tournament to decide the fate of the Earth, called the "Cell Games". After Goku sacrifices his own life a second time, to no avail, Gohan avenges his father by defeating Cell after ascending to the second level of Super Saiyan. Seven years later Goku, who has been briefly revived for one day and meets his youngest son Goten, and his allies are drawn into a fight by the Kaioshin against a magical being named Majin Buu. After numerous battles resulting in the destruction and recreation of the Earth, Goku (whose life is permanently restored by the Elder Kaioshin) destroys Majin Buu with a Genki Dama attack containing the energy of everyone on Earth. Goku makes a wish for Buu to be reincarnated as a good person and ten years later, at another martial arts tournament, Goku meets Buu's human reincarnation, Uub. Leaving the match between them unfinished, Goku departs with Uub to train him to become Earth's new defender. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0045296 | Viva Zapata! | Emiliano Zapata (Marlon Brando) is part of a delegation sent to complain about injustices to corrupt longtime President Porfirio Díaz (Fay Roope), but Díaz dismisses their concerns, and tries to bribe their leader, offering him some land which Zapata rejects. As a result, Zapata is driven to open rebellion, along with his brother Eufemio (Anthony Quinn). He in the south and Pancho Villa (Alan Reed) in the north unite under the leadership of naive reformer Francisco Madero (Harold Gordon).
Díaz is finally toppled and Madero takes his place, but Zapata is dismayed to find that nothing is changed. The new regime is no less corrupt and self-serving than the one it replaced. His own brother sets himself up as a petty dictator, taking what he wants without regard for the law. The ineffectual but well-meaning Madero puts his trust in treacherous General Victoriano Huerta (Frank Silvera). Huerta first takes Madero captive and then has him murdered. Zapata himself is lured into an ambush and killed.
Zapata is depicted in the film as a rebel leader of high integrity. He is guided by his desire to return the peasants their recently robbed lands, while forsaking his personal interest, even Josefa Zapata, his newly wed wife. Steinbeck meditates in the film on the tempting military force and political might, which corrupts men. | violence, alternate history | train | wikipedia | For this portrayal in his third film Marlon Brando got a second Academy Award nomination for Best Actor, but lost to Gary Cooper for High Noon.And as a film concerning the turmoil in Mexico during the teen and twenty years of the last century Viva Zapata!
But even a few years earlier the overreaction against the church was done in the John Ford film, The Fugitive which takes place within 10 to 20 years after Zapata died.Zapata as played by Brando may be illiterate, but he is possessed of a simple eloquence and a charisma that made him a revolutionary figure, in the same manner Che Guevara became forty years later.
He tries hard to hold to the ideals of the revolution, but finds as most do that tearing down a government is relatively easy, building one from scratch is a task that has defeated many.Anthony Quinn plays Emiliano's swaggering brother Eufemio who's not quite as idealistic as Brando.
It's a very good job by Wiseman, not often talked about for some reason.Besides Quinn's Oscar and Brando's nomination, Viva Zapata!
That's three horse parlay that can't be beat.For some reason Elia Kazan was overlooked for Best Director, possibly because he had won the year before for A Streetcar Named Desire.Still Viva Zapata!
The very idea of a motion picture scripted by John Steinbeck, directed by Elia Kazan, scored by Alex North, starring Marlon Brando, co-starring Anthony Quinn........this is an almost unbelievable gathering of artistic giants.Taste in movies varies and thus one can be certain that some will not respond positively even to this one.
With its spellbinding storytelling, superb cast in top form, its insightful examination of issues which are still crucially relevant today, I can not fathom why some would not praise it.Like a long list of really fine titles that endlessly persist in remaining unavailable in DVD release, this film has me wondering once again why, in the vastness of the internet, one can not discover the reason why this major Brando star-vehicle continues to be withheld from circulation.
His work never got as far as he wanted before he was assassinated, but it was burned into the souls of the people from his region of Mexico (who still call themselves Zapatistas when involved in political protests to this day), and it did help set the stage for Cardenas' reforms in the late 1930s.With direction by Elia Kazan and screenplay by John Steinbeck, VIVA ZAPATA is a wonderful, if simplistic view of the Revolution for American audiences.
Joseph Wiseman is properly sinister as an constant malcontent agent provocateur, insinuating each leader is too weak or unreliable to lead.There are great set pieces - like Kazan's symbolic assassination of Madero by General Huerta's goons who drown out the little reformer/orator's voice as he tries to scream with a siren (but it makes the screams of the unheard martyr like a clarion call to Mexico).
Zapata is truly one of the great heroes of the 20th century, and Brando captured this along with the frustration of trying to do the right thing and yet being hamstrung by the bureaucrats who manage to survive every change in government, no matter which way in turns.The final scene in the movie leaves Zapata as a legend --- did he die, or does he still live to help the millions of peons in Mexico.Elia Kazan's direction was terrific..
Marlon Brando is Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata in a role that earned him an Academy Award nomination.
In a rare role for Mexican born Anthony Quinn to be actually playing a Mexican as Eufernio Zapata for which he won the Academy Award for Best supporting Actor for 1952.
A peasant delegation from Morelos state go to visit Mexican President Porfirio Diaz when Zapata (Marlon Brando) reclaims their rights .Then Zapata along with his brother Eufemio (Anthony Quinn) back to Francisco Madero (Harold Gordon) , though resident in Texas , against Porfirio Diaz .
But his main enemies , the President Carranza and Obregon will fight for the power against the Villa's revolutionaries .The movie portrays until his early death , but he was assassinated when gunmen ambushed him , like it is well developed in the spectacular final shots , and it is subsequently copied at ¨Butch Cassidy and Sundance Kid¨ (by George Roy Hill with Newman and Redford).The movie is an exciting retelling of Zapata's Mexican campaign , suffering and love , with broadened focus on the power abuse .The film gets influence from classic Westerns until famous Russian directors (Eisenstein , Pudovkin).
Marlon Brando chewing up scenery in the title role in one of his best performances as the hot-tempered , simple-minded revolutionary.Anthony Quinn won a deserved Oscar for his well portrayed secondary role as rough brother named Eufemio .
There's a reflection on what can so easily happen to a revolutionary movement when it takes power, as Madero (Harold Gordon) betrays the people he supposedly fought for by not pursuing land reform after he becomes president of Mexico; there's a very moving and eloquent speech by Zapata (Marlon Brando): "if they take your corn, grow more; if they kill your children, breed more," etc., etc.; there's the reflection contained at the end of the movie when it becomes clear that to kill a man does not kill the ideas the man represented.
There was also a pretty good performance from Brando, who portrays Zapata as brooding and sombre throughout - a man who finds little time to enjoy the pleasures of life (even his beautiful bride) because he spends so much time fighting for the people.
At first he doesn't look much like we remember him - Marlon Brando appears as his Mexican Emiliano Zapata with a stern face at the Mexico Priesidente demanding, simply, land rights and making sure boundaries can be drawn.
His name is circled on the President's desk, not a good sign, and from here on in Zapata is fighting and fighting (what one character says is as simple as it is - it's all he knows) so that the farmers can have their land, as opposed to time and patience, to grow their corn with.When Brando first appears as this revolutionary figure he doesn't quite look like himself, and at the same time does very much, and it's disarming.
and then the scenes kept coming, and Brando, playing Zapata as stubborn and headstrong and without much in way of a sense of humor as a leader as a General (and rightfully so as revolutionary figures tend to be, see Che for more details), is spot on.
presents Mexico in some fresh and amazing cinematography, sturdy and sometimes clever and heartfelt direction from Elia Kazan, always best with his actors (even Anthony Quinn who again proves why he was best as taking on an ethnicity and making it believable, if only up to a point as his powerhouse turn shows here), and some very interesting writing from John Steinbeck.
The script sometimes takes its turns and movements that don't make it quite flow as well as it would in a book; individual scenes are knock-outs, mini-masterpieces of words exchanged with underlying meaning or trying to find the meaning in how people can persevere, or not as it turns out (one such scene I loved is when Zapata has been installed as the President- as Pancho Villa says there's "no one else"), and the farmers he says he knows comes and demands the same things he did once before, but at a personal price.There's lots of great things like that, or just the uncomfortable but true rapore between Zapata and his future-wife's family when they talk in metaphors.
Or, perhaps, things like this just aren't possible; one can see the parallels and maybe even find this to be like a condensed version of Soderbergh's Che in taking a sobering look at the sweet highs and sobering lows of rising up against the powers that be (and yes, this is quite the leftist movie, all the more odd considering it's John McCain's favorite film!).
We thank Brando for this amazing performance and we thank Elia Kazan for having faith for the young Brando to play such a hard role.Other actors were good ..
Did Zapata agonize about the loss of his friends?"Viva Zapata" was nominated for several Oscars, and Quinn won on the basis of one great scene with Brando near the film's conclusion.
Emiliano Zapata (Marlon Brando) was a principled, charismatic revolutionary who led peasants from Mexico in the early part of the 20th century against the dictator, Porfirio Diaz who might had proclaimed himself the father of the nation but was stealing land from the poor farmers.What Viva Zapata shows that the cycle of betrayal is endless, one dictator goes and another one emerges.
When Zapata is President his brother Eufemio (Anthony Quinn) regards it is his right to take land and property by force.With at times a literate and clever script written by John Steinbeck, direction by the then leftist Elia Kazan the film is too uneven.
There are at times some great black and white photography but the film lacks action, the plot is messy and it does not always makes sense.Brando gives a sombre and moody performance but does look odd as a Mexican.
(I got to know him when I lived in New York and in real life he was an extremely intelligent, polished gentle-man, in the literal sense of the word.) He played such an off-beat role to perfection in Detective Story, which was released in 1951, one year before Zapata.
I bet that working with him was truly an adventure.Quinn is also a really great actor.Although his face is more suitable for roles of Spanish and Arabian characters,he could rush at some other as well.Spectacular moment in this film is certainly that white horse,a symbol of many,not just Zapata.Symbol of all great people fighting for great ideas.At every step we could see that white horse,guiding his way to eternity...VIVA BRANDO!!!..and of course VIVA ZAPATA!!!.
The story of Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata (Marlon Brando), who led a rebellion against the corrupt, oppressive dictatorship of president Porfirio Diaz (Fay Roope) in the early 20th century.Sadly, I do not know the story of Zapata well enough to criticize this film for its accuracy or lack thereof.
Marlon Brando is Zapata, he is a man that stands up for his people, but he is troubled, he knows that if he wins the war it will be much harder to manage a country and compromise with the ruling forces, than to fight for it.
Joseph Wiseman is the man without feelings who has made power his God. Marlon Brando shows what a great actor he was for playing a character that was so distant from him in culture and appearance and not for one minute being unconvincing.
When asked by a reporter in early 2008 to name his favorite movie, U.S. presidential candidate John McCain said, "Viva Zapata!" "I still think it's the great classic," he said.This 1952 Darryl Zanuck production directed by Elia Kazan and the recipient of an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor to Anthony Quinn, stars Marlon Brando as Mexican peasant-turned-revolutionary Emiliano Zapata set in the years leading up to World War I.I'm a film buff and I never heard of it until I heard McCain speak.I found a VHS copy through my library and watched it today.Written by John Steinbeck with his only original screenplay, the script contains memorable passages on democracy, human conscience, violence, and peace.
This is great in some ways but unbalanced on the whole though it is required viewing for any serious classic movie fan especially anybody who appreciates Brando, Kazan and anthony quinn.
Surprisingly good Hollywood approach to the life of Emiliano Zapata by Elia Kazan and John Steinbeck, the kind of film that if made today would cause a controversy due to its lack of authenticity in self-representational terms.
One would think a film starring Marlon Brando and Anthony Quinn, directed by Elia Kazan, and written by John Steinbeck would be a sure thing.
I know casting Caucasian actors as people of color was a common convention in earlier cinematic times, and that one needs to just suck it up and go with it if one is going to bother watching a movie like this in the first place, but my goodness was it hard to get past Marlon Brando as a Mexican revolutionary.
It's like reading a novel with chapters missing.Quinn received the first of his two Best Supporting Actor Oscars for playing Zapata's brother, but I'm not sure why.
Brando won his second of four consecutive Best Actor nominations, Steinbeck was nominated for Best Story and Screenplay, and the film received two technical nominations for its black and white art direction and its score (by Alex North).Not exactly a dud, but definitely a disappointment.Grade: B-.
There are many many more in this wonderful movie which is directed exquisitely by Elia Kazan..Viva Brando!.
What was Marlon Brando thinking when he decided to play in Viva Zapata!?
And, with writing by John Steinbeck and direction by Elia Kazan (a great director, by the way), it's not surprising this film is far better than average.
But Viva Zapata would not be the excellent motion picture it is, if it didn't boast the wonderful performances of Brando and Quinn, and the stunning photography of Joe McDonald.
It needed something, anything!With Marlon Brando and Elia Kazan at the height of their powers, both young and passionate, between their twin masterpiece collaborations "Streetcar Named Desire" in 1951 and "On the Waterfront" in 1953 - you expect something special.But Viva Zapata is the least special thing i've ever seen.The unremarkableness of this movie is quite unsettling.
I don't know why he was even cast, and the only reason I can come up with as to why he was nominated for Best Actor was because the Academy was trying to apologize for him being the only cast member of A Streetcar Named Desire the year before who wasn't nominated.Anthony Quinn plays Marlon's brother, but for the vast majority of his screen time, he just stands in the background with a floppy hat to distinguish himself.
She also speaks exactly like she always does, without a hint of a Mexican accent.Marlon Brando stunk, the music stunk, the script stunk, and even my beloved Anthony Quinn stunk.
So if you are interested in "Viva Zapata!" in Blu-ray, or any of the other seven Kazan films then you will be as excited as I was to find out about their availability.
For his performance, he was nominated for his third consecutive Oscar, but Gary Cooper won for 'High Noon'.Anthony Quinn gives an effective portrayal of Eufemio Zapata , the swaggering, lecherous, bullying brother, and wins his first Academy Award as Best Supporting Actor...
Destiny has singled him out...'Viva Zapata!' received 5 Academy Award Nominations...It is a greatly entertaining film, excitingly directed by Kazan who made its action sequences so intense and who permitted his actors full scope in developing their characters....
Okay, I am not -entirely- going to pan this movie in the way it would certainly be universally panned today (to start with, you have to look real hard to find any actual Mexican@s in the cast - the only one I found in the named cast was Margo playing an unnamed "soldadera", though there are some others in the uncredited list).Furthermore, I think it's worth seeing for some of the theatrical bits that have entered the collective consciousness, like where Zapata demonstrates to Madero that political power really does grow out of the barrel of a gun, as Mao would later point out.
All he wants is justice and fairness for his people but as things progress he is drawn deeper into a civil war where allies and enemies are often difficult to tell apart.Written by John Steinbeck, directed by Elia Kazan, starring Marlon Brando and Anthony Quinn, and based on a true story, on paper this has all the makings of a classic.
Brando, in his third movie, puts in a strong performance as Zapata.
Anthony Quinn won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar in 1953 for his portrayal of Eufemio, Zapata's brother.No, it is in the execution, especially direction and editing, that things fall a bit short of their potential.
While Elia Kazan was a great director, I can't help but think this movie would have been a masterpiece if someone like John Huston, or maybe John Ford, had directed it..
But it might not come as a surprise for a film written by John Steinbeck and directed by Elia Kazan : through the portrayal of Emiliano Zapata, the legendary Mexican revolutionary played by the no-less legendary Marlon Brando, it's the very notions of power and leadership that are questioned, much more their corruptive effect.And the result is a strange mixture of conventional Western-like escapism with the local texture provided by sombreros, white outfits for men and black dresses for women and more ambitious attempts of a character study.
Great Kazan film with an amazing performance by Brando in one of his earliest (and best) roles.
Emiliano Zapata, as played by Brando, is a beautiful, simple man, whose ideals are used as a pawn by others.
You are not likely to forget the memorable acting by the young Marlon Brando (committed in then before he became jaded and walked through most of his later roles), as well as by Jean Peters, Anthony Quinn (Oscar Winner as Pancho Villa), and Joseph Wiseman.
The dialog is brisk and to the point with the exception of a hokey wedding night scene that is strained to say the least.Director Elia Kazan removed from the familiar trappings of the New York Stage and the city itself gets superb performances from his actors particularly Anthony Quinn as Zapata's brother, Jean Peters as Zapata's wife and Joseph Wiseman as a duplicitous adviser that is pure Shakespeare. |
tt0035970 | Happy Land | Act I
The fairies live in a lavish and art-filled Fairyland, floating on a cloud overlooking the mortal world. Three male fairies, Ethais, Phylion and Lutin, relate to the female fairies their "detestation" at their experiences below, in the "wicked" world. However, they note the conveniences of Victorian civilisation. The female fairies suspect that the males may not hate the mortal world as much as they say, and complain of the dullness of life in Fairyland, and long to experience that wonderful, wicked world. Selene, the Fairy Queen, expresses a determination to go to Earth. The three males resist this and instead agree to return to the world themselves and ask the Fairy King (who is in England studying "political economy", also known as "spending a pound to save a penny") to send three mortals up to Fairyland, so that the fairies may find out what men are really like. While the female fairies wait for the three mortals, Selene explains why England has an advantage over other countries: it enjoys a "popular government".
The three mortal statesmen arrive – Mr. G., Mr. L. and Mr. A – declaring, "Oh, we are three most popular men! We want to know who'll turn us out!" At first, Fairyland is not to their liking, as it is decorated with "ridiculous extravagance", but they change their minds as soon as they find themselves surrounded by the female fairies. The women are charmed by the mortals' oratorical virtuosity. At the fairies' request, they explain how "popular government" works. The fairies decide to introduce popular government into Fairyland. The fairies are divided into Government and Opposition, and the members of the Opposition are sent away grumbling. Then, ministerial posts are allocated after a competitive examination in which those who show that they are the least fitted for the particular duties are appointed to fill them. For example, the fairy who asks what a ship may be is appointed First Lord of the Admiralty. All the fairies want to be Prime Minister, but, following precedent, Selene is so appointed.
Act II
The fairies' experiment in "popular government" is a disaster. Penny-pinching and shabbiness rule the state, the military is in disarray, and the Chinese may soon invade. Leila and the other Opposition fairies revolt, and all the Government ministers resign. Selene appeals to Mr. A., who suggests that "patriotism is the ladder by which the rising statesman ascends to the pinnacle of place," and "place is the pinnacle seated upon which the risen statesman kicks away the ladder of patriotism." Selene replies, "Sisters, I've done with office, give me a peerage and let me end my days in respectability and peace." Mr. G. advises that even in this situation, she should not consider resigning or apologising; but Selene ultimately rejects this, although she has feelings for Mr. G.
The three mortal honourables return to earth, as they must attend a cabinet meeting. When the fairies realise that the mortals were corrupt, they exclaim, "How shabby!" Soon the three male fairies return with news from the Fairy King: they may enjoy the privilege of "popular government." Selene rejects this with horror. The fairies will "Leave such blessings to a happy land." | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0154129 | Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue | In Corey's bedroom, an unseen person steals her piggy bank from her dresser. The theft is witnessed by Papa Smurf, who emerges from a Smurfs comic book with the other Smurfs and alerts the other cartoon characters in the room (Garfield as a lamp, ALF from a framed picture, Baby Kermit as an alarm clock, Winnie the Pooh as a doll, Alvin and the Chipmunks from a record sleeve, and Slimer who passes through a wall).
The cartoon characters track down the thief and discover that it is Corey's big brother, Michael. Simon opens a box under Michael's bed and identifies its contents as marijuana. Meanwhile, Corey expresses her concerns about Michael's change in behavior. He storms out of the house. The cartoon characters quickly realize that something must be done about his addiction and they set off, leaving Pooh behind to look after Corey.
At the arcade, Michael smokes pot with his old "friends" and "Smoke", an anthropomorphic cloud of smoke. They run out and are chased into an alleyway by a policeman. The "policeman" is then revealed to be Bugs Bunny wearing a policeman's hat. Bugs traps Smoke in a garbage can and uses a time machine to see when and how Michael's addiction was started.
Meanwhile, at home, Corey and Michael's parents are concern about their son's behavior, but Corey passes it off as nothing despite also being worried about. Pooh then approaches her and questions her about Michael, which she responds saying she doesn't want to get Michael into trouble, Pooh however tries to reason with her.
Inside a Hall of Mirrors, ALF shows Michael his reflection of how he is today, then his reflection if he does not stop taking drugs: an aged, corpse-like version of himself. When Michael insists that he could quit if he wants to and that he is in charge of his own life, ALF takes him to see the "man in charge" — Smoke.
Corey and Pooh re-enter Michael's room and find his marijuana box. Smoke appears and throws Pooh inside a cabinet and tempts Corey to try the drug. Corey reasons that if she does what Michael does, then maybe they could have fun together, like they used to before he started doing drugs.
Michael comes back into his bedroom, just in time to stop Corey from using the drugs herself. He tells her that he never wants to see her end up like him, and admits he was wrong, though he is unsure if he can change. She advises him to talk about his problems to their parents and to her. Smoke tries to persuade him otherwise, but Michael throws him out of the window, as he feels that he "listened to him long enough." While in a garbage truck, Smoke vows to return saying "[Michael] can bet on it!" The special ends with Michael letting Pooh out of the cabinet and Michael and Corey go tell their parents about Michael's drug problem, while Pooh jumps into a poster on the wall with the other cartoon characters. | good versus evil, flashback | train | wikipedia | However, the plot and visuals are so insane that it seems more like the poster-child for LSD.Plot: The heroic struggle of Michael as he battles his drug addiction while being subjected to the humiliation brought on by the likes of Winnie the Pooh and Papa Smurf.Yea, yea, there's a good message, but it's obscured by the fact that the writers have taken a rather stale PSA idea and tried stretching it into 30 minutes.
This includes a song sequence, where you're told that there's a million, rational ways to say "No!" such as "I can't smoke pot, I have homework!"The writers can't make up their minds what to do with the characters they've brought in royalty-free.
Soon they begin interacting with the human cast, and the only one who's even slightly disturbed by this fact is not the drug-abusers, it's the little sister who talks to her teddy bear (Pooh, by the way.) Further, there's the little drug demon floating around.
So I guess he's...uhhh.....moving on!The whole plot finally culminates in some insane sequence in which Michael is in what would appear to be the Saturday Morning Carnival of Souls, aka a theme park from hell where the various cartoon characters beat him up and ignore him and stuff.
Of course, the film ignores the fact that Michael's been having highs for two years by this point, so why this tripping sequence would frighten him is beyond me.I realize I'm completely whaling on this film, but I actually just saw it again because I went through the trouble of tracking it down on eBay because of it's sheer infamy of being a BAD cartoon.
The ever-observant Mom tells him "Don't worry, you probably just drank them last night watching football." While we're obviously supposed to be learning that Michael is drinking beer (in addition to the pot and crack), we instead read further in and realize - Hey kids, it's okay to have chemical dependencies as long as you're a grown-up!
people were laughing hysterically throughout the whole movie and several people commented that if being high meant you got to meet the Smurfs, they wanted to get high.The teacher refused to comment on whether or not he intended this movie to seriously affect us.We were all born in the same year this movie was made, but I for one had seen all the cartoons with characters in the movie except The Smurfs, so it's not really true that you can't like it if you weren't young in the late eighties/ early nineties.The only thing that could possibly have made this movie better is if the Care Bears were in it..
I remember seeing this when I was 9-years-old and it blowing my mind- the fact that Alf AND the Muppet Babies AND Slimer would all be hanging out together was a truly amazing event in my life- perhaps THE most important moment of my developmental years.
This was the result of their collective animated illegalities.Anyway, my main question is: "How come I liked this so much as a kid but became a marijuana addict in college?".
Taking the most popular cartoon characters of the day (Bugs Bunny, Garfield, a Ninja Turtle, etc.), as merchandise that come to life to save a boy from drug addiction, Cartoon All-Stars acts as a public service announcement warning kids to stay away from marijuana and other illegal drugs.It's a novelty to see all these characters in one cartoon (copyrights usually prevent that), and the underlying purpose is noble, but the end result isn't impressive at all.
Did this special actually stop kids from trying drugs?
At most, after watching this a child may take the message for a little while, but by the time he or she gets to high school they've outgrown Winnie the Pooh and will likely experiment with marijuana anyway.So what do we have at the end of the day?
Getting kids not to try pot because all their favorite cartoon characters hate it...pretty weak!.
Do you kids love Kermit and The Chipmunks and Bugs Bunny and a dozen other cartoon characters?
Then you'll love their preachy anti-marijuana short film, featuring characters at random who have nothing to do with the plot, and are only there so kids can say "Hey, I love that character, I don't want to smoke!" This is a seriously bad movie, and just on how bad it was, we can only hope it turned more kids to pot just for future reference that movies like this are horrible and don't work!The plot makes no sense at all.
This kid Michael is just flung from one set piece to another, with well known 80s cartoon characters inhabiting various set pieces.
The characters who normally would try to be making jokes aren't funny in the least, and this thing just comes off as really preachy.
Of course, pot smoking makes people look like the phantom of the opera, that makes sense.
Most of the roles are pointless, but their's are the worst.This is an overly preachy short, that tries to hit kids despite that it has no logic behind it's method, and what better way to tell kids what not to do than with all their favorite cartoon characters together talking about it.
This is a horrible mash-up of characters, and despite that it may have worked to help kids not smoke, it scares without information, instead of informing and using logic.
And if smoking pot will make all your favorite cartoon characters appear, then why not try it?My rating: BOMB out of ****.
One of the greatest works of Anti-Drug propaganda, this time aimed at small children.
The video opens with a Ronald McDonald House commercial that is humorous on a bad taste level ("Peel them taters!") Then look who's here, if it isn't then president George Bush and his wife Barbara, historically famous for raising the Anti-Christ.
They give a well meaning message to the grade-school set, which obviously didn't take when you look at all that heroin those kids took a few years later.
The half-hour animated special features simply everybody: Bugs Bunny, Winnie the Pooh, Muppet Babies, the Smurfs.
How weird is it when you are a senior in high school, taking health class (which is supposed to be taken in 9th grade) and your teacher comes out of nowhere saying "I don't really feel like giving you guys more work for me to grade, so I'm going to put on an anti-drug cartoon from 199...something"?My point exactly.
So, while sitting there, watching this piece of work (which they should show on television or at LEAST have on tape available for purchase) and remembering that exactly 14 years ago I sat in my living room watching Alf, Alvin, Simon and Theodore under a bed talking about how drugs are bad.
WHY they don't do something like this again, or show it every year on National Anti-Drug Day (I don't know if there actually IS that day, but work with me)?Now, quality programming of this magnitude just can't be found anymore.
I was 9 when this aired, and in the habit of watching TV on saturday mornings, so I sure did see it.And it scared the living crap out of me.Drugs make your skin turn green and your eyes sink in, and your brain goes all haywire and you'll DIE!!
For the then-hip clothing of the kids, for the lingo, for the fact that it's a bunch of cartoon characters telling you that drugs are bad..
Let me get this out of the way.I love Bugs and Daffy, as well as Muppet Babies, Garfield, Duck Tales, and ALF.I respect George Bush, even if he wasn't my favorite president.I don't actively dislike the Smurfs.Let me get all of this all out of the way.Now let me point out that this special is truly one of the most unintentionally hilarious slices of "Reefer Madness"-style anti-drug propaganda pieces ever put to film (or in this case, video).
Not because I was needing an intervention on drug use, just because I liked seeing all these cartoon characters together who normally never would be.
Introduced by then-President George Bush and his wife Barbara, this is a made-for-TV drug PSA starring many of my favorite Saturday morning cartoon characters (and others that weren't my favorites).
The characters include Garfield, Winnie the Pooh, Tigger, the Smurfs, the Chipmunks, Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Alf, Slimer, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle Michelangelo, Muppet Babies, and Huey, Duey, and Luey.
They all come together to help a kid who's been seduced into using drugs by the villainous smoke monster "The Man in Charge." It's the kind of thing that ticks off certain crowds today and I'm sure it ticked them off then, as well.
As a kid I was raise and told how bad drugs and alcohol are bad for you and this video is part of the reason I avoid Drugs and never join the club.I remember renting Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue as a kid a few times and seeing it on TV.It is pretty cool how all these animation studios and networks actually join forces to help created this Public Service Announcement video feature your favorite cartoon characters plus some of my favorite cartoons were apart of this program.Alf from "ALF: The Animated Series" Alvin, Simon Theodore from "Alvin and the Chipmunks" Huey, Dewey, and Louie from "Ducktales" Garfield from "Garfield and friends" Bugs Bunny and Daffy from "Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies" Baby Kermit, Baby Piggy, Baby Gonzo "Muppet Babies" Winnie the Pooh and Tigger from "The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh" Slimer from "The Real Ghostbusters" Papa Smurf, Brainy Smurf, Hefty Smurf from "The Smurfs" Michelangelo from "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" It's not too often you ever seen a crossover like this and from many different TV series which were very huge at the time.
Each character does their part in this special and make it special to see a crossover with a message to stay drug free.The plot does it very well and gives each character their own right to shine the voice acting works very well and there are some moments of humor to lighten the mood but keeping it message in the plot along with the animation being impressive and why I love hand drawn cartoons.
I remember I asked a lot of questions after watching this cartoon and my dad told me a few stories about when he was younger and he did always have a point of telling me the parts about getting busted by parents, the police, and even about his "friends" having to go to the emergency room for doing something stupid while hopped up on something.
Of course, back then, I didn't care about the anti-drug message, I just cared about seeing all my TV heroes: The Ninja Turtles, Garfield, Kermit, The Chipmunks, etc.
It's true that kids should say no to drugs, and this cartoon special brought the message out in a big way..
As a kid, I didn't know if I liked the way all the different characters were stuck together (there are some crossovers that just do *not* work).
This is one of the few best half hour animated TV specials you'd find.Approved by Bush Sr. himself and NBC,CBS, and ABC.It's about a teen named Micheal who's addicted to drugs and he eventually steals money from his sister Corey to buy more.Corey finds out what he did to her piggy bank, but she was told not to tell their parents that Micheal is on Drugs.Things seem bad till some unlikely heroes show up to help Micheal's problem.
Every famous cartoon character you'd find from the old school Saturday Morning line ups are on a mission to talk some sense into Micheal that drugs are bad for him.Those who were around during the late 80s-early 90s won't have trouble in knowing who's who in this TV special.It has a great moral to it.
And a fun way of telling kids to say no to drugs.
Course for those who are parents just be sure to explain some parts to your kids when you watch this program.What's cool is they actually got permission to use more than 10 copyrighted characters.
And they're even voiced by the actual voice actors that put life into them.It's really cool to see, don't know if it'll have a chance in a decent DVD release.But I highly recommend it to those who grew up watching the cartoons from 16 years ago..
Therefore it's no accident that a cartoon got made telling the tykes to avoid controlled substances.Well, aside from the fact that "Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue" features characters that people in the 2010s likely will have forgotten ever existed, its message is all wrong.
Maybe some of them smoke a joint at the end and remind the audience that marijuana is NOT an addictive drug..
"Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue" is a half-hour animated short film from over 25 years ago.
The title already says that this is a collection of famous cartoon characters and they are making a statement against drug abuse.
As we watch this program, we learn about the story of Michael, who goes through the first part summarizing his drug addiction.
Your favorite characters like Winnie the Pooh, Garfield, Smurfs, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Smiler, ALF and Baby Kermit, will teach him the disadvantages of taking drugs.Part 2: This next part features Michael, with his friends, doing drugs.
Later, Bugs Bunny, also helps Michael refresh his memory by going two years back in time when he started drugs.
In result, all of the cartoon characters sing to Michael about not one, but millions of ways to say no before Michael wakes up.
Changing his mind, too late, ALF then shows him his future after this and reveals the man in charge of his life.Part 5: (I hate that smoke cloud.) Anyway, the fifth and final part of this program researches about Corey, being manipulated by Smoke who tempts her to use Michael 's drugs.
Basically, it's a Cartoon Drug Prevention Scheme starring the most famous Cartoon Stars of the day including ALF, Alvin and the Chipmunks, Muppet Babies, Garfield, TMNT, etc.
For a kid growing up at this time it would have seemed like a Miracle, all these stars coming together in one place seemed almost biblical.
So with pretty much every kid with a TV set waiting for this amazing spectacle to appear, first thing we get is George Bush Senior and the First Lady, and by no means in Cartoon form either.
Marijuana...Yes, for a child uninitiated in the indecencies of the adult world, this seems pretty unbelievable, their favourite Cartoon characters who'd they'd be expecting to be flying off on some mystical adventure over the rainbow are going to spend the next 25 minutes lecturing them on drug abuse, and that's what this whole Cartoon is all about, each individual Cartoon Star coming up to this kid with drug problems and telling him that he's going to be a walking corpse soon enough.
You could say that its like an Animated Xanadu, all your favourite things coming together in one place but for a pointless reason.
Also, the whole lesson is flawed from the start as it basically says that if you smoke marijuana all your cartoon characters will appear.
Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue has to be one of the most hilarious things I have ever seen.
It's an anti-drug video from the early 90s, where a bunch of media companies (Disney, Warner Bros, etc) teamed up to produce a cartoon special to tell kids that drugs are bad.However, it soon becomes obvious that the kid's sister is pretty whacked out on drugs as well, despite her trying to persuade him to drop the drugs habit...The kid, Michael, is smoking marijuana, and steals money from his sister, Corey, in order to get money for drugs.
At that point, something truly weird happens and the cartoon characters dotted around Corey's bedroom come to life, and end up trying to "wake her up".
unless you're tripping...), and tells her to go and see her parents about his drug problem (but not about her problems, which are obvious because she's hallucinating a bear talking to her).Michael goes to his "friends" who are smoking weed, and they take his wallet to buy crack.
then he appears to embark on a psychedelic journey where various cartoon characters talk to him, complete with glowing colours, and Michaelangelo the Ninja Turtle who appears to endorse drugs by calling him "cool".
All along the way there's this character called "Smoke" which I guess is meant to represent his addiction to drugs.
The other characters try to fight him off, and finally Michael manages to get rid of him when his sister tries to take drugs (although given she's seeing Smoke and Pooh Bear talking to her, she's riding the acid train already...).
In that respect it failed - drug use has indeed become a fact of life, seen in video games, films and TV shows, and being portrayed in a much more realistic way than the horror stories shown in this.
Indeed, I would say that it would push kids in the opposite way - the message here is that if you take these drugs, your favourite cartoon characters will pop up out of boxes and magazines to see you and tell you about drugs!
It's worth watching for the sheer hilarity of seeing squeaky clean cartoon characters express familiarity with drugs.
It's hilarious for the fact that drugs apparently make you look like the Plastic Prince of Pop. And it's also hilarious just that anyone in a boardroom might think that anyone, child or adult, would take this seriously..
Scott, I felt that it was time for me to mention that this was his very first cartoon voice role, in this made for TV animated special. |
tt0889573 | The Switch | 30-something Kassie Larson (Jennifer Aniston) is single, hasn't found love yet, and decides she wants to have a baby. Despite the objections of her neurotic long-time best friend Wally Mars (Jason Bateman), she chooses to do so alone because she can't wait any longer. She also wants a face-to-face sperm donor, disdaining using a sperm bank. Wally suggests he be the donor, but Kassie sees him as a bit too neurotic, pessimistic, and self-absorbed, and besides, as best friends, "that would be weird." Wally has always had feelings for Kassie, and they dated six years ago, but his friend Leonard (Jeff Goldblum) points out he missed his chance when she put him in the "friend zone."
Kassie selects as sperm donor a handsome and charming (and married) assistant professor, Roland (Patrick Wilson). Kassie organizes an "insemination party", where Wally meets Roland and takes an instant dislike to him. Roland is then called upon and produces his sperm in the bathroom, leaving it in a sample cup. Wally uses the bathroom and sees the sample. Drunk and doped up after taking a pill provided him at the party by Kassie's friend, Debbie (Juliette Lewis), and not liking the idea of Kassie being inseminated with this sperm, Wally plays with the cup and accidentally spills it into the sink. Panicking, he replaces the sperm with his own. The next day at work, still hungover, he remembers nothing. The insemination is successful. Wally is then upset when Kassie tells him she is returning to her family home in Minnesota, as she thinks that would be a better environment to raise a child in, instead of New York City. She leaves, and Wally maintains a non-fulfilling, dreary existence.
Seven years later, Kassie returns to New York along with precocious-but-neurotic son Sebastian (Thomas Robinson). She wants to reconnect with Wally, and is eager to introduce her son to him. After an awkward first meeting, Wally eventually forms a bond with this loveable and seemingly mini-version of himself, and Sebastian starts to become close to Wally, but the bad news is that Roland is in the picture too: Kassie has started dating him because he is now divorced and, as she thinks he is Sebastian's father, and a nice guy, maybe it would work.
After Wally notices the similarities between himself and Sebastian, and after talking to his friend Leonard, Wally realizes what happened seven years earlier. Just before Roland proposes to Kassie, Wally reveals to Kassie that Sebastian is his son, along with his true feelings for her. She is shocked and angry and does not want to see him again. Some time passes, and one day, as he is leaving work, Wally finds Kassie waiting for him on the street outside his office building. She tells him Sebastian really misses him and needs him. Wally admits he misses and needs Sebastian too. Kassie then discloses she isn't with Roland any longer, and that she loves him, even with all of his idiosyncrasies. Wally proposes to her, Kassie accepts, and they kiss. The final scene shows a happily married Wally and Kassie throwing Sebastian's eighth birthday party. | comedy, romantic, sentimental | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0058202 | Minnesota Clay | The year is 1883. Clay, a gunfighter with health problems, is interned in Drunner Labor Camp. He's determined to prove his innocence since he was framed by Fox, the current Sheriff of Clay's former home of Mesa Encantada. Fox has subsequently been hired by the townspeople to protect them from Ortiz and his bandits. Instead, Fox now runs a protection racket, extorting and terrorizing the complacent citizens, threatening them with violence if they do not pay exorbitant taxes to him. Clay rides out to meet Ortiz, who tries to hire him to kill Fox.
Ortiz's mistress Estella, whom Clay saved earlier from an attack by Fox's men, lets Clay escape the Ortiz encampment. She tells him Clay stole gold from him, prompting Ortiz and his gang to seek out Clay. This enables Fox to ambush both of them. Fox kills Ortiz and captures Clay. She helps Clay escape and, despite losing his sight, manages to decimate Fox's gang one by one. Realizing he is unable to see clearly, Fox seeks him out in one of the town's stables and tries to lure him into shooting his own daughter, Nancy during the final showdown.
Various VHS and DVD versions end with Clay lying apparently dead in the street, with Nancy at his side. This more pessimistic ending is in the style of Corbucci's later masterpieces, Django and The Great Silence. But in the Italian version, there is an afterword in which the Cavalry, having presumably dealt with any surviving malefactors, ride off, and Clay - now wearing glasses - bids goodbye to Nancy and her beau (who are to be wed). He then rides off.
Corbucci lets Clay reach the horizon, then cuts to a medium shot of Clay taking off his glasses, throwing them in the air, and shooting holes in both lenses. His sight, miraculously, has been completely restored. | western, violence | train | wikipedia | Spaghetti with Chorizo Western filmed in Spanish location as La Pedriza ,Manzanares Del Real and Colmenar Viejo and interior scenes shot in usual Italian scenarios called Elios studios.
As Minnesota Clay (Cameron Michell) takes prisoner a lieutenant (Julio Peña) and seeks revenge on the man who withheld evidence at his trial and arrives in a town ravaged by a sheriff and bandits .
But here is a problem however, Clay is going blind.The film packs violence , shootouts , high body-count and it's fast moving and quite entertaining .
It's an exciting western with breathtaking showdown between the starring Cameron Mitchell and his enemies , Geoges Riviere and Fernando Sancho .
In ¨Minessota Clay¨ appears as secondaries the habitual in Spanish/Italian Western such as Jose Luis Martin , Simon Arriga , Alfonso Rojas , Antonio Casas ,Alvaro De Luna and Guido Pernice , many of them usual in Corbucci films .
Maesso , also producer ( he produced several Western as ¨The ugly ones , Minnesota Clay , Django , A train to Durango , Hellbenders¨) .
Direction is well crafted, here Corbucci is more cynical and violent and less inclined toward humor and packs too much action , but especially this moving Western contains broad violence specially on the character played by Georges Riviere .
In addition Sergio directed other inferior S.W. as ¨Far West story¨ ,¨Johnny Oro¨, ¨The white the yellow an the black¨ , ¨Massacre at Great Canyon (his first Spaghetti) ¨ and ¨Minnesota Clay (his second Western)¨.
Unfortunately he is also slowly losing his eyesight, with his vision now so impaired that one more punch could cause complete loss of sight.The movie begins with Clay (Cameron Mitchell) escaping from imprisonment, and intent on getting revenge on the man who set him up.
The man in question is Fox (George Riviere), who has appointed himself as the Sheriff of Clay's hometown and abuses this power, with the townsfolk living in terror of his gang.
They had initially paid Fox to protect them from bandit Ortiz (played by the ever excellent Fernando Sancho), who himself terrorises the town.
They are reunited, but caught in the crossfire between the two gangs, co-ordinated mischievously by Estella (Ethel Rojo) who is as devious as she is beautiful (and my is she beautiful!).Minnesota Clay is one of the earliest Spaghetti Westerns, directed by a pre-Django Sergio Corbucci.
Whilst it is not as captivating or as dark as the films he directed during the Spaghetti boom of 1966-1970, it is still a very enjoyable movie, with the usual sprinkling of injustice that we have come to expect within his films.Mitchell, Sancho and Riviere are captivating throughout, and Rojo could win the heart of any man with her portrayal of Estella (no wonder her character is so able to use those around her so ably).
As a huge lover of Italian Westerns, Sergio Corbucci is one of my favorite directors ever.
Corbucci's most famous and influential film is doubtlessly the blood-soaked cult-flick "Django" of 1966, his most brilliant achievement is the dark 1968 masterpiece "Il Grande Silenzio" ("The Great Silence").
But Corbucci enriched the Spaghetti-Western genre by even more masterpieces than the aforementioned two films, such as the Mexican revolutionary Westerns "Il Mercenario" (aka.
And even his lesser known films, such as "I Crudeli" ("Hellbenders", 1967) or "Navajo Joe" (1966) stand out as gritty and great Spaghetti Westerns, which makes Corbucci the undisputed number 2 in the genre, right after Sergio Leone.
This being said, Corbucci's early Western "Minesota Clay" of 1965 does not live up to his later films in the Genre.
While this is by no means a bad film, it is nowhere near as cynical, gritty and memorable as Corbucci's later Westerns were, as it bears more resemblance to the traditional American 'Good Guys Vs. Bad Guys' Westerns than the masterpieces of Corbucci's later career.The eponymous hero, Minnesota Clay (played by the great Cameron Mitchell) is not really a typical anti-hero, as he is looking partly for revenge, but mainly for justice and for an opportunity to redeem his name.
American) that control the little town where this is set resemble the premise of "Django" as well as Leone's milestone "Fistful Of Dollars" (both of which were based on Akira Kurosawa's masterpiece "Yojimbo").
Even though a tough guy, Minesota Clay is basically an honest man who is looking for justice, and not nowhere near as immoral as anti-heroes like The Man With No Name or Django.
The sexy Ethel Rojo and Diana Martin make a nice-looking female cast and the supporting cast includes Spaghetti Western regulars Antonio Casas ("The Good, The Bad And The Ugly"), Fernando Sancho ("The Big Gundown") and Gino Pernice ("Django").
As mentioned above, this film often resembles a traditional American Western - only with a bit more violence and Spaghetti-style.
This is an entertaining film that my fellow Spaghetti-Western-freaks should enjoy, yet I recommend everybody to see some of Corbucci's other films before.
MINNESOTA CLAY (Sergio Corbucci and, uncredited, Mario Bava, 1964) **1/2.
Corbucci's second Spaghetti Western is an improvement on the first – MASSACRE AT GRAND CANYON (1965) – but still a long way from his best efforts in the genre (namely DJANGO [1966] and THE GREAT SILENCE [1968]).
The leading man is Cameron Mitchell, who wisely opted to appear in European films tackling starring roles rather than be stranded in Hollywood playing poor supporting ones; that said, he was also featured in a fine 'B' Western by Monte Hellman – RIDE IN THE WHIRLWIND (1966) – alongside rising star (and screenwriter) Jack Nicholson!
The narrative provides many typical Spaghetti Western elements but, as I said, it's an early example yet – so that it lacks the baroque touches inherent in later outings (suffice to compare Corbucci's relatively sober treatment here to the tongue-in-cheek approach to the same concept in the self-explanatory BLINDMAN [1971]!).Here, as in his two better-regarded genre classics, Corbucci gives us a hero – his name probably derives from Jackie Gleason's character, Minnesota Fats, in the pool-room drama THE HUSTLER (1961)!
Quick draw Cameron Mitchell escapes a federal hard labor camp and returns to his old stomping ground to find the man who could have exonerated him of murder charges, where he reconnects with his estranged daughter, and tangles with two rival gangs, all while contending with his own failing eyesight.The second western directed by Italian favorite Sergio Corbucci, this isn't as good as some of his later work.
Still, it's a solid western that's handsomely produced and a lot of fun to watch, with some good gun-play and a memorable title character, effectively portrayed by Mitchell.The climax where Minnesota Clay battles the heavies using only his sense of hearing is quite entertaining..
"Minnesota Clay" (1964) was one of the earliest Spaghetti Westerns directed by Sergio Corbucci; in two years time he would make the iconic and notorious "Django" and in 1968, he made the best non-Sergio Leone Spaghetti: "The Great Silence".
Shot around the same time as Leone's groundbreaking "A Fistful of Dollars" (1964), but released later, it shares the two gangs warring over a town theme, as well as the bandits being separated by race: the white, American Fox (Georges Riviere) and the Mexican Ortiz (Fernando Sancho); but this is the only similarity (which had been copied from Akira Kurosawa's samurai film "Yojimbo" [1961], which in turn had been inspired by the pulp writings of the brilliant Dashiell Hammett and his novel "The Glass Key" [1931]) and while nowhere near the greatness of Leone's Western, this is still a remarkably good movie.The plot (by Adriano Bolzoni and Corbucci) though, is clichéd ridden: Minnesota Clay (Cameron Mitchell) escapes from prison after being framed by the devious Fox; returning to his hometown, Clay discovers that it is overrun by two gangs: Fox's and Ortiz's and then proceeds to clear the place up, even though his eyesight is failing terribly.However, despite these script constraints, Corbucci directs some brilliant action, in particularly the climatic gunfight in the dark.
Wrongfully imprisoned for a crime he did not commit, Minnesota Clay seeks revenge on the man who withheld evidence at his trial.
There is a problem however; he is going blind.The most notable hing bout this film is that it happens to be a spaghetti western before "Django".
People more knowledgeable than myself could probably make style comparisons.In many respects, this is the same story that we see in westerns again and again: a good guy, a bad guy, and a town caught in the middle.
A pre-Django Spaghetti Western from Sergio Corbucci, starring b-movie master Cameron Mitchell as a gunslinger going slowly blind, and out to revenge his wrongful imprisonment before his condition overtakes him!
The town is ruled by Fox, a nasty fella who put Cam in jail in the first place and is looking for a way to rid the town of the Mexican bandit gang (led by Fernando Sancho.
Fernando basically plays the same character in every film I've seen him in - the chicken leg eating, cackling, Mexican bandit leader...and that's not a complaint).Cam thinks about hooking up with Sancho to get rid of Fox but there's a Latin spanner in the works by the name of Estella and she's playing everybody for a fool.
Cam is going blind but he's also the greatest shot the town has ever seen, which makes him a bit of challenge.Perfect pacing in this film I felt, and not only a great performance from Cameron (who is prone to over acting or not acting at all), but also a complete turnaround from Georges Rivieres as the bad guy Fox. The last film I watched him in (Castle of Blood) he played a wide-eyed, innocent romantic type...in this he's a man without a soul.Cameron steals the show as the world weary gunslinger out to save his daughter before his blindness is complete.
He was the king of the b-movie, from low budget acid westerns like Ride In the Whirlwind (with Jack Nicholson), horrors like Nightmare In Wax, terrible weirdo films like Medusa, Hollywood bigshot films like the Klansman (with Lee Marvin!), mystery films like Haunts, playing a psychic so terrible the people who hired him shoot him in the South African slasher film The Demon, going up against Satan himself in The Nightmare Never Ends, being a cult leader talking crap in kung fu film Low Blow, or a park owner in Memorial Valley Massacre, one things for sure: He always looked middle aged, for some reason..
It was one of the first spaghetti westerns to hit the American market and was playing as the second feature on a double bill.Cameron Mitchell who was doing sword and sandal epics in Italy at the time stars in this in the title role.
There's also another gang doing a lot of looting around there headed by a self styled Mexican general.Mitchell's also working against the clock because in addition to everything else, he's going blind.
It sounds like he's got glaucoma which is not getting better with the burning Southwest desert sun.Those of you who are devotees of the spaghetti western can pretty much figure out what's going to happen.
Turns out he has family in the town, family that doesn't know he's a blood relation.I'm not generally liking spaghetti westerns, but Minnesota Clay is all right and will hold your interest..
Sergio Corbucci's "Minnesota Clay" puts a spin on the spaghetti western genre.
Here the protagonist (Cameron Mitchell) is losing his sight as he escapes jail and seeks revenge on the man who wronged him.
Wrongfully imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit, Minnesota Clay (Cameron Mitchell) escapes to seek revenge against the man who refused to testify at his trial.
Sergio Corbucci is one of my favorite Spaghetti Western directors.
The movie plays more like a traditional American Western that just happens to have been filmed in Europe.
While there are set-pieces I enjoy (like Clay's meeting with the Mexicans or any scene with Ethel Rojo), as a whole, it never draws me in the way Corbucci's other movies do.I've always been a big fan of Cameron Mitchell.
He was more than capable of giving the kind of performance that should have been perfect for one of Corbucci's Spaghetti Westerns.
It's too bad this movie wasn't made later in the Spaghetti Western cycle.
I just picked up a 3 DVD/9 Movie set of Spaghetti Westerns put out by St. Clair Entertainment and am getting an introduction to some neat Eurowest films.
Cameron Mitchell portrays protagonist Clay, a gunslinger who escapes from a labor camp while waiting to be hanged for murder.
'Five Aces' Fox (Georges Riviere) and his band of five henchmen carries on a running feud with Mexican bandit Ortiz (Fernando Sancho), while the town suffers in silence.If things weren't hot enough, the presence of Ethel Rojo as Estella turns up the action a few degrees.
Nancy (Diana Martin) only knew her father as Mr. Clay, having met him for the first time in the course of the film.
Early spaghetti western is a fine looking film.
Sergio Corbucci is one of the spaghetti western's greatest directors – he was responsible for two classics, DJANGO and THE GREAT SILENCE, among many others.
This one feels more like a set-bound American western; it has that clean-cut style to it rather than the dark and gritty atmosphere that epitomised the 'spaghettis'.Saying that, it's still a great little film, really well paced for a western and with some intriguing characters.
Much of the film's success is down to Cameron Mitchell, who appeared in some of the best genre films Italy had to offer during the '60s; most of these were directed by the great Mario Bava (I'm thinking LAST OF THE VIKINGS, BLOOD AND BLACK LACE, KNIVES OF THE AVENGER, the list goes on).
Georges Riviere, who starred in a couple of Italian gothics like CASTLE OF BLOOD before appearing in this, is an unusual villain in that he doesn't actually do much that's villainous in the film: he just stands in Clay's way, and that's enough.
Cameron Mitchell followed several other American actors to Europe in the 1960s and starred in several films, including westerns and sword & sandal sagas.
"Django" director Sergio Corbucci cast him as a veteran gunslinger in "Minnesota Clay" who is losing his sight.
Unlike Corbucci's later westerns for which he is better known, including "Django," "Navajo Joe," "The Great Silence," "The Mercenary," and "Companeros," "Minnesota Clay" qualifies as a more conventional sagebrusher in the mold of traditional American model with few of the sudden, nimble reversals of a Spaghetti western.
One trope that "Minnesota Clay" adheres to in the Spaghetti western formula is its high body count.
As it turns out, Bolzoni supplied the story for Sergio Leone's "A Fistful of Dollars." Interestingly, when you compare the plots of both "A Fistful of Dollars" and "Minnesota Clay," the similarities are noticeable.
The chief difference between the two films is that Kurosawa sued Leone for copyright infringement but ignored Corbucci's western."Minnesota Clay," for the most part, resembles a standard-issue American horse opera about a gunfighter searching for redemption.
Second, a slimy stereotypical Mexican bandit General Domingo Ortiz (Fernando Sancho of "Gunfight at High Noon"), who is as dimwitted as he is gullible, wants to see Fox bite the dirt.
Corbucci stages a typical American western scene where Nancy struggles to halt a runaway team and Clay rides heroically to her rescue.
The above-average "Minnesota Clay" ranks far down on the list of Corbucci's westerns.
You got to be blind, if you think Minnesota Clay is a horrible movie.
One of the earliest Spaghetti Westerns directed by a pre-Django Sergio Corbucci, this film was indeed, fun to watch and you don't need braille to see that.
Between the time of Grand Canyon Massacre release and the making of Minnesota Clay, a little film call 1964's Fistful of Dollars by Director Sergio Leone came out and change how Italian westerns films would be made.
The year is 1883, Minnesota Clay (Cameron Mitchell) has just escape from a prison labor Camp.
To make the conflict worst, Mexican bandits leaded by a man named Gen. Domingo Ortiz (Fernando Sancho) wants to take over the town, no matter whom is the winner.
American) wanting control of a little town, resemble the premise of 1966's "Django" as well as Leone's Fistful Of Dollars in which both were based on Akira Kurosawa's masterpiece 1961's Yojimbo, which in return is based off, the 1929's novel, 'Red Harvest' by author, Dashiell Hammett.
Noble, shrewd, and lethal ace gunslinger Minnesota Clay (an excellent and convincing performance by Cameron Mitchell) breaks out of a federal labor camp while serving time for a crime he didn't commit.
This film further benefits from sound acting from an able cast: Mitchell impresses as a sympathetic protagonist, Riviere makes for a deliciously mean and hateful villain, plus there are commendable contributions from the luscious Ethel Rojo as the sultry, fiery, and duplicitous Estella, Diana Martin as the sweet and fetching Nancy, Antonio Roso as affable, jocular young buck Andy, the always great Fernando Sancho in one of his trademark greasy bad guy parts as vile and grubby Mexican bandit leader General Ortiz, and Antonio Casas as Clay's loyal friend Jonathan. |
tt1745672 | Children of the Corn: Genesis | Tim and Allie's car breaks down and they attempt to find shelter in a remote desert farmhouse after becoming lost. A strange Charles Manson-like character, Preacher (Billy Drago), allows them inside to use the phone. The couple find out they won't be able to get tow service until the following day. Preacher and his Ukrainian wife Oksana also known as Helen let them stay the night with strict orders to be gone by morning, and not wander "where you are not invited." They find their hosts weird but don't think much of it and head to bed after dinner. Allie wanders off in the middle of the night after using the outhouse, and discovers the garage has been converted into a cult worshipping church. She then stumbles upon a crumbling outbuilding where she hears faint cries coming from a child.
Allie runs back and tells Tim what she witnessed, but at first he doesn't believe her. He agrees to confront the Preacher about the voices, but falls into a hypnotized trance while viewing digital photos in Preacher's camera. The child then walks into the house and plants a seed inside Allie and disappears before being seen. Tim and Allie try to leave the house, but get locked in the house by a supernatural force. Allie calls the police, but is unsure if she got through as the line gets cut off halfway. Allie falls asleep and dreams about being murdered by children in a cornfield. Allie and Tim wake up to headlights flashing into the room and a cop arrives to check on the house but is thrown into the air and killed by the supernatural force. After witnessing this Tim insists on answers from the Preacher, finding out that the supernatural force needs children to survive and has already planted a seed inside Allie.
Come morning, a parcel delivery driver drops things off at the house. He agrees to give Tim and Allie a ride into town. Tim has a bad feeling about the driver so he takes off with Allie in the abandoned police vehicle instead. They get to the main road. The child in the outbuilding then kills Helen and psychokinetically causes Tim and Allie to have a car accident, in which Tim dies. The parcel driver approaches the accident and brings Allie back to the farmhouse where a group of children and their mothers greet her. In a trance, she sits next to the little child in the outbuilding and begins to sing to him. The child is then seen playing with a doll, then drops it on the floor, which causes the cop's corpse to fall from the sky onto the ground. | flashback | train | wikipedia | 'Genesis', the 8th film in the series, is quite good for the first half.
Intriguing storyline involving a couple's car breaking down in the California desert, and they seek refuge from a weird preacher and his hottie Ukrainian wife.
There's a child locked up in a shed behind the house, and it seems like a bizarre entity doesn't want the couple to leave the Preacher's house.
For the first 40 minutes or so, the film tells a good, straightforward creepy story.
Yeah, that was hilariously bad, and makes a film that did a good effort of covering its' low production values for the whole film look EXTREMELY cheap.
A young couple spend the night at a preacher's home, and soon begin to suspect that he has a child locked up in his barn.
Pretty much the nicest thing I can say about this film is that it features Billy Drago, who is a decent actor and under-appreciated.
The makeup department did a good job making him look old and rustic, and he he has much less of an exotic look about him than usual.That positive note aside, I am a bit confused what is going on with the Children of the Corn franchise.
Some efforts are made to connect it to the series by attempting to offer a back story (presumably why this one is called "Genesis").
But it could be changed and not affect the overall story at all.Obviously by stamping it with the Children of the Corn label, more people will rent the film and possibly even buy it.
There has been a spate of movies of late it seems that want to take us back to the origins or beginning of a successful series.
Well in this movie they're still grungy-looking and trying their best to look evil.A man and woman are stranded out in the middle of nowhere because their car broke down.
At first they are refused help, and as she is storming off in anger and frustration while her boyfriend is trying his best to placate her, the woman mentions her pregnancy and the preacher --being a man of God-- takes pity and invites them in.Things are a bit strained once inside; the couple are trying to have polite conversation seated across from the Preacher but he's oddly uncommunicative.
She takes the man to a phone in another room and charges him almost everything he had in his wallet to use it while imploring him not to tell the Preacher.After a meal where the Preacher continued his silent ways and it was time to go to their rooms the Preacher breaks his silence and tells the couple in essence to respect his privacy; that they shouldn't go wandering around beyond the outhouse in back.
She sort of towers over him like Wonder Woman dressed in shorts and combat boots so I don't blame him.Things begin to happen; psychokinetic events.
Genesis difference very much from the standard CotC movies, you will not find much corn and even less of children, almost no existent, and no Gatlin town, actually they are pretty much in the same cabin the whole movie, so it's different, doesn't have the CotC feel either, more like a possessed themed movie.
But all that being said, the tension has probably never been better within the series, good acting (Billy Drago steels the show, possible the best performance of within all CotC movies), good camera-work and good effects, so it's a good crafted movie but, it's probably not what I wanted from a CotC movie.
About the title Genesis, I didn't get much about that, it doesn't tell anything about the creation or beginning of anything, and towards the end I felt the plot was going nowhere, and when talking about the end, I didn't liked the ending at all.
Overall, Children of the Corn: Genesis was better than expected, but confusing and different..
Movie review:Remember in 1984 a scary movie came out called "Children of the Corn"?
The movie starts out with a man returning from the military to a dead family that was killed by the kids.
The movie is about a couple (Tim Rock & Kelen Coleman) that break down traveling in the middle of nowhere.
When Tim (character name, real creative) finds that they cannot get the car fixed until the next day, they decide to stay with Preacher and his nymphomaniac wife (Barbara Nedeljakova, who was in both Hostel movies for some reason).
Aside from one very funny line between the couple, this movie doesn't have much good going for it.
One dream showing a corn field, which there is absolutely no explanation or reason for (sound familiar?), the usual demon child, whacko cult family....all clichés are present.
It had a really weak ending and nothing going for it except good technical aspects..
here a sequel 10 years after the last sequel and a remake that came out two years ago.The best they could in the 10 years breaks, this movie was really dull, there was not much going at all, the Girlfriend and boyfriends they crash and they stop and talk for the whole 94% of movie and the scenes just drags on.The scare scene in this , so badly done, that you laugh and say come on!, there no atmosphere in this at all, everything was falt and plot was really boring.This movie did not feel like corn movie at all and the kids were not even in the movie, this were not creepy at all, there could have made a lot more scary.The scariest thing about this movie, was the acting, as it was really bad, (I Saw the trailer, I knew it was going bad, which actually a really bad trailer) .This is the worst in series, paired with number 5 in the series..
Becoming stranded in a small-town, a couple attempting to travel through the desert stop at a run-down house with a man and his wife for directions only to find them under the influence of a deadly being that won't let them leave and set out to find a means of stopping him from keeping them there.This one proved to be a decidedly bland entry in the series.
Not only does this include the opening flashback of the returning soldier meeting up with the cult-members in his house as the stumbling upon the bodies and then the murderous children themselves, but the actual setup of the couple arriving at the secluded house with the aura of secrets and mystery surrounding them makes for a rather fine setup to this one.
With the lame actions that occur throughout here anyway, it never offers any kind of threat or special macabre force to be included in the action which leaves this one feeling incredibly dull, bland and basically almost devoid of horror with the inability to actually present a coherent threat to anything, from the standing around in the cabin waiting around to decide on some course of action to the people flying around the house due to the paranormal person sitting off-screen in the farmhouse away from everything and basically not even bringing up any kind of reason for the threat to be given with the completely bland offering this delves into.
Not only that, but this one doesn't even connect itself to the franchise at all with the object of the film being about the paranormal person and not the possessed kids running around killing people.
There's nothing here to connect this one to the other films beyond some half-mumbled spiel about the town in question which is a hardly explicit reasoning for the tie-in which really makes this not even worthwhile to be included in the series.
I have to admit, I haven't followed the Children of the corn series up close, so I can't tell you, if this actually makes sense in the series.
Than again Dimension doesn't seem to care, if they put a movie out there that isn't that connected to previous entries in a successful series (see Hellraiser for that).
But this movie is nicely shot, has some interesting twists (though you can see them coming even before the scriptwriter put them down on paper).In the end this doesn't add much to the horror genre, has the typical erratic character behavior (it's the grown ups who act like children, doing stuff they've been told not to do).
This is the 8th Children of the Corn movie.
The 7th one Children of the Corn revelation is a great movie.
The eighth film, like several of the other sequels, doesn't take place in Gatlin, and is very loosely tied to the original story.
I give this movie credit for possibly being the creepiest children of the corn, and for doing it without much of the gore the other films featured.
A lot of the credit goes to veteran movie actor, Billy Drago, who is just creepy by nature.
There is no denying the film is creepy, but is it good?
Having a thread-bare link to the other COTC films (at best), this ninth (??!!?!) film has barely any children at all, instead it focuses on one child that's locked in an old shed in back of the country house that a couple have the misfortune of having their car break down near.
Children of the Corn: Genesis (2011) ** (out of 4) Direct-to-DVD entry in the never ending series has a husband and wife stranded in the desert after their car breaks down.
The two spot a house in the distance and go there to get some help but end up having to spend the night with its weird owner known as Preacher and his wife.
Soon the couple realize that they're in a very strange place after they discover a mysterious child being held captive in a shed behind the house.
CHILDREN OF THE CORN: GENESIS comes ten years after the seventh film in the series but you could still consider this the ninth film in the franchise since there was a remake a few years before this.
Either way, one really has to wonder why Dimension Films made this thing as it has very little connection to the previous films but if one had to guess it was made to cash-in on horror fans such as myself who are willing to watch anything.
Again, if you're looking for some sort of continuation of the series you're going to be disappointed but if you've sat through the previous sequels like myself then you know there's actually worse out there.
Even with a 75-minute running time (minus the end credits) you can't help but feel the film drags along because for the most part we just see the husband and wife talking about what's going on or what they should do.
There's never really any tension going on and I'd argue that you really don't care what's happened to the couple.
As a horror film there's very little horror going on not to mention there's really not many children and no corn except for a quick glimpse.
The performances for this type of film are actually pretty good and the opening sequence is effective but outside of this there's just not enough going right here.
You'd think that with the wealth of ideas that other Children of the Corn movies have succeeded / failed with, there'd be plenty to dip into from this 'Genesis' incarnation.
Sadly, the story is tortilla-thin and, as mentioned by other reviewers, goes wildly off the rails from about 30 minutes in.The action starts in a remote desert house, where the stranded couple have to spend the night with the creepy owners.
In fact, your guesses will probably be better than the script.This is another of those films that seems to have been made by people who haven't seen any movies for the last thirty years.
Genises was a poor attempt to explain the cause behind the cause of what made the kids go mad yet I thought the first two films handled it fine.A man returns from war to find all the adults killed and really was the best part of the feature.
The rest became ridiculous when a couple end up in town at the man's house to find he has become a disciple of the corn.
How or why is never explained since its usually only children.The entity now lives inside a child who's kept outside in a shed and wants to grow a super army of children to do his bidding.The idea isn't bad, but the conception was horrendous and didn't make any sense.
It lacked suspense or penance with a bland caste.There were so many plot holes that it seemed the writers taped together different scripts and branded it a corn film.The movie lacked a fresh film and ended the legacy for the children of the corn series instead of breathing air into a series on life support..
He comes home to an eerie setting, one we would expect from the series.The movie then jumps to present day as a couple (she is pregnant) are stranded in the desert far from civilization.
They seek shelter at a farm run by a strange overly religious man (Billy Drago) and his mail order bride (Barbara Nedeljakova) who seems to want out.
Soon aforesaid pregnant wife (Kelen Coleman) is out at night looking around in the barn which looks like a "Children of the Corn" barn.
She also discovers a child whimpering behind a locked door...hubby (Tim Rock) must do something, but the corn has other ideas.I didn't think the ending was as good as the rest of the film.
The movie doesn't have a whole bunch of kids running a community and killing adults as we have become used to.
Mind you I think he likes the way people butcher his stories.
I'm not that familiar with the whole sequel-prequel-franchise of Children of the Corn, I only saw the first one, it must have been like 30 years ago, and I remember that one as pretty creepy.
Then I found this dvd "Children of the Corn: Genesis" in a garage sale and thought that, who knows, a more or less recent version dating from 2011 might have added something new and could be even scarier than the first, considering the nowaday standards for horror movies.Well, I was wrong.
The movie itself was tedious and had a snails pace, with endless conversations, no scares, and strangely enough no corn and no children whatsoever.A young and loving couple is stranded with their car in the desert and asks for help at a forlorn dilapidated farm.
Although this is a premise that we've seen for like a zillion times, it can usually vouch for a nice tension-filled rest of the movie.
The couple tries to befriend the strange owner and his Ukranian wife (why on earth Ukranian??) during an awkward dinner, evidently to no avail, and in the night the girl discovers in a barn outside that a young child is locked up.
Only in a few dream-fragments of the girl we see hints of a few brutal children but in the rest of the movie we have to settle for just some people talking endlessly.I won't give the end away, but what happens during their escape in the car stands for the only real action and excitement of the whole movie (and by the way with very good special effects, and/or - I'm no professional - old fashioned stuntmens craftsmanship!).So I guess my old assumption was right: the theme of Children of the Corn is probably really too worn out for a decent sequel.
This movie did start of good but when the kid was discover, it went to s**t.
I want to like this movie but the acting went downhill and the writing.
Why do they film movies like this?.
I liked the trailer when i saw it & was waiting to watch this movie.
First of all mistakes have happened even before starting the film: the trailer itself shows you the best 2 minutes that occur almost at the end of the film (main road with cars smashing everywhere) so this kinda sucks.
Also have you noticed the movie is called "Children of the corn"?
Well, damn me if you see children for more that 10' & there is no corn field at all!
Story makes no sense at all after half of this movie and even before that you'll be bored by its extremely slow pace, things happen just to happen, and acting is not good with the exception of the husband doing excellent job on his role.
Liked the policeman's death & the smashed cars.CONS: The movie's existence & public release.
First part of the movie is really boring, second part makes no sense by any means.
Or do you carry on behind the transporter, keeping your speed up, and wondering why all those cars are falling off the transporter?Guess which one happens in the film.
Yep, I think it's time to officially retire this franchise.The "Children of the Corn" franchise has never been known as one with a rich mythology to dive into but rather a series of films with a whole bunch of unnecessary phoned-in sequels and "Genesis" somehow outdoes the combined might of all the other films and makes something that is even more lazy and lethargic than the others.Nothing happens that is really noteworthy in this film as the story just feels like it is slowing stepping its way to its incredibly underwhelming and anticlimactic finish.
Even Billy Drago, whose creepy looks already make him a force for thrillers and horrors, looks like he just doesn't care or is too depressed to work because his dog just died.To call "Genesis" lackluster is an understatement and words fail me to completely capture just how boring and unimaginative this latest Direct-to-DVD sequel in this lifeless franchise is. |
tt0102185 | Kamillions | Robins plays bumbling mad scientist Nathaniel Pickman Wingate, of the Miskatonic University. He works on opening a portal to another dimension while his wife, Nancy (Laura O'Malley) and family prepare his fiftieth birthday party. When he succeeds with contact with the new dimension, two triops-like creatures escape. These creatures possess shape-shifting abilities that allows them to assume the form and identity of anything, and thusly do so with Nancy's cousin, Count Desmon (Christopher Gasti) of Liechtenstein and Jasmine, a model from son Sam's (Dan Evans) poster (Dru-Anne Cakmis).
Jasmine and Desmon are shown to be polar behavioral opposites. Jasmine is friendly and intelligent. Via her telepathic abilities she quickly becomes Sam's girlfriend. Desmon on the other hand is ill-behaved, surly, and mischievously malevolent. His mischievous personality drives him to pull terrible tricks on Sam's family via his powers—for example, Lindy (Allison Rachel Golde) overuses the phone, so Desmon stuffs the receiver in her mouth, causing her to go to the ER to have it extracted. Handyman Floyd (Chuck Bartelle) is hurt by some cut wires a vindictive Desmon moves with psychokinesis giving him a severe electric shock. Suffering difficulties in retaining his new body, Desmon frightens off the maid Emma (Lynn Applebaum) when he tries to seduce her. Reverend Lawrence Newman (David Allan Shaw), Nathan's college roommate, tries some bedroom antics with Nathan's sister, Angelica (Kate Alexander); Desmon, clinging to the ceiling above them, uses his powers to transform Lawrence's penis into a dragon-like creature that attacks him.
Sam, Jasmine and Sam's best friend, Alex (Andrew Ross Litzky) run to get coolant supplies from the university, which are necessary to prevent an explosion that will destroy half the planet. Jasmine is concerned with doing anything she can to stop Desmon and get back to their own dimension. She spends time, though, with Sam in a '50s-style malt shop, sharing a milkshake with two straws. | psychedelic, alternate reality | train | wikipedia | a virtual smörgåsbord of film!.
this movie is AMAZING!!
Kamillions teeters so delicately between genres, and at times i am frightened by how good it is.
horror, romance, social satire and just enough comic relief to give this "frightfest" the perfect balance.
countless plot twists, a stellar cast, and elaborate, mind-blowing special effects make this movie absolutely a MUST SEE.
this movie will keep you guessing and guessing until you don't know which way is up.
the soundtrack is a sparse and shifting tempest of synth swells, backed up by a cavalcade of oldies hits.
think, the Mist meets the Fly meets Gremlins meets any other awesome movie you've ever seen!
Kamillions is that rare film that truly offers something for the film fan of every ilk.
We have scares that will make you jump right out of your seat, side-splitting laughs, unflinching eroticism, and awe inspiring FX work!
The plot of this film is rather similar to that of the horror blockbuster the Mist, or possibly the Thing.
A scientist is experimenting with interdimensional...something.
As a result, the doctor is sucked into his interdimensional...thing, and the Kamillions are unleashed on a group of unsuspecting houseguests as well as the scientist's own family!
The events that transpire from this point on are almost too incredible to be believed!
The box art said that the film reminded one reviewer of Cronenberg's the Fly, but I personally think that this is the superior film by far.
Say what you want about Cronenberg's masterpiece of body-horror, I don't recall a religious fanatic being killed by his own penis in THAT picture!
I've never heard of any of the people involved with the production of this masterpiece, but it is a damn shame that none of them rose to the heights of stardom that this film should have elevated them to.
I am giving this film 10 out of a possible 10 stars because it is as close to cinematic perfection as you are likely to see.
Catch Kamillions, before they catch you!.
"Funny enough to make you laugh at those new Gremlins...".
With some of the most hilarious box art I've ever seen and a back cover making references to the Fly and Gremlins, I was expecting a cheap knockoff film...
with a cool cover.
Instead, what I got was something that is not only as entertaining as those two films mentioned on the back, it actually might be BETTER than than those two films, combined!
This film is about a fat guy doing experiments, something we've all seen before.
In fact, it starts out just like any other horror-comedy...
but quickly turns into some bizarre art film...
the whole film kind of turns upside down as we suddenly see eyes through the life of some kind of weird bug, who crawls around and searches out the lab and spits acid at people.
Then, the "film" (with all the plot and such) restarts, and nothing is the same anymore.
We see insane penis monsters, people's whole bodies horrifically shoved inside fishbowls, people being violently electrocuted, and more!
There is not a boring moment to bad had, especially when the lead "kamillion" chews up the scenery...
this guy looks a really young Bruce Campbell meets a really young Jim Carrey, and he has to be one of the best characters to ever appear in a film.
He just kind of stalks around, killing people for no apparent reason, using his fingers as sharp knives, teleporting all over the place, making his face turn completely blue, and throwing knives into turkeys.
It's worth seeing the film just for this character.You know, it's a shame that this isn't available on DVD.
Rarely does one find films more imaginative or more entertaining -- there are more good ideas in this single 90 minute film than Hollywood releases in one year!
All the effects were really well-done; you can tell a lot of heart went into this release.
It's a shame it's not more well-known; see it at all costs..
Campy, deliberately stilted, hilariously bad..
The critics hate it...
but only the ones with no sense of humor.
This film will probably be to our generation what Plan Nine From Outer Space was to our parents.
It's so bad it's good, deliciously good!
The mad doctor is frumpy and completely self absorbed.
The monster is-- well-- beyond words!
The first time you see it, you think "what the f--" But by the second time, it gets to be like the Rocky Horror Picture Show.
You want to shout out replies and retorts to the actors!
If you're a fan of the weird and wonderful, this is a must-see film!
I had the same feeling after seeing "Eraserhead".
I hated it.
But I felt I had to see it again, despite my better judgment.
Now I look forward to any opportunity to see either film again and again.
These dark comedies are an acquired taste, but well worth it..
Why isn't this a huge cult classic?.
On the night of his birthday party, scientist Nathan Wingate discovers another dimension through a contraption he's built in his basement.
Unfortunately, just as the guests begin to arrive, the good doctor gets sucked into the other world and two shape-shifting bugs with magical powers enter ours.
One is good-natured, the other's a sadistic prankster, and the Wingate family and their eccentric guests are unknowingly caught in the middle.Every once in a while, I'll see some old movie and say, "WHY have I never heard of this before?!" That was certainly the case here.
Don't get me wrong, on the surface it looks like "MST3K" material - the acting is generally bad, the FX are super-low-budget, the pacing is off, and some of the gags fall flat.
But man, the characters have enough individuality that you wanna root for them, the FX are impressively inventive, and a lot of the stuff is genuinely funny (it was co-written and directed by a now-longtime alum of "The Simpsons").
It's intentionally campy but teeters on a tightrope where it's simultaneously creepy and it boasts a clever twist too (assuming you haven't read the film's tagline!?!).If Scream Factory or some other distributor would unearth and complete the director's cut of this endearing obscurity, there's a huge audience out there which is waiting to discover it.
Until then, it's worth seeking out online if you're into '80s movies with extra corn!.
Awful!
Complete crap!!!.
This movie reeks.
No money, no acting, no nothing.
I caught this on on the 3am late show movie tonight and felt compelled to comment on it.
This movie has nothing to recommend it.
I can't believe it ever got released to US television!
Nobody in this movie can act their way out of a paperbag.
The lame attempts at comedy fall flat on their face, the special effects consist of a worm-like handpuppet "monster"...
I can't even begin to tell you how rock-bottom this production is.
It looks like it cost maybe $50,000 to shoot, but only because it is on 16mm, and that is probably a generous estimate!
Anyway, I lost interest rapidly and had to settle for watching "Matlock" reruns instead of finishing it.
That's how BAD this movie is!!!.
Good example of bad film.
Kamillions is a great film for practicing your skills at studying a film for general narrative flaws.
It's a welter of poor scenario and character development work, tepid writing, and fine-to-merely-OK acting held together in a pudding of pretty good technical production work (e.g., good editing, OK music/sound).It's a disconnected series of comic/spooky/horror scenarios loosely derived from an opening, "kick-off" premise involving a portal to another world, with invaders coming from that world.I've seen a few films that fill out the same contours, failing on the same grounds, and with even better production values (e.g., "John Dies at the End"), so there appears to be a strange market that directs funding to produce this kind of low-budget drek.
Its one saving grace is that it gives budding film folks an opportunity to exercise and refine their chops.By-the-by, I dug seeing Hal Robins, and love hearing his voice..
good performances in fine SF comedy.
Unknown Christopher Gasti gives a tour-de-force performance in a dual role as practically perfect Count Desmon and a creature from another dimension who has copied his body.
It would be a spoiler to give away what makes his performance so brilliant, but it also helps make the film rewarding for multiple viewings.
Although it contains some mildly raunchy humor (in about three scenes), there is almost no violence in this film (which was only screened theatrically in South Amercian and Arabian countries, and a few others, Ning-Ping Chan tells me, and thus never submitted for rating), and it is mostly suitable for families, particularly considering much of the PG-13 fare parents take their kids to these days.
The film contains references to Lovecraft (as in Miskatonic University) and Hubbard (Larry, the hypocritical preacher and Nathan's best friend, preaches "Dynagenics," and promises God to make it cheaper after his great sin).
It also deals effectively and humourously with extradimensional creatures adapting to human bodies and American culture, sometimes in a retro-fifties style.
The film also has a beutiful new age score by Kent H.
Randolph, and only once, for Desmon, does the synth based ensemble create a pale imitation of an orchestra, nor is it merely synthesizer droning.
Although the characters sometimes seem stereotypical, they are often allowed to show multifaceted personalities.
The kids, of course, are the ones who know what's going on, like _The Night of the Hunter_ with teenagers.
The film never takes itself too seriously, but the naturalness of the dialogue, the flowing camera movements, and simply-decorated mansion make Nathan's fiftieth birthday party preparation seem like a real birthday party preparation.
Nothing is ever presented as very sinister, save for the possibility of an earth -shattering explosion, and with good reason.
It is a shame the video release of this film was limited, making it hard to find and impossible to order.
It's a delightful bit of normalcy affecting the genuine humdrumness of a supposedly-exciting family gathering. |
tt0424939 | A Deadly Encounter | The film follows a group of teenagers living in a fictional planned community called New Granada. It begins with Carl Willat (Michael Kramer) and his friends, Richie White (Matt Dillon), Claude Zachary (Tom Fergus), and Johnny (Tiger Thompson) hanging out at "the Rec" (Recreation Center), which is the only place in the community where young people can spend time and be supervised by Rec counselor Julia (Julia Pomeroy).
From an overpass, Mark Perry (Vincent Spano) and his friend shoot a BB hole in the windshield of a passing patrol car and flee on their bikes. They pass Carl and Richie and tell them to hide. Sgt. Ed Doberman (Harry Northup) arrives shortly, pulls them from their hiding place and finds a pocket knife on Richie. He takes them in and calls Carl's father Fred (Andy Romano) to pick up his son.
Carl's father is a local businessman. Before getting Doberman's call, he is talking to Homeowners Association president Jerry Cole (Richard Jamison) about getting wealthy landowner Mr. Sloan (Lane Smith) to buy land across the street from the Rec and build an industrial park instead of the planned twin cinema and roller rink, to the loss of the local kids. Doberman questions the defiant Richie and Carl about the BB gun. Richie is then taken out of the room while Doberman lectures Carl and warns him that he could end up at "the Hill", a juvenile detention facility.
The next day at school, Claude announces that he took drugs to prepare for an upcoming test and has a bad reaction. Afterward, the students are assembled in the school's cafeteria for a presentation about the recent shooting of the police car, where Carl exchanges smiles with Cory (Pamela Ludwig). That evening, Carl asks his father about the land across from the Rec, and his father tells him about the proposed industrial park. An apoplectic Carl storms out to join friends at the Rec.
The kids have brought drugs to the Rec's playground, where Claude buys a gram of hash from Tip (Eric Lalich). An announcement about a party at a nearby house causes the group to migrate there. Carl sees Mark making out with Cory on a couch. Mark threatens Carl not to mention his name to the cops. Carl then tells Cory that she could do a lot better than Mark and leaves, unknowingly followed by Mark and his friend who, after Doberman arrives in his patrol car to bust the party, beat up Carl as he is walking home alone. Carl stumbles home but is unable to sneak past his parents, who interrupt their meeting with Jerry Cole to grill the boy. After Carl goes upstairs, Jerry suggests to Fred that the Rec should be closed the next day so that the kids won't be making trouble when Mr. Sloan and his people come to visit.
The next day at the Rec, Doberman arrives and Julia talks to him about keeping the Rec open, but over Julia's objections, he comes inside, finds drugs on Claude and takes him into custody. They emerge from the Rec among rowdy teens to find Richie standing defiantly on the roof of the patrol car. After a brief foot chase, Richie gets away.
Richie and Carl come upon Cory and her friend, who have just emerged from a house with a stolen pistol. They all go to a half-finished town home that Carl and Richie call their condo. They plan a 'picnic with a gun' for the next day. On the way home, Carl sees Mr. Sloan's car at his house and plants firecrackers under the hood. The firecrackers go off as the men are leaving, and Mr. Sloan is scared away from buying land in New Granada.
At the picnic the next day, the kids take turns shooting the pistol until the ammo is gone. Later, Claude tells Carl that it was Tip who sold him the hash, and Cory announces that Tip had recently gotten busted. They decide to pay Tip a visit and interrogate him. Tip admits he told the police whom he sold the hash to. The group throws Tip into the adjacent pond while Tip's mother watches. Cory gives Carl a kiss, showing him that she likes him. When Carl gets home, his mother Sandra (Ellen Geer) tells him that he is forbidden to see his friends and that the Rec will be closed. Carl gets in a fight with his father.
In school the next day, Carl overhears Tip's mother revealing the names of the boys who assaulted her son. Carl grabs Richie and they run to Richie's house, where Richie grabs the pistol and the keys to his mom's Bronco. As they leave town, Doberman chases them. They flip the Bronco and flee the scene in opposite directions. Doberman chases Richie and fires a warning shot. Richie points his unloaded pistol at him and Doberman fires and kills Richie. Carl runs away to 'his' condo. Cory meets him there and they spend the night together. After Cory leaves in the morning, Carl goes home to grab money, and along the way he sees Mark riding his dirt bike. He takes Mark's BB gun and shoots him in the shoulder, which causes him to crash his bike. Mark sits down with Carl and they decide their fight was stupid and they should team up instead. Carl goes home, sneaks in and sees his mother on the phone discussing a community meeting about the kids at the school for that night. He flees to the Rec where all of his friends are.
The kids decide to go to the school to confront the parents. While the meeting is in progress, the kids chain the doors closed, begin lighting fireworks and trashing the school. One girl taunts her mother over the school's loudspeaker, and a boy taunts an officer. The kids then begin destroying cars in the parking lot. The kids break open a patrol car and pull out guns, eventually blowing up several cars and starting fires. Julia, locked inside the school, sees Johnny and convinces him to give her a phone. Police arrive and the kids run. Doberman speeds off to find Carl. He's able to arrest him and they drive off. Mark is waiting down the road and shoots the police car, causing it to crash and catch fire. Carl escapes leaving the unconscious Doberman inside. The car explodes in a massive fireball.
The next morning, Carl boards a bus with other teens involved in the vandalism for their ride to the Hill. As the bus goes beneath an overpass, Carl smiles as he sees Claude, Johnny, and Cory waving down to them. | violence | train | wikipedia | Interesting Premise.
Pulling in 2.6 million viewers, one has to wonder what everyone's opinions on the storyline/plot is.Reading the run down over at lifetime, I was led to believe that this would be an edge-of-your-seat thriller about a single mother being stalked and finally confronting the stalker.
Sadly I was mistaken.
While the main plot is interesting enough - Single mother run off road one night, then is stalked by same guy, the reasoning behind the stalking left nothing but a really bad taste in my mouth.Laura Leighton plays the victim, and she does it well.
Whether it was all those years on Melrose Place or not, she does well in this movie, playing a mother who would do anything to protect her son from harm, and she's looking pretty good too these days.Leighton is really the only good thing about this movie.
I think many people will identify with the main character, after discovering why the stalker is stalking, it will be a view-only-once type of movie..
disappointing film after a good premise.
Settling down with a cuppa for an afternoon film, the idea of a single mum being stalked by a loony driver seemed quite entertaining.
How wrong I was!
The single mum who works nights is run off the road by a man furious at a driving mistake she made on the road.
But because her phone number is in the car window he can track her down!
Therein follows a ridiculous trail of events, totally unrealistic things in the circumstances e.g. leaving her child alone ( who is never allowed to be alone )in a motel to order pizza very late at night whilst she goes to see her ex husband hoping for a reconciliation.
The sex scene here was totally unnecessary to the plot of the film.The ending was just silly!
And there is a very obvious time goof in that she leaves the motel at night and gets out of the car in the daylight..
Good Mystery.
Not a bad MOW.
I was expecting another film based on womens issues but was pleasantly surprised at the element of suspense.
Sure, parts of the plot were pretty hokey but for the most part the movie kept me guessing.
Was the nut bar connected with the ex husband, somebody in the tavern or was it the guy (person) that she cut off?
Daniel Magder was excellent.
I've seen him in Mom's on Strike and in Guilt by Association, both MOW's and he is very creditable, especially the way he challenges his mother the way a preteen would typically act.Laura Leighton also played the typical mother (ex-wife) that both men and women can relate to.
She was frustrated enough to seem real.See it if you missed it.
It's worthwhile..
Stalker film hurt by poor motivation and stupidity of main characters....
A DEADLY ENCOUNTER promises to be a good story of a male driver (ALAIN GOULEM) harassing a woman (LAURA LEIGHTON) whose accidental cut-off in traffic causes him to go berserk.
The opening sequence on a highway at night is well directed and manages some taut suspense.
But as soon as the script delves into showing us the predicament of the foolish woman who cares a great deal about protecting herself and her son from further harm, the story goes off the deep end because none of the plotting is believable or makes any sense.
It's no help that Leighton's character makes a lot of foolish mistakes.Especially unbelievable is the ending both in the manner the outcome is reached in a cat-and-mouse game and then a blazing over-the-top shootout with the predator.
His motivation is simply "You cut me off!" which is all we ever learn about him.The acting is competent enough but the story is watchable for the first fifteen minutes before abruptly changing to implausible the rest of the way..
Beyond Awful.
The female lead was stiff and wooden and the ex-husband was not engaging in the least.
The lead's friend had all the talent you'd expect to find in a middle-school theatrical production.
The lead's mother was not even in it; she looked more like a producer's assistant running lines with the lead rather than someone actually acting.
Within ten minutes, I was rooting for the bad guy.
It was so bad that I ended up reading a package insert from a box of sinus pills I found in the drawer of the nightstand.
The possible side effects were a lot scarier than this movie..
Could have-should have-been much better.
A lame ending and some silly plot elements take the zing right out of what could have been a decent enough made-for-T stalker movie.Laura Leighton may never win an Oscar, but she deserves better material than this lazy effort.
A first year film student could have written a more sensible and more gripping script than this, and almost anybody over the age of puberty could have scripted a better conclusion.The premise of a furious driver stalking a fellow motorist who cut him off on the freeway is reasonable, if over-the-top considering the two did not actually have an accident.
Some people are nuts (for want of a more politically correct word), and extreme road rage is not unknown.
However, in the world of fiction scenarios of this sort should not end in as lame and downright senseless fashion as they do in this instantly forgettable movie.
And we won't even worry about some of the implausible and illogical things that happen in between - the brightest mom on the planet, this woman is not..
OK, so she doesn't have caller ID.
When you are being stalked, you GET IT!
And no cell phone?
When you are being stalked, you GET ONE if you are one of the few full time working parents that is the head of the household that doesn't own one already.
This mom gets a big ZERO in the parenting department.
So her mom is in the hospital and she decides a shopping trip will help her out.
Glad I have Tivo and a FF button on the remote.And what is with the 10 line minimum, I just don't have that much to say about such a bad movie.
I guess I can ask why she keeps opening packages that she has no clue who they are from.
The son really didn't add much to the movie either.
The cops were a big ol zero too.
Now get to the nearest Verizon and get the darn cell phone.
Bad, bad and really bad!
**SPOILERS**.
Warning: This may contain SPOILERS!!First of all I watch a lot Lifetime movies and realize they are just that....Lifetime movies.
Some are great (really), some are good and some are bad.
Unfortunately this movie falls into the latter category.
It actually started out with some potential....single, divorced hard working mom (who gets out of work at 2:00 AM) cuts a guy off while driving home from work and let's just say he doesn't take it too well.
The stalking begins immediately with phone call hang ups and escalates to her home being broken into and completely trashed.
So she goes to her mother's for the night and the next morning her mother's car blows up.
This seems to be just a pain in the butt for our heroine who deals with it by going underwear and jewelry shopping!!!
So the police put her and her son in a local motel for safe keeping and what does Mom do?
She goes off to work leaving the kid all alone at night in a strange motel room and tells him to order a PIZZA!!!
I couldn't believe it!
Then it really gets stupid!
And the ending just made me angry because it was so ridiculous and typical.
Too bad because it seemed to have possibilities..
Appalling stupid, even for a Lifetime Network movie.
Bad news for anyone wanting to film a full-length parody of a Lifetime Network movie- the makers of A Deadly Encounter have already done it, albeit unintentionally.
All of the Lifetime tropes are there- a divorced mother in peril from a deranged stalker, an unreliable ex-husband (who, of course, cheated on her while they were married), and a police department that patronizingly dismisses her complaints, forcing her to Stand Up For Herself.
Especially jaw-dropping is the scene where the heroine, after enduring a break-in and the attempted murder of her mother by her seemingly ubiquitous stalker, decides to relieve the stress by going shopping!
Having seen first hand the harassment of a co-worker by some creep she met at church, I know stalking is not a joke, but it certainly is in this movie..
Road Rage.
***SPOILERS*** Over the top made for TV movie about this crazed stalker,Alain Goulem, who sets his sights on pretty single mom, aren't they all now a days in the movies, Joanne Sanders (Laura Leighton) who innocently cut him off one night on the highway on her way home from work as a hostess at the Santana Nightclub in downtown Phillie.
Feeling both hurt and disrespect's this nut case starts to make Joanne and her 13 year old son Eric's lives miserable!
If miserable is the right word for it.
Hounding Joanne day and night by making threatening phone calls to her house the psycho goes a step farther by at first booby trapping her mom's car and then going so far as kidnapping her son Eric.
As for Joanne's ex Keith,Frank Schorpion, he's on the outs with Eric as well as herself and tries to keep as far away from Joanne, and Joanne's problems, as possible.The film gets more ridicules by the minute with Joanne really doing nothing to help herself in finding the creep by just installing a caller ID system on her phone, which for the most part is mandatory, to get his number and reported him to to the police.
Joanne doesn't even have a cell phone that she can use to call the cops, which she magically later obtains, to use when she spots the stalker or his SUV when she's outside out of her house.
In fact there was a scene when Joanne spotted the stalker's SUV parked right alongside her car and didn't even bother to take down his license plate and give it to the police!***SPOILERS*** The ending really tops it, the movie, all with Joanne being forced by the stalker,who's holding her son Eric hostage, to say pretty please to him for all the hurt he suffered because of her, not at once considering all the hurt he caused Joanne, by cutting him off on the highway earlier in the film.
Still not satisfied with her answer, yes Joanne did say pretty please to him, this total nut job went in for the kill only to end up getting everything that's coming to him, from an finally outrage and gun toting Joanne, that put him on ice or the hot seat for good!.
Really stupid movie.
Really stupid movie.
Really stupid movie.
Okay here's the story - a stupid woman cuts off a car on busy highway and then kills the driver.
The end.Are we really supposed to have any sympathy for her?
I think not!
She is also stalking her ex-husband.
By stalking is going to his home, long after their divorce and then making him feel bad because he's moving on with his life and she isn't.
He is in his own home with a young woman making love.
I felt no sympathy for her barging into is house late at night uninvited and then leaving in a huff.
I felt bad for him.
She also gets her mother involved in a car explosion.
She also makes no attempt to allow her son and his father to get together.
She accuses a complete stranger of being her stalker, is proved wrong, and does nothing to apologize for the mistake.Again, we're supposed to have sympathy for her?
In fact I also thought her son was an obnoxious brat and that they deserved each other.I liked the mother and Daniel Magder, as the husband, as best in the film and most honest in their interpretation.
The kid was just plain awful and the leading lady, Laura Leighton, just as bad.
Whether my judgment is because of the role or the fact that she never showed a sign of any honesty in her performance.
Cold all the way through and she was in the wrong.
And the only killer in this.
Her look at the end, which was really a laugh, with her son, proves my point.
Close up of them without an expression of any kind.
Not worth any price of admission or time. |
tt4254242 | The Magicians | Harry Kane and Karl Allen are best friends who work together in a successful and popular magic double act, with Harry's wife Carol working as their assistant. After one show, however, Harry discovers Karl and Carol backstage in a magic box having sex (during an agreement between Harry and the theatre owner about letting the act go on for 4 more weeks and letting them do an act on a cruise ship). During the next show, Carol is locked into a guillotine as part of a climatic trick, only for the blade to decapitate her; it is not immediately clear whether Harry, despite his protestations of innocence, has murdered her or whether she was the victim of a freak accident. Four years later, the act has broken up and the two friends – now bitter rivals – have gone their separate ways; Harry, having given up professional magic, is working in a Wilkinson hardware store, only to be fired after a customer complains when he creates an illusion of him cutting his arm severely with a knife blade during a sales pitch, whilst Karl is attempting to reinvent himself as a Derren Brown-esque magician called the Mindmonger, with limited success. During an unsuccessful impromptu-pitch at a television corporation, the only person he manages to impress is Dani, the tea girl, who Karl immediately gets a crush on much to the jealousy of his incompetent agent Otto, who nurses an unsubtle homosexual crush on him.
After numerous failed attempts at raising money, Harry sees a poster for the "Magic shield" competition held in Jersey, with a prize of £20,000, and decides to enter. Trying to find a new assistant, Harry is forced to recruit the only applicant, Linda, an old work friend whose only entertainment skill is a poor dancing routine. Harry swallows his pride and contacts Karl, who agrees to enter the competition with him; although their reputation in the magic community is still strong enough to get them into the tournament without an audition, the tensions between them ultimately prove too strong and they decide to go solo from that point on. As Harry and Linda rehearse their magic act, they begin to grow closer, but whilst Linda is open about her interest in Harry, he is too uptight and insecure to fully express his reciprocation. Much to his discomfort, Linda discovers the guillotine amongst his magic props and convinces him to use it as the centrepiece of the finale. Karl, meanwhile, is delighted to learn that Dani has come down from London to see him perform, but is slightly alarmed to discover that she believes him to be a genuine psychic. He nevertheless goes along with her belief, particularly as the interest in the competition has seen him approached by a television producer who wants to make him the centrepiece of a psychic show. Karl agrees to make his act for the finale a medium display, but begins to suffer a crisis of conscience. Karl tries a trick where he is buried in sand for a day.
Upon learning that Harry has not told Linda of what happened to his wife, Karl informs her. Harry panics when he discovers that her hotel room is vacant, believing she has returned to London. He conquers his fear of flying to immediately fly back to London, only to discover as soon as he gets there that she has merely switched rooms and forgotten to inform him. Managing to return to Jersey in time to compete by telling Linda to make one of the judges delay the act, both Harry and Karl make it through to the final; Linda claims that she is okay with hearing about what happened to Carol, but tensions between both begin to grow as she struggles to trust him. The night of the finale, Harry is heartbroken to learn that Linda has apparently slept with another magician, the sleazy and unethical Tony White; although Linda confirms it, she is lying in an attempt to force Harry to open up about his feelings, which he is still unable to do. Karl, meanwhile, finally prepares to consummate his relationship with Dani, but admits that he is not a true psychic after she thinks he is contacting her dead father, and betrayed, she shuns him.
That night, Karl and Harry have a confrontation backstage, in which Karl accuses Harry of murdering Carol; Harry angrily rejects the accusation and challenges that Karl merely finds it easier to believe that rather than accept the guilt of betraying his best friend. On stage, Karl begins to pioneer his psychic act, but the stooge he has hired in the crowd which he had chosen with a fake random ball toss, accidentally trips and concusses himself on the stage. Upon hearing the sad story of another selected audience member, he decides that he cannot perpetuate the fraud, admitting to the audience that he is not able to contact the dead. As a result, Dani forgives him. Harry, as 'The Black Widower', starts his guillotine act, but at the moment of truth Linda's nerve fails her and she flees the stage. Although Harry’s act would appear to be ruined when he asks if anybody else wants to try, Karl steps forward and announces that he will face the guillotine instead. Karl allows himself to be locked in the guillotine, explaining that Carol was frequently unfaithful and forced Karl to have sex with her. Harry appears to decapitate Karl – although it is merely an illusion, and Karl appears unharmed, the trick having worked perfectly. Harry wins the competition, and in his acceptance speech both forgives Karl and admits that he loves Linda, who joins him on stage and the two kiss. Their friendship mended, Karl and Harry embark on a reunion tour, incorporating Dani and Linda into the act as their assistants. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | A very good entertaining watch for anyone who enjoys adventure themed shows/movies or magic..
I feel like the writers are very much aware of how annoying the characters are (haven't read the books btw) and portrays them this way in order to create this very fast, quirky and weird plot.
There's simply not enough time to dwell on the characters while at the same time having this crazy and quite complicated plot unfolding.The characters in a way becomes secondary to the topics being discussed, the underlying topic being the role, function and meaningfulness/or not of magic.(Edit: having re-watched the entire show and going on season 4 I have come to actually like the characters.
For me partly because I didn't care too much about the characters, but I did care a lot about the plot so I kept watching, and kept being amazed at the inventiveness and strangely light and playful way it is written and delivered.Just watched the latest episode of season 3 and Im still loving it!.
If you've read Lev Grossman's wonderful Magicians trilogy you may find watching this series rather disorienting.
The characters are all there and quite recognizable, and it's still about magic students and mysterious otherworlds, but it often feels like the series' writers cut the books into pieces, stirred those pieces in a bowl, then pulled them out and stitched the pieces together in random order, making up new stuff to fill in gaps.That's not bad, and the world they have created works quite well, but it increasingly diverges from the books' mythology.
This approach means I often find the show full of weird left turns where it shows me something familiar and then wanders off somewhere else with it, but the show is very entertaining, and it's prickly characters (awkward guy geek, ridiculously hot, short-skirted girl geek, snarky macho guy, snarky gay guy, angsty magic reject) are, if not quite likable, still fairly relatable.The first changes from the book were relatively small.
And while the books' Quentin did not have a Harry Potter-ish Destiny - he was just a smart guy so desperate for grand adventure that he would pursue all sorts of crazy things - comments made by supporting characters suggest that in the series, Quentin is in some way inherently Important.
I feel that's a bit too obvious - the lack of destiny was one of those nice contrasts with Harry Potter - but it's fine.Some story elements in the series are from the books, but they can come from any book in any order and are often mixed with things that aren't from the books at all.
It was also a nice idea on Syfy's part to make the first episode available on Youtube before the actual series premiere, as it was what got me to take an interest in it in the first place.It's certainly refreshing to see a show that is not a procedural drama.
I couldn't help myself and started reading the book series, unable to wait for the next episode.People may compare aspects of it to Harry Potter, I'd like to argue that it is very different, because it has the potential to explore mature themes in a way Harry Potter never did.
And the idea it proposes - that the cause behind being an awkward teenager with identity crisis is actually sensitivity to magic - is a brilliant touch, with timeless quality and something that should resonate well with the audience.It's based on a book I haven't read - so I can't really tell you how much it's faithful to the original or not.
However, the storytelling in this TV adaptation so far has no flaws, it's just perfect.It's contemporary, it's realistic, it creates credible logic in its own universe, it's presented by quality actors and it builds gradually into what I would expect to become a much more interesting and powerful version of HP-fantasy.
For me, Harry Potter was always just a cute story of an slightly-upgraded-but-still-out-of-date world of magic for children aged 4- 14.
I felt a similar pull while watching the pilot of this show, and since I wasn't totally happy with the only review at the time and also believed it deserves better rating, I wanted to contribute a bit if I can.
What's more important, you can't really expect such ingenious character development when issues and inner conflicts of the main character are nowhere near as deep and socially and existentially relevant to be able to engage you on such a fundamentally deep level.However, we are all nowadays more and more inclined to explore the true potential of life, so the topic of magic is indeed asking for far more (quality) exploration of it in the modern TV and film medium, then it's being done at the moment.
There are sudden twists in the plot that make it quite unpredictable, there's been already a powerful appearance of a villain who promises to be an imminent and overpowering threat to our unlikely hero; while interesting inversions of the common motives and good-vs-bad principles of fantasy worlds (such as walking/not walking the 'garden path') and introduction of spiritual 'cross-over' ideas (as 'not having any molecule of control over what happens') make it cast undoubtedly a new, fresh and exciting light to the genre...
He is a very self absorbed introvert, who in the book just walks away from his friends and leaves everything behind for his pursuit of magic.To me he is the awful modern version of Holden Caulfield.So this is NO Harry Potter - do not even compare.
I am a huge Harry Potter fan, or a fantasy fan in general, and so I was really excited to hear of a series in which adolescents discover having magical powers.
I expected to see a kind of rip-off from Harry Potter, but not that I really cared much about that, because I am a fan of the genre in general.But what the show actually was like, blew me away.
It is actually an adult show (would not advise watching it with younger children), trying to bring to you a story of a group of misfits that happen to all have magical powers.
Every time you think you know what will happen, they surprise you by adding a new element to the show.I know many people call it an adult, dark and gritty Harry Potter adaptation, and I cannot say that they are wrong.
To start up a show with a very small fan base, almost from scratch and ending up with a quality product like this, from episode 1 already, gives me the feeling that this show will bloom to get even more awesome than it is already.
I think season 2 is even better than season 1, so if you are having your doubts after season 1, I think it's worth a try to keep on watching and see how you feel about the second season.All I can say is that if you're a fan of the fantasy genre and you're not easily scared by the ugly side of the magic, this is has to be on your watch list.
The main character of "The Magicians" is Quentin Coldwater (Jason Ralph)--a college senior who suffers from a general malaise, as if he never feels comfortable in the world.His path is set--the obligatory applications for ivy league schools, probably followed by an unfulfilling career in something uninspiring.
It feels more like "His Dark Materials" than Harry Potter, and that is a good thing.The story moves quickly.
In Season 3 there is an episode that is so heartfelt that I weeped both times I watched it and just thinking about the story that was told in that episode (episode 5!) gives me chills.
They rightfully picked a cast of people who seem to know how to come off with just the right amount of nerd vs sex appeal to make the show a little of both but enough to where it enhances the story lines.Now for the actual story, so as you might have guessed from the title this show is about people who can do magic.
I mean, there are villans and heroes but even while they're doing good all the characters seem a bit bored, like they're doing it because they think it's proper, not because they feel it's right.
The plots are craaaaazy, Alice in Wonderland level crazy, and characters keep growing with the story and changing which is surprising because I never would have guessed it from season 1.
Highly recommend watching it if you like something different and out there I've seen reviews online that rate this show badly solely because it's not Harry Potter.
While it's has several twists and turns and you have to remember small characters because they come back to be important roles in their journeys- the show is constant and never feels like a wasted episode like the over-scripted/plotted TV shows now.
I imagine when someone in Hollywood got his 5 minutes to pitch the show, he must have said something along the lines of:"It's like Harry Potter, but more Emo instead of British, and they are old enough to drink alcohol and have sex!"The characters are vapid and capricious, puppets with arbitrary and disconnected behaviors that serve to drive cliché after cliché.They mention how much they like booze with an abnormally high frequency, just to make sure the viewer understands that this series is really for adults, not like Harry Potter which is for children.The good thing about fantasy is that if the characters are completely shallow and lack any real sense of purpose, you can always put some magical prop — a necklace, a portal to another world, whatever — to give the appearance of motivation.It *is* pleasingly anaesthesiac, if that's your cup of tea..
The universe in which it plays is vast and colorful and also the characters are quite interesting.Give it a try if you like fantasy series!.
3 Episodes in and I don't think that there's one character I like (definitely not the amazingly annoying anxious emo lead.
Think Woody Allen without any humour or charm), nor a character relationship I believe.There really is very little magic or spells in the show, so all you are left with are the neurotic, peppy, ridiculous, New-York-upper-class characters (who look more like parodies than actual characters), more befitting a particularly bad episode of Gossip Girl.What really amazes (and saddens) me is that they managed to create a "magical world" devoid of any charm.
I really wanted this series to be good, but the magic simply isn't happening, and this is not a world I want to step into, and not one I want to have in my life for 45 minutes a week.
A flat story, with stereotyped characterless(!) characters and plot holes everywhere.To begin with stupid behaviour: Hiding a school (like in Harry Potter) from the "normal" world and then being so negligent with letting people walk in and out does not work!
Actually i pretty much lost my train of thoughts over this review, because there are so many discrepancies within the first 3 episodes.It is watchable if you are really bored and don't care about stupid characters or a bad story.
But the second in the series was a quite a letdown.This first book had real potential, I think, as a TV series-- as a portrayal of a more adult contemporary and realistic version of what a "Hogwarts U."-a college of Magic, might look like.
Viewers who haven't read the books are likely utterly confused about 'Fillory' and its role in story (as well as any number of other things).
Ok first THIS ISNT FOR KIDS UNDER 15 now this is a show I stumbled upon on Netflix and I have almost finished the entire first season in just a week its a very good show there is plenty of action and even some humor its one of those shows you need to clear your schedule to watch cause you will be spellbound for quite awhile I cant quit watching but fair warning this show has some of the most graphic sex I have seen on a tv show but its a very magical show I totally recommend it.
When I started watching Magicians, its easy to see the influence of Harry Potter on the original plot line.
Things like The Vampire Diaries could have been this good if you didn't already know every single line the characters were about to say because you've heard it all before - this one totally gives you stuff you don't expect!
So far it's a bit like if 'Harry Potter' and 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' got married and had a baby (but very much with a 2000s vibe rather than a 90s one...) Cheers to this show, to both the writing and the casting, and really looking forward to future episodes!
yes no doubt it somewhat matches to (U S) fantasy movie series Harry Potter(HP) but it mostly differ from that .After so many crime solving (investigation) t v seriesviewers will have something different to watch .Huge number of HP fan who wanted to go Hogwarts will get to see something more of it ...no doubt show will draw huge attention as similar work has outstanding box office recordwhich is clearly is a evidence of people's interest ..
How many more 'promising' series do we need to be fed that turn in to an emotional overloaded love-story twilight like crap thing before we get really crazy.
Not much book studyingI really wanted to be able to enjoy this, but I guess I just want too much, I need to want the four staples in my magic movies and TV shows, then I would love thisI really liked the Dresden files, so of course it got cancelled after one seasonI really liked Haven for the first three seasonsThis TV series also has violence and dramaThe one thing it really does not have is how one goes about learning magic, that just comes w/ the staples.
This was unwatchable, I got through about 5 episodes of seasons one and two, after that I started skipping ahead on the BluRay, cutting out the scenes with either Quentin or Alice, then I couldn't stand watching Eliot and Margot.
I'm beyond happy to considering I cant think of one film or series they've released that warrants a review.You wont find any tv series quite like the magicians, no its not the next harry potter, not even close.
The overall story is actually somewhat fragmented in the first season; however, the fragments eventually come together to weave a decent tale somewhat along the lines of a Twilight theme with a Hogwarts or Harry Potter type of setting.
The season moves through the 2 main characters as they both immerse themselves into the magical world and learn to harness their powers.
"Hey let's make a Harry Potter but with sex, drugs, mediocre acting, bad VFX, predictable writing and unrelatable characters who you don't care about"I'm kidding the depressed main character is relatable since you will end up with depression yourself after watching this..
I stopped watching the channel a long time ago.Then along comes The Magicians which is actually surprisingly good.
I think the TV show is more accessible, the books were actually a bit hard to read.What I like most about it has to be, it is written more for adults, Sex, drugs and violence abound.
I haven't read Lev Grossman's books, so I can't tell you if The Magicians is faithful to his work or how it deviates from it.Quentin Coldwater a student from Brooklyn joins Brakebills College for ...Magical Pedagogy.
The ending of the episode(s) though which includes a cliffhanger of some sort may give some hope but I doubt this series will pick up later on.Overall: As I said I haven't read the books but I'm pretty sure the fans will be disappointed.
The books are good mainly because of the characters, with the plot being a spin off of the Chronicles of Narnia mixed with Harry Potter and laced with hipster stereotypes.
The actors are far too good-looking to be the characters that they portray, and the CGI for the magic is truly terrible.
Magic and fantasy are the grounds for great characters, flawed and skilled, with great evolution and you actually get to like them.
Game of Thrones especially bothers me, as it continues to feel like a watered down version of the books, where the characters and events are less substantial versions of what Martin wrote of.It's that the creators of The Magicians were brave enough to tell their own story that makes it worth watching.
The Magicians is not like Harry Potter!!!
And you will end up liking it if you just dont make any connection to Harry Potter series..
To sum up, The Magicians is a very great series which needs to go a little deeper in the characters history and maybe use the teachers a little more since it is a school of magic..
A lot of the time the characters just mimic movements and they are able to do complicated spells.The show seems to borrow a lot of idea's from other known stories like Harry Potter and Narnia.
Because it makes you feel like what happen next if this character do that or that do this what will be the end result the bottom line is you should watch it.
But, the pilot is very fast paced, it never bothers to develop the characters and is a bit rushed to reach all the .Nevertheless, while reading those books a few years back I used to think, that this should be adapted into a TV series, and well, Here it is.You will either love it or hate it.So, sit back and enjoy (or not).
I liked Harry Potter but I absolutely love The Magicians. |
tt0802821 | Pandemic | Lauren Chase, a doctor from New York, comes to Los Angeles to find survivors of a worldwide pandemic. She is assisted by her team, which includes Gunner, Denise, and Wheeler.
The movie opens with Dr. Chase being given a tour of the facility that's being used to monitor, treat, and euthanize sufferers of the disease. She is taken through the multi-level patient holding cells, and added into a team of sweepers who search for survivors. They immediately set out toward a school rumored to have around 89 plague survivors.
On the road to the school, they encounter an uninfected woman begging for help. They hop out of the bus to help, but are ambushed by a group of uninfected desperate to get out of the city. Gunner shoots several of them as the others hop in the bus and take off. Gunner chases after the bus, barely getting on board before it pulls away.
After driving a ways, they come across a yellow school bus. Gunner realizes it was a bus from the facility. Gunner forces Wheeler to stop so he can inspect the school bus. Gunner finds his wife, who is dead. He asks Dr. Chase if the infected eat people.
Finally arriving at the school the team is able to find supplies. Searching for the survivors, the team comes across a room barricaded from the inside. Once breaking through the doors, they see all of the survivors are dead. After a few seconds, some of the infected wake up and charge at the team. All, except Gunner, escape through a window.
Wheeler separates himself from Dr. Chase and Denise, causing them to seek shelter elsewhere. They find shelter in an abandoned Oriental store, where Dr. Chase confesses she is really Rebecca Thomas who came to the facility to find her daughter Meghan.
Both Denise and Rebecca are ambushed by a Level 5. After a long struggle, Wheeler impales the Level 5, killing it instantly.
Wheeler claims he made contact with a Doctor from a previous excursion who has 8 survivors nearby, and they need to return to the facility.
Rebecca realizes Wheeler has a bleeding wound on his side and is infected. She makes a deal; he hot wires the ambulance to save the survivors, takes Rebecca to her home to find her daughter, and she will return him to the facility to be treated as a Level 1.
Before arriving at the hospital, Denise is hit by a car and kidnapped by Level 3s. With her helmet cam still recording, the infected are shown cutting her open and eating her.
Rebecca shoots and kills the infected. Wheeler consoles her and they continue searching for the hospital.
Once they reach the survivors and hot wire the ambulance, the Doctor with the survivors knocks out Rebecca, yelling that she isn't Dr. Chase. The survivors escape, causing Wheeler and Rebecca to hot wire a different ambulance.
Rebecca and Wheeler finally reach her house. She finds Meghan, tests her blood, and realizes Meghan is infected. While waiting in the ambulance, Wheeler is ambushed by Level 5s. Rebecca, realizing they need to run, has Meghan change into her suit from the facility.
Wheeler escapes the ambulance and rushes into the house, causing Rebecca and Meghan to run upstairs. All three escape through a window, but Wheeler is bitten multiple times and can no longer walk. Rebecca is forced to leave him.
Rebecca and Meghan make it to the ambulance and rush to the facility. On the way to the facility, Rebecca sees the other ambulance on fire.
Finally arriving at the facility, the guards are able to kill multiple infected, but do not recognize Rebecca without her suit from the facility. She pleads with the guards to not shoot her daughter. Rebecca, in turn, is shot multiple times.
Meghan is taken into the facility for Level 1 treatment under the impression she is really Dr. Chase. | suspenseful | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0076853 | The Uncanny | In 1977, in Montreal, writer Wilbur Gray (Peter Cushing) visits his publisher Frank Richards (Ray Milland) to discuss his new book about cats. Wilbur believes that felines are supernatural creatures, and that they are the devil in disguise. Wilbur tells three tales to illustrate his thoughts:
In 1912, in London, Miss Malkin (Joan Greenwood) is a wealthy woman who rewrites her will leaving her fortune to her cats rather than to her nephew Michael (Simon Williams). Her maid Janet (Susan Penhaligon), also mistress of Michael, steals one copy of the will from the lawyer's briefcase and tries to destroy the original copy which is kept in the safe. When Miss Malkin sees her attempt, Janet kills her. The cats avenge Miss Malkin.
In 1975, in the Province of Quebec, the orphan Lucy (Katrina Holden) comes to live with her aunt Mrs. Blake (Alexandra Stewart), her husband (Donald Pilon), and her cousin Angela (Chloe Franks) after the death of her parents in a plane crash. Lucy brings her only friend, the cat Wellington, but her mean cousin forces her parents to get rid of Wellington. Lucy uses her mother's book of witchcraft to avenge Wellington.
In 1936, in Hollywood, the actor Valentine De'ath (Donald Pleasence) replaces the blade of a fake pendulum to kill his actress wife (Catherine Bégin), and give his young mistress and aspiring actress (Samantha Eggar) a chance. The cat of his wife avenges her. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | Oh, and there is a cat in it, but it doesn't do a lot, and seems pretty amiable really.Third story stars Donald Pleasence as a creepy little git, and is introduced by Cushing handing his publisher a stock photo from "You Only Live Twice" (Pleasence as Blofeld holding his fluffy white cat), which will probably amuse somebody.
Cushing's now gone into nervous overdrive, wringing his hands and exclaiming "It was the cat that did it!" A story set in 1930s Hollywood in which real devices of medieval torture are used on the actors (with the hilarious, yet seriously-delivered, "explanation" from a detective that goes "Well sir, there seems to have been a little mix up in your props department..."), it's all rather dull with yet more dodgy accents and, at one point, some misplaced slapstick and comedy music.
Not even fun in a sort of "So bad it's good," way, "The Uncanny" is a dull, listless and at times thoroughly unpleasant little film that is best avoided - and Cushing's only in it for about 10 minutes, so it's not even worth watching for him.
An anthology containing three tales used by a writer (played by Peter Cushing) in an attempt to warn people that cats are the real rulers of the world.
The second story is based around the daughter of a witch who comes to live with an adopted family, complete with her late mother's black cat.
In 1977, in Montreal, the scared writer Wilbur Gray (Peter Cushing) visits his publisher Frank Richards (Ray Milland) to disclose his new book about the evilness of cats.
Wilbur tells three tales to illustrate his thoughts.In 1912, in London, Miss Malkin (Joan Greenwood) is a wealthy woman that rewrites her will leaving her fortune to her cats rather than to her nephew Michael (Simon Williams).
When Miss Malkin sees her attempt, Janet kills her and the cats revenge Miss Malkin.In 1975, in the Province of Quebec, the orphan Lucy (Katrina Holden) comes to live with her aunt Mrs. Blake (Alexandra Stewart), her husband and her cuisine Angela (Chloe Frank) after the death of her parents in a plane crash.
Lucy uses the witchcraft book of her mother to revenge Wellington.In 1936, in Hollywood, the actor Valentine Death (Donald Pleasence) replaces the blade of a fake pendulum to kill his wife and also actress and give a chance to his young mistress and aspirant actress.
The cat of his wife revenges her.In spite of having great names, such as Ray Milland, Peter Cushing, Samantha Eggar and Donald Pleasence among others, the lead story of the afraid writer and his publisher is very weak and silly.
In this horror anthology, a writer (Peter Cushing) attempts to prove to his sceptical publisher that cats are really menacing supernatural beings by relating three stories of feline terror.
Cushing, as usual, was delightful in his role as the seemingly paranoid writer Wilbur Gray, but his rather short screen time meant that the gauntlet would fall to the rest of the cast who, with the exception of a select few performers which most notably included Donald Pleasance, were never able to perform to the standards required to make the lengthy segments enjoyable.
The following segment, set in Canada, tells the story of young Lucy (Katrina Holden, who would never work in film again) who goes to live with relatives after the death of her parents.
Her only friend, a black cat named Wellington, is the subject of unwanted attention and maltreatment from the jealous Angela (Chloe Frank, who previously appeared in the far superior horror anthology The House that Dripped Blood').
Virtually the entire segment seems incongruous to the rest of the film, and while some additions to the story seem to fit the theme when considered at face value, the ludicrous nature of the tale is little but damaging to the movie.
The Uncanny' is far from a great movie, but it has enough redeeming features to make the film enjoyable for one watch.
Replete with endless shots of disinterested moggies (presumably being teased by an out-of-shot toy mouse) and fluorescent red paint (supposed to be blood), 'The Uncanny' is a tedious dud.Peter Cushing and Donald Pleasence are fabulous actors notable for giving their best to even the most irredeemable of projects.
In the tradition of the omnibus horror movie, the Uncanny begins with a framing sequence that sees a seemingly eccentric writer (Peter Cushing) petitioning his publisher to consider his most latest manuscript which foretells a feline conspiracy to rule the world.The first episode relates the story of a sickly Victorian women who chooses not to bequeath her estate to her ungrateful, high-living nephew, but to her beloved family of cats.
If you are not in either group I would suggest staying away from this film, because you may find more faults with the film than I did.The story is about an author named Wilbur (Peter Cushing in really a great role) who visits a publisher named Frank Richards (Ray Milland) to see if his stories about cats can be published.
It really was wonderful for me to see Peter Cushing so nervous all the time.The first story is about a dotty old rich lady (Joan Greenwood) who owns a thousands cats and her will.
The third and final story is about an actor with a wonderful name in Valentine De'ath (Donald Pleasance in a nice hammy performance) whose wife dies on set only to be replaced by a younger woman named Edina (Samantha Eggar) who Valentine's got the hots for.
All this, plus a wraparound featuring Peter Cushing.Many people rate this film low because of its campiness and the less-than-usual acting from Cushing (who plays a crackpot writer named Wilbur Gray).
But there's a feel to this film that makes it enjoyable nonetheless, a guilty pleasure that you would watch with your friends late at night while your parents are in another room.And sure, the blood is unrealistic, the gore is cleverly shown too quickly to notice (cats have a tendency to devour human flesh in this film, just like in real life).
there are dozens of great cat titles that would have been better.) Why cast Cushing or Pleasance in a subpar film?
Although quite amusing in parts due to the bad special effects this film was still very entertaining (in a good way) and I actually enjoyed the second story the most.Was a shame that Peter Cushing didn't have larger role.Interesting to see themes of witchcraft/magic being brought into a film about evil cats, although the blood did look very fake, as did the scene with the older girl fighting the cat.Definately a good film for cat lovers!
The Uncanny features Peter Cushing in yet another effortlessly good performance as an author who champions the theory that cats are out of to bump off mankind.
Good cast totally wasted in a sometimes chilling but generally flat omnibus type film.Peter Cushing appears in the overly familiar guise of an earnest and nervous author who has stumbled onto the little-known secret that cats are evil and in fact rule the world.
Most interesting story was the second one, in which a teenaged girl named Angela picks on her cousin Lucy, rubbing in how short she is and sending her cat, Wellington, to the pound.
The film is about cats, cats that get revenge.The story of Miss Malkin is quite good.
The cat will have your tongue in the end.Now the parts with Peter Cushing and Ray Milland are actually the best part of the film because it's interesting what happens with the two men, the evidence and the book.Worth watching if you like horror, cats and a good starring cast.
A rather silly anthology movie featuring three macabre tales about malevolent cats, The Uncanny is a lacklustre affair despite a solid cast (which includes genre greats Ray Milland, Peter Cushing and Donald Pleasance).Cushing plays Wilbur Gray, an eccentric author who attempts to convince his sceptical publisher (Milland) that his latest book is not as unbelievable as it sounds.
However, the film ultimately disappoints, with the other stories failing either due to their laughable premises or (in the case of the third) the semi-comedic approach taken in its telling.The usually reliable Cushing and Pleasance give rather poor performances: Cushing's character is a jittery crackpot and only serves to annoy, whilst Pleasance proves that comedy is not his forté.I hate to be a sourpuss and make catty remarks, but The Uncanny is definitely NOT the cat's whiskers..
Cats are no strangers to horror movies and literature.Edgar Allen Poe's legendary novel "The Black Cat" proves me right.Cats suddenly leap out of dustbins and closets to scare us silly."The Uncanny" is an old school horror anthology about cats.It consists of three stories linked to the main story of Wilbur Gray(Peter Cushing)is trying to convince his publisher and besotted owner of a cat that cats are actually evil and set to take over the world.The first story consists of cats exacting revenge for their former mistress.It's eerie and gruesome.The second story is about a young witch and her cat.The last story involves a cat and another killed owner.All stories are unbelievable and tongue-in-cheek with few stomach-churning scenes of horror.A fun horror anthology to watch.8 out of 10..
The wraparound story concerns a paranoid writer, played by the great Peter Cushing, who has come to believe that cats are the devil in disguise and secretly rule over humans.
Wilbur Gray,(Peter Cushing) an author on strange phenomenon, visits his publisher Frank Richards(Ray Milland) to show him his new manuscript about evil killer cats.
The second tale is about an orphaned girl Lucy, who has to go and live with her aunt in Canada, there she is treated badly by her cousin, her aunt doesn't want her cat in the house either, Lucy believing her mother was a witch proceeds to cast some spells on her erstwhile enemies.
The final tale is of a Shakepearian actor Valentine De'ath,(Donald Pleasance) whose wife is accidentally killed on set of his new film, he suggests her stand in(And his lover) as a replacement.
This Canadian/British production imitates the Amicus anthology formula – emerging to be lesser than most of their films that I've seen, though not too bad in itself (it has a great title and a splendid cast, but the premise is rather silly).Peter Cushing and Ray Milland appear in the linking story as an author and his proposed publisher respectively; the former suffers from a phobia of cats and has accumulated a series of cases which demonstrates the evil nature of felines and their inherent hatred of mankind.
Unluckily for Cushing, Milland is fond of cats – but he's willing to hear him out and, so, three stories are played out for our consideration.The first has a period setting: wealthy old recluse Joan Greenwood has decided to alter her will and leave her fortune to the assortment of feline pets in her house rather than to her no-good nephew.
The second episode turns out to be easily the least of the lot, and is overlong into the bargain: an orphaned girl goes to live with her aunt's family, incurring the wrath of older cousin Chloe Franks because she has brought along a black cat (the former was never allowed to have a pet, since mother Alexandra Stewart is a stickler for tidiness).
The three stories over, Cushing leaves Milland's house with the promise that he'll sleep over the idea of publishing his work; however, his cat has other plans and duly hypnotizes its master into burning the manuscript!
**SPOILERS** Collection of cat tales that's backed with a load of police and scientific evidence to vouch for their authenticity by Wilber Gray, Peter Cushing, the person who's telling them that proves beyond a doubt that it's actually the members of the feline family or cats, not humans, that are the true masters of the world.Wanting to get his theory of cat domination published before he himself in done in by the vengeful and destructive felines Gray goes to book publisher Frank Richards, Ray Milland.
Gray wants Richards to to put his evidence, in the form of a book, into the stores to warn the public of this very imminent danger before it's too late for mankind to resist the coming cat takeover.The sorties that Gray tells Richards, backed up with a bulging file of newspaper clippings and police and medical reports, are really not at all that convincing to Richards that has to do with people who crossed cats, or their owners, getting their comeuppances with the kiddies doing a number on them.The first cat tale has to do with a lousy and good-for-nothing nephew Michael, Simon Williams, who together with his girlfriend Janet, Susan Pehaligon,who works as a maid at his aunts mansion planing to get their hands on his ailing aunts Miss.
The cat back for revenge ends up doing, to the now cut down to size big bully, what he does best, OUCH!The third and final story that Gray tells Richards has to do with Hollywood horror star Valentine De'ath, Donald Pleasence,who has his actress wife, Renee Girard, accidentally, on purpose, killed during the filming of his latest horror movie.
Donald Pleasence hams it up in the third tale, which has probably the weakest story of the bunch.THE UNCANNY is a mildly fun film, worth watching if you're not expecting too much, and if you like the work of some respected actors.
Eye Of The Cat (1969) finds a bunch of cats ganging up on the scheming nephew of old Aunt Danny, who's threatening to leave her fortune to a cat's home.Yet among this particular sub-genre, The Uncanny (which shamelessly plunders the plots from those two movies) stands head and twitching tail as one of the stupidest films of the lot.In present-day Montreal, nervy writer Gray, whose previous works on UFOs and the secrets of the pyramids have apparently set the literary world abuzz, reckons he's cracked a trio of unsolved murder cases.
Lucy (Holden), whose parents have died in a plane crash, is sent to live with her snooty aunt and brat cousin Angela (Franks), whose idea of fun is to buzz her with a remote-controlled plane, jeering "You haven't got a mummy, you haven't got a daddy, you haven't got anybody!" Using black magic, Lucy shrinks Angela to the size of a mouse; a tasty treat for her cat Wellington.In the final story, set in Hollywood 1936, B-Movie star Valentine De'ath (Pleasence - the best thing in this by miles) murders his wife with a medieval pendulum and casts his adulterous lover Edina in her place for his new picture.
Sure, the acting isn't great (apart from the always fantastic Peter Cushing), the storyline is questionable (although I always love any horror film involving cats) and the gore effects look rather bland, fake and dated.
You can have fun watching a bad film.The storyline is that an author (Peter Cushing), who writes about such things as alien conspiracy theories, is trying to convince his cat-loving publisher to publish a book on how cats have been responsible for murders all around the world.
The story takes place on the set of a medieval horror film, so the death sequences involve pendulums, Iron Maidens, etc.
The second tale, also a doozy, has a child in mourning, named Lucy, with a black cat named Wellington, whose parents died in an airplane crash, having to go live with a wretched cousin, Angela, and Uncle and Auntie Blake.
Pleasence doesn't even attempt to hold back and I think the role is all the better for it in this case.Seeing Cushing at the mercy of ferocious alleycats that sense him as a danger to them (his author is someone who wants to call mankind's attention to how evil and menacing they really are, having done so in the past regarding Ancient Egypt and UFOs) at the end, his appropriate nervous nature and paranoia in the mere presence of publisher Ray Milland's pet white cat, is reason enough to check out "The Uncanny", even if the idea of cats as the ultimate predatory beasts leaves you rolling your eyes in disbelief and not taking the movie all that seriously.
After the opening credits set against paintings of cats we are informed that we are in 'Montreal - Present Day' as author Wilbur Gray (Peter Cushing) prepares for a meeting with his publisher Frank Richards (Ray Milland) at his house.
Frank isn't keen on the idea so Wilbur tells Frank some extracts form his book...The first story is set in 'London 1912' & begins as an elderly lady named Miss Malkin (Joan Greenwood) makes a new will with her lawyer Mr. Wallace (Roland Culver) that leaves her entire fortune to her cats & not her Nephew Micheal (Simon Williams).
However things don't go as planned as Miss Malkin's large collection of cats seek revenge...The second story is set in 'Quebec Province 1975' & begins as a young girl named Lucy (Katrina Holden) is driven to her Aunt (Alexandra Stewart) & Uncle's (Donald Pilon) house where she is to live after her parents were killed in a plane crash.
Eventually Lucy decides she has had enough & with the help of a little black magic has her revenge...The third story is set in 'Hollywood 1936' & begins as an actress named Madeleine (Catherine Begin) is 'accidently' killed on the set of her latest horror film entitled 'Dungeon of Horror'.
One thing I would say though is the constant cat theme grew a little old by the end & is maybe another reason why I didn't like the third story that much.
The Uncanny feature's a great cast, Peter Cushing, Ray Milland, Susan Penhaligon, Donald Pleasence, Samantha Eggar, John Vernon & Alexandra Stewart which means there's no problems in the acting department as far as I'm concerned Pleasence apart of course, in fact the cast is probably better than the film deserves. |
tt0088103 | Sheena | While investigating rumors of a mystical "healing earth" whose powers are said to flow forth from the sacred Gudjara Mountain, geologists Philip and Betsy Ames (Michael Shannon and Nancy Paul) are killed in a cave-in, leaving their young daughter Janet an orphan.
Janet is adopted by Shaman, a woman of the native Zambouli tribe (Princess Elizabeth of Toro), and because of a prophecy about the cave-in ("when the sacred mountain cries out") she is viewed as a child of the gods and renamed Sheena, Queen of the Jungle.
As she grows up, Sheena (Tanya Roberts) learns much from Shaman about the lore of the jungle and the ways of all its creatures. She is even entrusted with the secret of telepathic communication with the animals. Outsiders rarely disturb their territory, since that part of Tigora is under the special protection of King Jabalani (Clifton Jones).
But trouble is brewing in Tigora; the King's ex-football champion younger brother Prince Otwani (Trevor Thomas) is conspiring with his brother's fiancée, Countess Zanda (France Zobda), to have Jabalani assassinated so that they can exploit the titanium-rich Zambouli land. (This may or may not have something to do with the healing properties of the soil, but this is never explained).
Experiencing a vision foretelling the death of the King, the Shaman hastens to Tigora's capital of Azan to try to warn him, but is arrested by corrupt police officers working for Zanda.
Otwani's old "friend", reporter Vic Casey (Ted Wass), and his cameraman Fletch Agronsky (Donovan Scott) are in Tigora to do a story on the former football player. When King Jabalani is killed and the Shaman is framed for it, Vic and Fletch realize they are on to a much bigger story than they had anticipated.
Heading to a remote prison compound to interview the Shaman, they bear witness to her rescue by Sheena and her animal friends: "Chango", an elephant; "Marika", a zebra; and "Tiki", a chimpanzee. As they escape back into the jungle after destroying the prison, Vic and Fletch follow. Soon after however, Shaman dies of injuries.
Otwani obtains the services of Colonel Jorgensen (John Forgeham) and his small army of soldier mercenaries, the Black Berets. Their mission is to eradicate the Zambouli people so their territory will be open for strip-mining. Vic must join forces with Sheena to stop the evil Prince and his army, and along the way, Vic and Sheena fall in love.
The climax of the film takes place on the African serengetti, where Sheena leads her people against the mercenaries and Otwani. Vic gets wounded during a shootout in which he succeeds in killing Otwani. Vic is healed with the earth, and wants to stay with Sheena, but realizes if he tells his story to the outside world, then other corporations will destroy Sheena's home. Vic and his cameraman Fletch leave on an airplane back to New York. Before leaving, Sheena records a farewell message on his tape recorder, wishing him a safe journey. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | Tanya Roberts was sooo worth watching in BEASTMASTER that the big wigs at the studio thought they'd give her another film to "show off" more of her special talents.
no ERA stuff for her!), big city reporter (reference to his view of the Towers), mystical shaman (imdb has the actress having a pretty interesting backstory), and Sheena (talk to me in words I understand!) all are fun.Commenting on Tanya Roberts' acting skills is a bit redundant.
"Sheena" shares the same orb as "Wonder Woman," "Supergirl," Emma Peel of "The Avengers," "Le Femme Nikita," and most obviously, "Xena." This is a family adventure film that is most of all fun where the children seem to enjoy it equally as well as the adults.
Children like things that are pretty, and this includes people, so Tanya Robert's natural beauty is appealing to children too on a more simpler level.
Tanya Roberts certainly got the best part of her career (alongside the Roger Moore Bond movie, of course) in "Sheena".
My favorite actress in the role of Sheena is Irish McCalla, but I've enjoyed Tanya Roberts and Gina Lee Nolan too.
Just compare "Sheena" with other so-called jungle movies from the early eighties : "Tarzan the Ape Man" with Bo Derek, one the true worst movies of all time or the two abysmal Allan Quartermain movies starring Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone.Sheena comes off quite nicely.I gave it 7/10..
Although Sheena (Tanya Roberts) is sexy and scantily clad, the film is about a young girl, brought up by native Africans, who has special kinetic powers and can communicate with animals.I don't feel that this film has ever really been seen on a wide scale, and although it isn't perfect, it is worth a watch.
This movie is a classic Tanya Roberts , I feel she was so natural in the role instead of fake acting, she is also very magnetic in all her attractions.Shenna is truly the Queen of the jungle , also the villains are superb in there ability to make you hate them for there dirty deeds.
British viewers will be intrigued by actor John Forgeham (who plays the evil Colonel Jorgensen) - he's a dead ringer for ageing DJ Jimmy Saville (of "Jim'll Fix It" fame).Rather amusingly, critic Pauline Kael, ruthless scourge of many films better than this, actually liked "Sheena"!.
There is only one reason to see "Sheena", and that is to appreciate Tanya Roberts, very striking, and not a bad actress at all.
I could watch the wonderfully appealing Tanya Roberts all day in slow motion riding that horse
Ah I mean zebra and swinging through the jungle.
Other than Roberts being pretty much eye-candy, the stunning Kenya locations managed to give the film a sense of place with Pasqualino De Santis' handsome widescreen photography being smoothly protracted.
Really pretty, well-chosen children, but very surprising, all that nudity, not that I myself see anything wrong with that, quite the opposite, it is healthy and natural, BUT WE ALL KNOW HOW PEOPLE ARE, and I suppose there were at least some outcry in the Puritanical regions.) Then, gloriously, Tanya Roberts, all golden mane and long legs and curves everywhere, one stunning example of young maidenhood, and now fully exposed on equally glorious DVD!
Tanya Roberts is, by all accounts, a difficult actress to work with, and she really got canned for A VIEW TO A KILL, but the initial haughtiness of her Sheena really made the character all the more tangible.The theme music during the opening credits, and the dramatic climactic showdown, deserves special mention.
Otherwise it's a Saturday-morning action film for kids and guys who like to look at gorgeous women (Tanya Roberts and France Zorda).
I give 10 points mainly because of the animals .I must say that this is film about kind of a lady jungle hero.I would recommend this film to children if there were no savage scenes such as shooting,bombing and killing both innocent people and animals.Sheena (Tanya Roberts) is a sexy young girl who brought up by native Africans, has special kinetic powers and can communicate with animals.First of all it is not a boring movie.Landscape is amazing.
This film had the beautiful actress Tanya Roberts and its thanks.
Alas, she's also a pretty dire actress (as anyone who saw A View to a Kill can testify), so if you don't find her beautiful then you might struggle to make it all the way through this movie.The story is about an American journalist (Ted Wass) and his cameraman (Donovan Scott) who are covering events in the African interior.
She is fighting to save her tribe and land from various nasty types, like gunrunners and political tyrants, and before they know it Wass and Scott are helping her in her struggle.The movie is full of laughable moments, like the unpersuasive scene in which flamingoes attack a helicopter, and the truly bizarre moment where Sheena holds her head as if concentrating really hard and manages to telekentically communicate with a zebra.
When a pair of geologists are killed by a cave-in, their young daughter Janet is adopted by the shaman of the Zambouli tribe of Tigora, who believes the blonde girl to be Sheena, the one who has been prophesied to become protector of her people.As she grows up, Sheena is taught to survive in the wild, and also how to communicate telepathically with animals, a trick which comes in very useful when nasty Prince Otwani assassinates Tigora's king, frames the shaman for his crime, and attempts to exploit the titanium-rich Zambouli lands.Aided by a variety of jungle friends, and a pair of American news reporters (played by Ted Wass and Donovan Scott) who have stumbled upon Otwani's plan, the beautiful wild-woman sets out to free the shaman and stop the evil prince and his army.With an embarrassingly bad script littered with risible dialogue, stereotypical characters, dreadful action scenes (including a laughable flamingo attack on a helicopter!), a horse unconvincingly painted to look like a zebra, and some of the worst acting imaginable, Sheena sounds like an unmissable slice of low-budget, bad B-movie heaven.Nothing could be further from the truth.Based on comic book writer Will Eisner's female version of Tarzan, Sheena was actually a relatively big-budget, major studio release (it cost an estimated $25,000,000).
Directed by John Guillermin, the man behind the immensely successful disaster film The Towering Inferno, and the less impressive 1976 remake of King Kong, the film attempts to capture the excitement and sex-appeal of Eisner's jungle heroine, but only succeeds in achieving the latter, resulting in a disappointing and dreary yarn memorable solely for the fact that its star, Charlie's Angels hottie Tanya Roberts, spends the entire film in (and out of) a tiny animal-skin bikini.I give Sheena, Queen of the Jungle 3/10 for Ms. Roberts' incredibly hot bod, and the unintentionally hilarious scene where our heroine carefully clears a patch on the ground in order to illustrate her strategy, draws a single line in the dirt with a stick, and says 'This is the edge of the great forest; we shall wait for them here'.
This is another film I recall being released in my childhood but have taken over twenty years to catch up with – not that it was a priority for me, knowing of its dismal reputation (SHEENA having been a nominee of five Razzies back in the day); that said, having just watched the even more maligned TARZAN, THE APE MAN (1981), I thought I might as well get to that jungle character’s female counterpart (who originated in a comic-strip)...The result is perhaps even worse than the notorious John Derek film: if anything, the fact that the character is a household name makes the Tarzan outing a more desirable commodity – besides, even if Tanya Roberts as Sheena does get a couple of gratuitous nude bathing scenes, she’s not really a match for Bo Derek’s Jane!
The latter is jailed, but she’s apparently able to communicate telepathically with Sheena (who promptly sets out to rescue her); the scantily-clad, tree-hopping jungle-girl was raised by the shaman ever since the childhood trauma of watching her explorer parents die in a cave-in; the young woman’s gift also allows her to talk to the animals (apparently, all that’s needed is to rub one’s forehead...only it looks more as if the subject’s suffering from migraines!) and, on many an occasion during the course of the film, they come to her aid.
Also involved in the narrative are wimpish reporter Ted Wass (who eventually teams up with – and falls for – Sheena), his comic-relief cameraman, and a band of mercenaries in the new king’s employ (unrealistically, he and his bride tag along to their ultimate regret) who sets out in pursuit of our heroes because Wass has unwittingly filmed the assassination.The film is not unwatchable per se, but it’s not very rewarding either outside of some undeniable campiness – despite the involvement of interesting talent behind the camera: director Guillermin, for one, wasn’t new to the jungle habitat – having directed a couple of the 1960s Tarzan films, SHAFT IN Africa (1973), and the 1976 version of KING KONG (with its lamentable 1986 sequel following SHEENA itself)!; story and (bad) script come courtesy of David Newman (the SUPERMAN films), Leslie Stevens (THE OUTER LIMITS TV series) and Lorenzo Semple Jr.
Campy Fun. Fun camp adventure with Tanya Roberts as the blonde female Tarzan clone Sheena.
The second is the striking good looks of its heroine Tanya Roberts which were clearly the reason why she was cast in the part.
I'm betting the casting of Tanya Roberts in this movie was primarily dome because someone said "We need a chick that looks good in leather and who has worked with animals" and someone else said "How about that girl from that movie about some animal master a couple of years ago?" Apart from being dire in the extreme, this movie has a similar plot to Beastmaster.
Between the obvious blue-screen and the truly muppet-like flamingo puppets, your biggest fear will be trying to breathe through the laughter to the end of the scene.A really crap movie, but worth watching for laughs (and there are plenty)..
There is really only one reason to watch this movie, and that reason has a name: Tanya Roberts.
Anyway, Sheena is obviously in the narrative tradition of Tarzan, with a very simple, kind-of-silly-but-still-charming story about greedy rascals being thwarted by a benevolent, jungle-dwelling white person who also happens to be amazingly attractive in every way.
Tanya Roberts is not a great actress either, but she has real screen presence and so Sheena's scenes don't feel awkward for the most part.
It's no surprise, therefore, that the movie "Sheena," aka "Sheena, Queen of the Jungle" (1984) plays like a comic book on screen.
Everyone knows going in that the plot, dialog and acting of a film like this will be of the comic book variety with a similar tone to Tarzan flicks or Indiana Jones.
What's magnificent, awe-inspiring and "A" level are the African locations (Kenya), the entertaining array of animals, the grand score and Tanya Roberts in the titular role.As far as the African locations go, if you're bored with your every-day locale, this movie is the perfect antidote.
I never concern myself with ratings when watching films, but I couldn't help but be a little surprised by the PG rating here because Sheena (Roberts) is shown TOTALLY nude on a few occasions and prances around throughout the flick in a ridiculously skimpy leather bikini (Zanda is also shown nude getting a massage).
For this reason I don't feel the movie is inappropriate for kids, despite the nudity.While Siskel & Ebert laughed at "Sheena" on their show in 1984 and wrote it off as a "bad movie," it's very effective for what it is: a comic-based flick about a beautiful, but formidable jungle woman, a journalist she meets (Ted Wass) and their fight against evil oppressors.
My appraisal reflects the happy medium between the Grade B plot, dialog & acting and the Grade A African locations, animals, score and Ms. Roberts.The film runs 117 minutes.GRADE: B.
Even worse is the scene where the bad guys are chasing after Sheena and her ally/sort of love interest, Vic. She's the jungle girl, right?
Sheena's paramour ought to be an African guide or someone familiar with the area, and not some displaced New Yorker who tries to tempt Sheena to come with him by describing the sight of Wall Street!And finally, Tanya Roberts, while impressive in her costume in publicity stills (but what the heck happened to the leopard skin?) is simply terrible, giving us a preview of her even worse performance the next year as the worst Bond girl of all time in "A View To A Kill".
And when she goes into one of her trances to summon the animals she looks more like a poster for an Excedrin commercial."Sheena" is the kind of concept that deserves a better treatment than this.
The girl is raised by the Zambouli tribe to be a mystical white warrior woman named Sheena (played as an adult by Tanya Roberts).
But let's not kid ourselves: the main reason "Sheena" the movie exists is to give us some prime eye candy in the form of Roberts, who looks ravishing (and does some nudity, to boot).
As many other movies based in popular culture characters, this is an "Origins story" of the female hero of the title which updates and upgrades the ancient archetype -and male fantasy with racist overtones- of a blonde amazon who rules a savage land, however, this movie succeeds in a more respectful portrayal of the natives and their millenarian wisdom, depicted as rather peaceful people living in balance with nature, properly turned into fierce warriors in order to assume the defense of their land from evil and greedy visitors.Beautiful starlet Tanya Roberts brings charm and brightness to the leading role, despite her odd outfit that underlines an adequate sense of campiness (just like, let's say, a horse painted as a zebra), which delivers the magic (some people would like to call it suspension of disbelief) this story deserves.
Breath-taking African scenery and Tanya Roberts, one of the most beautiful women ever to appear on a movie screen, provide lots of lovely things to look at but don't QUITE distract one from the central truth of this movie, which is that it stinks.
The movie was filmed in Kenya and has some spectacularly beautiful photography of African plains and wildlife.Even in a movie with modest aspirations, though, it is surely a bad sign when the best acting is done by animals.
In a movie which tries to combine adventure, romance, and humor, he has no toughness, charm, or wit.And a cautionary note to anyone who thinks the comic book heritage of this film and its PG rating might make it a good choice for children.
So my wife and I watched as Ms. Roberts, clad only in a leather bikini-like garment, went about her adventures in the jungles of darkest Africa.Then, out of nowhere, there's a scene where she stops by a lake to bathe.
Ted Wass actually does act in the first scene and in the last, both shot on the same airplane, leading me to suspect that those were filmed before he met his co-star, the truly inept Tanya Roberts.
Tanya Roberts may have been good looking but her acting range is limited to one expression where she screws her face up in an effort to look like she is concentrating (I thought she might just have been constipated throughout the filming since that is what her one facial expression suggested to me).
The biggest reason is that while it is a bad movie, the production values are amazingly good and it looks pretty nice.
In fact, movies like BLONDE SAVAGE and DAUGHTER OF THE JUNGLE are very cheap films but they manage to provide decent B-movie entertainment--and are an awful lot like SHEENA, an A-picture in almost every way.
I assume that no one actually saw the film since it was pretty goofy and didn't notice the two very striking nude scenes with its star, Tanya Roberts.
Oddly, after all this (and almost 20 minutes of film), the credits now roll.Later, time has passed and Sheena is now a buxom babe--sort of like a combination of Tarzan and a Playboy cover model cavorting about the jungle and talking with animals...and taking her clothes off now and then.
Also, too much of the dialog sounds like it came from an old movie serial--which is great for kids (who are often less demanding) but for a skin-flick, this makes no sense.Another problem is simply that much of the film isn't that interesting.
You KNOW that in the end Sheena and the forces of good will win, so there is no real sense of uncertainty.As for Miss Roberts, she wasn't THAT bad...but she wasn't particularly believable.
The 'zebra' that Sheena rides throughout the film is clearly not a zebra but a horse painted like one.
After learning how to communicating with animals, swing from vines, ride zebraback (don't ask!) and sling arrows through the years (and by the film's main credits), Sheena's a fully grown woman (Tanya Roberts , "The Beastmaster", "That 70s Show"), a mix between Tarzan and any skin-mag dame, and the adventure starts.It's not much of an engaging one, though.
She e na is a bad movie, but Sheena is a hot girl, nooooow.
Too bad that image is very early in the movie and the rest is all "love the animals, peace be with everyone." Tanya Roberts, while fully equipped to be naked, is not so equipped to be in a serious film which this misguided movie tries to masquerade as.
To watch the horrible "silly natives" sequences that these movies always have coupled with lazy film-making that a twelve year could improve on, more than negates the pleasant sight of Tanya Roberts' moist breasts. |
tt0037135 | None But the Lonely Heart | Ernie Mott (Cary Grant) is a restless, irresponsible, wandering Cockney with a good musical ear. On Armistice Day, Ernie visits the tomb of the Unknown Warrior in Westminster Abbey, which memorializes those who died in World War I, including his father. Ernie wants a better life but does not want to settle down or work for it. When he returns home, Ma Mott (Ethel Barrymore) asks why he has returned after so long, and she gives him an ultimatum that he must stay home now or leave forever. He informs her that he will then be leaving next morning, and goes out to get a drink. He meets fellow musician Aggie Hunter (Jane Wyatt) outside the bar, but instead prefers the company of a gangster's fickle former wife, Ada Brantline (June Duprez). However, when Ernie becomes smitten with Ada she rejects his offer of a date when he tells her he will be leaving town tomorrow.
The next morning, Ma Mott tells her pawnbroker friend, Ike Weber (Konstantin Shayne), that she has cancer. Ma and Ernie get into another fight, but after he storms out, Ike shares with him that his mother needs him in her battle with cancer. Ernie returns and says that he will stay with her at home and help her run her shop.
A month passes, and Ernie continues to pursue Ada. However, when gangster Jim Mordinoy (George Coulouris) informs him that she's still his wife, Ernie doesn't believe Ada when she says that's a lie and he cuts her off socially. Ernie begins to notice the poverty surrounding him in London, and chooses to accept Mordinoy's offer to join his activities, even against Ada's pleas. Ernie begins to steal cars, and he is involved in a police chase until his car collides with a truck and explodes into flames. Ada implores him to run away with her, but he does not want to leave his dying mother.
When Ernie is eventually bailed out of jail by Ike, he finds out that after the police find Ernie's platinum cigarette case—his birthday gift from Ma—was stolen, the police arrest her and put her in prison. She begs for forgiveness for shaming the family, and dies in prison hospital. When he returns home, he learns via a letter from Ada that she decided to stay with Mordinoy because that would make her life easier. Ernie is crushed, and walks along the street until he gets to Aggie's door and walks in. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0896529 | Cairo Time | Juliette is a Canadian magazine editor who arrives in Cairo for a vacation with husband Mark, a UN official working at refugee camps in the Gaza Strip. Their children have grown and Juliette is looking forward to spending more time with Mark. Delayed, Mark asks his friend—a handsome Egyptian named Tareq—to watch over Juliette. Mark is continually delayed in Gaza, during which time Juliette makes friends with Cairo locals, North American and European ex-pats like Kathryn, explores the city and the surrounding area, and finds herself falling in love with the city during her "Cairo Time".
Tareq is a regular (but not constant) companion during Juliette's extended time waiting for Mark, leading to a very close relationship between the two. While their relationship remains platonic, it is steadily headed to a stronger connection. After travelling to Alexandria with him to attend the wedding of the daughter (Hanan) of a girlfriend from his university days (Yasmeen), she admits that she will miss him when she returns to Canada.
The two visit the Great Pyramids—something Mark had inisisted should be "just for us" on his sporadic calls to Juliette at her hotel room. Whatever change this may signify in Tareq and Juliette's growing relationship, they return to the hotel to find that Mark has finally arrived. Mark is happy to see Juliette, while she and Tareq adequately hide their sorrow over the end of their Cairo Time. | romantic, intrigue | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0318761 | Thumbsucker | Justin Cobb is a shy 17-year-old in a family of four in suburban Oregon. He has a persistent thumb-sucking habit his father disapproves of, which has led to major orthodontic repair. He addresses his parents by their first names, Mike and Audrey, so as not to make his father feel old. Audrey, a registered nurse, is idly fascinated by actor Matt Schramm, entering a contest to win a date with him. She insists it is "innocent fun", but is inordinately concerned with looking attractive for the contest.
Justin struggles on his school's debate team, led by Mr. Geary which he joined to get closer to his environmentalist classmate Rebecca. He tries to start a relationship with her, but she rejects him after he cannot open up to her about his thumb-sucking habit.
At a regular checkup, Justin's orthodontist, Dr. Perry Lyman, indicates he can tell that Justin is still sucking his thumb, and attempts hypnosis, coaching Justin to find his power animal (a deer) and suggesting that his thumb will taste like echinacea. This works, and Justin finds his thumb distasteful, but falls deeper into frustration without the crutch. After Justin conspires with his brother to disrupt Dr. Lyman in a bicycle race with Justin's father, his school counselor prods the Cobbs to give him Ritalin. While his parents wring their hands over the idea, Justin insists that he needs the help.
Almost immediately after beginning treatment, Justin begins to have elevated energy, confidence and focus. He begins to excel on the debate team, unseating Rebecca from the star position; she quits the team and drifts into the stoners crowd. Justin's newfound aggressiveness nets the debate team repeated awards. Simultaneously, he begins to challenge the neuroses of the adults around him, especially their struggles with aging. With a somewhat deceitful cover letter, he applies to NYU, in spite of his mother's urging that he go to college closer to home.
After rambling incoherently at the state debate championship, Justin quits the debate team, throws away the pills, and seeks out Rebecca to hook him up with pot. During their smoking sessions, Rebecca blindfolds him and engages with him in kissing and other sexual activity, which Justin interprets as a relationship. But when he broaches the subject, Rebecca tells him otherwise, calling their meetings an "experiment." He quits both her and the drugs.
Both Justin and his father suspect that Audrey is having an affair with Schramm after she is transferred to a celebrity rehab facility where Schramm has been committed. Attempting to catch his mother in the act, he instead meets Schramm sneaking a smoke in the bushes, and learns the unromantic truth. The next day, he receives an acceptance letter from NYU.
During a final checkup, Dr. Lyman reveals to Justin his discovery that thumb-sucking is not a medically debilitating problem, and says that everyone has their own flaws and nobody has all the answers—that in fact learning to live without having the answers is (perhaps) the answer. On his flight to New York, Justin dreams of reaching his goal of being a TV anchor, "sharing the truth with the world". He wakes up after sleeptalking to find his thumb in his mouth and an attractive girl smiling at him. Slightly embarrassed but self-confident, he introduces himself. | violence, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | This is no typical teenage coming of age as interpreted by Hollywood.The film is an intelligent account of Justin's life and what makes him act the way he does.
Keanu Reeves and Vince Vaughn make excellent appearances in roles that are different to what they usually play.The film work because the good ensemble Mike Mills assembled for the movie..
I was impressed by his acting, and I really will have to re-evaluate my opinion of his talent after this movie.Since I'm talking about the talent in the movie I'll keep going and give the biggest and most deserved mention to the lead, Lou Taylor Pucci as Justin Cobb, the teenager who is just starting out on his journey of really growing up, finding girls, himself and a new relationship with his parents, something we've all been through (unless you were finding boys!) around that age and we have all faced with equally different results.
For the most part of the movie I thought Vincent D'Onofrio was the weaker part and the lesser actor, however I ended up feeling that this was down to his role and that of the dysfunctional Father who is having severe problems coming to terms with his own life.
Likewise I felt that Tilda Swinton was the stronger actor of the two, until the Father gained more scenes, then I felt she was much weaker and her storyline seemed relegated to merely showing us that another of the characters has their own problems, and to introduce us to Matt Schraam, the addicted to anything actor.At the beginning of the movie we find that Jason has a problem, he sucks his thumb for comfort and the movie shows us in an easy and effective way what he actually feels and hopes for during these moments.
Through the film it explores this through the idea of addiction, and how some people need to be addicted to something to get them through, from the extreme of the actor to the lead himself who starts out addicted to sucking his thumb.Another issue brought out of this movie is the idea that drugs are the answer, and that if there is a problem with someone then they immediately should turn to a Doctor and attempt a cure.
That scene is very strong, and at that moment when the Teachers leap you don't know whether to laugh or feel awkward and ashamed that society has turned so easily to drugs being the answer instead of trying to turn to each other, open up a little, and not being so wrapped up in yourselves.It's filmed really well, and apart from the dream\comforting scenes and the representation of the effects of the ADD drug, you forget that you're watching a camera filming the movie.
as an adolescent Justin, the main character, struggles with trying to stop sucking his thumb, the film creatively explores issues of identity, self-worth, achievement, family dynamics and so many other elements of life that are difficult to articulate.
Justin and his mother Audrey seem to be alike - they both have crushes: he, for a girl in his debating class, and she, for an actor on daytime TV."Thumbsucker" shows that teenagers with a lot of parental love and support can also end up feeling alienated anyway.
I was not expecting much from a teen movie, but this one really made its way to my heart.The story is about a 17-year-old Justin who has problems with his self confidence, and that causes him to suck his thumb.
His weirdo dentist (Keanu Reeves) uses even hypnosis to help him to get rid of his thumbsucking...The story is about growing up, and Lou Taylor Pucci as Justin delivers a brilliant job.
But the main thing are the "sidekicks": Reeves the dentist and Benjamin Bratt as a totally weird drug addict actor and Vince Vaughn as Justin's teacher just do it, give some laughter to the otherwise serious story, and make this movie enjoyment..
First-time director Mike Mills guides a cast of well-knowns through a decent script that peers into one teenager's coming of age and his battle with an unusual addiction: he sucks his thumb.Yes, Justin Cobb (Lou Pucci) sucks his thumb.
His father Mike (Vincent D'Onofrio) clearly has issues with it while his mother Audrey (Tilda Swinton, also the film's producer) is a little more lenient (though she has the hots for T.V. actor Matt Schramm, played by Benjamin Bratt), and it just gives his younger brother Joel (Chase Offerle) greater incentive to insult him.
A new leaf is turned over the for the young man as he joins the debate team and finds widespread success there, gets on the good side of his laid-back teacher Mr. Geary (Vince Vaughn) who also has some hair issues, and finds a little teen love with fellow classmate Rebecca (Kelli Garner).But it's short-lived when Justin is also diagnosed with ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) and is prescribed Ritalin(?) but goes cold turkey when he realizes he's addicted to it.
For example, the father, played by Vincent D'Onfrio seems to have a little to no parenting skills and while it makes an interesting character, it's a bit discomforting to be at peace with a character like that actually possibly existing.The biggest Indie flaw is that there seems to be no thematic direction in the film.
Keanu Reeves channeling his "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" character as a dentist.I respect that the filmmakers got this made, so maybe there's hope for other films with good stories to reach the light of day.
The story was so dull that I actually envied the main character in the scenes where he is in the dentist's chair because root canal surgery is preferable than viewing this film.There is not a single character in the movie that seems real and its not the fault of the actors they were simply working such a terrible script that there was no hope of rescue.Normally I would write quite an in depth review but this film does not warrant one and the only reason I wrote anything at all was to maybe save 1 or 2 other people enduring the hell on earth I have just endured.Only one mans opinion of course but I am sure others have felt the same hope its of some use to someone..
It was a complete waste of time and money, and although I am a fan of Keanu Reaves and Vince, they really should have avoided this script.I watched quite a while back, so can't really comment on the editing, etc - but the bitter after-taste still lingers and when I came across it here on IMDb, had to vent some latent frustration that had been pent up.It's over-rated as a comedy, actually there's nothing remotely funny about it, and has no direction as a "coming-of-age" movie.My advice : save yourself the hassle of returning to this page and commenting on how much this movie sucked..
Tilda is such a moving performer and she gives her all as a mother questioning herself and her role as a parent.Mike Mills is a first time movie director but he accurately captured the indecision and pathos of being a teenage.
"Thumbsucker," a first-time film by Mike Mills, is a successful coming-of-age story because of strong, restrained acting and a subtle attitude.
His mom Audrey (Tilda Swinton) is shocked and his dad Jack (Vincent D'Onofrio) is disapproving; and his orthodontist Perry (Keanu Reeves) -- who fancies himself as a consciousness-raising therapist, tries to cure him with hypnosis evoking his "power animal" and making the thumb taste to him like Echinacea.Perry's cure works but Justin is going nuts in the absence of his habit and his girlfriend Rebecca (Kelli Garner), an environmental activist, drops him because he can't be "open" with her and he drops out of the debating team.
If "Thumbsucker", his debut feature, feels like the kind of small, quirky picture that sometimes gives independent movies a bad name it might simply be because it deals with aspects of growing up that even small, independent movies tend to overlook.Our teenage hero, (an excellent Lou Taylor Pucci), has issues that tend to stem from his inability to stop sucking his thumb but that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Good performances, too, from Tilda Swinton and Vincent D'Onofrio as Pucci's parents, (only to be expected), but also from Vince Vaughan, never better as Pucci's teacher though Keanu Reeves, woefully miscast as a hippy dentist, is his usual wooden self.
Seventeen-year-old Lou Pucci (as Justin Cobb) still sucks his thumb, which disturbs his parents - registered nurse Tilda Swinton and ex-football star Vincent D'Onofrio (as Audrey and Mike).
He likes bosomy pot-smoking Kelli Garner (as Rebecca), thinks mother Swinton might be having an affair, and...Strangest of all, Pucci is unable to realize orthodontist Keanu Reeves (as Perry Lyman) is more than a little weird.
It is nicely cast, with Pucci and Swinton especially believable as mother and son.******* Thumbsucker (1/23/05) Mike Mills ~ Lou Taylor Pucci, Tilda Swinton, Vincent D'Onofrio, Vince Vaughn.
In Thumbsucker, we are introduced to Justin, a boy who sucks his thumb, even though he is a teenager.Like most teenage boys, Justin has a troubled relationships with his parents, brilliantly played by Vincent D'Onofrio and Tilda Swinton.
Creating a lot of buzz at the Sundance Film Festival, but unfortunately having a very limited theatrical release, "Thumbsucker" recently came out on DVD for the mass audiences to see.This independent film, based on the book by the same name, attempts to display the problems of American families in suburbia and a kids coming of age story.
Although this plot seems a little contrived, "Thumbsucker" tackles many different issues on the subject that makes this film stand out from the rest.The main character Justin (Lou Pucci) has a dilemma.
The DVD itself is not very exciting having only a behind the scenes documentary, an interview with the author and director, and commentary by the director.The behind the scenes documentary is fairly basic showing the different actors and their opinion on the movie, which is always that it is a great film and they loved doing it.The interview between the author of the book Walter Kirn and director Mike Mills fortunately is extremely interesting.
Normally I do not like to see movies on small screen, but with no chance in near future that this movie would be released in the theatres anywhere, the best option for me was to make myself cozy in bed and let the disc revolve.The movie is about growing up years of 17 year old boy Justin Cobb, played by Lou Taylor Pucci, (I read that he was selected for this role after audition of over 200 boys).
A special reference for Vincent D'Onofrio who plays Justin's father who won the best actor for this role at Stockholm Film Festival The best high of the movie for me was when the Greenpeace book was shown and reference made for the appreciation of GREENPEACE work.
But Justin, who is heartbreakingly portrayed by Lou Taylor Pucci, is a young man who is open to learning from his mistakes, a fact which leads to a genuinely touching and inspiring conclusion to the film.Expertly written and directed by Mike Mills (based on the novel by Walter Kirn), "Thumbsucker" is an observant, poignant tale that anyone who has ever felt that he "just didn't quite fit in" - and that would clearly be everyone - can certainly relate to.
Even the two key non-parental adults in his life - a well-meaning but often brusque debate coach (Vince Vaughn) and an equally well-meaning but somewhat spacey New Age orthodontist (Keanu Reeves) who tries to hypnotize Justin out of sucking his thumb - are portrayed as flawed but caring individuals.Mills has drawn rich and beautiful performances from his entire cast - even Keanu Reeves, who gets to sum up the movie's message in his climactic speech: that we spend so much time trying to find ways to "fix" ourselves that we wind up becoming eternally frustrated and utterly miserable in the process.
Without being tiring, the film is yes, a philosophical, but full workmanship of affection, mainly with the notable performance of Lou Taylor Pucci (more good actor in the festivals of Sundance and Berlin of 2005), that it makes of its unsafe Justin a memorable personage, and obtains to be distinguished in a cast of veterans, making with that, if it wants let us distrust that this is only, one of its first works for the cinema..
Thumbsucker is a touching and heartfelt dramedy that, if you feel the film in yourself, you'll love it just like I did.Thumbsucker stars Lou Pucci as Justin, a 17 year old who, you guessed it, still sucks his thumb.
After the hypnosis and discovering he has ADD, Justin completely changes, enveloping himself in his debate team, marijuana, and experiments with sex with a girl (Kelli Garner, 'London').Thumbsucker is truly an actor's movie, and Lou Pucci takes full advantage of it.
The leading character, who plays the teenager is an unknown kid actor to me, who really delivers a great acting achievement as well!However silly the subject of thumbsucking might seem, this is NOT a silly comedy picture, although it has lots of funny moments.
i watched this movie cuz that one of my friends asked me to.and the reason for why he would like to watch this movie was that it was partly filmed in Oregon~~he he he..sounds a bit ridiculous huh?hmmm...anyway,i know that this movie has got an award for the best actor somewhere before,and yeah,the performances of the actors in this movie were really nice,no matter the leading roles or the supporting roles,they all did shine!and actually when i saw the beginning of this movie,the first thought in my mind was "oh,this movie looks a bit like 'Junebug'!"i didn't mean the stories or the structures of these two movies were alike..just..the feelings that those two movies gave me were really similar!both of them started from the families,and finished by leaving the families,and both of them looked quite real and just like the things that we might have experienced,and also the weakness of these movies was almost the same which was that both of them lacked of the real climax!i meant that i didn't really see that kinda breathtaking moments appearing in these two movies,maybe because that they were just about the things that might happen in real life and usually that you couldn't really ask the things that might happen in real to be that dramatic~but that actually really made watching this movie a bit boring,and also to make the whole movie a bit...loose~but still,i would like to recommend people to watch this movie,cuz for those people who have already experienced that period in their lifetime,it could probably remind them of some interesting memories,and for those people who are just about to experience that,it could be like the lesson for telling them what to do or what they should think about to do!.
Other films such as this one include Pieces of April, The Chumscrubber, Junebug, In the Bedroom, The Mudge Boy, Mean Creek etc - films that take unpopular subjects and use that as a pivotal point for opening superficial wounds in the integument of family units.Adapted from the novel by Walter Kirn, screenwriter and new director Mike Mills introduces us to the Cobbs, a Portland, Oregon family of four, each with secrets or private problems that prevent them from functioning at full capacity: father Mike (Vincent D'Onofrio) fractured his knee at the brink of a brilliant football career and married Audrey (Tilda Swinton) who, lost in the routine of a boring life, works as a nurse who fantasizes about a TV star Matt Schramm (Benjamin Bratt) to the point of entering contests to meet him; youngest son Joel (Chase Offerle) is not allowed a life in the household dominated by the bizarre behavior of older brother Justin (Lou Taylor Pucci) who is a chronic underachiever and geek and still sucks his thumb at age 17!
Each of the roles is filled by actors who surpass even their own standards: Tilda Swinton is amazing in the breadth of her emotional role; Lou Taylor Pucci may be only 20 years old but he is a dynamite actor; Vince Vaughn, Keanu Reeves, Benjamin Bratt and Vincent D'Onofrio - each out of their element - prove that given the right material they can produce subtle, nuanced performances.
Thumbsucker almost makes a point.It is worth seeing for Keanu Reeves' performance alone, as an orthodontist (!) saying lines like "Call upon your power animal." Aside from that merit, there is of course Kelli Garner, one of the more riveting women to appear in movies in recent years.Unfortunately, Vince Vaughan is wasted and the coming-of-age aspects of the story are undistinguished and typical, and the subplot of the mother's crush on a TV star never quite clicks with the central story.
Keanu Reeves is awesome as Justin's dentist, the movie really picks up in the scenes with him.Thumbsucker may not a be a revolutionary film about growing up, but its still a great film that gives you a really warm feeling inside, showing that things aren't as bad as you think..
This film uses this formula again, and in a very successful way, although the focus is clearly on Justin, the teenager played by Lou Pucci, and the other family members have more supporting role character.
With the great addition of music from Polyphonic Spree and Elliot Smith, this movie really gets to the troubles of life for most American families dealing with dysfunctional households, young relationships, dabbling with drugs to cover your awkwardness, and trying to figure out how to put your past to rest.For those who haven't seen it, Lou Taylor Pucci plays Justin Cobb, a high school student who tries his hardest to get by with an addiction to sucking his thumb (for security perhaps?).
"Thumbsucker" is a movie about a kid named Justin Cobb (Lou Pucci) who has a bad habit of still sucking on his thumb. |
tt3037336 | Sedmero krkavcu | A peasant has seven sons and no daughter. Finally a daughter is born, but is sickly. The father sends his sons to fetch water for her, in the German version to be baptized, in the Greek version to take water from a healing spring. In their haste, they drop the jug in the well. When they do not return, their father thinks that they have gone off to play and curses them and so they turn into ravens.
When the sister is grown, she sets out in search of her brothers. She attempts to get help first from the sun, which is too hot, then the moon, which craves human flesh, and then the morning star. The star helps her by giving her a chicken bone (in the German) or a bat's foot (in the Greek) and tells her she will need it to save her brothers. She finds them on the Glass Mountain. In the Greek version, she opens it with the bat's foot, in the German, she has lost the bone, and chops off a finger to use as a key. She goes into the mountain, where a dwarf tells her that her brothers will return. She takes some of their food and drink and leaves in the last cup a ring from home.
When her brothers return, she hides. They turn back into human form and ask who has been at their food. The youngest brother finds the ring, and hopes it is their sister, in which case they are saved. She emerges, and they return home. | intrigue, fantasy, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0325055 | Sylvia | (Born in Boston, Massachusetts in 1932, Plath developed a precocious talent as a writer, publishing her first poem when she was only eight years old. That same year, tragedy introduced itself into her life as Plath was forced to confront the unexpected death of her father. In 1950, she began studying at Smith College on a literary scholarship, and while she was an outstanding student, she also began suffering from bouts of extreme depression. Following her junior year, she attempted suicide for the first time. Plath survived, and, in 1955, she was granted a Fulbright Scholarship to study in England at the University of Cambridge.)
The film begins with a shot of Plath sleeping, then opening her eyes. As a student at Cambridge she rides along on her red bicycle and wearing an academic gown. She hears of a party to celebrate the publishing of a magazine called St. Botolph's, where she meets the young poet Ted Hughes. The two fall in love and marry in 1956, then go off to Massachusetts where her mother lives (Aurelia Plath, played by Paltrow's mother Blythe Danner). While they both are teaching at Smith College. Sylvia quickly learns that others are also enthralled with her husband, for a combination of his good looks, charisma, fame and success. They return to England, first to London and then to Devon, where Sylvia raises their two children and lives in her husband's professional shadow as she tries to eke out her own writing career, which doesn't come as naturally to her as it does to Ted. After a visit by David and Assia Wevill, who had rented their London flat, Sylvia rightly accuses Ted of infidelity. She kicks him out and then begins to write the poems that would be published posthumously in her collection titled Ariel. Sylvia then moves back to London with her children. Ted visits at Christmas and they make love again but he says he cannot leave Assia, who is pregnant. Shortly thereafter she prepares for her suicide, sealing off the children's room from the gas from her gas oven. A nurse comes to take out the children and Ted sees Plath's manuscript on her desk. A closing title informs us that her book made her much beloved and that Ted wrote his response in 1998 (just before his death), in a collection titled The Birthday Letters. | romantic, autobiographical | train | wikipedia | When poet and novelist Sylvia Plath committed suicide in 1963, she became the archetype of the tortured artist - particularly for sensitive young people who came to romanticize her end and her suffering in ways that lifted her and her work to iconic status.The biopic, entitled simply 'Sylvia,' gets the 'tortured' part pretty much right, but has considerably less success with the 'artist.' The film focuses mainly on the tumultuous relationship between Plath and her husband of eight years, famed poet Ted Hughes.
The movie sidesteps the electroshock therapy Plath underwent at various times in her life (though it very subtly hints at them), yet the film still manages to convey just how great a victim she was of this disease she could not overcome.Thanks to John Brownlow's rather singlemindedly depressing screenplay, there's a tremendous feeling of sadness hovering over the film.
Whatever fame she achieved in her life has been eclipsed by what can only be described as a cottage industry of people studying her relationship with Hughes, an activity more important to some than her very fine poems and her most famous book, a novel, "The Bell Jar." In short, the real Sylvia Plath, whoever she was, has been hijacked.Wells takes a sympathetic view of Ted and Sylvia, not joining in the political debate over feminism and Sylvia's supposed maltreatment by Ted. Sylvia in this film is brilliant but also terribly brittle and her inner demons are not caused by a brutish or callous husband.
A man who only wanted to be a first-rate poet, he became (and still is post mortem) the subject of arguments as to his treatment of Sylvia and his responsibility for her taking her life."Sylvia" sets the record straight as Paltrow acts the part of a woman - mother as well as poet - who slowly loses control of her life while her husband reacts first with confusion and later with the self-protective armor of withdrawal.Hughes went on to publish many fine poems and he became poet laureate of England, a post he definitely wanted and enjoyed (Hughes was one of the very few modern and relatively young intellectuals who was a convinced monarchist).Not long before succumbing to cancer, Hughes published "Birthday Letters," an attempt to show through years of verse the nature of his relationship with Sylvia.
It analyzes the poets' relationship through the prism of Hughes's writings, most unpublished before "Birthday Letters." A recent book, "Her Husband: Hughes and Plath, Portrait of a Marriage," by Diane Middlebrook, is also recommended.Incidentally, the film accurately shows Sylvia's suicide preparations which included putting breakfast next to her little kids' beds before opening their window wide and sealing their door so the gas she employed to dispatch herself wouldn't harm them.
Most people might agree that poetry offers something special, so a film celebrating the life of a famous poet might be expected to bring us a glimmer of that something.Sylvia Plath has been championed not only as a poet but as a sort of feminist' a cry on behalf of women treated as a commodity, subjugated by an unfair male-dominated system.
Cast in the lead role, Gwyneth Paltrow's Plath focuses much attention on how downtrodden she was, chained to two children, overshadowed by a brilliant and celebrated Ted Hughes, struggling with bitterness, jealousy, mental instability and a less than attractive persona.
Rather dull and uninspired biography, even though Gwyneth does a good performance, she's unable to save a biography which probably will make your own life look exciting - Sylvia Plath is portrayed as not much more than a quite ordinary housewife that is cheated on over several years.
She has her "Rain" cinematographer John Toon bathe the entire film in a nostalgia-tinged amber glow, like the extended flashbacks to the young lovers in the Australian film "Innocence." I think the point is to determinedly place Plath and her husband poet Ted Hughes into their specific time at the cusp before "The Feminine Mystique" put a name to Plath's frustrations and contradictions as a Fulbright scholar - experimental poet turned wife and mother who ultimately turned on herself.
While they are competing for editors' accolades and print space, she's setting her hair, arranging her pearls and cleaning house, like a proper Smith graduate of the time who is perfectly at home visiting her Boston mother (played by real-life mom Blythe Danner) and amidst the books of her late bee scholar father (My friend the PhD in English tells me that the original film title of "The Bee-Keeper's Daughter" would have been fraught with much more significance about Plath's obsessions.)
I am terrified to believe that the millions of people who watched this movie without actually understanding who Sylvia Plath was, her intellect, her raw and beautifully successful poetry, will come away from this movie thinking she was an untalented, petty, nagging, weak, depressed housewife who never came up with a single poem.
What the viewer gets is the portrait of a delicate, too sensitive, but innerly tortured woman, without having to face too much, as a form of respect towards the woman and her painful life, as if (and indeed it is), depression and mental disorder were something belonging to such depth of a soul that trying to render it too explicitly becomes a misleading, fake, if not disrespectful attempt; the final result being intense but never obtrusive.A little underdeveloped, maybe, is the relationship with the mother, and in general we are not given he chance to know much about Sylvia's childhood, when her mental problems began to trouble her, but on the whole the movie is well focused and gets to render the complexity of her personality: strong and weak, self-confident and depressed, longing for life but falling into an always evoked death.
Plath's well known life history is covered in straightforward biopic narrative: her close-distant, love-hate yo-yo relationship with her mother; her famous first suicide attempt and the subsequent year spent in a sanatorium that was the basis for The Bell Jar; her rocky marriage to British poet Ted Hughes that ended because of his infidelity; her prolific period as a celebrated poet and her eventual death by suicide while still young.I should point out that I thought the cinematography and production design were wonderful.
It is still reasonably interesting but I didn't feel that I learnt anything specific about Plath other than the fact that she was with a man that wasn't particularly good for her which puts her in the company of a lot of woman; the difference between her and them was her poetry but the film doesn't seem too bothered about this.The upside of this is that Paltrow is best in the role when she is being downtrodden and oppressed; when she is asked to do something other than this then she seems less sure of her character and is less able at least depressed she seems to know what is required of her.
The support is mostly pretty good, although I didn't understand what attracted Michael Gambon to such a small role, but the film pretty much belongs to Paltrow, who takes to her downtrodden well.Overall this was an average film that plays out like a relationship melodrama and didn't do much to help me understand the character or talent of Plath other than showing me what happened within her relationship with Hughes.
Sylvia Plath, while being a brilliant writer, was also a deeply disturbed and fragile woman having tryed to commit suicide at least twice before she ever met Hughes, and to suggest that his affair was responsible for her death is misleading.
I think if the filmmakers were really concerned about telling the audience the story of Sylvia Plath they should of focused on her whole life, not just her marriage to Hughes, and if they were commited to the tragic love story they should of focused more on the passionate love and less on the jealousy and bitterness.
A bit or some of such things can be handled but not to the extent that the audience gets bored by the idea of thinking again and again to understand things in the movie.The movie could have been the director's work if it would have been able to show Sylvia Plath's heart but the whole credit for the movie goes to Gwyneth Paltrow for being able to try to show the things director could not have a hold of.
I decided to watch this movie since Gwyneth Paltrow is starring as Sylvia and i heard some good reviews on the movie.To be honest, I don't read poetry at all, so I have no idea how Sylvia is talented and admired in the field.When i was watching this movie, i was just so drawn into Gwyneth's acting.Well.., the story itself is, as you know, telling how Sylvia was straggling with the relationship with her husband and how much poem meant to her life.I could see Sylvia's depression in her life through Gwyneth's great acting.The story goes kind of slowly and really focuses on Sylvia.I hope to see some development in the character of her husband, but considering to make her life into 2hrs movie, I cannot say anything about that.Personally, I liked this movie and enjoyed it, but I understand some people don't like it.If you can be satisfied with a great acting, you should check this out..
Somehow, I think there's probably much more to the life story of suicidal poetess Sylvia Plath than just her unsatisfying marriage to gad-about poet Ted Hughes.
It begins on the very day when the American Plath meets her English poet husband-to-be Ted Hughes, and it ends just a few years later with her death by suicide.
Some people blame Hughes for Plath's suicide in 1963.The film begins when American Sylvia Plath (Gwyneth Paltrow) a Fulbright Scholar at Cambridge University where she meets acclaimed and passionate Ted Hughes (Daniel Craig) a man who lives for poetry.They quickly get married and initially move to the USA.
They return to Britain, but Sylvia struggles with Ted's infidelity, his success as a writer while she raises two young children.However in time Sylvia starts to develop her own style of poetry which is based on her personal moods and state of mind.Craig gives a passionate performance as Hughes, he comes across as fiery, talented and a ladies man.
The film makes it clear that Plath had bouts of depression and even attempted suicide before she met Hughes.Sylvia cannot get a handle on the complexities of the characters that it is dealing with.
We can debate whether it's better for a biopic to focus more on the subject's work or the subject's life, but I think that it's good to have a frame of reference (in this case, Plath's unfulfilled existence).Gwyneth Paltrow puts on a pretty grim performance as Plath, while Daniel Craig makes Ted Hughes look like a real creep.
It's the first time that Gwyneth Paltrow really impressed me; she interprets wonderfully Sylvia Plath (October 27, 1932 – February 11, 1963) in this historically accurate biopic of the clinically depressed and bipolar poetess who committed suicide at the early age of 30.Even though the story starts in Cambridge, at the University where the 20 something year old Sylvia was studying, right when she meets the poet and writer Ted Hughes, there are enough hints to learn about her previous tormented life as well.The movie depicts how the two like-minded, Sylvia and Ted Hughes (a very good Daniel Craig), fall in love, encouraging and inspiring each other passionately in the same literary field.
Therefore, biographically a tad chopped to my taste.Later many feminists accused Ted Hughes of having had jeopardised Sylvia's creativity and even boycotted her to be successful out of fear of competition, I guess a little bit in the same way as August Rodin stepped on Camille Claudel.Beautifully filmed with the colours and shades of a 50's movie and the touching soundtrack suits perfectly, setting the right mood to the individual frames and some recited poems.
The film was well balanced and not unduly critical of Ted Hughes, a figure still much-vilified by the feminist lobby as being responsible for Sylvia Plath's mental disintegration and death.Daniel Craig's striking similarity to Hughes adds that extra something to his fine performance.
This film largely takes on Plath's life though her relationship with Ted Hughes, a well-known and respected poet of his day.
`I feel like God is speaking through me.' Oscar-winning actress Gwyneth Paltrow breathed life into the title character she plays in her new movie, `Sylvia' along with co-star Daniel Craig.
Now while prior to watching this movie I was not aware of American poetess Sylvia Platt (played by Gwyneth Paltrow in the movie), at least it gave me good start to her life and everything else in between.This movie first began with her university days at Cambridge and it's where she met Ted Hughes (Daniel Craig), her future husband.
Christine Jeffs (2003) biographical film of the life of American poet Sylvia Plath (Gwyneth Paltrow) is set mainly in Boston and Cambridge in the 1950's.
It documents her troubled marriage to the eventual British poet laureate Ted Hughes (Daniel Craig).Considering that Sylvia Plath's life was destined to be a dark tragedy from the time her father died until she eventually took her own life, this film manages to give a sensitive and balanced view of her fragile existence and the bleak helplessness of the people who surrounded her and loved her as best they could in these difficult times.Professor Thomas (Michael Gambon) stands out in the film as a truly helpless bystander who is painfully aware of the incomprehensible hopelessness of Sylvia's situation yet somehow touches the spirit of it with something as simple as candles and matches in a power cut.
If you want to know more about that read "The Bell Jar" which is a memoir disguised as a novel.The person with whom I watched this movie was not at all interested in Plath's work or her life.
Gwyneth Paltrow does a good job of portraying Plath, and Daniel Craig is decent as Ted Hughes.
Despite Gwyneth Paltrow and Daniel Craig's solid performances, this filmsuffers from a sketchy script that rushes past the important elements of therelationship between Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes to reinforce a set of cliches.
One could not really pinpoint to where the fault is and what is lacking in the adaptation of this Sylvia Plath's biography.Daniel Craig makes us despise his Ted Hughes, a man who went to bigger and better things while his wife, who obviously was more talented in her short life.
That's a problem, given that the two main characters are Ted Hughes and Sylvia Plath, two of the more celebrated poets of their time, and doubtless the lack of their work in the movie stems from the hostility of their respective literary estates to the making of this film.
The company credits read that this was a BBC film funded by the arts council which could only mean one thing - It's of little interest to anyone who didn't work on the movie , but to be fair I was pleasantly surprised as to how the story drew me in This is a bio-pic on Sylvia Plath the wife of famous poet Laurette Ted Hughes .
Also, from the description of the way Sylvia and Ted met (love at first sight and how she bit his cheek), I thought there would be more fiery passion in the movie.But if there is anything more boring than watching a depressed woman sit around and think about committing suicide, I wish you would tell me!
Gwyneth Paltrow was fine in the part, but the movie did nothing to make me understand why so many people think Sylvia Plath's work was so great.
Ted Hughes is treated in a much better light than is usual in the analysis of this particular subject, the film in parts seemingly blaming Sylvia for the problems which so famously caused her to take her own life.A nice idea, but perhaps a more balanced and in-depth analysis of the intense relationship between these two great minds would be preferable.
ANYTHING to portray an interesting, REAL person and to relieve the monotony of all the pseudo-artsy posing that goes on in the film.)In short, this movie sucks every bit of life out of Plath, portraying her as a zombie-like character almost from the get-go, when in fact we know from reading her own words that there was actually a thinking, feeling, LIVING person on the premises up until the very end..
It doesn't go into enough depth for a love story or for Scenes From a Marriage, Times Literary Supplement style."Sylvia" is the airplane movie of Plath's life.
A more appropriate title for Christine Jeffs' film would have been "Ted and Sylvia" as we only pick up poet Sylvia Plath's (Gwyneth Paltrow) life from the time when she met fellow poet Ted Hughes (Daniel Craig).
"Sylvia" from 2003 is basically the story of poet Sylvia Plath's relationship with her husband, the poet Ted Hughes, rather than the story of Plath's life, therapy, or evolution as a writer.Someone here put it best -- Plath suffered from depression from the time of her father's death when she was 9 years old, but she also had an almost manic energy which enabled her to churn out her work...and the mania in this film is sadly lacking.
This biography of the relationship between poets Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes is beautifully played out in this film.
This film tells the real-life story of the complex relationship between Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes, two famous poets who were married to one another.
I've wanted to see this movie for quite some time, so you can imagine my disappointment when I found a shallow and almost un-sympathetic retelling of the great Sylvia Plath's marriage to Ted Hughes.The story at first felt very rushed and then just seemed to drag on. |
tt0055992 | Follow That Dream | A vagabond family composed of Pop Kwimper (Arthur O'Connell), his son Toby (Elvis Presley), and various "adopted" children, including nineteen-year-old Holly Jones (Anne Helm), is traveling in Florida when Pop drives onto an as-yet-unopened section of highway. When the car runs out of gas, Holly persuades Toby to persuade Pop to take up residence on the land next to the road. A chance encounter with an avid fisherman (Herbert Rudley) gives Holly an idea. They build a thriving business catering to sports fishermen.
Trouble soon follows. Toby rejects the advances of amorous social worker Alisha Claypoole (Joanna Moore), who goes to court to have the children taken away in revenge. Also, her government official boyfriend considers the squatters' home to be an eyesore and wants to evict them. Finally, since the area is outside the jurisdiction of any law enforcement, two gamblers (Jack Kruschen and Simon Oakland) soon set up a casino in a trailer, and Toby has to deal with their armed thugs.
In the end, Toby's earthy wits win over the judge and the family returns to its new land and home. Holly also gets Toby to recognize that she is a grown woman. | cult, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0069316 | The Stone Tape | Peter Brock (Michael Bryant) is the selfish and petulant head of a research team for Ryan Electrics. His team is developing a new recording medium that will give the company an edge over its Japanese competitors. They move into a new facility at Taskerlands, an old Victorian mansion that has been renovated for their use. On arrival, they learn from estates manager Roy Collinson (Iain Cuthbertson) that the refurbishment of one of the rooms in Taskerlands remains uncompleted, the builders having refused to work in it because it is supposedly haunted. The room, with its stone walls, is a remnant of the original building, with foundations dating back to the Saxon era. The rest of the mansion was added on over the centuries.
Curious, the researchers explore the room and hear the sounds of a woman running followed by a gut-wrenching scream. Jill Greeley (Jane Asher), an emotionally sensitive computer programmer, has a vision of a woman running up the steps in the room and falling, apparently to her death.
Inquiring with the local villagers, they learn that a young maid died in that room during Victorian times and that an unsuccessful exorcism had previously been performed on the property.
Brock hypothesises that it is not a ghost, but that somehow the stone in the room has preserved an image of the girl's death—this "stone tape" may be the new recording medium they have been seeking. Their scientific devices fail to detect any evidence of the phenomena the team experience, and different team members experience different phenomena: most are able to hear sounds, Jill can also see images, but another member of the team experiences no sensory input. Jill hypothesises that the "tape" does not produce actual sound or light, but instead interfaces with the human nervous system during playback to create the sensory impression of sound and vision, and some individuals are more sensitive to this than others. She surmises that the recordings are imprinted in moments of extreme emotion, like a kind of telepathy.
Excited by the possibilities presented by a recording medium which uses a person's own senses as the means of recording and playback, Brock and his team move into the room. They bombard it with their technology, hoping to find the secret of the "stone tape" and have it play on demand. When results are not forthcoming and under mounting pressure to succeed, a last desperate attempt wipes the recording and some team members break under the strain. Brock's failures are compounded when he is informed by his superiors that they have lost confidence in his work, and that the Taskerlands facility is to be shared with a rival research team working on a new washing machine.
Embittered, Brock no longer wants anything to do with the stone tape. He disregards Jill's insistence that there is still more to learn about the room and her mounting concerns that it is dangerous to stop their research. After studying the failed exorcism, Jill presents the theory that the stone tape can be recorded over again and again, like magnetic recording tape; the maid's death was simply the most recent and clearest recording. Independently continuing her research, Jill realizes that the maid's death was masking a much older recording, left many thousands of years ago. Brock cruelly dismisses her findings, and forces Jill to take a two-month leave to prevent her from continuing her research.
Returning to the room one last time, Jill's senses are besieged by a powerful, malevolent presence from the much-degraded older recording. Like the maid before her, she dies while frantically trying to escape it.
During an inquest, Brock tries to save face by denouncing Jill as having been mentally unstable. Afterwards he orders that all of Jill's research be destroyed without reviewing it. The "haunted" room has been declared of historical importance by a preservation society, prohibiting development, destruction, or commercial use. He makes a final visit to the room and discovers to his horror that the stone tape has made a new, crystal-clear recording—that of Jill screaming his name as she dies. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1780762 | Aftershock | Three travelers, Gringo, Ariel, and Pollo travel through Chile. They party in a club and meet three young women, sisters Monica and Kylie, and their Russian friend Irina. The two groups pair up and decide to travel down to Valparaiso together. They party at another club in Valparaiso when an earthquake strikes, killing many of the partygoers and trapping some under debris. Ariel's hand is cut off as he tries to help a trapped bartender. The group tries to get out but their exit is blocked by more falling debris. The cleaning lady of the club leads them through a tunnel to a nearby manhole. As they proceed to climb out, a passing truck hits the old lady and kills her. Once out on the street, the group tries to get to their car but find it destroyed. Ariel's condition continues to get worse due to blood loss and the group decides that they need to get him to the hospital on top of the hill as soon as possible. Suddenly, a tsunami warning is heard and they all rush to the cart going up the hill. After some negotiation, they are able to get Ariel on the cart with other people in line. The group watches the cart reach the top of the hill when an aftershock suddenly occurs, causing the cart to fall all the way back down, destroying the cable and killing everyone inside.
After mourning the death of their friend, the group heads toward the cemetery, trying to reach the cathedral at the top of the hill through a previously mentioned hidden tunnel. The group comes upon a looting party on the street which turns out to be escaped prisoners from a nearby prison that was damaged during the earthquake. They try to run past but the women of the group attract some attention. While running away, part of a building falls on top of Gringo and pins him in place, still alive and conscious. Monica and Pollo leave to get help while Irina and Kylie stay with Gringo. While they are seeking help, Monica and Pollo come across an out-of-control firetruck. The truck crashes and one of the firefighters in the cab is run through by wooden beams while the other one is trapped. Pollo and Monica get the living firefighter out, who explains that some prisoners were trying to take over the firetruck, which was why it went out of control. Meanwhile, as Irina is trying to comfort the seriously injured Gringo, Kylie hears the prisoners approaching. Gringo tells Kylie and Irina to hide, reasoning that they would only take his money. The women hide in the tombs while the prisoners threaten Gringo. They pour alcohol on him, threatening to light him up if he doesn't tell them where the women were. Frightened, Gringo motions toward their hiding place with his eyes. Irina crawls out of her hiding place and tries to run away. She is quickly captured by the prisoners. The leader of the prisoners rapes Irina while the rest of the gang sit around telling jokes. Gringo throws a rock at the leader, trying to stop him from continuing raping Irina. The leader, enraged, lights him up and burns Gringo alive, killing him. Kylie, hearing all the chaos outside decides to run. The group goes after her, but the leader's brother stays behind to continue raping Irina. Kylie is able to run away, bumping into Monica and the others. They go back for Irina and Pollo axes the leader's brother to death. Just as the group is about to run, the prisoners return, the leader seeing the dead body of his brother and fires at them, killing Irina. The rest of the group manages to escape and comes across a gated building with other survivors who live there. A single mother does not want to let them through but her neighbor wants to open the gate. As Pollo begs, the woman shoots him in the chest injuring him. The others help carry him away but decided to hide him so they can go get help. Pollo's phone suddenly rings and one of the prisoners hears it and finds him. They kill him and continue to go after the others. The group finally arrives at the cathedral where they are saved by a priest who shuts the door just in time. As another aftershock hits, the Cathedral begins to fall apart. The priest leads them to a secret passage inside the cathedral. As the group descends a ladder through the secret passage, another aftershock shakes the ladder off. The priest falls off in the process to his death, and Kylie falls on top of a metal object that pierces her thigh. Monica, meanwhile, is stranded at the top alone as she was the last to go down the ladder. The firefighter attempts to help Kylie by removing the object and takes off his own coat to try to stop the bleeding. Taking off his coat reveals the prison tattoos on his arms and shoulders. He turns out to be one of the escaped prisoners who was taking over the fire truck, Kylie panics and promises that she won't tell anyone.
Monica is able to find some ropes and goes down the ladder shaft to an empty landing. She finds Kylie's body in one of the tunnels. The fake firefighter/prisoner then tries to kill her but an aftershock occurs and Monica is able to kill him with the axe instead. Monica finally manages to escape through the tunnel and onto a beach. She walks around the beach, bewildered that she was able to escape to safety at last. As she turns around, she sees a tsunami rushing toward her. | revenge, suspenseful, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | Just bad, unoriginal, characters you have little reason to care about, in search of shocks the film continually seeks for escalations but most of them, right down to the ending are predictable.
The acting and dialogue weren't altogether bad but I'm really not sure whether in the end this was a bad comedy or a truly awful disaster movie.You have to hope that in the end Eli Roth is not funded to make any more rubbish films - ironic to think some really good film makers get funding cut off at the knees for being un-commercial but this sort of junk gets made.
After an earthquake they have to find their way out from an underground nightclub only to find the city in chaos with cons roaming the streets.The opening is way too long and does not indicate at all what genre it belongs to, nor does it hint that the characters will face off against criminals in the last third of the Movie, major plot flaws if you ask me.
Everything here is just so trite and so plain, so cliché and laughable, downright vulgar and derivative, at the best, i finally came to the conclusion that maybe I should truly stick to some of those low budget's B or even C grade Horror flicks, that, at least, most times, are way more interesting to watch than anything like this mess, since those indie Horror's dare more, they push the limits, and, they truly get controversial!
But, this semi costly crap, all telephoned as it is, and, on top, even so fake as it feels, to the limits of ridiculous, ends to become only another annoying failure to entertain, at its very best, and, it never even gets real scary or chilling, nor sexy, and, truly, never visionary, or, at least something a little interesting to watch at any possible level..
If, instead he was to go back to watch those classic Euro Horrors from the Golden era, he says inspired him so much, then, who knows, perhaps, and, with a little effort, he could go back on shooting some new film, and, finally make something daring, provocative and thoroughly scary, and, with some tension, like his first Cabin Fever was...
First thing is I love disaster movies even ones which have been slated I have enjoyed but this just doesn't work on any level, first thing is nothing happens for over 30mins I suppose they were trying to get you attached to the characters or use shock when things kick off which works incredibly well with an epic film like the perfect storm you really do end up completely engrossed, but with this its an epic failure I just ended up thinking what I'm supposed to feel for these drunks, these over privileged rich kids that act like selfish aggressive *****, I actually was hoping they were going to get taken out lol, mix this with terrible acting clichéd ideas, its all terrible, it earns 2 stars because underneath it there is a couple of nice ideas, but it just goes to prove you do need proper writing/direction and people who can act not just play drunk well, also what we are meant to feel sorry for the main dude because he has a kid.....
There is obviously a joke to be made about fecal matter and the title of this picture (which has probably happened a million times) but after watching Aftershock...a total disaster "of a" movie, I don't feel like "piling" on.
Not so much the blood and guts kind of way (which was lacking) but important stuff, like major events that come out looking like something you'd see on SyFy.But even better (if you are looking for this sort of thing) the combined horrible writing/acting on display, actually kept my interest from start to finish, in a so bad it's good kinda way.
With a busy schedule and a short attention span, I have a hard time sitting down for a movie in one viewing but no lie (maybe I was in a really good mood at the time) I watched Aftershock the entire way through on the first try, with only a slight ache in my belly from laughing so hard.For those interested in what Aftershock was shot with (a C-300) and more importantly what the final outcome looked like, I'm pleased to say the outside daytime shots looked great and the low-light shots were more than passable.
Ignoring the fact that there is a lens being used that is probably more expensive than the camera it is attached to, this should inspire a lot of future filmmakers to go out there and make their own movies without the constraint of needing expensive cameras looming over them.PROS -One or two good twists relating to how one might act during a crisis -Killer untouched locations straight from the actual quake -Shot on a camera cheaper than most cars but doesn't look like it -Eli Roth's over acting is fun to laugh at.CONS -Virtually no gore in a movie promising gore!
A rubber appendage from the dollar store bouncing around the screen for 5 minutes does not a Fulci film it make.FINAL SCORE I was all set to give it 1/10 for being a technically well shot movie but still horrible, then a 2/10 for making me laugh when I wasn't expecting to but as the final scene approached, I told myself, if the film makers went in the direction where I hoped they were going to go, I'd bump it up another point.
Pretty good special effects, bad acting at times...but, what movie doesn't have all that, anyway?Give it a shot...there's some gore, there's some cursing, there's a lot of violence.
When they see the women on the streets, they hunt them down along the nightmarish night."Aftershock" is a lame American-Chilean horror movie with a terrible story that is a nightmare for the viewers and shallow characters.
Aftershock (2012) * (out of 4) Set in Santiago, Chile, a group of people are traveling around partying and having a good time but that all changes when an earthquake rips the city apart.
EARTHQUAKE meets THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is pretty much the only way to describe this awful movie that starts off bad and just gets worse as it goes along.
Reminiscent of the character build up that came with Eli Roth's own Hostel director Nicolás López delivers a hard hitting freely traditionally shot (no found footage here) well executed, gritty disaster film which successfully shocks with its unnerving set ups and exceptional special effects.
While not a horror in the traditional sense with graphic amputations, rape, drugs, a human torch, shooting and murders to name a few, granted it will make the regular viewer wince but it's well written and sharply directed by López - forget the endless copycat films of the same sub-genre if you rated Hostel and part 2 this sleeper isn't one to miss..
I understand Eli Roth had something to do with the film and people say he was responsible for most of the gore, but wait a minute, the gore and tragedy are nowhere near this fluffy and nice in real life.
and don't skip ahead like some people suggest, the movie builds up and connects you to all the characters in just enough time that right when you say: okay enough partying, things are going well, I get it - bam!
I think I'm going to have to make peace with the fact that Roth will not be making quality horror films like Hostel or even Cabin Fever anymore.
The film immediately opens with scenes of three men, Gringo(Roth)the practical guy, Pollo(Nicolás Martínez)the laid back ladies man and Pollo's lifelong friend Ariel(Ariel Levy)the nervous type who is preoccupied with reconnecting with his ex-girlfriend, all vacationing in beautiful Chile, having a blast club hopping while looking for some beautiful women to spend the night with.
Cutting to the plot-line itself, I found it refreshing that unlike many other lower-budget and less-known disaster movies, the viewer is given time to settle into the scene and characters before all hell breaks loose.
Though somehow this felt different
perhaps it was the anticipation, the fact that I (foolishly) avoided reviews and put my faith in Eli Roth, the sick yet somehow unmistakable visionary behind the glorious Cabin Fever (2002) and Hostel (2005) and refused to foresee anything other than a blood-drenched, high octane original thrill ride that would stand as one of the guilty pleasures of the year.Ladies and Gentlemen, I can inform you with much certainty that there are no pleasures at all to be gained here, and that Nicolas Lopez' grand, thorough failure is one of the worst movies ever made.Is it the acting?
I understand that as a producer he needs to promote his project, but to recommend Aftershock is to recommend creating a latch in your head and pouring your brain cells down the sink.As a film fan, I just want to feel a connection to the material displayed before me, whether it be through fear, grief, joy or humor; movies have a magical ability to transport us places and show/teach us things that stick close to our hearts and heads, as well as entertain us like no other art-form in the process.
I went into this expecting a lower budget film about a group of party goers including Eli Roth, who get trapped inside a nightclub when a massive earthquake hits Chile.
The scope of the movie shows much of "The Real" Chile as the character played by the director Nicolas Lopez tells his American friend simply called "Gringo" played by Roth.
It takes a bit of run time before the earthquake happens, but not too long and then the action does not stop.In the DVD making of the director said he got the idea for this movie because he survived a tragedy like this that struck Chile in 2010.
(How did they build a hospital with only cable car access?) By this point you won't need reminding this is an Eli Roth horror movie, for better or worse, and you know it's going to be brutal.
If you've ever seen an Eli Roth movie, you know what to expect, which essentially is that it's kind of cheap, lots of blood, lots of gore and a few awkward laughs thrown in here and there on a modest film budget.
But I do want to express that I feel this was an absolutely brilliant movie by a wonderful and talented newcomer, Nicolas Lopez, with the collaboration of established master Eli Roth.We'd all like to think (or hope) that everybody will be philanthropic and kind in the face of disaster, but this film shows us the frightening reality of human nature.
But after forty minutes of needless setup, scene after scene of sequences which mimic those outrageously low budget SyFy Channel movies shown at two in the morning, and the fact that my suspicions of this films watchability were already high considering it was only produced (not directed) by Roth, it soon became clear that "Aftershock" was built on a foundation which literally fell apart at the seams.Synopsis: A group of "young people" who seek an adventure (lead by non-actor Eli Roth himself) attempt to find it in a country outside of the United States.
So, after said phenomenon occurs, the movie doesn't seem to know what to do with itself, as if Roth and friends hadn't come prepared with any other plot development which could sustain a feature length film.
So, aside from a few smirk inducing social network jokes, an extremely short back and forth between Roth and one Selena Gomez and some minor suspenseful situations in the final 30 minutes, "Aftershock" is a generic and somewhat boring horror endeavor.Final Thought: The ending is actually the best part of this movie, and I'm not even being sarcastic.
oops I guess there goes keeping this short.Anyways, I just watched it this morning so while it's fresh in my mind, is this movie any good?If you like horror, action and/or adventure (along the line of Jaws, though this is no Jaws) you might enjoy this.
Add in a couple of "didn't see that coming" plot twists, a fun ending and you may start moving towards the edge of your seat but, I don't think you'll make it all the way there.Bottom line, it's not a particularly moving piece of cinema but,if you got an hour and a half to kill and you're not paying for it (like me I caught it on cable) It's still better than a lot of the other crap I've seen lately on TV so it's coming in at a solid, watchable but not earth-shaking 6.
It's certainly an original film and makes some intriguing points sadly it's bogged down by the amateurness of the production overall and a controlling need to try and make the proceedings entertaining which they never are.So if you've seen taht nifty red band trailer that looks utterly ridiculous and like a lot of fun you're in for a much different experience indeed for better and worse.
Anyone can meet their untimely end when you least expect it, just like a real life disaster.This may sound like an intense and nihilistic experience, but beneath the surface, the film sticks to the usual horror movie rules and holds back too much to be a truly effective shocker.
A bunch of tourists are in Chile to party, but when an earthquake hits the city, they need to fight for survival, not only against the natural disaster, but also against criminals who seized the opportunity to escape from prison.I would have rated 'Aftershock' higher than 6 of 10 if it wasn't for the boring first 30 minutes.
Probably should have avoided it for the persistent Eli Roth involvement, but considering this is meant to be a disaster type movie, it was grotesquely over the top in terms of pointless gore and death, above and beyond what would be realistically expected in an earthquake.i'm not even someone who gets sick or repulsed by gore in movies but much like fudgy chocolate cake, if you eat fifty pounds of it in one sitting, you'll never want it again and you'll wish everything around you was dead.this film takes a tediously long period of time to actually get to its core concept, spending way too long to build up a group of barely likeable characters cruising around Chilean nightlife looking for parties and women.
'AFTERSHOCK': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five) Horror master Eli Roth co-wrote, co-produced and co-stars in this disaster/horror film about six tourists trying to survive the aftermath of an earthquake that hits an underground nightclub in Chile.
The movie feels like a slasher version of your typical disaster flick with the earthquake and societal chaos being the movie's main villain.The film revolves around six travelers in Chile (Roth, Andrea Osvart, Nicolas Martinez, Ariel Levy, Lorenza Izzo and Natasha Yarovenko) partying at an underground nightclub in Chile when an earthquake hits.
The two groups spend the next day together and go to an underground party when an earthquake hits.This is Eli Roth and his two douchey friends with 3 hot girls in a troubled South American country.
Writer Eli Roth bags a big role as a geeky father figure who spends his time trying to score with various women, although Nicholas Martinez's comic Pollo is the film's most likable character.
Aftershock is written and directed by Nicolás López (Eli Roth takes a co-writing credit) who uses true stories of the real 8.8 magnitude earthquake that hit Chile in 2010 as the basis for his survival film, and filmed it in a lot of the same locations where the actual earthquake hit.
Although the story and characters become a bit predictable, with a couple of plot holes here and there, it still is an entertaining film to watch and more so if you enjoy Roth's work..
Working with co-writers Nicolàs López and Guillermo Amoedo, this kind of approach makes the film function but not entirely, seeing as this is the kind of story that could've greatly benefited from scenes of true terror and fright.Good horror/disaster movies have unfortunately become novelties, but because of its lower budget, Aftershock possesses a kind sincerity and intimacy in its material that allows itself to be rewarded with recognition.
More stupid people in ridiculous situations, more women treated like pieces of meat on the male hormone market and more stupid decisions that lead to dumber consequences.The only thing decent about this film was the fact that Eli Roth allows himself to be killed off.That's not normally something you see...lead actors biting the dirt.As for the rest of the cast...good riddance.
Aftershock is written and directed by Nicolás López (Eli Roth takes a co-writing credit) who uses true stories of the real 8.8 magnitude earthquake that hit Chile in 2010 as the basis for his survival film.
The build-up to the disaster takes forever though, and we spend half of the film meeting the characters before the earthquake.
Not the worst horror movie I've rented recently, but with Eli Roth involved, one would expect better..
Oh, by the way, Eli Roth "acts" in this movie, and his character suffers a particularly extended and gruesome fate.
I'll leave it there since I don't want to spoil the ending.Although the story and characters become a bit predictable, with a couple of plot holes here and there (I really didn't understand the fireman characters intentions), it still is an entertaining film to watch and more so if you enjoy Roth's work..
There is some pretty brutal violence and unpredictable deaths, but there's not nearly as much carnage as you might expect, or hope for, from a movie with Eli Roth's involvement.I was generally entertained by Aftershock, but it didn't blow me away and, like so many modern flicks, it just feels kind of disposable.
You know that is true before you ever start watching am Eli Roth film. |
tt0058694 | Two Thousand Maniacs! | Six Yankee tourists whom make up two married couples, John and Bea Miller, David and Beverly Wells, plus an unmarried couple of Tom White and Terry Adams, are lured via detour signs placed in the road into the fictional small Southern town of Pleasant Valley by "redneck" citizens, to be the "guests of honor" for the April 1965 centennial celebration of the two days where Union troops destroyed the town at the end of the Civil War. The three couples meet the town mayor, Joseph Buckman, and his two right-hand men, Rufus and Lester, as well as shop owner Harper and his girlfriend Betsy. The tourists are initially treated with hospitality and given rooms to stay in the local hotel. However that afternoon, after an argument with her husband, Bea goes off with Harper to a wooded area for alone time where he shows off his pocket knife, but then slices off her right thumb. Harper takes Bea to Mayor Buckman's office where she is accousted by Rufus and Lester who hold her down on a table and dismember her alive with an axe.
Meanwhile, Tom tries to explain to Terry about something strange going on with the town and attempts to contact for help on the outside, but cannot get through. He tries using a local payphone where he tells a friend where he is staying. But unknown to Tom, the person on the other line is Mayor Buckman.
That evening, Bea's dismembered limbs are roasted over a barbecue with the townspeople in attendance. Wondering away from the gathering, Tom and Terry discover a park plaque describing the "blood centennial" celebration in which they will be killed. While David and Beverly are taken back to the hotel, the drunken John is apprehended by the townspeople and made to participate in a "horse race," which entails his body being ripped apart limb by limb by four different horses who are roped to his extremities.
The next day, the remaining tourists are forced to participate in various cruel games which led to their gory deaths. David is rolled downhill in a barrel embedded with nails. Beverly is lured to the town square where she is tied up and is crushed by a boulder held aloft in a contraption resembling a carnival-style dunk tank. After discovering the nefarious plans of the townspeople, Tom and Terry manage to escape from their hotel room with Harper in pursit. They run to a nearby swamp area where Harper falls into a quicksand pit and drowns.
With a little help from a little boy named Billy, whom Tom and Terry take with them as a hostage/guide, they manage to locate Terry's red car and drive out of town while being chased by Rufus, Lester and a horde of townsmen. After releasing Billy, Terry and Tom make it to the nearby main road and drive away. Later, Tom and Terry arrive at a local police station where they tell the disbeliving sheriff about their ordeal. Back in Pleasant Valley, Mayor Buckman orders his people to take down the centennial banner and declares the celebration over.
Tom and Terry return with the local policeman to Pleasant Valley, only discover that the town has disappeared. The policeman is skeptic to their story about the murderous townspeople, but comes to think there may be some truth in it for he tells Tom and Terry the story that 100 years ago as the Civil War was drawing to an end, a group of renegade Union troops attacked the small town of Pleasant Valley and, over two days, massacred the entire population of 2,000 people and burned the town to the ground. But there are local legends that the town's ghosts haunt the clearing and wooded areas where the town once stood. After leaving the area, Tom and Terry finally realize that the all of the townspeople of Pleasant Valley that they interacted with were ghosts who come back from the dead once every 100 years into their contemporary time to kill Northern people as a blood vengance for their deaths. The film ends with Tom and Terry driving away, while the vengeful spirits of Rufus and Lester watch them depart, along with Harper who emerges from the quicksand pit where he drowned. Rufus and Lester talk about looking forward to the next centennial in 2065, when Pleasant Valley will rise again to resume its vendetta against the Yankees and what technology they expect will be in store for them and the town when they emerge from their limbo state. Harper, Rufus and Lester walk into a nearby fog and disappear. | violence, revenge, horror, cruelty, sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0108341 | Time Indefinite | In the film, director Ross McElwee gets married, finally putting an end to his family's worrying; his grandmother dies; his wife Marilyn has a miscarriage; and his father, a medical doctor, dies suddenly within a week of McElwee's wife's miscarriage. His mother had died of cancer ten years earlier and so McElwee returns to his father's house, where his father's housekeeper ministers to him about Christianity and faith.
McElwee goes to visit his friend Charleen, who is now living alone in a new apartment. She had lived on an island in an old two-story house abandoned by the U.S. Army; she and her husband worked to restore it and lived together there for years before becoming estranged. Charleen then lived there alone, but on returning home from a trip she finds that her husband has set fire to the house and died downstairs at the grand piano in an arson/suicide. Charleen has her husband's cremated remains in a bag inside a box and tries to get rid of them but can't bring herself to do it.
McElwee's brother is a successful doctor; on a visit to his brother's practice, Ross talks with his brother about their father's death, which took them both by surprise. Ross's brother receives a patient who has a large malignant tumor on her breast; the woman has had the tumor for years without seeking medical help. Ross's brother takes a slide of the tumor for his files; it has spread across much of her chest and is both multifaceted and multicolored. Ross incorporates his brother's interview with the woman—and the slide his brother takes—into his film, musing in voiceover about motivation and fatality and marvelling at the power of denial.
Eventually Ross abandons the film, only to continue it later: his wife is pregnant. The pregnancy comes to term and Ross and Marilyn go with their baby son to visit Charleen, who criticizes them for bringing children into such a hostile and unpredictable world but speaks to the passion that drives life and procreation. Ross and Marilyn dote on their son and seem largely unbothered by the criticism. | autobiographical | train | wikipedia | Captures the interior/exterior dialogue of life clearly and beautifully. In the head of every human runs a dialogue with oneself. We are thinking about the perception our eyes are scanning every moment. In the head of a filmmaker, these processes are twice as complex, as he is examining the world as if it were life imitating art and vice versa. There's a sly and profound moment in Ross McElwee's "Time Indefinite" where the filmmaker (and main subject) is having his blood drawn, in accordance with the State Laws that require such an ordeal before marriage. Ross is looking at this through his camera and he tells us that he would rather watch it through his viewfinder because it's almost as if it were not happening in real life, but only in the world inside his film. That said, he purports to make his life into a document of absolute truth - sometimes comical, sometimes endearing - always real. What an amazing technique. What a film of exploration. Never have I sat viewing a film that moved me so effortlessly.He bargains with his wife on the wedding day for ten more minutes of footage. Why would someone do that? He has grown up around his uncles, who shot thousands of hours of home movie footage and when he unearths the footage of his parents' wedding, not seen for ages, he realizes how many moments have been missed. To Ross, those ten minutes he is granted by his wife are ten minutes more he will have documented regarding the great journey of victories and downfalls that his life.The film appears to be the maximum in solipsism, but, in fact, the opposite is more true. Ross doesn't come off as self-obsessed, but rather concerned. He is concerned with death and the whole issue of mortality that confronts us all. He wants a record of his life. Sure, he has a performance aspect to his role inside the film's world and the "flat but cynical" (To quote the great Paul Swann) voice-over narration, added long after the camera was put away, adds an internal aspect that puts him in center stage; but forget all that - this is a treasure to him. All this footage that everyone he knows has had to cope with being a part of is well-worth it in spades. Ross McEffee has done himself and his family justice when he paints his world out of what it gives him on a daily basis - reality and hidden messages within the everyday humdrum.Isn't that life, anyway? A series of images processed to mean what you take it to mean? When Ross greets a Jehova's Witness at the door and questions the bible as a means of comfort to the world's collapse, we are seeing in the simplest of terms, one thing perceived two different ways.This is Ross's life according to Ross. And it's brilliant. Insightful/Moving. The "sequel" of sorts to McElwee's brilliant "Sherman's March" as he continues to film his life, only now things have really changed: he gets married and he has a son. All of this makes him question many things: his mortality, what is important, true love, fidelity, lineage and he does it brilliantly. I've always enjoyed the form of documentary filmmaking but so many of them are bad, sloppy and rambling, but somehow, McElwee's always seems to avoid that. This is a terrific film and something worth renting (especially if you are a newlywed or just had your first child).. Self-Indulgent McTwaddle. Does anyone care about Ross McElwee's life except Ross McElwee? Having seen several of his movies (I took a course in documentaries, and the instructor was enamored of the oh-so-twee McElwee), I can honestly say that I don't. I don't care about his family; I don't care about his wife; and most of all, I don't care about him. Some find his meandering self-explorations charming; they're just boring. And I can't recommend this film to anyone unless they are very willing to waste two hours of their life. |
tt0042360 | Cue Ball Cat | Tom is playing pool in a pool hall, pocketing two balls by physically moving the table and a side pocket. Tom then wakes Jerry up by pocketing the 10-ball, which rolls Jerry to the ball return before the 10 and 13 balls squash Jerry between each other. Jerry walks up through the pocket, but spots Tom perched behind it.
Jerry tries to jump into another corner pocket, but Tom hits a cue ball at Jerry with so much force that it rolls and spins backwards to Tom; Jerry slides up Tom's cue stick before Tom blows him down. Tom then shoots a stream of balls to flatten Jerry before the balls rebound back towards Tom with Jerry on them and stack up at the end of the table. Tom hits the balls in succession with his cue; Jerry hangs onto the cue tip, but Tom rubs chalk on Jerry and shoots him at the 8-ball.
Jerry becomes dizzy and is upended by the 8-ball, which rolls in circles. Tom forces Jerry to jump through a ball rack, even setting it on fire, before discarding the flaming rack and shooting the 8-ball across the table, which rebounds and hits Jerry, giving the mouse the 8-mark printed on his rear. Enraged, Jerry flings Tom's cue stick into his face.
Tom throws the 8-ball at Jerry, but Jerry ducks and the ball bounces back into Tom's face. Tom then throws the 8 and 6 balls, but Jerry hits them back into Tom's eyes with a cue. Tom puts on a catcher's glove and throws the 10-ball, which is returned with such force that it burns a hole through Tom's glove. Tom then throws the 1-ball, and Jerry breaks his cue returning it. Tom, dashing through the pool hall to catch it, stretches backwards and barely catches the 1-ball, but due to its weight and the cat's unbalanced posture, Tom is pulled into a drink machine and spat out as a drink bottle.
Jerry then dives into a corner pocket. Tom gropes through the pocket to find Jerry, but grabs his own tail, pulling himself through the pockets. Tom then sticks a hose down the holes, sweeping Jerry up, and swings a mechanical bridge to hit Jerry, but Jerry, latching onto the end, climbs up onto a wire and steals the bridge. Jerry uses the bridge as a balancing stick, but Tom throws two cues at Jerry. The first hits the wire dead centre and shreds in two, but the second scrapes Jerry's rear to an alarming red. Angry, Jerry then shoots the mechanical bridge into Tom's mouth.
Jerry then runs away as Tom shoots a stream of balls at him, which chase Jerry in and out of various pockets. The balls then chase Jerry on their own accord, but Jerry jumps on Tom and opens his mouth, causing Tom to swallow all seven balls. Jerry then flees into a corner pocket, and Tom pokes his cue through it, but Jerry attaches a hatpin to the tip of the cue, which strikes Tom when he pokes again, causing Tom to rise yelling in pain and then fall into the hole at a corner. Jerry then tidies the rack, with all fifteen balls inside it, and hits them all. The cue balls all fall into holes except for the 1-ball; when Jerry whacks Tom with the cue, Tom screams and ends up swallowing it before the cartoon closed. | comic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0092549 | Miami Connection | A cocaine deal in Miami is interrupted by a group of motorcycle-riding ninjas led by Yashito, who steal the drugs and ride back to Orlando to party. At a club, Yashito's close associate, Jeff, sees his sister Jane onstage. She has become romantically involved with John, the bassist of the club's band, Dragon Sound, which consists of five best friends who are University of Central Florida students, live together and train Taekwondo. Jeff disapproves of his sister's relationship with John and confronts him at school, but Mark, rhythm guitarist of Dragon Sound, and Taekwondo instructor and father figure to the other band members, stands up to him.
Another band confronts the owner of the club over his hiring of Dragon Sound, but gets beaten up. The band leader brings a large group of rowdy guys to Dragon Sound directly and fights them in the street, but Dragon Sound defeats them with Taekwondo. Consequently, the rival band enlists the help of Jeff, who summons Dragon Sound to fight at a train depot, but he and his gang are badly defeated by Dragon Sound's superior martial arts skills. Jeff tries again by kidnapping Tom, the lead guitarist and singer of Dragon Sound. The remaining band members stage a rescue, wherein they free Tom and accidentally kill Jeff. Yashito is angered by Jeff's death and sets out for revenge.
Meanwhile, the keyboardist of the band, Jim, has revealed that he is searching for his long-lost father. He finally receives word that his father has been relocated, so the band pools their money to buy him a suit and then head to the airport. Along the way, Yashito and his gang of ninjas surround Mark, Jim and John and chase them into a park, where they do battle. Jim is critically injured, but John and Mark manage to kill all of the ninjas, and Mark kills Yashito in single combat. At the hospital, Jim survives his wounds and reconnects with his repentant father. | cult, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0322420 | Zivot je cudo | The film opens just as construction has been completed on a railway connecting a mountainous regions of eastern Bosnia and western Serbia in 1992. Luka, a Serbian engineer, has moved to Bosnia from Belgrade with his mentally unstable wife, Jadranka, and his football-playing son, Miloš, to run a railway station and act as caretaker. Luka is at work preparing the opening of the railway while Miloš attempts to become a professional footballer with the Partizan team. Utterly engrossed in his work and blinded by natural optimism, Luka remains deaf to the increasingly persistent rumblings of war, which has broken out in Croatia and threatens to spread.
When the conflict explodes, Miloš is denied his place on the football field when he must join the Serbian army, and Jadranka disappears on the arm of a Hungarian musician. Eventually, he receives news that Miloš has been taken prisoner of war. Luka considers suicide, but a profiteering acquaintance presents him with Sabaha, a Bosnian Muslim whom he has taken hostage.
Luka intends to exchange Sabaha for Miloš, but the two fall in love after they are forced to flee deeper into Serb-controlled territory. When a UN-enforced prisoner exchange is finally arranged, Luka and Sabaha try to escape to Serbia, but Sabaha is wounded by a Bosnian sniper as they attempt to cross the Drina river. Army nurses narrowly manage to save Sabaha's life, and she is exchanged for Miloš, along with other prisoners. Jadranka also returns, and the family is reunited in their old home, but Luka is lovesick. He lies down in front of a train, but when the train stops to avoid running over a mule, it is revealed that Sabaha is on board, and the two ride away on the mule. | romantic, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0052937 | J'irai cracher sur vos tombes | Manhattan short story writer Jennifer Hills (Camille Keaton) rents an isolated cottage in Kent, Connecticut near the Housatonic River in the Litchfield County countryside to write her first novel. The arrival of the attractive and independent young woman attracts the attention of Johnny, the gas station manager, and Stanley and Andy, two unemployed men. Jennifer has her groceries delivered by Matthew, who is mildly mentally disabled. Matthew is friends with the other three men and reports back to them about the beautiful woman he met, claiming he saw her breasts.
Stanley and Andy start cruising by the cottage in their boat and prowl around the house at night. One day, the men attack Jennifer. She realizes they planned her abduction so Matthew can lose his virginity. She fights back but they rip her bikini off and hold her. Matthew refuses to have sex with her, so Johnny rapes her first; Andy anally rapes her next. After she crawls back to her house, they attack her again. Matthew finally rapes her after drinking alcohol. The other men ridicule her book and rip up the manuscript, and Stanley sexually assaults her. She passes out; Johnny realizes she is a witness to their crimes and orders Matthew to stab her to death. Matthew cannot bring himself to do this, so he dabs the knife in her blood and returns to the other men, claiming he has killed her.
In the following days, a traumatized Jennifer pieces both herself and her manuscript back together. She goes to church and asks for forgiveness for what she plans to do. The men learn Jennifer has survived and beat Matthew up for deceiving them. Jennifer calls in a grocery order, knowing Matthew will deliver it. He takes the groceries and a knife. At the cabin, Jennifer entices him to have sex with her under a tree. She then hangs him, and drops his body into the lake.
At the gas station, Jennifer seductively directs Johnny to enter her car. She stops halfway to her house, points a gun at him, and orders him to remove all his clothing. Johnny insists the rapes were her fault because she enticed the men by parading around in revealing clothing. She pretends to believe this and invites him back to her cottage for a hot bath, where she gives him a handjob. When Johnny says that Matthew has been reported missing, Jennifer states that she killed him; as he nears orgasm, she takes the knife Matthew brought with him and severs Johnny's genitals. She then leaves the bathroom, locks the door, and listens to classical music as Johnny screams and bleeds to death. She dumps the body in the basement and burns his clothes in the fireplace.
Stanley and Andy learn that Johnny is missing and take their boat to Jennifer's cabin. Andy goes ashore with an axe. Jennifer swims out to the boat and pushes Stanley overboard. Andy tries to attack her but she escapes with the axe. Andy swims out to rescue Stanley, but Jennifer plunges the axe into Andy's back, killing him. Stanley moves towards the boat and grabs hold of the motor to climb aboard, begging Jennifer not to kill him. She repeats the same words that he used against her during the sexual assaults: "Suck it, bitch!" Jennifer then starts the motor, disemboweling Stanley. She speeds away as the film ends. | revenge, murder, melodrama | train | wikipedia | Boris Vian disowned it reportedly.... I've not read his novel,so I will not argue,but all that I can say is that the film is a complete disaster ;today in France everybody's forgotten all about the movie .Director Michel Gast has made only four movies in total.The leads ,Antonella Lualdi and Christian Marquand ,had teamed up the precedent year in Astruc's excellent "Une Vie";but Gast left them to their own devices and it has to be seen to be believed.How could we believe Marquand is a black man with a white skin? (Vian's book was a pastiche ,they say)How could we believe that Daniel Cauchy (see Melville's "Bob le Flambeur") and Jean Sorel (Jean Sorel?) are "rebels without a cause "James Dean style?(the electric chair scene takes grotesque to new limits).And this macho racist man played by Paul Guers?And the old man played by veteran Fernand Ledoux ,the best actor in the whole movie,but in his worst part ever.The script is so poor (I do not speak of the lines,particularly those when Guers tells Lualdi she is restive and he will take pleasure in taming her) it's difficult to catch up with the plot.The form is Nouvelle Vague style complete with jazz with borrowings from the American movies (the ending recalls Lang's "You only live once" and too many chase movies).If it's a plea against racism,then it thoroughly fails in its purpose.. Racism rewarded and turned on its head. It may be that the nightmarish quality of my memory of this movie is caused by my having seen it at about 2 a.m. one night in New York at one of those very seedy all-night theaters on Times Square while I was waiting for a 6 a.m. train. The American "South" portrayed in the film was as phantasmagorical (and real, in its way) as the vision of the country in Kafka's _Amerika_. As I recall it, the screenplay was quite faithful to Boris Vian's original novel of the same name, and both developed from European stereotypes of American culture, with some probable input from Faulkner and Erskine Caldwell. The acting was barely tolerable, but the filming technique (again, as I remember it after almost 40 years) made it seem appropriate. Altogether this was a startling and powerful experience, obviously memorable, but I am sure that it was artistically very bad. Somehow that suggests that some examples of bad art can transcend their own badness, though the reasons are seldom clear.. French film about a racist gang of "rebels without a cause". This film tells the story of a black man, Joe Grant (Christian Marquand) that has white skin, and decides to revenge his brother's death. He goes to a town and starts hanging around the people he thinks are involved in the lynching. The young crowd that should have the style of "Rebel Without a Cause" look more like they came from "La Dolce Vita". The women get crazy about Joe, working in a library. He seems to have ambivalent feelings, almost strangling them at the beginning, and then becoming passionate. He falls in love with a rich girl, Lizbeth Shannon (Antonella Lualdi) which corresponds him, but is engaged to Stan, the gang's leader. Meanwhile Lizbeth's sister Sylvia will try to seduce him. For those who like sports cars of the fifties there is a nice looking Austin Healey. There is love, passion, but most of all hate. After seeing the film I read the Boris Vian book which I disliked, and thought that the film was much better.. Nimble Recollections. When I watched this film to the time of its launching, I was sufficiently surprised, since the french cinema, until then did not approached the subject of the racism (At least in the movies that I had watched). In the truth I already attended films with this type of subject, but they have been produced in Hollywood. What it called the attention was the performance of Christian Marquand, much to the will in the paper of the mestizo who comes back to the city in which happened the shame. Filmed in black-and-white with a musical score that left me souvenir (by the way: it must have left souvenir in all those that had attended the movie), in my opinion was a film that opened way for all the ones that had followed and approached the same subject. |
tt0024238 | Ladies They Talk About | Nan Taylor (Barbara Stanwyck) is a member of a gang of bank robbers, posing as an regular customer to distract the security guard while her accomplices take the money. Her cover is blown by a policeman who had arrested her before, and she is arrested. Reform-minded radio star David Slade (Preston Foster) falls in love with her and gets her released as a favor from District Attorney Simpson (Robert McWade). However, when she confesses that she is guilty, Simpson has her imprisoned.
At San Quentin State Prison, Nan meets fellow inmates Linda (Lillian Roth), "Sister Susie" (Dorothy Burgess) and Aunt Maggie (Maude Eburne), as well as prison matron Noonan (Ruth Donnelly). Slade continues to send Nan letters, but she refuses his entreaties. Meanwhile, Linda has a fancy for Slade, and resents Nan for spurring him. Her bank accomplice, Lefty (Harold Huber) visits her, and tells her that Don is now imprisoned in the men's section on the other side of the wall. Lefty tells her to make a map of the women's section as well as a copy of the matron's key so that the men can escape via the women's section of the prison. However, Nan believes Slade told the prison officials about the escape plot and Don is shot dead as he gets to Nan's cell to break her out. Nan is given another year, and is not allowed visitors, but vows to seek revenge on Slade.
When she is released, Nan goes to a revival group meeting hosted by Slade. He is glad to see her, and she is escorted to a back room where he professes his love for her. She scoffs and accuses him of turning in her bank robber accomplices. She shoots him but misses, hitting him in the arm. Sister Susie sees this from outside via a keyhole, but Slade denies that he has been shot, and Slade and Nan announce their intention to marry. | revenge | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1135084 | Takers | Two detectives, Jack Welles (Matt Dillon) and Eddie Hatcher (Jay Hernandez), investigate a daring heist by a group of well-organized bank robbers. The crew, led by Gordon Cozier (Idris Elba), consists of John (Paul Walker), A.J. (Hayden Christensen), and brothers Jake (Michael Ealy) and Jesse (Chris Brown) Attica. The crew is without a former member, Ghost (T.I.), who was caught during a previous robbery 5 years ago. In his absence, Jake has begun a relationship with his former girlfriend Lilly (Zoe Saldana), who has accepted his marriage proposal.
After Ghost gets released from prison, he meets up with the crew to plan a heist, in which it is discovered that two trucks will travel together but that all the money is kept in the lead truck, which holds $12 million.
The crew, dressed as construction workers, hide out underground while Ghost poses as a police officer so he can keep an eye out for the trucks. Meanwhile, in order to cover themselves in case Ghost is setting them up, John heads to the top of a nearby garage to take out Ghost with a sniper rifle in case things go sour. The blast, having been perfectly timed to the time the trucks had turned the last corner, occurs too far forward because the lead driver had stopped short to avoid the bicyclist, and the ruse is up. The lead driver radios the police while armed guards pile out of the rear truck.
A gunfight ensued between the robbers in the crater and the guards on the street until John, commandeers the rear truck, and rams the lead truck into the crater. John and the other robbers pack the cash into bags and flee by heading down a variety of different tunnels with the plan of connecting into various subway lines to make their escape.
Welles and Hatcher show up on the scene and, after learning of the robber's escape through the sewer system, remembers a map of the city subway system from the Russian gang hideout, and deduces that they must be escaping through the stations marked on the map where the sewers intersect the subway. They rush to the nearest station where they find Jesse, and a chase ensues, during which Jesse hides his bag of money and is cornered and is forced to shoot Detective Hatcher in his escape. Jesse escapes, while Welles stops to aid his partner, who dies from his wound.
Jesse reconvenes with the rest of the crew at a hotel room and admits to the shooting of Hatcher. It is now revealed that Ghost had previously cut a deal with the Russian gangsters to kill his former crewmates in exchange for half of the heist's take. Ghost gives the Russians the hotel room number, then escapes out the bathroom window, just before the Russians storm the room and attempt to kill the crew. A.J. dies in the ensuing firefight, but the rest of the crew is able to kill the Russians and flee the building before the police arrive. Jake and Jesse return home where, to their horror, Jake finds Lilly's lifeless body and Jesse finds the safe where they kept their secret stash of money opened and cleaned out. The police surround their home and shoot the two when they make a suicide charge outside.
Gordon and John separate to make their escape but realize Ghost intends to take all of their money, which is being held by Scott (Johnathon Schaech), a well-connected fence. Ghost sneaks onto Scott's private plane and kills him, taking their laundered money in two large suitcases. Gordon and Detective Welles arrive and a three-way Mexican standoff results in which Ghost hits both Gordon and Welles. As Ghost prepares to finish off Gordon, John arrives and shoots him dead. John recognizes Welles as the same cop, who was with the little girl. John and Gordon refuse to kill Welles. John and an injured Gordon take the money and drive off, with Gordon's sister Naomi (Marianne Jean-Baptiste) in tow. A gravely-wounded Welles manages to call 911 for help on his cell phone.
The film ends without revealing whether either Cozier or Welles survive their injuries. | revenge, suspenseful, neo noir, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt3543634 | Ängelby | Vera Fors lives an ordinary life with her husband, two children, her job and their home. Her husband has an affair with another woman, then she loses the job that she only got because of him. Desperately seeking a new job Vera immediately gets an answer about a job vacancy in Ängelby, a small remote city she's unfamiliar with. She sees it as a chance to start a new life and immediately moves there with the children. On the way there something unexpected happens that she can't let go of. She seems to have hit and killed a teenager who is a local ice-hockey star. In shock, she just runs from the crime scene. When she decides to report to the police the next day, the body has disappered. It will be the beginning of a series of strange and unpleasant events in Ängelby, where even some of the locals behave strangely. Despite the incident Vera is determined to stay in Ängelby and live her own life. She decides to get to the bottom of things. | paranormal, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0251127 | How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days | Andie Anderson (Kate Hudson) is a writer who works for a magazine called Composure as the "How to..." girl. She is bored and wishes she could write more about important things, such as politics, economics, religion, poverty; stuff she actually cares about. She soon finds herself writing an article called "How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days". The idea comes about when Andie's friend, Michelle (Kathryn Hahn), experiences a minor breakdown after yet another break-up. Using her friend as inspiration, Andie reveals how she will actually start dating a guy and drive him away but "only using the classic mistakes women make".
At the same time, advertising executive Benjamin Barry (Matthew McConaughey) is striving for a pitch to advertise diamonds. When they question Ben's knowledge about love, Ben bets he could make any woman fall in love with him if he wanted to. If he can make any woman fall in love with him before the upcoming company ball, in just 10 days, he can head the advertising for the new diamond company.
Ben's rival co-workers, Judy Spears (Michael Michele) and Judy Green (Shalom Harlow), who were at Composure magazine earlier and are aware of Andie's new assignment, conspire to have Andie and Ben meet that night and start their quests. Fortunately, that night Andie and Ben happen to be in the same place and as Judy and Judy refer to Andie as "the blonde with the pretty smile", Ben thinks it is a done deal.
Neither Andie nor Ben reveals their true intentions. Andie works hard to make Ben break up with her in order to complete her article. However, Ben continues to stick around in hopes of making her fall in love with him. Andie goes on to get Ben knocked out by talking aloud at the movie theater while watching a chick flick, rapidly moves her things into his apartment, acts overly possessive and sensitive at all times, ruins boys' poker night for him and his friends, and takes him to a Celine Dion concert when he was under the assumption he was going to see a New York Knicks basketball game.
Ben stays with her despite everything, and after coming very close to breaking up they attend couples counseling, led by Andie's friend Michelle. They agree, as a solution to their "problems", to visit Ben's family in Staten Island for the weekend. While holidaying together, Ben and Andie begin to form a genuine bond, playing card games with the family, learning to ride Ben's motorcycle. Upon arrival home Ben even refers to Andie as "his girlfriend".
Andie tries to explain to boss Lana (Bebe Neuwirth) that she cannot continue writing and publishing this article as she has "really got to know this guy", but Lana remains insistent upon it. Around the same time, Andie and Ben go to the company ball together where Ben's boss, Phillip (Robert Klein), meets Andie and tells Ben that he "met her, she loves you, you win". Seeing Ben's good news, Judy and Judy are instantly envious and set about to ruin it for their co-worker. They tell his close colleagues, Tony (Adam Goldberg) and Thayer (Thomas Lennon), Andie knew about the bet all along and was playing along to help Ben win. Almost instantly, Tony and Thayer rush to Andie's side and beg her to keep quiet, when they do not realize she is still blissfully unaware. Almost simultaneously, Lana—who is unaware of Ben's role in Andie's "How To" article—reveals Andie's true intentions to Ben.
Upon learning of Ben's bet, Andie attempts to humiliate Ben by getting on stage and telling all he has prepared a "special treat": to sing a song. In an attempt to leave, Ben reveals they have prepared a "duet" and instructs his friends not to let her leave the room. They go on to sing a poor version of Carly Simon's "You're So Vain", which they describe as "one of their personal favourites".
They go their separate ways before Ben is shown Andie's article and encouraged to read it. She explains in it how she "lost the one person she ever fell for", and when he hears she quit her job at Composure and is on her way to Washington, D.C. for an interview, he chases her taxi and stops her. Once he accuses her of running away, they reveal their true feelings for each other and the film ends with Ben instructing the taxi driver to return Andie's belongings to her home, and then they kiss. | bleak, comedy, entertaining, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0109010 | 1942: A Love Story | The film is set in 1942, when the British Raj was declining. It was a time when many Indians were either working for the British or rallying in underground meetings and protests against them. In this atmosphere, Naren Singh (Anil Kapoor) falls in love with Rajeshwari "Rajjo" Pathak (Manisha Koirala). Their romance is shown developing in spite of the political and social unrest at the time.
Naren's father, Diwan Hari Singh (Manohar Singh), is a loyal British employee, while Rajjo's father Raghuvir Pathak (Anupam Kher) is a revolutionary fighting against British rule. When Naren asks Raghuvir for Rajjo's hand in marriage, Raghuvir becomes livid. Naren declares that he is willing to sacrifice everything for Rajjo, and convinces Raghuvir of his love for her. Pathak relents and tells Naren to talk to his father. When Naren does so, Hari Singh is angry that his son has chosen Rajjo, the daughter of a revolutionary, but pretends that he will do anything for Naren's happiness.
Hari Singh tricks Naren into revealing Pathak's secret location, and leaks the information to the British authorities. Soon, police barge into Pathak's hideaway and try to kill him, only to find him waiting to light a bomb. He kills them all, dying with them. Rajjo, who was out at that time, realizes what has happened and runs away. She is taken into refuge by Shubhankar (Jackie Shroff), a compatriot of Pathak who has learned of his death. Under Shubhankar's tutelage, Rajjo follows her father's revolutionary path. Meanwhile, Naren is angry with his father for being used as a pawn in the ambush and killing of Pathak and driving Rajjo away. Promising to make up with Rajjo and help her cause, he pledges to become a protester or a revolutionary, opposing his own father.
Naren severs all ties with his father and stands up against British rule, in particular General Douglas, in front of the city. He is convicted and sentenced to hang for attempted murder. Moved by Naren's actions, Rajjo tells Shubhankar about him. Shubhankar saves Naren from being hanged and the two finish off Hari Singh and many of the British loyalists. They are helped by Major Bisht (Danny Dengzongpa), who has a change of heart after having tragically witnessed the killing of his daughter Chanda, a revolutionary, by the gunshots of British loyalists upon General Douglas' orders. With the loyalists dead, Shubhankar hangs General Douglas by the same noose that was intended for Naren. Shubhankar, Rajjo and Naren, together with Major Bisht and the citizens are shown at the end of the movie saluting the Indian flag, being hoisted by Shubhankar. | violence, avant garde, cruelty | train | wikipedia | An absolute masterpiece.
"1942 A Love story" is a portray of a beautiful love story with the backdrop of the Indian struggle for freedom.The plot is still the same of a love story but unlike other Bollywood movies the villains are not the parents but the political turmoil of 1942.Vidhu Vinod who was just three movie old when he made this movie teams up with the genius Sanjay Leela Bhansali ( screenplay) to deliver a movie which is definitely the best of 93.With an impressive star cast of Anil Kapoor, Prem , Jackie Shroff,Danny, Ashish Vidyarthi and Anupam Kher this one could have never gone wrong.The story runs on two parallel lines one is the love story between Rajjo(Manisha Koirala) and Narender(Anil Kapoor).
The other story is about the assassination of general Douglas.THe music of the movie is absolutely amazing R.D.Burman delivers yet another masterpiece which was unfortunately his last.
Manisha Koirala fits so well in the role of an innocent and beautiful young girl.THe introductory scene of Manisha Koirala is absolutely amazing."Ek Ladki KO " and Kuch Na Kaho are one of the best pasteurized songs.
Kuch Na Kaho gets you into the moment so well.THe on screen kiss if definitely one of the best on the Indian screen.Javed Akhtar wrote the songs that are just a brilliant example of superb poetry.THe songs are a part of the story and since they are so good you don't get irritated when they pop up unlike other Hindi movies.The story takes a sharp turn just before the interval after the death of Anupam Kher when Manisha Koirala is rescued by Jackie Shroff and the conditions forces Anil Kapoor to jump into the struggle of Indian independence.performance wise Jackie steals the show delivering the role of a young and self driven freedom fighter he is able to portray the emotions and feelings to picture perfect.BUt that does not undermines the performances of other actors.I give this movie a 9 out of 10 a must watch for people who believe that Indian cinema is not dead yet and there are great film- makers who will deliver the best when ever they could.
Lavish filmmaking.
Blending musical poetry with epic spectacle, "1942: A Love Story" stands as a definitive work of Indian filmmaking.
As the film follows a pair of lovers through the Indian uprising against imperialist Britain, traditional Indian song is used to juxtapose the harsh realities of an oppressed people.
Though the film is grand in size, the fact that a small core of characters inhabits the plot makes for an easily understood picture, even while reading subtitles as I did."1942" celebrates the people of India and their struggle for independence.
When compared to traditional American films dealing with political revolt, this film wins over in heart.
When compared to traditional American musicals of the 1950s and 60s, "1942" displays a deeper social conscience and a more solid grasp on narrative storytelling.
Above all, "1942" provides entertainment with a rich cultural tapestry..
A romantic film and a great choice for my first Bollywood hit!.
As an ABCD (An American Born Confused Desi) I wanted to make my first Bollywood hit a memorable one...and that this movie was!While keeping to a simple plot and common theme of love in a war-torn country, the struggles are just and portrayed more seriously than other "love during war" films...I won't give away the terrific ending, but I will tell you that it is a happy one, and though it is common for Hindi films to have a happy ending, a love story with a happy ending never gets old, does it not?The only thing non ABCD'ers will find odd/curious is the fact that the movie frequently took a "break" for the characters to lip-sync a song about how they felt.
I liked it, but for the first five seconds I was like, "Why are we having a music video in the middle of the movie??"Overall I give this movie 5 stars out of 4.
Is it because I love any Bollywood film?
Is it because I'm an ABCD?
Is it because I'm a hopeless romantic?
I don't know, but I highly recommend you see 1942: A Love Story!.
An iconic love story......
Just like the title suggests, the film has two sides, 1942, a historic period and a love story.
1942, represents the time period when the Indians revolutionized against the British rulers for the freedom of the country, popularly know as "Quit India" movement.
Many patriots sacrificed their lives during the freedom fight of the '40s.
Under this backdrop, a beautiful love story has been weaved under a fabulous music of music maestro RD Burman.
It was his last movie for which he won the coveted Filmfare awards for the best music director.The film remains commendable for three strong reasons.
The first is obviously RD Burman's memorable music, which was unfortunately his last masterpiece.
The songs like "Ek Ladki Ko Dekha To" or "Kuch Na Kaho.." remains the modern day classics.
The songs get blended well with the beauty perpetuated through the superb cinematography.
The lights and colors of the sets and the costumes all have a right touch for depicting the period.
And the third nice aspect of the film remains the performances.
Vidhu Vinod Chopra recasts Anil Kapoor and Jackie Shroff from his "Parinda" and they look good enough in their roles.
Manisha Koirala adds beauty to the film and looks innocent.
In the small roles, Raghuvir Yadav, Anupam Kher, Pran, Danny, Sushma Seth all play their roles perfect.
Although the film saw some criticism and wasn't a very big success in the box office, the film is an iconic love story from '90s which has been made with an optimum care for which the film appears technically flawless.Rating: 3 stars out of 4.
Sensationalist drama.
Not much substance..
1942: A Love Story, stays unfaithful to its name.
Its neither a love story, nor does it contain the factual underpinnings surrounding the events of 1942.
But I digress.
If those were the only two shortcomings (albeit major) of the movie, it would be bearable.
Reality, however, sets in.
After watching this sensationalist and inane film, I must confess: I've had more fun watching grass grow on my lawn.
And my lawn is dead.The film attempts to draw you in to its hero, Narendra Singh (played by Anil Kapoor), the son of a wealthy lord of the era, Diwan Hari Singh, who also happens to be an obtuse sycophant of the British Raj. True to fashion of Hindi cinema, there is (predictably) the anti-Raj, aka the freedom fighters.
The daughter of one of these fighters, Rajeshwari (played by Manisha Koirala), catches the eye of Narendra, and he is smitten by her beauty.
He immediately falls in love and begins his pursuit of her.
Mind you, all of this happens in the first five minutes, and it only deteriorates from there.The hero's propensity to bring calamities to those around him is befuddling (I affectionately started calling him Forrest Gump).
In an attempt to portray the yearning and desire he has for his love, the film misses connecting with the audience.
Instead, it portrays him as a bumbling idiot who, in a blind frenzied search for a girl he has met for only five minutes, has no hesitation in breaking promises (he states that he will not reveal the identity of the freedom fighters, yet immediately afterwords reveals their identities to his mother) and wreaking havoc (numerous times he foolishly pursues Narendra, only to further expose her identity) on those around him.Furthermore, much like the hero, the other characters in the film lack dimension and also fail to connect with the audience.
In a desperate attempt to draw the film together and make some coherent sense of the madness, sensationalism is thrown into the mixture.
And not just any sensationalism, but "Jai Hind" at that.
What better way to prey on the emotions of a stupefied audience than to bring in a revered chant of the freedom fighters of the era.
The sum of its tattered pieces do not add up to a congruous and solid movie.
The plot line is unbelievably predictable, and the acting sub par, sans for Manisha Koirala, who churns out a half-decent tear during the final scene.
Sadly, the audience won't shed a drop when this waste of celluloid hits the can.
In reality, this movie is more akin to the tripe you find at the butcher's block in Albertsons.So, should you watch this film?
If for some reason there is an extra three hours in your life that is expendable, by all means, go for it.
But if you're looking for a movie that has coherency and can grip its audience, you'd be better off looking out your window and at the lawn..
Fiction yet good and wonderful music.
VVC made several great films like PARINDA(1989) In 1942 Love Story he reunites with Jackie, Anil, Anupam Kher and brings yet another good film The film is completely a fiction and holds no true story of real independence struggle(as far as my knowledge) People looking out for historical accuracy should not watch the film The film was in news as it was the last film music maestro RD Burman composed music for.
The film was released after his death.
Though Ghatak and Gang delayed films with Burman's music released much later in 1996 and 2000 respectively.
The film starts with hanging of Anil Kapoor and then is told in flashback where during the chaos of struggle of independence Anil and Manisha fall in love.
The first half focuses more on the love story with songs breaking in every 10 minutes, All the brilliant songs are in the first half the subplot of Anupam Kher is superbly handled and also the track of Anil's father and Danny's subplot too.
The story takes off at interval after Jackie enters the frame and then the focus is on nationalism and patriotism.
The film manages to hold your attention and make you feel for the viewers though it's a bit melodramatic yet the handling is brilliant The ending also isn't realistic yet it works with the patriotism element VVC does a great job, his expertise shows in drama and crowd scenes too Music by RD Burman is classic, every song is brilliant and most are still known of, Ek Ladki, Kuch Naa Kaho, Rim Jhim, Pyaar Hua Chupke se every song is a classic, Rut Na Jaana is also memorable Yeh Safar by Sivaji Chattopadhyaya is superb too their placements is too quick especially in first half thoughAmongst performances The film has a wide range of actors Anil Kapoor does a great job as usual playing the romantic lover to the patriotic hero, he does a great job Jackie Shroff comes in the second half but does a superb job too again in a VVC film he always stole the show Manisha Koirala looks beautiful and acts brilliantly, a far cry from her previous days and later recent days.
Amongst rest Sushma Seth is usual, Manohar Singh is terrific Danny is admirable in his role, Anupam Kher excels in his role as usual Pramod Moutho(for once the good guy) does a great job too Raghuvir Yadav is superb too Brian Glover is theatrical in his stereotypical bad British guy role.
Chandni as Chanda is goodThe film was an average at the box office but yet it's remembered especially for it's music.
What a joke.
My first thought watching the movie : Is anil Kapoor the hero or the best villain for this movie.
Can't believe the hype this 1994 movie received.
Music is really good but every 15 mins in the movie there is a song.
Pre interval it's all about boy meets girl falls in love pursues her.
Post interval all hell breaks loose ie Bollywood being typical Bollywood .
Can't believe the parents and kids dynamic portrayed in the movieOne major who suddenly wants to do the *right thing* and the public which is running away turns around because somehow they heard him yell "jai hind" but alas is useless for the climax .
The special needs person in the movie is more useful to the plot and it's success than this major.
So the hero was able to save himself from capital punishment because his hands weren't tied but Douglas couldn't ?
Argh!!!
I am all up for a good independence movie , makes me emotional and full of pride , this movie stirs it for all of three out of ten stars for me.
Rest I am laughing or smacking my head thanks to whoever wrote the character of anil Kapoor .
As for rajjo's character (Manisha Koirala ) she looks beautiful but so dumb , the girl lives her whole life being ignorant of her brother and dad's actions .
Falls in love with anil Kapoor and then her dad doesn't approve so heartbroken she decides to also turn into a participant as a revolutionary.
But does absolutely nothing , nothing other than crying .
Her love is real?
Her love is for her dad?
Her love is for the country or she just wants to be whatever the men in her life need from her ?
The acting is pretty good , the star cast obviously makes the movie that much more exciting to watch but wish they had actually tried to be make a smart movie.
Since it's been 14 years since the release no one will be wasting movie to watch this silliness just your precious time . |
tt2621414 | Dead Reckoning | Leaving a church, Father Logan, a well known ex-paratrooper padre, is approached by Captain "Rip" Murdock (Humphrey Bogart). Murdock needs to tell someone what has happened to him in the past few days in case his enemies get to him. A flashback follows.
Just after World War II, paratroopers and close friends Captain Murdock and Sergeant Johnny Drake (William Prince) are mysteriously ordered to travel from Paris to Washington, D.C. When Drake learns that he is to be awarded the Medal of Honor (and Murdock the Distinguished Service Cross), he disappears before newspaper photographers can take his picture. Murdock goes AWOL, follows the clues and tracks his friend to Gulf City in the southern United States, where he learns Drake is dead – his burned corpse is recovered from a car crash.
Murdock finds out that Drake joined the Army under an assumed name to avoid a murder charge. He was accused of killing a rich old man named Chandler because he was in love with his beautiful young wife Coral (Lizabeth Scott). Murdock goes to a nightclub to question Louis Ord (George Chandler), a witness in the murder trial. Ord reveals that Drake had given him a letter for Murdock. Murdock also meets Coral and Martinelli (Morris Carnovsky), the club owner, there. Seeing Coral losing heavily at roulette, Murdock not only recoups her losses at craps, he wins her $16,000. For some reason, however, she is uncomfortable with the situation. When they go to collect the money in Martinelli's private office, Murdock accepts a drink; it is drugged. When he wakes up the next morning, he finds Ord's dead body planted in his hotel room. He manages to hide the corpse before police Lieutenant Kincaid (Charles Cane), responding to an anonymous tip, shows up to search his room.
Murdock teams up with Coral. Suspecting that Martinelli had Ord killed in order to get the letter, Murdock breaks into his office, only to find the safe already open. Just before he is knocked unconscious by an unseen assailant, he smells jasmine, the same aroma as Coral's perfume. When Murdock awakens, Martinelli has him roughed up by his thug, Krause (Marvin Miller), to try to find out what is in the coded letter. However, Murdock manages to trick his captors and escape. The flashback ends, and Murdock slips away.
Now suspicious of Coral, he goes to her apartment to confront her. She claims to be innocent, but finally admits that she shot her husband in self-defense. She went to Martinelli for advice and gave him the murder weapon to dispose of, but he has been blackmailing her ever since. In love with her himself, Murdock agrees to leave town with her, but insists on retrieving the incriminating weapon first, despite Coral's objections. He threatens Martinelli with a gun, eliciting some startling revelations. The club owner reveals that Coral is his wife. He killed Chandler (having learned the man had lied about having only six months to live) and framed Drake so that Coral could inherit the estate. Murdock gets what he came for and forces Martinelli to precede him out of the building. As he opens the door, Martinelli is shot and killed.
Murdock jumps into the waiting car and drives off with Coral. As they are speeding away, he accuses her of having just tried to kill him. When she shoots him, the car crashes. He survives, but she suffers fatal injuries. In the hospital, Murdock comforts her in her final moments. | neo noir | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0064045 | The Assassination Bureau | In London, during the early 1900s, aspiring journalist and women's rights campaigner Sonia Winter (Diana Rigg) uncovers an organisation that specialises in killing for money, the Assassination Bureau, Limited. To bring about its destruction, she commissions the assassination of the bureau's own chairman, Ivan Dragomiloff (Oliver Reed).
Far from being outraged or angry, Dragomiloff is amused and delighted and decides to put it to his own advantage. The guiding principle of his bureau, founded by his father, has always been that there was a moral reason why their victims should be killed – these have included despots and tyrants. More recently though, his elder colleagues have tended to kill more for financial gain than for moral reasons. Dragomiloff, therefore, decides to accept the commission of his own death and challenge the other board members: Kill him or he will kill them!
With Miss Winter in tow, Dragomiloff sets off on a tour of Edwardian Europe, challenging and systematically purging the bureau's senior members. Little do they realise that this is a plot by Miss Winter's sponsor, newspaper publisher Lord Bostwick (Telly Savalas), to take over the bureau {Bostwick is the bureau's vice-chairman and is bitter for having been passed over in favour of the founder's son}. Bostwick and the other members of the Bureau plan to get rich quick by the "biggest killing" of them all — buying stocks in arms factories and then propelling Europe into war by assassinating all the heads of state of Europe while they attend a secret peace conference where the kings, emperors and prime Ministers of Europe are trying to avoid a possible war caused by a Balkan prince who was killed by a bomb intended for Dragomiloff
Dragomiloff and Miss Winter uncover the plot — dropping a bomb from a hijacked Zeppelin airship onto the castle in Ruthenia where the peace conference is held. Dragomiloff steals aboard the airship and destroys it, killing the remaining members of his board of directors. He is then decorated by the heads of state he has saved. It is implied that Dragomiloff may wed Miss Winter as well. | sci-fi | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0110076 | Hum Aapke Hain Koun...! | Prem (Salman Khan) lost his parents at an early age. He lives with his elder brother Rajesh (Mohnish Bahl) and uncle Kailashnath (Alok Nath). Rajesh manages the family business and his family is on the look-out for a suitable bride for him. Professor Siddharth Chaudhary (Anupam Kher) and Mrs. Chaudhary (Reema Lagoo) have two daughters, Pooja (Renuka Shahane) and Nisha (Madhuri Dixit). The Chaudhary couple and Kailashnath are old friends who meet again after several years. They arrange a marriage between Rajesh and Pooja. From their first meeting, Nisha and Prem start bickering lightheartedly with each other, and the fun and mischief continues throughout Pooja and Rajesh's wedding.
Prem has an amicable relationship with his warm-hearted sister-in-law. In time, Pooja and Rajesh discover that they are expecting a child. Professor and Mrs. Chaudhary were unable to come to Kailashnath's house for the ceremony marking the impending arrival of the baby. They send Nisha instead, who is present at the birth. Meanwhile, Nisha and Prem fall in love with each other, but keep it a secret. Professor and Mrs. Chaudhary come over to Kailashnath's house to celebrate the birth of their grandchild. When the time comes to part, their hosts are dejected, especially Prem. He and Nisha promise each other that they will soon reunite for ever.
Pooja is invited to stay at her parents' house, and Prem takes her there. When they arrive, Pooja learns that Prem and Nisha are in love, and gives Nisha a necklace as a token, promising to get them married. Shortly afterwards, Pooja accidentally slips and falls down the stairs, and dies from a head injury. Everybody is shattered by the tragedy.
Nisha takes good care of her sister's son. Hence, her parents and Kailashnath feel that Nisha will be a great mother to the baby. They decide to have Nisha marry Rajesh. Nisha overhears her parents talking about her marrying into Kailashnath's family and thinks that they are discussing her marriage to Prem, to which she agrees. Later, at a pre-nuptial ceremony, she finds out that she is actually going to marry Rajesh.
Prem and Nisha vow to sacrifice their love for Rajesh and the baby. Moments before the wedding, Nisha asks Prem's dog Tuffy to give Prem the necklace that Pooja had given her, along with a letter. The letter and necklace fall into the hands of Rajesh. When he realizes that Prem and Nisha love each other, he halts the wedding and confronts both of them. In the end, Nisha and Prem marry each other with the consent of their families. The film's title Hum Aapke Hain Koun..! appears and then rephrases to Hum Aapke Hain..! (English: I am yours!). | melodrama | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0108734 | The Critic | Simple, abstract, geometric shapes move and morph on the screen to harpsichord music, from a French Suite (BWV 816) by J. S. Bach. The voice of an audience member, who claims to be 71, complains throughout the film despite being told repeatedly by other audience members to keep quiet.
The onscreen images feature geometric patterns. The "cranky and clueless" old man is trying to make sense of them, and describes what he sees at various points, including a squiggle, a fence, a cockroach. The old man finds that certain images remind him of the biology classes of his Russian boyhood. When two abstract shapes approach each other and unite, the old man sees it as a mating sequence. "...They like each other. Sure. Lookit da sparks. Two things in love!... Could dis be the sex life of two things?"
When the scene shifts from the "mating" to other abstract images, the old man gets bored. He proclaims the images must be symbolism, then adds that they are symbolism of junk.
He eventually concludes that some of the images, depicting lips, are "dirty", obscene. He admits at some point that he was looking for "a hot French picture", which he hoped would involve nudity. The implication is that the old man is in the wrong movie theater, probably one screening art films.
He also wonders why the creator of the film wasted his time with this. He points that this creator could instead do something meaningful, like driving a truck, or do something constructive, like working in shoemaking. | absurd, satire | train | wikipedia | Like most Simpsons watching fanatics that are also latched tightly to the Family Guy, I couldn't help but walk (never run) to buy this series when it came out.
He is a God among Gods in my book!Created by the same team that did The Simpsons, Sherman great to life through not only the witty banter that leapt from his mouth, but also his surrounding characters.
I also liked the shows send up on the entertainment industry and films and actors in general I think Al Jean and Mike Reiss did an excellent job with this series.
The basic premise of the show is that a middle aged film critic by the name of Jay Sherman leads an miserable existence.
I feel the Critic was cancelled at the height of its potential when its comedic timing was dead on and the most of the jokes made me at least chuckle (well, other than the final episode .
which was disappointing because it was a reprise of all the faux film clips and little original material.)As for the Webisodes, I really didn't care much for them due to their lack of the rest of the cast - Alice, Dorris, Duke, Vlada, Jeremy, Martin, Penny, and Jay's family.
Even though I like Jay Sherman, the Critic was never a solo act, and the webisodes brings to light how important the supporting cast are who is Jay supposed to bounce jokes off of, and who's going to make fun of the poor guy?
I think that's why the Webisodes lack the edge its full episode brethren have.The funniest aspect of the Critic, which is also noted on one of the DVD commentaries, is that not only does Jay wind up criticizing movie-parodies on Coming Attractions, but Jay's life is a series of movie parodies.
And of course, a show about a movie critic would eventually involve a plot around Siskel & Ebert, which is perhaps one of the more entertaining episodes.So, as a fan of films, I found the Critic to be pretty sharp and a pretty fun ride.
Though it never really becomes more than the sum of its parts (hindered by quite a few rather generic plot lines and unimaginative film parodies) `The Critic' does contain more than its share of memorable laugh-out-loud moments, generally due to the brilliant voice acting of Maurice LaMarche, who performs most of the celebrity voice impersonations.
WAtching this show in reruns,I was able to enjoy this offering from many of the creators of the Simpsons,but since the movie reviews were stuck in the period that spanned 1994-95 and before,the series will always retain a sense of being stuck in time and that never fails to make me a bit sad whenever I'd watch it.Otherwise,this series,based around the eponymous Jay Sherman(voiced brilliantly by rumpled comic actor Jon Lovitz,whose talents endure) is a great nose-thumbing at Hollywood culture and the movies that sometimes get cranked out from it.
The movie spoofs were funny, Jay Sherman and the other characters were hysterical, and the stories were great.
The comedy was somewhat remniscent of "Sienfeld", the only differences being that "The Critic" is not painfully boring and actually has a plot to it.The entire cast is given good lines, much kudos to the writers.
Of course, it would be nice if you could rate TV series like you could rate movies on imdb, unfortunately that is not the case, you will just have to read reviews like mine to see whether or not you want to watch it.
Levitz is as funny as any cartoon voice over there is.Any time I can find the Critc, I'll watch, without even (GASP) changing the channel during commercials.A shame that Will and Grace is still on, and the Critic is relagated to the cable crawl space..
In fact, very much like Sports Night, the critics love it, the people hate it.
Cartoons don't last very long, except for the Simpsons - which by the way, The Critic comes from the same Producers - so thus lasted the show.
The entire series is out on DVD now, and it was worth every penny ($41.99) If you like the Simpsons, you will love THE CRITIC.Pudgy and balding Jay is not a well-liked man.
Fortunately for Jay, he has his 11-year-old son Marty and one very unlikely friend, Jeremy Hawke, the Australian film hunk.Jon Lovitz provides Jay's distinctive voice as a single father who searches for happiness while satirizing life and the movies in this irreverent comedy....
I find it hard to believe that ANYTHING could dethrone the great Simpsons, but I think had this show survived in either of its stints (ABC or FOX) it might very well have done just that.
This is an updated version of The Critic where after a long absence Jay Sherman has his show come back on the internet after having his show being on ABC and then FOX, Comedy Central, then becoming Regis Philbin's sidekick and then being on the Discovery Channel and then he came back to his show Coming Attractions!
In this series we also miss the absence of Jay's family, Marty Sherman, Duke Phillips and Jeremy Hawk.
Unfortunately, "The Critic" faced the same problems that its hero Jay Sherman did in "Coming Attractions": humor that is funny but too obscure for its own good (Jay: "Let's watch the 15-hour version of 'Berlin Alexanderplatz'!" Marty: "Again?"), an uncaring public and an ugly star.
Jon Lovitz was perfectly cast as Jay Sherman, the scathing, yet sensitive critic.
I think Jay sherman was one of the funniest cartoon characters.why did this show get cancelled?!
I love the Critic, and was extremely saddened to know that this gem had been passed around by three different networks, and canceled.
I was watching a rerun on Comedy Central last night, and it was the episode where Jay is hired to write "Ghosthunters 3".
It spoofed musicals well, and had me rolling.So, to make a long story short, I am a HUGE fan of The Critic, and I urge people to watch it in reruns or to go to shockwave.com and watch new episodes.
Seeing as how the new Simpsons episodes are, this is the best thing to watch to get real humor."Achem!".
Undoubtably, one of the greatest animated comedy series to hit the American airwaves, The Critic always delivered laughs, from the simple slapstick comedy antics of the characters, right down to the parodies of movies that actually at times require half a brain to figure out.
When Jon Lovitz appears on screen or in cartoon character form (with good writing), the results are hilarity.
Certainly those in the "Tribe" religion will also get some more of the jokes--like when Lovitz's Jay Sherman sings in Yiddish, but nevertheless The Critic was an unfortunate victim of ABC and FOX's quick dismissal of this very funny and underrated show.I will note one thing about The Critic's DVD (there were so few episodes made, the DVDs are all in one purchase): why wouldn't Lovitz be in the commentary?
Whether it was that 'subtle' New York sarcasm or the insulting of actors and actresses and everybody in showbiz, it seems that this one remains one of the cult classics of a few real comedy fans.Thanks goodness it's out on DVD, all 23 episodes, watching them could actually teach you a few little known facts about Hollywood's elite and not-so-elite, all in all this cartoon is right up there with the Simpsons (crossover producers and voices) and the Family Guy, another great animation cut short in its prime..
When The Critic first appeared on the ABC network I naturally believed that the show's producers (who also produce The Simpsons) had hit another home run.
After the FOX network picked up the show and put it on right after The Simpsons it seemed The Critic's troubles would soon be over, but again it didn't catch on and after it's second funny season it was cancelled again!
The show's movie parodies, social humor, obscure referrences, and numerous in-jokes along with some great voice acting from Jon Lovitz and company should have been enough to put The Critic over as America's new favorite animated show...
This show is great, and if you like The Simpsons then you'll love The Critic!
This was one of THE greatest animated series on all time.It keeps you laughing from start to finish,and the parodies of various stars are absolutely hilarious(And SO true!).Unfortunately it got cancelled before it could find an audience.It's a good thing Comedy Central reruns this show!If I had to choose between this and The Simpsons(Speaking of which,some of the people that worked on The Simpsons did work on this series as well.),well,just read the title of this review!P.S.-I have found four episodes of an online version of The Critic at Shockwave.com.Unfortunately Shockwave cut it after four episodes.It's as good as ever,though!.
While 'The Simpsons' broke a lot of ground with its far-out humor, 'The Critic' sits just above it in my list of favorite animated series.
The Critic is funny series done by the same producers who also produced our favorite family from Springfield, The Simpsons!
The Critic is about this guy named Jay Sherman (voiced by Jon Lovitz) who is a New York movie critic for this news station who is forced to review these pathetic films and he always says "It Stinks!" for his reviews.
But still I wish FOX could have kept it longer and I think this show should have gone and have the same amount of seasons and episodes as The Simpsons!
It was a highly intelligent and very funny show that made fun of movies, Hollywood, TV stations at the same time as giving us a sympathetic hero and the whacky world he lives in.Jay Sherman is short, fat, bald and dresses like dweeb, his ex-wife hates him, his boss is always on his back, women run from him in terror and his make-up lady humiliates him at every given opportunity.
This little trick is what made The Critic so good, that it didn't depend on characterisation or weirdness, or weird characterisation (astronaut Homer, Peter Griffin versus a giant chicken, Roger the alien in the attic), though these aspects are of course not entirely absent – Jay has a son he worries about, a younger sister, weird WASP parents incapable of showing they love him, and so on.
It follows the life & times of Jay Sherman (voice of Jon Lovitz), a New York-based film critic who is forced to review films he doesn't like.
The show pretty much deals with his attempts at finding love in the Big Apple and trying to deal with his crazy life, crazy parents, and crazy job."The Critic" is one of the great shows from my early years as a young boy growing up during the early 1990s.
Six years ago, I managed to purchase the complete series of "The Critic" on DVD from Best Buy and I'm glad that I did, since I don't think that the DVD set is in print anymore.It was a truly one-of-a-kind show that was canceled way before its time.
(Why are the really good shows always the ones getting canceled?) Lovitz, a greatly under-appreciated comedic talent, was great as Jay Sherman, who did a cross-over on "The Simpsons" once.
"The Critic" was hilarious in the way that it parodied famous movies at the time.
That was really one of the reasons why I loved it and why it worked so great as a comedy show that made fun of real life."The Critic" - 10/10.
I am a Canadian and I try to watch Canadian TV but a few shows have come along like The Critic and The Simpsons that I thought were very good and just had to watch.
Plus a lot of Canadian TV stinks so if there's nothing to watch (which happens sometimes, seems to be happening more often the last few years but that's how it goes) I'll try the U.S. stations.Jon Lovitz was great as The Critic, a fat balding slobby guy who is trying to raise his likewise fat slobby son in New York City.
The tagline for this show is one that most certainly does not apply the content.The Critic, an animated show for the older crowd, was an original and entertaining series that was shut down before it's time.
It follows the story of Jay Sherman, a short pudgy, balding film critic who's job is to review bad movies for a living.
This show is full of great Hollywood references, guest voices, and very funny film parodies such as "Apocalype Wow: The Musical", "A Few More Good Men" and "Forrest Gump 2: Gump Harder" just to name a few.
A Satirical Work of Art. Created by ex-partners Al Jean and Mike Reiss (of Simpsons Fame), The Critic is a short-lived, satirical sitcom about a highly intelligent yet obese cable TV film critic named Jay Sherman, voiced to perfection by Jon Lovitz.
Overall, The Critic is great satirical series that was ahead of it's time.
While The Simpsons is still my all-time favorite show, I'd rank The Critic pretty high..
The critic is a fairly old show which has started playing again on teletoon.I never saw it during its original run, but I am watching it now and realize its a very intelligent and funny show.It got cancelled after maybe 2 seasons like most good shows.The show is basically about a critic named Jay Sherman who is harsh(and ugly).He also dislikes most Hollywood films and likes movies normal people would consider over-long or boring.The show also involves his usually unlucky searches in finding true love while coping with his adoptive parents and his younger sister.The Critic also features plenty of funny pop-culture references.The Critic is a great show, it plays on teletoon Wednesday and Thursday nights at 10pm and if you don't have teletoon, you could find the show on DVD..
I loved how Jay Sherman would always say to a bad movie "It stinks!" This is an excellent show.
Jon Lovitz really put Jay Sherman to life when he voiced him.
The show was created by the producers of "The Simpsons"(another great show!) and even Jay Sherman was on "The Simpsons" a couple of times!
"The Critic" was such a well-rounded cartoon with funny characters who were slinging random, situational jokes long before "Family Guy" was a twinkle in Seth MacFarlane's eye.Sadly, "The Critic" is just one of many shows cut down in their prime.
There is a lot of heart inserted to the characters, the stories are far more interesting than most of the modern-era Simpsons episodes.If you feel like you miss the golden days of the Simpsons - seasons 3-5, then go watch these, and it'll be a nice, fresh fix of that kind of writing..
It took The Simpsons' humor style, threw out the sugar-coating, and added a touch of bitterness aimed at all things celebrity and New Yorkish, in the form of a cranky film critic named Jay Sherman.
The movie and celebrity parodies were top-notch (the made-up films were a lot funnier than what they did at atom films.com), the humor was biting as well as sometimes a bit warm, and Jay even a cameo on the aforementioned Simpsons...all in all it was one of the best cartoons I've seen.
Jay Sherman is one of the best cartoon characters ever.
You know, I first watched "The Critic" when it started out on ABC, I think after the show "Dinosaurs".
This was an outstanding and hilarious cartoon series from the producers of "The Simpsons", and indeed featured some of the voices from it too.
Like "The Simpsons" it features a lot of satire, both of modern movies and of life in general.
I have often criticized on the fact that when the general audience wants to see something different, and when it does air, nobody seems to watch them.
There could be shows that would be as clever as "The Critic," but then again, whoever said that the American viewing audience has the intelligence or the timespan to watch a good show.
Expect I'm not a famous and hated movie critic such as Jay Sherman.
Jon Lovitz was great with his voice work that he provided for the show.This wasn't a bad show, but it wasn't nearly as good as animated shows like Beavis and Butthead, The Simpsons, South Park, or Family guy.
This show was a spin off from THE SIMPSONS and featured the adventures of a lovable loser, movie reviewer Jay Sherman (voiced very ably by Jon Lovitz).
I'll always have a soft spot for chubby, pathetic protagonist Jay Sherman (Jon Lovitz), a film critic who is bombarded by dreadful Hollywood sequels or remakes, such as "Robo-Beverly Hills Cop and a Half 2" or "Apocolypse Wow!".
I'd kept it on the air if I were in charge of Networking programs.Anyways this is produced by the same people that made the Simpsons possible.It's about a Short, Bald, Fat Critic name Jay Sherman.
Jon Lovitz is perfect as Jay Sherman.
It had a short run with poor reviews, and fizzled out like a flare, only faster!Of course, The Simpsons is his masterpiece, and his best work, but I think this should have got the appreciation that Futurama gets, which I also love.
It is only on Comedy Central at 1:00 a.m. on Sunday's , or new episodes that are less than three minutes but still funny at Shockwave.com.
The only characters that were funny were Duke Phillips and Jay Shermans father.
That thing is milked for all of its worth by giving him a boss (brilliantly voiced by Charles Napier, you know the guy from Rambo II and a couple of Russ Meyer films) who thinks Jay Sherman (Lovitz' character) is gay.This show has not been shown in Denmark but I was so curious about it that I had to check it out because Al Jean and Mike Reiss of The Simpsons were involved. |
tt0083000 | Roadgames | The film opens on truck driver Patrick Quid (Stacy Keach) as he pulls into a motel for the night. Quid notices a man in a green van checking in with a female hitchhiker he had passed earlier because the trucking company policy forbids it. Nevertheless, Quid is upset at the man for taking the last room in the motel and picking up the attractive hitcher. In the motel, the hitcher strums a guitar naked on the bed, while the unidentified man unpacks a new guitar string. He winds the string around his gloved hands and uses it to strangle the woman.
Quid wakes the next morning in his truck. His pet dingo sniffs relentlessly at the garbage outside the motel, and Quid notices the van driver watching the dingo from the window of the motel room. Quid picks up a load of pigs from Universal Meats. He sets off for Perth with his load and passes various characters on the road: a nagging wife and her family, a cautious man hauling a sailboat, and a station wagon crammed full of toy balls. He repeatedly passes by another female hitchhiker.
The nagging wife creates a roadblock by streaming pink paper across the highway. When Quid stops at the sight of it, she climbs into his cab and orders Quid to catch up with her husband who left her at the side of the road. They play What's My Line? to pass the time. The woman informs Quid about the grisly murder of a woman, and his nonchalant answers start to disturb her. She suspects that he might be the serial killer from the news. Quid stops the truck when he sees the green van parked along the road. Its driver has several trash bags and an esky. He appears to be burying the bags. When the van driver notices Quid watching him through binoculars, he abandons his work and drives away.
At a roadhouse, the van driver assaults Quid's dingo while he is inside. Quid gives chase, but he encounters the slow driving boat owner who refuses to let Quid pass. Eventually, Quid destroys the boat, but the green van is too far off to catch.
Quid picks up the female hitchhiker, Pamela Rushworth (Jamie Lee Curtis), that he has passed before. She gradually reveals that she is the daughter of a powerful American diplomat. Quid urges Pamela to let her father know that she is alright. The duo eagerly discuss the serial killer. At a service station, they notice the green van parked near the restroom. Quid sees a pair of feet in the toilet stall, and he thinks he has the killer cornered. Pamela investigates the green van while Quid tries to get the man to exit the stall. As Pamela reaches for the esky inside the van, she realizes that the driver is sleeping on the floor. In the restroom, a biker emerges from the stall and rushes outside. Quid rushes outside to see that the green van is gone.
When he catches up to the van, it appears that Pamela is happily in the passenger seat. Later that night, Quid notices the van parked off the side of the road, and pulls over to investigate. He hears people giggling in the bushes nearby and assumes that Pamela and the van driver are engaged in sexual intercourse. When he breaks into the van to investigate, he finds that the esky only contains food so he rests his suspicions.
Quid arrives at the outskirts of Perth, and while reporting to the weigh station, sees the green van. The proximity of several police cars revives his suspicions, and he follows the van through the streets of Perth, trailed by the police. Eventually the van reaches a dead end, and Quid's truck becomes stuck in the narrow alleys.
The van driver approaches Quid's truck and attempts to strangle Quid with a garrotte, but Quid manages to disarm him. When Quid starts to strangle the van driver with the same weapon, the police arrive and falsely assume that Quid is the killer. Upon freeing a gagged and bound Pamela from the van, the police learn that Quid is innocent, and pursue Pamela's actual captor through the crowd.
When Quid finally delivers the meat shipment, a torso and human head, presumably belonging to a murder victim, are found in his trailer. | insanity, violence, grindhouse film, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0088891 | Cavegirl | The main characters are Cavegirl herself and her family Dad, Mum, Big Sis, Gran and Little Bro. Other tribe members feature prominently. Cavegirl is a pretty, feisty individual and a bit of a tomboy although during the series she begins to become interested in boys and many of the storylines involve her becoming more mature. Big Sis is very interested in her appearance and how boys see her. She is also rather shallow. Dad is the stereotypical rugged caveman, although he is protective of his children, and is the chief of the tribe. Mum is a little dozey and Gran is very young at heart and more than a little crazy. Little Brother is curious about the world and often annoys Cavegirl immensely.
In season 2, Dad has left to look for new hunting grounds, and a new character, "Chief", has replaced him. In a flashback episode near the end of the season it was shown that Dad left Mum in charge, but she lost a bet with "The Chief of the Tribe to the North" and the tribes merged to form a larger one. | cult | train | wikipedia | Cave Girl is a humorous tongue in cheek romantic comedy that follows the romantic relationship of bumbling modern day Rex and beautiful and sexy pre-historic cave girl Eba.
The movie follows the bumbling Rex through a series of slapstick pranks and mishaps that culminate in his transport 25,000 years back in time to meet and fall in love with the beautiful Eba. And, along the way, Rex becomes a man that saves Eba and the rest of the local clan from cannibals.
This movie is a humorous, and at times poignant, look at the trials, tribulations, opportunities and decisions that young people often face as they come of age.
It starts off fairly decent when Rex (Daniel Roebuck) is caught in the middle of a practical joke and is in the women's locker room with at least 4 topless women.
Good start it my book.Anyhow, on what seems to be some kind of class field trip or something, Rex ends up going back in time by about 25,000 years or so and meets a tribe or family of cavemen (and cavegirls).
This is where he meets Eba (Cynthia Thompson), the cavegirl I assume the title of this movie refers to.
Eba is very hot when compared to the other cavegirls of this era, one of whom is a hefty old heifer who can't keep her breasts covered around Rex. Naturally, Rex falls for Eba and cheesy 80's hilariousness ensues.I can compare this movie to Teen Wolf, Weird Science or movies like that, although not nearly as good..
its a typical z rate movie with jokes that are so rubbish they are funny.
it should be a cult film :))) Eba is beautiful and the cave men try to be funny, most people probably wont laugh but i found them class especially the chief and the woman with black scraggy hair.
A 20th century loser finds love in the past with an adorable blonde prehistoric babe.I'm sure that the writers of Cavegirl intended their film to be nothing more than a charming lightweight sex comedy, but that's not quite how it comes across to me: I see supposedly sympathetic nerd Rex (Daniel Roebuck) as an opportunistic sexual predator, taking advantage of beautiful child-like primitive Eba (Cynthia Thompson), 'grooming' her from the word go.
I'm not blaming the guy for trying his luck—after all, Eba is smoking hot, legal, and available—but the sleazy, rather forceful manner in which he pursues her just is is just a little wrong when you think about it.So best not think about it then...Instead, just switch your brain off and enjoy the silliness and dated 80s trappings, which includes a fair amount of nudity, lots of unsophisticated slapstick humour (much of which comes courtesy of the other members of Eba's tribe), the obligatory 80s soft rock ballad, and a predictably sappy ending in which Rex's persistence pays off (the lucky bugger!) and the once pitiful nerd proves his love by rescuing Eba and her tribe from cannibals.5.5 out of 10, happily rounded up to 6 for the lovely Cynthia Thompson..
Together they get involved in spectacularly boring encounters with wild bears and big cats (what, no dinosaurs?) while the nerd tries to teach his new primitive girlfriend English and have his way with her, but just failing every time.
Can our weedy hero use his 20th century know-how to save the day and return to his own time, or is he doomed to a life of eating plants and sleeping on rocks?The opening five minutes sets the tone of this soft-core sleaze-fest, with a bunch of topless busty beauties chasing the doofus out of their changing-room in super slow mo.
There are some laughs to be had in this movie but the best thing going for it is the nudity.
The best parts are at the beginning and the end but nudity is present throughout the movie mostly in the form of flashing breasts or bathing in a river.This movie is now on DVD and I must say, the video quality is crisp and clear and is presented in widescreen format.
In his first leading role, actor Daniel Roebuck ("River's Edge", "The Fugitive") plays Rex, a geeky high school student who's constantly being mocked and made a victim of pranks.
Due to some sort of miracle involving jet plane tests and a weird crystal inside the cave, Rex is magically transported back to caveman times.
Here he meets the girl of his dreams, the sweet, bubbly and naive blonde Eba (Cynthia Thompson).
Roebuck is good (and a good sport when it comes to being the butt of jokes), but it's the charming and absolutely lovely Ms. Thompson (who sadly died much too young) who is the main reason to watch.
You won't be able to take your eyes off of her, and she's enormously appealing, to boot.There is some well executed aerial photography to begin the movie, and unlike most Crown International productions, almost all of the credits are saved for the final few minutes.
Writer / producer / director / cinematographer David Oliver looked like he was working with a pretty low budget, but his movie hits the ground running and clocks in at a fairly painless 82 minutes.Six out of 10..
This is a woefully unfunny film, with none of the 'so-bad-it's-entertaining' elements which similar films sometimes provide.Story follows Rex, a geeky high-school student ( who looks far too old ) who is an incredibly annoying character, totally without charm.
Here he meets and falls in love with a pre-Baywatch, tanned, buxom, curly blonde-haired Charlie's Angel in a bikini.I almost invariably find something to like in these 1980's teen comedies, but 'Cave Girl' is dire from start to finish.
They only serve to pad out the narrative which runs out of ideas after 20 minutes and wanders aimlessly around until things stagger to a faltering conclusion.When a fart joke and a sight-gag featuring blowing up a condom, provoke not the slightest response you know its not looking good.
Just when things seem to have reached their lowest, new depths are plunged into with a dire love song on the soundtrack, as Rex loses Eba and wanders around forlornly trying to find her.This really is rubbish - the only features with any merit are the video cover featuring the scantily clad Eba posing with a club over her shoulder; the early scene when Rex goes into the wrong changing rooms and is chased out by a group of topless girls; and the brief couple of seconds when Eba finally gets her 'thrupenny bits' out.Rex makes an immediate entry into my hit-list of the most irritating characters in film..
Let's admit at the start that Cynthia Thompson is a pretty girl - she has a very genuine looking smile, a nice figure, and you get to see her boobs.That's about it, folks.Rex, who is supposed to be a sympathetic character is never, at any point in the proceedings even slightly sympathetic - his character is badly written, directed even worse, and appallingly acted.The film is loaded with humorous routines which aren't.
I note that someone has already mentioned the hilarious condom-inflating gag, but how could you forget the hysterically unfunny edible shaving cream routine which was stretched out for what seemed like half my life, getting less and less funny with each passing hour-long second than it wasn't to start off with.Take my word for it, if this comes on then find something else to do - doing ANYTHING with your time is a better use of it than using it to watch Cavegirl..
Normally, I'd be a big fan of the time-travelling and 80s odd-adventures teen comedies, but this was just plain insulting.
And, although it was devoid of most anything I would consider funny, there was no shortage of your standard cheap 80s T & A, including playful locker room romp with our geek and oft-pranked hero.Daniel Roebuck, who never seemed to have an eye for good material (or may have never been offered much of it, with the exception of The River's Edge), plays our nerdy protagonist.
A teen brain, he joins his classmates on some archaeological field trip and, thanks to his frequent taunters, loses the group and inadvertently stumbles upon an Air Force experiment which sends him back in time to the age of the cave man.
Of course, already being amateur hour to begin, he finds a cave girl (complete with cave girl bikini ensemble and shiny white teeth) and does what anyone would do if suddenly sent back in time -- he teaches her the English commands that would get him laid.Bottom line: if it's the nudity you get off on, then you'll likely be satisfied with even watching this crap on mute.
When the social outcast (READ: nerd) vanishes from a school field trip via an unexplained military experiment and finds himself in prehistory, the movie loses all logic and redeeming qualities.
Atypical misadventures with Our Hero attempting to score with the beautiful (and amazingly well-groomed) Cave Girl.
Watch it on a self-induced Bad Movie Night or walk on by like I should have done for the 1,000 and first time..
CAVEGIRL is an awful concoction mixing the usual '80s high school comedy hijinks with a Stone Age adventure.
The main character is an overweight creepy guy who enjoys spying on women, and he ends up being transported back to prehistoric times by a secret military experiment.
There he meets and falls in love with a beautiful blonde cave girl and the two have various adventures as they evade grizzly bears and cannibal tribes.This really is hopeless, barrel scraping stuff, and yet there's a little of the so-bad-it's-good vibe going on.
Daniel Roebuck (THE RIVER'S EDGE) is awful as the uncharismatic lead, although buxom starlet Cindy Ann Thompson (NOT OF THIS EARTH) is a little better as the vacuous cave girl and at least gets into the spirit of the thing.Everywhere the paucity of the budget is apparent, with rubbish fur bikinis and a general cheap-looking shooting style out in a quarry somewhere.
Goofy back in time teen sex comedy attempt....
1st watched 9/13/2014 – 3 out of 10 (Dir-David Oliver): *review based on 85 minute VHS version* Goofy back in time teen sex comedy attempt about a high school student, played by Daniel Roebuck, who is fond of the prehistoric times but looked at as a geek to the girls.
The class takes a field trip to a mine and the combination of a glowing crystal and a mistaken government missile test hitting the cave amazingly transports the student – Rex – to the cave people times.
A sexy young cave girl, played by Cindy Ann Thompson, wakes him up the next morning and he spends the next half hour of the movie trying to have sex with her while they teach each other their languages.
There are a couple of slightly funny scenes – one particular one where the cave men try to destroy a flashlight, and a slight chuckle occurs when Rex asks the cavegirl to sit on his face - juvenile humor, of course, but brought an unexpected response from me.
It is a blatant attempt by Crown Pictures to pander to the teen audience even though the movie is Rated "R" with the theatrical trailer showing all of the nude scenes!!
This is typical of the 80's where the titillation takes center stage and the movie falls flat on it's face
skip this one unless you're interested in Cindy Ann..
Alas, this was not the case and sadly the audience are subjected to an awful, bumbling romance between Roebuck and Thompson whilst the other cave people, mildly amusing at first, simply get really tiresome.
I have to admit, Cavegirl did, unintentionally, have me laughing at some points at how bad everything was and how the plot went from bad to worst but this is not good comedy!
His performance is charmless and devoid of any talent.The worst film I have ever seen and the only film I've seen that has no redeeming features whatsoever, avoid Cavegirl at all costs unless you are a bad movie fan or there's a big group of people who can all join in on the mockery..
This movie actually starts out with some laughter as high school antics ridicule a nerd.
The nerd travels back in time and encounters prehistoric cavemen and cavewomen.
B-movie producers Crown International Pictures seemed to churn out a lot of comedies in the 80's.
Like most, Cave Girl has a title and cover that suggests it might be decent fun at the very least but in practice this is yet another laugh-free zone from good old Crown.
It tells the story of a nerdy anthropology student called Rex who touches a coloured rock while out on a field trip and is somehow or other subsequently sent back in time to the prehistoric era.
Almost immediately he meets cute cave girl and then more stuff happens.You would think that an 80's time-travelling teen-comedy would at the very least have a few ideas up its sleeve.
Well, you'd be wrong in this case as despite the potential in the set-up, all this one more or less boils down to is our protagonist trying to teach the cave girl English in order to facilitate having sex with her.
Not only that but in spite of his character being a high school student, the actor that played him looked like he was pushing forty.
Needless to say, the antics of this individual are somewhat alienating and don't generate anything approaching empathy.The film itself is a half-hearted sex comedy at best, with an early scene in a girl's locker room that did at least provide boobs which is never exactly ever going to be a bad production value.
The prehistoric set-up is the only thing that really provides any interest but even that is pretty underwhelming on the whole, with boring cave people and little in the way of much else, aside from an encounter with a tribe of cannibals, which did enliven things a bit I have to say, although even that wasn't exactly very interesting.
For a prehistoric comedy, you'd really be better off watching the cult movie Eegah (1962) or even the more recent California Man (1992); neither of those are exactly stellar stuff but both are marginally better than Cave Girl..
Cyntia Thompson and Ringo should collaborate and make a really great prehistoric movie.
If not for the nude scenes and and a few other things, children may have very well made this movie a hit.
Too bad it ended up on the all time worst list.
It is also too bad Cynthia Ann Thompson has not done a lot more in her career.
Bumbling nerdy high school anthropology student Rex (a winningly goofy performance by Daniel Roewbuck) travels 25,000 years back in time.
Rex not only stumbles across a wacky tribe of primitive Neanderthals, but also meets and falls in love with sweet and beautiful cave babe Ebba (delightfully played with disarming radiance and innocence by adorable blonde sprite Cynthia Thompson).
Rex teaches Ebba English, makes various clumsy attempts at seducing her, and saves the tribe from a nasty rival group of savage cannibals.
Roebuck and Thompson make for appealing leads; their central romance is cute, funny, and even quite charming.
Rex is a nerdy, picked on high school student.
The teacher claims Einstein said time travel is possible and the atom bomb happened, and a helicopter is flying overhead, so Rex goes back into time and meets a cute blonde and a much of stereotyped dumb cavemen that don't even know zug-zug.The humor didn't make it.
"Cave Girl" (1985) is a movie that just about everyone will either really hate or avidly love.
I loved it – but then, as most of you know, I'm a sucker for movies in which the bungling, overweight, getting-on-in-years comedian ends up with the really luscious eighteen, or nineteen year-old girl with the blonde hair, the beautiful voice and the gorgeous breasts.
The girl who really likes Dan and totally overlooks his many faults, is the ultra-lovely Cynthia Thompson.
"Cave Girl" is a movie about a dork who goes back in time when he enters a cave on a school excursion.The movie spends very little time in the present day; only enough to establish that the guy is a dork, and get a quick topless scene out of the way (featuring Michelle Bauer).The budget obviously didn't cover extensive use of a high school or even many other actors.
The only other students we see are the trio of topless girls, who of course only do that one scene, and then a small, faceless group of people who play tricks on the dork.The movie can't wait to go back in time where it won't cost as much, but this is where it gets boring.
A high school as a setting works in better movies because there is life there.
The desert, not so much, or at least not so much when filmed as badly as b-grade teen comedies are.When our hero meets the cave girl of the title we see where the rest of the budget went.
Not even the babe makes it worth watching, and there's surprisingly little nudity from her, just a quick topless scene..
They also produced some horrible comedies- Ishtar, The Pirate Movie, Rhinestone, ETC.
It is the story of Rex (Daniel Roebuck), an annoying loser who travels back in time, and meets an attractive cave girl named Eba (Cynthia Thompson).
The reason being Rex is an annoying jerk who's so desperate that he sexually harasses Eba. The movie is not even close to funny.
It's an ugly and aggressive film, not realizing it has no potential but instead thinking all of their nasty jokes are so funny.
There's cave girls farting, Rex touching Eba's boobs for no reason, and cavemen thinking up the wheel. |
tt0255195 | The Goddess of 1967 | The storyline opens in Tokyo where JM (Rikiya Kurokawa), a rich young IT worker and sometime computer hacker, is attempting to purchase a 1967 model Citroën DS, or Goddess, as it is known to French car aficionados. JM lives in a pristine but unfriendly hi-tech apartment. The smog filled city is blue-grey and bleak. He rarely speaks to his live-in girlfriend and is preoccupied with other possessions—his latest snorkeling gear as well as the pet snakes and other exotic reptiles he keeps in the flat. After tracing, on the Internet, a perfectly restored Citroën owned by a couple in Australia, JM abandons his job and flies out to purchase the rare car, which he thinks can fill the emptiness in his life.
No one meets JM at the airport but he eventually finds the home where the car is located and meets BG (Rose Byrne), a blind and emotionally unstable young woman. BG, who is minding a young child, explains that the couple did not actually own the Citroën and that the husband shot his wife and then killed himself after a violent argument over money. She shows him the car and tells him, after he has test driven it, that she can take him to its real owner, who is somewhere in the Outback, a five-day drive away. Intoxicated by the vehicle, JM agrees. BG abandons the young child at the blood-splattered house, instructing her not to trust anyone.
As BG and JM journey into the spectacular but harsh landscape, the viewer is taken on a series of complex and often confusing flashbacks which attempt to illustrate the dark tragedies that have shaped their respective lives. JM, we learn, became fabulously wealthy after a friend gave him the computer password to a major bank. But his friend was soon run over and killed by a passing truck. JM's infatuation with the car is apparently an attempt to fill the emotional gap created by his friend's death and the barren life he leads in Tokyo, which, he tells BG, is alien and "just like Mars".
Most of the flashbacks, however, concern BG. She was sexually attacked three years earlier by a young boxer from a travelling circus who is frustrated in his attempts by a Chastity belt. BG then escaped into the bush where she was protected by wild dingoes. As a young child, she was also sexually abused by her grandfather (who is her blood father) and traumatised by Marie (Elise McCredie), her disoriented and deeply religious mother. Grandpa (Nicholas Hope), who was a hippie, a wine maker and then an opal miner, believes his outback existence frees him from all moral constraints.
BG's favourite radio show is the obituary notices program and she is infatuated by the sound of insects splattering on the Citroën's windscreen, which, she explains to JM, is the "sound of death". Although blind, BG carries a pistol which she fires occasionally: the first time at two sinister men who pull alongside the car during JM's test drive and later, in the outback, to destroy the radio she uses to listen to the obituary notices. Unbeknownst to JM, BG's grandfather owns the car and she is leading JM to him not to consummate the car's sale but in order to kill the old man.
In the course of their journey through an unremittingly hostile world inhabited by cruel outback men and women, the couple become friends and, after JM teaches BG how to dance, tentative lovers. BG eventually finds her grandfather and confronts him in his rundown opal mine. She had planned to shoot him but, having reconciled her past in the course of the trip and found someone who genuinely cares for her, decides not to go ahead with it. The film ends with BG and JM travelling off together in the Citroën, the message being that humane relationships are only possible when people come to terms with their past. | murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | I loved it.The movie starts with a computer screen that says: I want to buy GOD.The Prologue doesn't have any human voices.
Because of that movie I can't let go of that.She succeeds in showing us her own vision of The Goddess of 1967 because she stays consequent by creating a contemporary and postmodern feeling.
Afterwards Film in London and lives with her husband in Australia.What Clara Law tries to explain in her movie is sort of autobiographic, it is obvious that she reflects this on the two protagonists.
Clara Law doesn't work this movie out in a shallow kind of way.
Or so she says.Once they are on the road with the car, you can follow the mental way of both characters.
On the road the flashbacks follow and the viewer learns the pain and history of the characters and why the are what they are.
I knew it was a road trip picture with a Japanese man and Australian woman...
What I didn't expect was two very real people, scared, vulnerable and eccentric characters on a journey across Australia that becomes luminous and intoxicating.
The visual style of the film /cinematography, while gorgeous, was at first distracting...
But as the story unfolds, the visual look of the film matches with the messy, hypnotic storyline and its characters.
Clare Law was a successful blockbuster director while she was in Hong Kong, who made films like The Reincarnation of Golden Lotus.
Its cinematography is beautiful; its writing is humorous, despite the fact that the story is heavy.
This is a description that requires a lot of hand gestures.It moves in such a way that you are carried along with the action, not separated from the action by this big "movie".
Although some of the underlying issues that the main characters have gone through are in many respects very serious and macabre, I don't think it was the director's intent to make this a depressing movie which dwells on those issues alone.
Ironically, the central character is blind, and cannot see all this visual beauty directly.
Rose Byrne's performance alone makes this film worth a look (it still airs occasionally on sundance).
Actors who take on the challenging role of blind characters are nothing new- but to see a talented actress take to it with total commitment and still be very believable and not over the top is something special.
Rose Byrne is brilliant here as B.G. and really shines in the more subtle moments, which are the primary driving force for this Clara Law film.The theme of incest abuse and it's lingering affects through generations make for very heavy subject matter that would otherwise threaten to undermine the film's subtle tone - but it's told in flashback here and works surprisingly well.
The comparisons of style to Wenders and Jarmusch are apt since it is precisely the more subtle scenes in this film that resonate more as the viewer gets drawn into the lives and past histories of this unlikely couple.
Not a perfect film by any means - the loving yet determinist, religious mother, Marie could have been fleshed out more, as well as the male lead - but the real gem here is Rose Byrne.
This film does several things that are hard to read and harder to fully appreciate without being hammered over the head with the story's themes.
The film sets up expectations for the characters, then proceeds to change said expectations as the characters evolve and reveal like layers peeling away.
I'm awed by much of the delicate caress of the pacing, and the contrast of the beautiful way many of the scenes are shot against the contents of the scenes themselves.
If you are driving or contemplating a purchase of a featureless economical car with automatic transmission, or if you have REALLY managed to bear the tedious 3 hours of `The Titanic' without leaving the theatre for a half-an-hour refreshment or for good, THE GODDESS OF 1967 is not a film for you.
On the other hand, if you are sick of being able to predict the remaining two and a half hours of the contemporary Hollywood mind-numbing production, Clara Law has a remedy for you!
Moreover, if you have ever fallen in love with a car, you would be even more delighted to see that there are people like you out there.The first hint of the cinematic joy that THE GODDESS OF 1967 offers is clear from the first 10 minutes of the film.
However, Clara Law bravely takes the challenge, carrying us smoothly through the wonderful world of moving pictures backed by enchanting music.Thematically, THE GODDESS OF 1967 incorporates a number of topics, child abuse being but one of them.
Questions seemingly so simple that most of us would not bother asking, yet most of us would not be able to answer them, as well as the characters in the film remain perplexed, stammering nonsense that reverberates mockingly.THE GODDESS OF 1967 is a meeting point of several worlds.
The good and the evil, love and hate, reason and absurdity, trauma and optimism, gloom and humour are interwoven into the plot with straightforward simplicity, which makes the film surprisingly lifelike.
Finally, the film brings all these worlds closer to us, making us richer for knowing one another better..
In movies - road movies especially - we are looking for change in the characters, the relationships and possibly the balance between two themes.
Learned to love a being without scales?And in looking for themes that may be juxtaposed or in tension with each other - yes there is Megacity Vs Outback, there is beauty vs ugliness, black holes vs religion, responsibility for yourself vs the excuse of horrid childhood - but for me somehow they were a bit fitted in, if any one stands out - perhaps it is travelling with a purpose vs with your eyes closed, and the frightning thing of travelling with a purpose (to buy the car or kill your dad) turns out to be: What then?
The Goddess of the title is a Citroen DS which a young Japanese Man agrees to buy over the internet.
When he arrives in Australia to get it, the owner is dead and he embarks on a journey into the outback with a blind girl for a reason which is never clear, even when it is made apparent at the end.
Its flashbacks into the deprived and abused past of the blind girl are bleak, but otherwise there is little story and the two main characters appear almost lost in the vast landscapes they are travelling through.
Could Australian movies please get over their current pretentious pre-occupation with mad and irrational characters and meaningless storylines?The votes on this site, and some press reviews, suggest that some people enjoyed this film.
I suspect they are the same people who enjoyed performance art during the 1990s and Andy Warhol movies in the 1980s.
Clara Law succeeds in striking a style, but tells us nothing we want to know.
Even the Australian outback, which dominates the film, gets a raw deal: the locations appear random, the colour in the outdoor scenes is fashionably bleached, and the whole thing was shot during the wettest summer for years..
Visually impressive in a way that few films are, The Goddess of 1967 is a sumptuous feast for the eyes.
Unfortunately all the eye candy in the world can't save a film that suffers dreadfully from being extremely self indulgent.
There's nothing wrong with a slow film as evidenced by such cinematic gems as The Thin Red Line so long as the winding narrative path takes the audience somewhere.
Ponderous and meandering, The Goddess of 1967 is a tedious example of a film overly impressed with its own importance..
I loathe the phrase "It's only a movie", as in, "it's not real, they're only actors, don't let a film affect your emotions".
Obviously it's only a movie, but I for one can relate to scenarios, or start to equate a film to real people's lives, envisioning the woes and traumas of dark story lines affecting people all too vividly in the real world.
There are certain scenes in certain films that haunt me and stick in the back of my mind like an ugly memory, making the fact that the film was great or not a mute point.
GODDESS OF 1967 has a few such scenes which I found particularly disturbing and I wish I had never seen this film because of those few disturbing scenes.
I can't find this film beautiful or look at it strictly as an artistic endeavor with attempts at social commentary.
I did not get enough value or mind opening insight from this film to make it worth watching.
People who's projected imagination and human empathy are less vivid than mine, will probably have a much milder take on this film..
While some of the content of the film was not something I enjoy watching, there were two things that I did enjoy.
In addition, many of the camera movements added to the feeling of the story rather than be a distraction as in so many movies.
I just finished viewing this movie (The Goddess of 1967) that my roommate had rented and was quite moved by it.
That of a naive, young Japanese man (Rikiya Kurokawa) and a blind Australian girl, Deidre (Rose Byrne).
The movie tells of their journey through the Australian outback after the Japanese man travels to Australia in search of the car of his dreams, a classic French Citroen.
The trip is not a vacation, but a journey of release particularly for the young woman who has been tormented for most of her short life by the horrible memories of sexual abuse and a mother who failed to stop it.
THE GODDESS OF 1967 is a film by Clara Law and husband Eddie Fong.
It's set in Australia and it's by a Hong Kong/Australian director famous for her less 'Aussie' films.
It's about a Japanese businessman (Rikiya Kurokawa, look out for this name, a great performance by a Prada model(?!) in his first role) who finds a classic car (a Citroen DS 1967) on the internet and comes to Australia to buy it.
Anyway, when he arrives he finds the owners dead and ends up on a journey in the car across the outback with a blind Australian girl (yeah, it's a road movie).
The look of the film reminded me of innovative HK directors like Wong Kar-Wai and his cinematographer Chris Doyle.
Clara uses a lot of visual effects and graphics that work well, (although sometimes look like vague attempts to be experimental) and obvious back projection behind the drivers in the car which I thought was great but alot of people might not like.
Providing expensive clothes with designer labels , night life, bars with spirits and music , trips to Maldives , Mexico Bay , calm beaches of Africa by plane or liners , even by high speed catamaran without considering seasonal restrictions , open air concerts, opera , theater , all exclusive accesses which you will feel personally special , heavily depend on money.
He goes to the house where he thinks the owner lives only to find a red-haired blind girl, BG.
The Citroen DS is a much-loved car.
This fits since the two leads have shut themselves off with painful souls and away from the real world when they journey into the spectacular but harsh landscape.
P.S. Film based on C.L' s 18 days road trip by 4x4 car.
There are two important locations : Lighthning Ridge (for The Goddess of 1967) and White Cliffs ( for The Mechanical Bird-This film is not appeared yet.).
Directionless japanese internet thief goes to Australia to buy a Goddess (a Citroen 2CV) and meets a blind women.
They travel through Australia together and flashbacks into the women's history reveal a terrifying yet simple story about her childhood, including sexual abuse and religious fanatism.
While being displayed in beautiful pictures using very interesting camera technique, I experienced the movie as an overly long trip into the world of simply insane people.
The absurd end spoiled all the sympathy I had for the movie while I watched it, leaving me with the question: "What the hell did Clara Law want to express/tell/explain with this movie?" I didn't enjoy searching for the answer at all..
Although i have never been in either of the countries I think that this film gave me a good impression of what I could expect.
A person from the nearly unhuman hi tech world of Tokio comes to look for an old car which is more than low tech.
In this extreme world a love story is set.Very interesting..
It is lovely to look at, especially the way the scenery is filmed (& I don't care who tries to contemptuously dismiss it as 'arty'.
I don't want to look at tourist brochure cinematography, a la 'Japanese Story' - I've already been to the outback & seen the scenery).
The characters felt real to me (& never acted in ways that were inconsistent with or unexplained in terms of their personality & motives, unlike Toni Colette's character in 'Japanese Story').
However, if your life has not followed the mainstream-media 'happy families' narrative, you might, as I did, be able to deeply relate to the main characters, as well as the whole sense & sensibility of this movie..
Like too many arthouse movies 'The Goddess of 1967' seems to think that some excellent cinematography is enough to carry a superficial script full of stereotypical characters.
Apart from a handful of memorable visual images I can think of nothing positive to say about this movie.
Personally I'm sick of this outdated, narrow view which in no way represents the diversity and richness of contemporary Australian life.
To add further to the shallowness and predictability of this movie the Japanese car buff played by newcomer Rikiya Kurokawa is so poorly developed and pointless that he may as well wear a t-shirt saying "silly Asian character" and leave it at that.
The inexplicably touted Rose Byrne's "fiesty blind girl with a dark past" has slightly more depth, but only just.
This film combines an interesting and meaningful plot with cinematography which is a tribute to the many textures of Australia and some restrained but insightful acting and direction.
I saw this movie at a film festival, and have been patiently waiting for it to be distributed.
Beautifully shot and artfully acted, this film achieves (and then some) what Japanese Story fell short of..
It looked like just another graduate thesis from every film school around America: Tarkovsky-alikes.
Personally I am tired of seeing films like that.
How did Clara Law think of this film --- and write the script?.
It begins with an obsessed Japanese man, who meets a blind 38 year-old woman in Australia.
There are flashbacks.Try not watching this film: I don't think you will be able to.
See a female director credit and always go, you will never be disappointed.Clara Bow was born in China (Macao) and has two different Chinese names, according to IMDb. She first made films in China, in Chinese.
Her Japanese leading man is a knock-out, too.This film is a great package: definitely take it in..
The three main flashback scenes feel unnecessary and distracting at first, but once we make it to the finale everything comes full circle and all of the 'unecessary' filler from before just adds more and more to the complexities of Rose's character.
Salvation lay in the affection between the two protagonists.I sought this film out for Rose Byrne and was not disappointed.
Her performance is worth the film's nearly two hours running time.
There was too much of Byrne's character stumbling around feeling her way about.
His love making scene with Rose Byrne's character is very sensual and hot.
That'd be a simplified way of describing "The Goddess of 1967", a dazzling, unique road movie written and directed by Clara Law ("Floating Life").The goddess of the title isn't a woman, but the nickname of a Citroën DS, a famous car designed in the 50's.
A young Japanese man (Rikiya Kurokawa) dreams of buying that car, and he travels to Australia after he finds an offering on the net.
But special kudos go to Clara Law, her co-writer Eddie Ling-Ching Fong and cinematographer Dion Beebe (Oscar winner for "Memoirs of a Geisha"), responsible for the breathtaking visuals (Aussie landscapes seldom looked so gorgeous).Incest, murder, blindness aren't light issues, and a less talented director could make an imbroglio with this material.
Fortunately, Clara Law knows what she's talking about and her film is a cinematic poem - sad, sometimes disturbing, but not depressing (I have no idea how could someone classify this as a comedy, though).
"The Goddess of 1967" is a vigorous film that deserves to be discovered.
The fantastic cinematography and the performance of Rose Byrne.
The rest of the film however--While The Goddess of 1967 is very pleasing to look at, the actions of the characters are frequently shallow and seemingly random.
For example, during the conclusion, it simply was not believable that B.G. would make the choice to put her past aside and choose to pursue a life with J.M. when the chemistry and dialogue between the two characters was so completely mindless.Law failed to demonstrate the growth and change B.G. allegedly must have made during the trip and forces her into a 180 at the end of the film as a quick fix..
Clara Law's directing technique is first-year film school stuff with a lot of unnecessary appendages that do little other than distract; and the story is a fairly stale reworking of tired old themes about betrayal, revenge and redemption built upon on a narrative of incest and sexual transgression.
Even Rose Byrne's gorgeous face can do little to make this film watchable. |
tt0238414 | Mickey's Once Upon a Christmas | === Donald Duck Stuck On Christmas ===
Inspired by Christmas Every Day by William Dean Howells. Huey, Dewey and Louie wake up one Christmas morning and open their presents, even though they are supposed to wait first for Aunt Daisy, Uncle Scrooge and Aunt Gertie to arrive. After the boys take their new sleds from their Uncle Donald (not reading the included gift card) they go sledding and have Christmas dinner. While Donald, Daisy, Uncle Scrooge and Aunt Gertie sing carols, the boys play with their new toys.
Later, it is time for the boys to go to bed and having enjoyed the day immensely, the boys then wish that it would be Christmas every day. Their wish is granted and at first the three are joyful. After a few days, however, they begin to get sick of Christmas and soon realize that every day will be exactly the same as the day when they first made their wish. They then decide to change the course of action of the next day by playing tricks and pranks, including swapping the cooked turkey with a live one for the dinner table. The day turns out to be a bad Christmas for everyone, especially Donald.
After this, the boys finally read the gift card that was given to them which they had previously disregarded. The card is from Donald and Daisy, it wishes them love and explains that Christmas is not just about presents, it is about being with family. The boys instantly become guilty for their pranks and decide to make amends by making the next day the best Christmas ever. At the end of the next day, the boys finally realize the true meaning of Christmas and the time loop comes to an end, leading into the day after Christmas.
=== A Very Goofy Christmas ===
Goofy and Max are mailing out a letter to Santa Claus. However, as soon as they get home, Pete, the neighbor, tells Max that Santa does not exist, predicting how he can't fly around the world in one night. Things get worse when Goofy poses as Santa for some kids and Max finds out that he tricked him. Goofy is determined to prove to Max that Santa does exist and even stays up all Christmas Eve to keep an eye out for him. But after falling off the roof, Goofy gives up hope of Santa coming. Now, Max does everything that Goofy did to make his father happy, including posing as Santa. In the end, the real Santa actually comes and gives Max the gift the boy asked for earlier (as well as blowing some snow on Pete's house when the cunning neighbor tries to flatter the legendary figure).
This segment of Mickey's Once Upon a Christmas chronologically precedes the cartoon series, Goof Troop. Max is voiced by Shaun Fleming of the indie rock bands Diane Coffee and Foxygen.
=== Mickey and Minnie's The Gift of the Magi ===
Based on the story The Gift of the Magi by O. Henry. Mickey wants to get Minnie a gold chain for her one heirloom, her watch, so he works at Crazy Pete's Tree Lot. Minnie wants to give Mickey something special for Christmas as well, so she works hard to get her special bonus. However, Pete (Mickey's uptight and greedy boss) steals all of Mickey's money and fires him when he ruins his chance of selling an expensive 10-footer to a poor family and Minnie's bonus proves to be nothing but a fruit cake. After playing music for a toy drive with the Firehouse Five, Mickey has the idea that he can trade his harmonica for the chain. The shop closes by the time he gets there and the owner rejects it, thinking it's not worth anything, but changes his mind after hearing its music. Back at Minnie's house, Mickey gives her the chain for her watch and Minnie gives him a case for his harmonica. Of course, the irony is that Minnie no longer has her watch—just as Mickey no longer has his harmonica—so the gifts are essentially useless. As in the classic Gift of the Magi upon which this adaptation—penned by O. Henry—is based, the thought behind each gift is what counts. The film concludes with a medley of various carols.
In "The Gift of Magi", one of Mickey's dance moves are very similar to his dance routine in the 1942 theatrical short, "Mickey's Birthday Party". | revenge, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0298856 | Evelyn | Nine-year-old Evelyn Doyle's (Sophie Vavasseur) mother has abandoned the family, leaving her out-of-work father Desmond Doyle (Pierce Brosnan) to bring up Evelyn and her two brothers, Maurice (Hugh MacDonagh) and Dermot (Niall Beagan) on his own. Matters are only made worse when Desmond's mother-in-law (Claire Mullan) reports the abandonment of the children to the authorities. Irish law prohibits children from being brought up in a "broken home", and therefore places these children in Church-run orphanages. Desmond also drinks excessively. Although it is shown that the boys orphanage is very strict, details are examined in Evelyn's orphanage. She is dropped off by her grandfather (Frank Kelly), who, in attempts to comfort the clearly nervous Evelyn, explains to her that rays of light created by the sun shining in a specific spot through the clouds are called "angel rays," and mean that a guardian angel is watching over her. Evelyn, although momentarily comforted, is brought away by the nuns. She is introduced to a dining hall of girls much like herself. It is revealed that many of them have been in the orphanage for many years due to Irish law. While the children are adjusting to the harsh treatments of Catholic orphanages, Desmond has not been doing well. Desmond, finding no hope in the retrieval of his children and unable to afford a lawyer, has gotten very drunk and tried to punch the innocent Father O'Malley. The father instead punches Desmond. Desmond is helped by the local part-time bartender and chemist, Bernadette (Julianna Margulies). Bernadette tells Desmond to go to her brother's office, who happens to be solicitor (a type of lawyer, although he cannot speak in cases such as these) for help. The solicitor, Michael (Stephen Rea), makes it very clear to Desmond though, that he cannot help him until he gets his act together. This means bringing in a regular income and setting a good example for his children. Desmond does get a painting job and spends nights singing for tips with his father in the pub where Bernadette works. Unfortunately at this time, Evelyn had been having problems with Sister Bridget who beat her after she questioned her authority. Evelyn objected to Sister Bridget (Andrea Irvine) beating her friend who forgot Bible scripture, although the Bible scripture stated that "God is merciful," therefore meaning that He wouldn't want Sister Bridget to beat the children for forgetting scripture. Enraged, Desmond goes to find Evelyn after reading this in a letter that she wrote to him. On his way, he finds Sister Bridget and shakes her while threatening her to never touch his daughter again or he will "tear her limb from limb." This leads to a series of drunken rampages which leads to Bernadette refusing to continue her romantic encounter with Desmond on the grounds that he needs to, essentially, shape up. During this time, Desmond also loses his father when he has a heart attack. Desmond does shape up though, including quitting drinking. Unfortunately, their (now the lawyer and speaker, American Nick Barron (Aidan Quinn), and his old mentor and consultant, injured rugby player and rebel lawyer Thomas Connolly (Alan Bates) plea is rejected by the courts leading Desmond and his children heartbroken and separated. But, that night (the same night Desmond quits drinking) a gambler rigs Desmond to win copious amounts of money to pay for his legal bills. With nowhere to go though, the case seems hopeless until Connolly comes up with the idea of bringing an entirely new issue to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the lack of Desmond's custody with his children goes against the Irish Constitution itself. No one has ever successfully made a statement like this and won. Through publicity, Desmond gets a court hearing where they successfully make their case and Desmond makes a compelling speech to the court. The next day, Evelyn is brought to the stand and told that she was lying about Sister Bridget beating her after Sister Bridget exaggerates her run-in with Desmond and tells a false story about Evelyn's black and blue face. Evelyn, although momentarily confused by this change in events, is comforted by "angel rays," she believes are from her grandfather. Evelyn denies this statement and makes rather hilarious comebacks, unknowingly, to the defense and Sister Bridget. She then finishes it off with a beautiful repeat of her prayer asking to forgive Sister Bridget and insure the prospering of Ireland and its people. Moved, two out of the three judges side with Desmond who not only gets his children back, but finally falls in love with Bernadette. They are shown on Christmas Day, celebrating as a family. It is then shown that due to these efforts, many children all across Ireland were reunited with their families due to amends in the Irish Children's Act. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0070291 | The Last of Sheila | On a one-week Mediterranean pleasure cruise aboard the yacht of movie producer Clinton Greene (Coburn), the guests include actress Alice Wood (Welch), her talent-manager husband Anthony (McShane), talent agent Christine (Cannon), screenwriter Tom Parkman (Benjamin), Tom's wife Lee (Hackett), and film director Philip Dexter (Mason).
The trip is, in fact, a reunion. All were together at Clinton's home one year before, on the night a hit-and-run accident resulted in the death of Clinton's wife, gossip columnist Sheila Greene. (Yvonne Romain, a former Hammer horror actress, appeared as Sheila Greene in a cameo performance.)
Once the cruise is under way, Clinton, a parlor game enthusiast, informs everyone that the week's entertainment will consist of "The Sheila Greene Memorial Gossip Game." The six guests are each assigned an index card containing a secret (in Clinton's words, "a pretend piece of gossip") that must be kept hidden from the others. The object of the game is to discover everyone else's secret while protecting one's own.
Each night the yacht anchors at a different Mediterranean port city, where one of the six secrets is disclosed to the entire group. The guests are given a clue, then sent ashore to find the proof of who among them holds the card bearing that night's secret. The game for that night ends when the actual holder of the subject secret discovers the proof. Anyone who has not yet solved the clue receives no points on Clinton's scoreboard for that round. Following the revelation of the first card, "YOU are a SHOPLIFTER," suspicion begins that each guest's card does not contain "pretend" gossip but in fact an actual, embarrassing secret about each guest.
When Clinton does not return from the second evening's installment of the game, where the second card was revealed to be "YOU are a HOMOSEXUAL," the guests return ashore and discover Clinton's corpse. Before contacting authorities, one reveals that his card reads, "YOU are a HIT-AND-RUN KILLER." This begins a macabre game of musical chairs of sorts, with guests jousting over who lays claim to which dirty little secret. Paranoia grows over the obvious implication that both Sheila and Clinton were killed by somebody on this yacht.
The game being played is actually just a portion of a more elaborate puzzle created by Clinton, including additional clues that are ever-present and the suggestion that any guest could win the game without even leaving the yacht, "If you're smart enough," Clinton taunted. Although his own diabolical game did not end as Clinton planned, characters continue to discover these clues, resulting in another death aboard the ship and the revelation of the identity of the guest who killed the host. | revenge, comedy, murder, sadist, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038882 | Rigoletto | Place: Mantua
Time: the Sixteenth century
=== Act 1 ===
Scene 1: A room in the palace of Duke of Mantua
At a ball in his palace, the Duke sings of a life of pleasure with as many women as possible: "Questa o quella" ("This woman or that"). He has seen an unknown beauty in church and desires to possess her, but he also wishes to seduce the Countess of Ceprano. Rigoletto, the Duke's hunchbacked court jester, mocks the husbands of the ladies to whom the Duke is paying attention, including the Count Ceprano, and advises the Duke to get rid of him by prison or death. The Duke laughs indulgently, but Ceprano is not amused. Marullo, one of the guests at the ball, informs the courtiers that Rigoletto has a "lover", which astonishes them. The courtiers resolve to take vengeance on Rigoletto for making fun of them. The festivities are interrupted by the arrival of the elderly Count Monterone, whose daughter the Duke had seduced. Rigoletto provokes him further by making fun of his helplessness to avenge his daughter's honor. Monterone confronts the Duke, and is immediately arrested by the Duke's guards. Before being led off to prison, Monterone curses Rigoletto for having mocked his righteous anger. The curse terrifies Rigoletto, who believes that an old man's curse has real power.
Scene 2: A street, with the courtyard of Rigoletto's house
Preoccupied with the old man's curse, Rigoletto approaches his house and is accosted by the assassin Sparafucile, who walks up to him and offers his services. Rigoletto declines for the moment, but leaves open the possibility of hiring Sparafucile later, should the need arise. Sparafucile wanders off, after repeating his own name a few times. Rigoletto contemplates the similarities between the two of them: "Pari siamo!" ("We are alike!"); Sparafucile kills men with his sword, and Rigoletto uses "a tongue of malice" to stab his victims. Rigoletto opens a door in the wall and returns home to his daughter Gilda. They greet each other warmly: "Figlia!" "Mio padre!" ("Daughter!" "My father!"). Rigoletto has been concealing his daughter from the Duke and the rest of the city, and she does not know her father's occupation. Since he has forbidden her to appear in public, she has been nowhere except to church and does not even know her own father's name.
When Rigoletto has gone, the Duke appears and overhears Gilda confess to her nurse Giovanna that she feels guilty for not having told her father about a young man she had met at the church. She says that she fell in love with him, but that she would love him even more if he were a student and poor. As she declares her love, the Duke enters, overjoyed. Gilda, alarmed, calls for Giovanna, unaware that the Duke had sent her away. Pretending to be a student, the Duke convinces Gilda of his love: "È il sol dell'anima" ("Love is the sunshine of the soul"). When she asks for his name, he hesitantly calls himself Gualtier Maldè. Hearing sounds and fearing that her father has returned, Gilda sends the Duke away after they quickly trade vows of love: "Addio, addio" ("Farewell, farewell"). Alone, Gilda meditates on her love for the Duke, whom she believes is a student: "Gualtier Maldè!... Caro nome" ("Dearest name").
Later, Rigoletto returns: "Riedo!... perché?" ("I've returned!... why?"), while the hostile courtiers outside the walled garden (believing Gilda to be the jester's mistress, unaware she is his daughter) get ready to abduct the helpless girl. They tell Rigoletto that they are actually abducting the Countess Ceprano. He sees that they are masked and asks for a mask for himself; while they are tying the mask onto his face, they also blindfold him. Blindfolded and deceived, he holds the ladder steady while they climb up to Gilda's room: Chorus: "Zitti, zitti" ("Softly, softly"). With her father's unknowing assistance Gilda is carried away by the courtiers. Left alone, Rigoletto removes his mask and blindfold, and realizes that it was in fact Gilda who was carried away. He collapses in despair, remembering the old man's curse.
=== Act 2 ===
The Duke's Palace
The Duke is concerned that Gilda has disappeared: "Ella mi fu rapita!" ("She was stolen from me!") and "Parmi veder le lagrime" ("I seem to see tears"). The courtiers then enter and inform him that they have captured Rigoletto's mistress: Chorus: "Scorrendo uniti" ("We went together at nightfall"). By their description, he recognizes it to be Gilda and rushes off to the room where she is held: "Possente amor mi chiama" ("Mighty love beckons me"). Pleased by the Duke's strange excitement, the courtiers now make sport with Rigoletto, who enters singing. He tries to find Gilda by pretending to be uncaring, as he fears she may fall into the hands of the Duke. Finally, he admits that he is in fact seeking his daughter and asks the courtiers to return her to him: "Cortigiani, vil razza dannata" ("Accursed race of courtiers"). Rigoletto attempts to run into the room in which Gilda is being held, but the courtiers block the way. Gilda enters. The courtiers leave the room, believing Rigoletto has gone mad. Gilda describes to her father what has happened to her in the palace: "Tutte le feste al tempio" ("On all the blessed days"). In a duet Rigoletto swears vengeance against the Duke, while Gilda pleads for her lover: "Sì! Vendetta, tremenda vendetta!" ("Yes! Revenge, terrible revenge!").
=== Act 3 ===
A street outside Sparafucile's house
A portion of Sparafucile's house is seen, with two rooms open to the view of the audience. Rigoletto and Gilda arrive outside. The Duke's voice can be heard from inside, singing "La donna è mobile" ("Woman is fickle"). Sparafucile's sister, Maddalena, has lured him to the house. Rigoletto and Gilda listen from outside as the Duke flirts with Maddalena. Gilda laments that the Duke is unfaithful; Rigoletto assures her that he is arranging revenge: "Bella figlia dell’amore" ("Beautiful daughter of love").
Rigoletto orders Gilda to put on a man's clothes to prepare to leave for Verona and tells her that he plans to follow later. After she leaves, he completes his bargain with the assassin, who is ready to murder his guest for 20 scudi. Rigoletto then withdraws.
With falling darkness, a thunderstorm approaches and the Duke decides to spend the rest of the night in the house. Sparafucile directs him to the ground floor sleeping quarters, resolving to kill him in his sleep.
Gilda, who still loves the Duke despite knowing him to be unfaithful, returns dressed as a man and stands outside the house. Maddalena, who is smitten with the Duke, begs Sparafucile to spare his life. Sparafucile reluctantly promises her that if by midnight another victim can be found, he will kill the other instead of the Duke. Gilda, overhearing this exchange, resolves to sacrifice herself for the Duke, and enters the house. Sparafucile stabs her and she collapses, mortally wounded.
At midnight, when Rigoletto arrives with money, he receives a corpse wrapped in a sack, and rejoices in his triumph. Weighting it with stones, he is about to cast the sack into the river when he hears the voice of the Duke, sleepily singing a reprise of his "La donna è mobile" aria. Bewildered, Rigoletto opens the sack and, to his despair, discovers his dying daughter. For a moment, she revives and declares she is glad to die for her beloved: "V'ho ingannato" ("Father, I deceived you"). She dies in his arms. Rigoletto cries out in horror: "La maledizione!" ("The curse!") | tragedy | train | wikipedia | Opera as it used to be.. This film was actually shot at the Rome opera house. It was originally made in black and white but may have been coloured later on. The only singer not acting her own part is Lina Pagliughi, at that time dealing with quite severe weight problems. The cast is very good, Tito Gobbi's interpretation of Rigoletto being quite convincing, although the voice is too light and lacking in darkness for my taste. Mario Filipesci is a tailor-made duke and Giulio Neri, the only true basso profondo ever to emerge from Italy, is simply the greatest Sparafucile of all time. The smaller roles are fairly well cast. The beauty of this production is that here you can see opera as it should be produced. Period, sincere, with commitment, and well sung. Some might complain about the acting, but then again, opera is mainly about the quality of singing. If you want acting, go to the theatre. Rarely you can have both. Trust me as a professional opera singer (basso profondo, this is really a production to enjoy.. A Rigoletto to treasure. Rigoletto is one of my favourite Verdi operas not just for the intriguing characters and story but especially for the music which, with Cortigiani, the quartet, La Donna e Mobile, Ella Mi Fa Rapita...Parmi Veder Le Lagrime, Caro Nomme, the wonderful duets between Gilda and Rigoletto and the chilling La Maledizione, is magnificent.Alongside the 1982 Jean Pierre Ponelle film, this is my favourite Rigoletto. The orchestral playing and conducting do perfect justice to this amazing score, and the settings, photography and costumes still look absolutely beautiful.The performances are outstanding. Gilda is sung with an appealing tone and is acted beguilingly, while Mario Fillepeshi is perfect as the Duke of Mantua and one of the best tenors in the role and I don't think I know a Sparafucile better than Guilio Neri(though Martti Talvela on the 1971 Bonynge recording comes close).Tito Gobbi however is a revelation in this very difficult title role. Vocally, perhaps he is not entirely ideal, I too think Rigoletto needs a darker voice, however Gobbi does do a superb job with a moving Cortigiani and La Maledizione was enough to chill the blood. Gobbi did have a good voice that he used with great skill, it's just that it wasn't what I call powerful and it wasn't always beautiful either. However, as an interpretation Gobbi is one of the best, his acting and musicianship here as it always was is extraordinary.All in all, one of the best Rigolettos there is. 10/10 Bethany Cox. Italian opera at its best. The film "Rigoletto" is marvellous and quite electrifying, every scene is so meaningful -- high drama at its best, I call it -- and so well acted by Gobbi, a master of his craft. What a pity I've waited six decades before having the privilege of seeing it.The main plot centres on the Duke's philandering ways and the misfortune he has brought down upon the families at court who have suffered from his escapades, in other words, no maiden is safe when the Duke is around.Rigoletto has a lovely daughter, Gilda, that no one knows about. The Duke has been intent on secretly courting her in the disguise of a student and has entered the house. However one night she is abducted from her home while Rigoletto unwittingly aids the courtiers involved for they blindfolded him and he does not realize until too late that it was not the neighbour's house but his own house and his daughter who were targeted by the abductors. In later scenes Rigoletto plans on his revenge for injustices done but it has surprising consequences.If you like a riveting dramatic opera, you've got it here. Don't miss it. |
tt1178663 | Whatever Works | Boris Yelnikoff (Larry David) is a cynical chess teacher and former Columbia professor in quantum mechanics. Divorced, he avoids human contact except for his friends (Michael McKean, Adam Brooks, Lyle Kanouse) and students, patronising everyone he meets for not matching him intellectually. He spends much of the film washing his hands, all the while singing the "Happy Birthday" song—an attempt to gauge the proper length of time for the process.
Boris comes home one night to find Melody (Evan Rachel Wood), a simpleminded 21-year-old, lying on his doorstep. He reluctantly lets her in for a meal and soon she tells him her story. She turns out to be of a distinctly southern background, having been born to fundamentalist parents in Mississippi and ran away from them. She asks if she can stay the night, which Boris eventually allows, and she stays with him while she's looking for a job. Melody develops a crush on Boris despite their age difference and their varying cultures and intelligence.
Melody finds a job as a dog walker while still living with Boris. Out on the job, she meets Perry Singleton (John Gallagher, Jr.) and they arrange a date. When she comes back home, she explains to Boris that she didn't like Perry because he loved everything in the world too much. Boris realizes that he loves her and they get married.
After a year passes, her mother Marietta (Patricia Clarkson) finds Melody, explaining that she and her husband John (Ed Begley, Jr.) thought Melody had been kidnapped. She goes on to tell her that John left her and sold their house after John lost money in the stock market. She meets Boris and is disappointed with him, so she tries to convince Melody to end her marriage. The three go for lunch at a restaurant and meet Boris' friend, Leo (Conleth Hill). As Marietta goes to use the restroom, Randy Lee James (Henry Cavill) inquires about Melody. Marietta slyly decides to recruit him to end Melody's marriage. Later that evening, Leo, who had taken an interest in Marietta, asks her over for dinner. They spend the evening together, and they both discover that she is a talented photographer and he even makes plans to contract her professionally.
Boris explains to the audience that the next few weeks, Marietta changed and started experimenting in artistic photography, exotic new habits, and having an open relationship with Leo and his business partner, Morgenstern (Olek Krupa). Marietta still hates Boris and continues to arrange for Melody to marry Randy. She takes her to an outdoor craft market and "accidentally" runs into Randy, who questions her about her marriage. Melody initially sees past Marietta's attempt and tells him that her marriage is fine. She warns her mother to stop her attempt at once, but Marietta keeps trying. Later shopping for clothes, Melodie meets Randy in another planned encounter with her and gets her to admit that her relationship with Boris is not entirely satisfying. He invites her to the boat he lives on, and the two end up kissing and beginning an affair.
John arrives at Boris and Melody's home full of regret and hopes to get the family back together. They all go to Marietta's photography exhibit opening together, and he sees how his ex-wife has changed since she moved to New York. Distraught, he retreats to a bar, drinking away his misery. While there, he meets a recently divorced gay man named Howard (Christopher Evan Welch), and admits something that he has known most his adult life: that he is also gay.
Melody tells Boris she is in love with Randy. Boris is devastated by this and jumps out a window again, but this time lands on Helena (Jessica Hecht) breaking her arm and leg. As he visits her in the hospital, he asks her if there is anything he can do to make up with her, and Helena says she would like to go to dinner with Boris.
Finally, Boris hosts a New Year's Eve party, at which everyone is seen in their new relationships: Marietta with Leo and Morgenstern, John with Howard, Melody with Randy, and finally Boris with Helena. Melody and her parents had, each one separately, completely shed their former southern conservative mindsets and wholeheartedly adopted the liberal New York City way of life and values. (John tells that his former membership in the National Rifle Association had been but a sublimation of his repressed homosexuality.) They are now all the best of friends, and at midnight heralding a new year they kiss. Afterwards Boris is revealed to be the only one who is able to communicate with the audience, and explains directly to them that one has to find all the enjoyment he can, to find "whatever works". | romantic, philosophical | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1264074 | Le chant des mariées | Myriam (Lizzie Brocheré) and Nour (Olympe Borval) are two young Tunisian girls who live in the same poor tenement building. Jewish Myriam is allowed to go to school and was given certain privileges while Nour, a native Tunisian is banned from being educated. At sixteen Nour becomes engaged to one of her cousins, Khaled, though the marriage is delayed until Khaled can find work.
Meanwhile, in November 1942, the German army invades Tunisia. They begin spreading propaganda to the native Tunisian population telling them they will help to liberate their country from the French and blaming World War II on the Jewish population. After Americans bomb Tunisia the Germans also levy a heavy tax on members of the Jewish community.
Unable to pay the tax Myriam's mother Tita introduces her to a much older wealthy Jewish man, Raoul (Simon Abkarian) who works as a doctor. Myriam is horrified at the prospect of marrying him and lies to her mother and Raoul, claiming she is no longer a virgin. When Raoul questions her he realizes that Myriam does not understand what intercourse is, and decides to go on with engagement preparations.
Nour learns that Khaled has gotten a job working for the Germans and they are to be married soon. Shortly after, the German army, with Khaled acting as translator, search Myriam's home for money and jewels, assaulting her mother in the process. When Myriam tries to bring this up with Nour, Nour dismisses her.
The Germans order all poor Jews to be rounded up and forced into labour camps. Myriam calls Raoul a coward for not going and on her advice decides to volunteer for the camps. He and Myriam are married beforehand however Myriam is too upset to consummate the marriage.
Myriam cannot enjoy the protection of Raoul's money however as Germans invade a Turkish bath and round up the women who have no veils to cover themselves up. Nour who is at the bath pretends that Myriam is her sister and another woman hands her a veil. When Khaled learns of this he grows angry, telling Nour that the Jews helped the French to oppress the native Tunisian population and that the Koran forbids Jews and Muslims from being friends. Nour repeats some of this back to Myriam causing a rift between the two girls.
After an air strike comes too close to Raoul's compound Myriam moves her mother, mother-in-law and herself back to the poor tenement building she comes from, but is still shunned by Nour. Nour decides to attempt to read the Koran to see what it says about Jews but cannot as she is illiterate. Her grandfather, seeing that she is trying to read, shows her a passage that says that people of all faith will enter heaven.
Nour marries Khaled and tells him that he is mistaken about his beliefs about Jews. Khaled forbids her from seeing Myriam but Nour tells him the decision ultimately rests with her.
During a night air raid Nour runs to an underground shelter. There she sees Myriam and the two girls run to each other and reunite. Together they begin praying. | romantic | train | wikipedia | The Wedding Song.
I saw this last month at the 2009 Palm Springs International film Festival.
This is the second feature film of writer/director/actress Karin Albou who received critical acclaim for her debut film La Petite Jersalem.
As as writer and director Albou seems to have a promising career ahead of her as she knows how to put a film together and get the best out of her cast including herself as an actress as she plays the role of Myriam's stern but loving, smart and hard working mother Tita.
The film is set in 1942 in German occupied Tunisia as the German's are vying for the support of the Muslim population to be their allies in the promise of independence for Tunisia.
16 year old Nour (Olympe Borval) is a Muslim engaged to her cousin Khaled (Najib Oudghiri).
Nour's best friend since their earliest childhood is Myriam (Lizzie Brouchere).
Myriam is Jewish and the German occupation has brought understandably hard times and tension for the Jewish Tunisian population.
Myriam longs for the love that her friend Nour sees in Khaled but Myriam is betrothed to a wealthy and much older Doctor Raoul (Simon Abkarian) who is being forced to work in sympathy to the Nazi occupation.
Photographed by cinematographer Laurent Brunet this is a good film but despite the war setting there is not a lot of war action and the film centers around the relationship of Myriam and Nour and this could be categorized as a chick flick.
I liked it though and would give it a 7.5 out of 10 and recommend it..
Friendship In The Face Of Adversity.
The year is 1942.
The Nazi's have taken North Africa (Tunesia,in this case),and are spreading their vile wave of anti Semetic propaganda to the Arab speaking citizens of Tunis (and are Hell bent on carrying out their agenda of ethnic cleansing,as well).
Amid all of these vile goings on,are two lifelong friends,Myriam,a Sephadic Jew,and Noor,an Arab,both young girls,about 16 years old,and are preparing for an arranged marriage.
Myriam (played by Lizzie Brochere),is engaged to marry a much older man,a doctor transplanted from France,Raoul (Simon Abkarian),whom Myriam doesn't like one tiny bit (and no surprise,what so ever,as Raoul just drips with contempt that we all find out as the story unfolds),while Noor (played by Olympe Borval)who,although is arranged to marry Khaled (an Islamic extremist in the making,making him not much better than Raoul,played by Najib Oudghiri),her marriage has been called off by her stern father,due to Khaled's lack of work (although he is courting the prospects of going to work for the Germans,who claim to be a friend & ally of the Arabs.
With the prospects of Nazi anti Semitism looming,the once peaceful relationships between Jews & Arabs threatens to disintegrate Myriam & Noor's long lasting friendship.
Karin Albou,who directed the superb 'La Petite Jerusalem',writes & directs (as well as acts out the role of Noor's Mother,Tita) this sad on the surface, but uplifting drama that is also a meditation on cultural & religious differences (we get a taste of both Jewish & Arab culture).
The cinematography is a treat for the eye,balancing muted colours with some Earth tones.
The musical score is an eclectic mix of some traditional Arab & Jewish folk musics,with some unexpected bursts of modern music (the use of a piece of music by Nina Hagen is a nice counterpoint to all of the Nazi mayhem that transpires at times).
This is a toothsome piece of drama that some will dismiss as little more than an "art house" chick flick,but don't let the "nay sayers" discourage you from seeing it.
Spoken in Arabic & French (with a wee bit of German)with English subtitles.
Not rated by the MPAA,this film contains full frontal female nudity,sexual content,a most distressing preparation scene for a traditional Jewish bride that is just as difficult to watch as some of the goings on in Lars Von Trier's 'Anti Christ' & some rude language (leave the little ones home).
During World War II,Tunisia is occupied by the Germans and the Allied forces are bombarding with French soldiers hanging out..
Two girls try to survive....
Outstanding movie!
Historical accurate - outstanding acting performances!
Lizzie Brocheré succeeded in a convincing way, her efforts must have been tremendously exhausting but they bluntly payed off, the actress merits plenty of awards.
Olympe Borval performs as the best actresses do.
Simon Abkarian impersonates his character with a dept seldom seen on the screen.
The script is well written, and one has the impression that it is well researched up to an academic level.
Even if one does not like war movies he or she will be more then surprised about the films touch for human experiences and underlying anthropological - sociological study..
I couldn't completely suspend my disbelief but....
Much is heard about the ability of Jews and Muslims to live together in relative peace and harmony in medieval Spain and later in French North Africa, and it's hard to know to what extent this was really true.
Angel Vasquez in his novel, "La vida perra de Juanita Narboni", set in Tangier, certainly made it such peaceful co-existence seem both possible and real.
And certainly the ambiance of North Africa is present in "The Wedding Song", which combines some of the sexual tension present in "Wedding in Galilee" with the wartime tension of "Battle of Algiers." The German have occupied North Africa, and neither Muslim nor Jew really have any reason to love the French, who treated their colonial subjects like dirt.
Given a choice between supporting the French or the Germans, I couldn't fault the North Africans in the movie for feeling sympathy for Germany or for working for Germans.
In fact, this very French sort of moral conundrum works well in a film that is full of moral conundrums.Concerning the sexuality and...gasp...full frontal nudity...found in "The Wedding Song", this movie is probably not for a pre-teen since the movie is really about the status of women...in a foreign culture, and, thus, is going to be over the heads of most pre-teens.
That would seem to make the film an "R" rather than a "PG-13" (though I wouldn't be surprised if our censors gave it an "NC-17" because in a lots of ways, we in the "liberal" west aren't much more enlightened on sex and nudity than the ayatollahs in Iran).
I certainly wouldn't have any problem though with my teenage son or daughter seeing this movie if he or she were interested in the culture or the topic (they're not going to see it at the cineplex, so we're talking about whether I would rent it and then let them watch it).
But don't worry, worried parents, to most American teens this movie is of no interest and I doubt your kids will want to watch it at home with you).
Yes, the sexuality *is* occasionally erotic, but more often than not, it's realistic and not very sexy by Hollywood standards.
There is nothing pornographic about the sexuality whatsoever...unless you're one of those people who finds the human body to be an abdomination and all nudity unholy.Finally, is "The Wedding Song" a chic flick?
I would say definitely NO.
But are more women than men likely to take an interest in the topic of women's rights in a Muslim country?
Sadly the answer is probably yes.
In the end I just couldn't really buy into the relationship between the two young protagonists.
Still, interesting, well-crafted films from North Africa/the Middle East don't ever make it to the cineplex, and there is plenty of suspense and action in "The Wedding Song", so I think thoughtful, thinking people will find this film worth a watch.
By the way, I would give both "Wedding in Galilee" and "Battle of Algiers" a 10/10..
Rich, complex study of teenage friendship during war.
Like her earlier, excellent 'Le Petite Jerusalem', Karin Albou's story of two best teen girlfriends suffering through WWII in Tunis is rich with sensual textures; bodies, fabrics, a powerful sense of place.
Albou is one of those directors who uses silence, a look shared, an extreme close up to communicate what most filmmakers rely on dialogue to say.
One girl is Jewish, the other Muslim.
Both dream of happy marriages in societies and religious cultures that keep women as objects used by men, while both religious groups are used as puppets and victims used by the Nazi occupiers - if in very different ways.
A deceptively complex film, this story of friendship touches on war, religion, class politics, race, and sexual roles.
If I found it a touch less successful than her last film, it may be because she was being so ambitious.
But I'll take that kind of ambition in an artist anytime..
Engaging but Uncompelling.
During WWII, the lifelong friendship between two young women (one Muslim, one Jewish) in Tunisia is tested when the Nazis take over the country.
This is a good-looking film with fine performances from Brochere and Boval as the two women, although the characters are not very well developed.
While generally engaging, it fails to be compelling, particularly for those not invested in the cultures portrayed here.
It also doesn't offer any new insights about the religious themes it explores.
It is sensitively directed by Albou, who also plays the mother of one of the young women.
There are some surprisingly frank scenes depicting the grooming of Brochere for her wedding night..
Beautiful and stressful.
Film africain bien sympa.
Encore les nazis qui font des dégats et des abus, mais pas de massacres ici.
Une histoire de copines juive et musulmane qui dévoile beaucoup des coutumes..
Hodge Podge.
Although this movie has interesting moments and themes it really never coalesces.
There is just too much of a lot of things – adolescence, sexuality, religion (Muslim and Judaism), Nazis, arranged marriages, friendship, betrayal and probably some other themes as well.It takes place in Tunisia in 1942 after the Allied invasion of North Africa (so there are bombing raids too) and is the story of two teenage girls – one is Muslim and the other is Jewish - with all the above mentioned topics thrown at us.
Their on-again off-again friendship is the centrepiece and everything else rotates slowly around this.
The word "slowly" is deliberate as the film is ponderous, as if it doesn't quite know where to take us..
Beautiful performances.
Probably filmed on a bit of a shoestring, this picture is nonetheless a towering piece of peace propaganda in the ongoing hostilities between Israel and the Arabs.
Two charming youngsters, both about to undergo arranged marriages, one to a man she loves, the other to a man she detests, find Nazism intruding on their lifelong friendship.
The story is told with fascinating insight into the Jewish and Islamic worlds and includes the preparation of the Jewish girl for an "oriental" marriage --- in other words, total depilation of her pubic area, which looks extremely painful.
Without giving spoilers, the film has moments of high tension and resolves itself elegantly with the friends reunited.
A most satisfying drama from a gifted writer, actor, and director. |
tt0070000 | Double Indemnity | Walter Neff (Fred MacMurray), a successful insurance salesman, returns to his office building in downtown Los Angeles late one night. Visibly in pain and sporting a gunshot wound on his shoulder, he begins dictating a confession into a Dictaphone for his friend and colleague, Barton Keyes (Edward G. Robinson), a brilliant claims adjuster. The story, told primarily in flashback, ensues.
Neff first meets the alluring Phyllis Dietrichson (Barbara Stanwyck) during a routine house call to remind her husband (Tom Powers) that his automobile insurance policy is up for renewal. They flirt, until Phyllis asks how she could take out an accident policy on her husband's life without his knowledge. Neff deduces she is contemplating murder, and makes it clear he wants no part of it.
However, he cannot get her out of his mind, and when Phyllis shows up at his own home, he cannot resist her any longer. Neff knows all the tricks of his trade and devises a plan to make the murder of her husband appear to be an accidental fall from a train that will trigger the "double indemnity" clause and pay out twice the policy's face value.
After Dietrichson breaks his leg, Phyllis drives him to the train station for his trip to Palo Alto for a college reunion. Neff is hiding in the backseat and kills Dietrichson when Phyllis turns onto a deserted side street. Then, Neff boards the train posing as Dietrichson and using his crutches. He makes his way to the last car, the observation car, and steps outside to the open platform to supposedly smoke a cigarette. A complication ensues when he meets a passenger named Jackson (Porter Hall) there, but he manages to get the man to leave. Neff then throws the crutches on the railway tracks, jumps off at a prearranged meeting spot with Phyllis, and drags Dietrichson's body onto the tracks by his crutches.
Mr. Norton (Richard Gaines), the company's chief, believes the death was suicide, but Keyes scoffs at the idea, quoting statistics indicating the improbability of suicide by jumping off a slow-moving train, to Neff's hidden delight. Keyes does not suspect foul play at first, but his instincts, to which he refers as the "little man", pointing to his stomach, starts nagging. He wonders why Dietrichson did not file a claim for his broken leg, and deduces he did not know about the policy. Keyes tells Neff of his theory outside Neff's apartment, while Phyllis hides behind the door. Keyes soon concludes that Phyllis and some unknown accomplice murdered Dietrichson for the insurance money, but needs more proof.
Keyes, however, is not Neff's only worry. The victim's daughter, Lola (Jean Heather), comes to him, convinced that stepmother Phyllis is behind her father's death. Lola's mother also died under suspicious circumstances, when Phyllis was her nurse. Neff begins seeing Lola, at first to keep her from going to the police with her suspicions and then because he is plagued by guilt and a sense of responsibility for her.
Keyes brings Jackson to Los Angeles, suspecting that the man aboard the train had not been Dietrichson, but rather had been Phyllis' accomplice in Dietrichson's murder. After examining photographs of Dietrichson, Jackson is sure the man he met was not that old, but at least 10 years younger. Now certain that he can prove murder, Keyes is eager to reject the claim and force Phyllis to sue. Neff warns Phyllis not to pursue the insurance claim in court and admits he has been talking to Lola about her past. Phyllis, however, insists on filing suit to pursue the claim despite the risk to both her and to Neff. Lola eventually tells Neff she has discovered her boyfriend, the hotheaded Nino Zachetti (Byron Barr), has been seeing Phyllis behind her (and Neff's) back.
When Neff learns that Keyes suspects Nino of being Phyllis' accomplice, Neff sees a way out of his predicament. He arranges to meet Phyllis at her house. He informs her that he knows about her involvement with Nino, and guesses that she is planning to have Nino kill him. He tells her that he intends to kill her and put the blame on Nino. She is prepared, however, and shoots him in the shoulder. Seriously wounded but still standing, he slowly comes closer and dares her to shoot again. She does not, and he takes the gun from her. She says she never loved him "until a minute ago, when I couldn't fire that second shot." Neff doesn't believe a word she says, and as she hugs him tightly, Neff says, "Goodbye, baby," and shoots twice, killing her.
Outside, Neff waits for Nino to arrive (something Neff had orchestrated). Neff advises him not to enter the house and instead go to Lola, the woman who loves him. Nino is reluctantly convinced and leaves as told. Neff drives to his office and starts speaking into his Dictaphone, as seen at the film's opening. Keyes arrives unnoticed and hears enough to know the truth. Keyes sadly tells him, "Walter, you're all washed up." Neff tells Keyes he is going to Mexico rather than face the gas chamber, but sags to the floor from his injury and blood loss before he can reach the elevator. A weakened Neff tells Keyes the reason he couldn't figure the case out was because the guy he was looking for was "too close, right across the desk from you." When Keyes replies "closer than that, Walter." Neff replies that he loves Keyes too. As Neff had done, lighting Keyes' cigars for him throughout the film, Keyes lights Neff's cigarette as they await the police and an ambulance. | neo noir, murder | train | wikipedia | This 1973 remake of the classic 1944 Billy Wilder film, "Double Indemnity," is a textbook example of how to destroy a great script.
While Hollywood has gone after greedy executives that colorize black-and-white films and sought disclaimers on wide-screen movies that are shown in pan-and-scan versions, the industry has ignored the hacks that insist on taking a classic film and diminishing it with a shoddy remake.The first step in producing a bowdlerized version of a classic is to edit the script.
The Billy-Wilder-Raymond-Chandler work was cut by a half hour to fit the finished film into a specified time-slot with room for commercials.
Thus, the brand-new "Double Indemnity" eliminates the atmospheric black-and-white film-noir cinematography that enhanced the mood and characterizations of the original.
Gone are the close bond between Keyes and Neff and the erotic attraction between Neff and Phyllis.The look of Jack Smight's take on "Double Indemnity" is more "Dynasty" than film noir.
Phyllis Dietrickson has a designer home to die for, and Neff's comfy pad would be hard to afford on an insurance salesman's salary, not to mention the sporty Mercedes convertible that he drives.
Richard Crenna shows little interest in Samantha Eggar, and their kisses are about as lusty as those between a brother and a sister.
Crenna fails to capture the cynicism of Neff, and his attempts at double-entendre and sexual suggestiveness fall horribly flat.
Director Jack Smight and his three principals have all done much better work.There was no conceivable reason to produce this wretched remake except to fill time in a broadcast schedule.
There was no conceivable reason to resurrect this dud on DVD and package it with the original film except to fill out a double-disc package.
The 1973 "Double Indemnity" should be titled "10% Indemnity," because viewing it only underscores the 100% perfection of the original movie..
When Samantha Eggar (as Phyllis Dietrickson) answers the door of her house swathed in a towel, you realize that as competent an actress as Eggar may be, she doesn't have the hypnotic allure of Barbara Stanwyck.
In the original film, Wilder had Stanwyck not only appear in a towel, but she enters the scene on the second floor balcony of the house.
Stanwyck's stand-in, Eggar, answers the door with a towel around her.
The script may have said "Phyllis appears in towel" so the filmmakers of the remake simply follow the instructions and include the required towel.
The filmmakers of the remake gave her a towel because that's what Wilder did.
Part of the problem is Crenna appears so much like a 70's actor.
In the original, Neff says, "I didn't get the money, and I didn't get the woman." In the 1973 version, Crenna says, "I didn't get the money, and I didn't want the woman." Did the filmmakers completely misunderstand the entire point of the story?
This 1973 boring remake is a forgettable TV-movie made probably by the same people who did "Gilligan's Island".
This 1973 TV remake of the Billy Wilder classic is inferior to the original.
This remake's only improvement over the original is that it cuts down the role of Lola Dietrichson, the step-daughter of the femme fatale, Phyllis Dietrichson.And that's it for the good things.The bad things are many.
The director records everything in an indifferent manner: if you watched the film with the sound muted you'd hardly get the impression that anything especially interesting was happening.
Because of modern bad taste, the film must be in color instead of black and white.
Walter Neff's expensive apartment, in particular, is hideous.The modern setting hurts in a lot of small ways.
Women in mourning stopped wearing veils, which robs Samantha Eggar of a prop Barbara Stanwyck made splendid use of in a key scene.
(Oddly, Lola still has the line where she reveals that her stepmother was trying on a black hat and veil before she had need of them.)Stephen Bochco keeps much of the Billy Wilder-Raymond Chandler script the same.
Bochco may not be to blame.Richard Crenna is passable as Walter Neff.
With a director who barely seems interested in what's happening in front of the camera, how could Barbara Stanwyck herself have come off well?.
It was hard to watch this film and be totally fair and objective since I am a big fan the original 1944 movie.
Scene after scene, I found myself comparing what I was looking at it, and remembering how it played out with Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck, Edward G.
Now I was seeing these famous actors playing their famous roles replaced by Richard Crenna, Samantha Eggar and Lee J.
Cobb.When it was all over, I found it wasn't as bad as I had expected but it's no match for the 1944 original.
The two main areas in which this made-for-TV film wasn't as good were (1) the electricity between the two leads was missing and (2) being only 90 minutes, they rushed the story with hardly time to develop the plot, characters and chemistry between those leads.
Crenna and Eggar were flat, and simply no match for MacMurray and Stanwyck as "Walter Neff" and "Phyllis Dietrichson," respectively.Where this re-make held its own was in the other characters, such as "Barton Keyes" and "Edward Norton." Cobb was terrific as Keyes and Robert Webber as Norton, head of the insurance company.
Otherwise, the storyline was very similar, just rushed.However, one viewing was enough and I will happily go back to the original version for the rest of my viewings of this classic story and film..
OK so it's made for TV, but why watch a bad copy, when you can get your hands on the superb original?
As a big fan of the original film, it's hard to watch this show.
Crenna is not a bad choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy wardrobe and "swank" apartment don't fit the mood of the original, or make him an interesting character.He does his best to make it work but Samantha Egger is a really bad choice.
Lee J.Cobb tries mightily to fashion Barton Keyes,but even his performance is just gruff, without style.It feels like the TV movie it was and again reminds me of what a remarkable film the original still is..
Unlike the sizzle you could see and practically feel between MacMurray and Stanwyck in the original, the chemistry between dumb ol' Dicky Crenna and whats-her-face here is just non-existent.
Cobb as Keyes practically burping/upchucking his way through the explanation of his "Little Man" to Mr. Garloupis.
Bochco must have known how unnecessary the whole idea was, especially since no amount of effort could even hope to get the project out from the shadow of Billy Wilder's classic 1944 version.
The three leads (Richard Crenna and Samantha Eggar as the illicit lovers, Lee J.
Insurance salesman Walter Neff (Richard Crenna) is hurt and returns to his office to record a confession.
He's not home but his alluring wife Phyllis (Samantha Eggar) is there to meet him.
He secretly sells her husband an accident insurance policy and insists on killing him on a train to collect the double indemnity of $400k.This is an unnecessary remake and not a good one.
Jack Smight directed this TV remake of the original 1944 film, based on James M.
Cain's novel, that stars Richard Crenna as Walter Naff, an insurance salesman seduced by a client's wife named Phyllis Dietrichson(played by Samantha Eggar) to murder her husband for the insurance money, with the double indemnity clause giving them twice the payout, though Walter's boss Barton Keyes(played by Lee J.
Cobb) is suspicious of Phyllis, convinced she murdered her husband with the help of another man, not knowing that it's Walter...
Needless and ineffectual remake still has a good cast and story, but no atmosphere or point at all..
This remake of the film noir classic about a seductress and an insurance man having an affair of horror, planning the murder of her husband, gives us the same question as just about any remake.Why the remake?
Many remakes are simply film adaptations of classic novels, such as TREASURE ISLAND.Here, though, we have what is essentially a "homage" to E.G. Robinson and the others, who made the original classic.The crux of the story is the Columbo style E.G. character.
I don't mean to disparage Richard and Samantha, but they were very bland.And that was probably the point, to keep them bland.It still makes for the question "Why the remake?" Lee J Cobb tries to make this his own role.
Cobb, in the effort to make it his own, knows it is taking something away when he adds "much closer", but he doesn't want to be compared too much to E.G.'s perfect portrayal.Which is why you don't really want to remake a classic film noir..
It's a hard chore to even equal, let alone top, the likes of Barbara Stanwyck or Edward G.
5) David Janssen, Rosemary Forsyth, and Dean Jagger.Other candidates for Phyllis could be Elizabeth Ashley and Diana Hyland.John Badham was doing some stylish TV movies at the time including "Isn't it Shocking?" with Alan Alda and "Reflections on Murder" with Tuesday Weld.
The second of the 2 discs in the splendid new DOUBLE INDEMNITY (DI) DVD set contains Universal's updated 1973 TV-movie version (let's call it DI v2).
The original 1944 film noir rocks, but the remake sinks like a stone.
Still, both versions are worth a look for anyone who wants to learn how make a spellbinding film noir, because you learn important lessons when you watch them back-to-back: 1.
*Just because your leading lady is pretty, it doesn't automatically mean she's irresistible enough to lead men to their doom.* As the 1973 edition of femme fatale Phyllis Dietrichson, Samantha Eggar is very pretty.
I'll admit I liked Eggar's long, lovely red hair (and the black turban she wears in the murder scene -- very Lana Turner!) better than Barbara Stanwyck's trashy blonde wig (as a studio boss reportedly griped during the filming of the original DI, "I hire Barbara Stanwyck, and I get George Washington!").
*It don't mean a thing if the leads ain't got that zing.* That brings me to Eggar's delivery; she always sounds vaguely bored and/or annoyed with Richard Crenna's Walter Neff.
DI v2 might be remembered as more than just a cinematic footnote if Eggar and Crenna had even a fraction of the chemistry that sizzles between Stanwyck and MacMurray, the latter brilliant as a cynical smart-aleck whose street-wiseness goes out the window under this devious dame's influence.
It just goes to show that in a story like this, the best acting in the world won't help if the leads don't have chemistry and charisma.3.
*A little moody atmosphere goes a long way in crime movies.* Despite the attractive locations, especially the Spanish-style accents in the opulent Dietrichson home (though I'd forgotten how prevalent the colors beige, harvest gold, and avocado green were back in the 1970s, not to mention blocky impressionistic artwork!
The remake's flat '70s TV lighting and uninspired camera angles can't hold a candle to the original's menacing lighting effects and the great John Seitz's photography, which looks almost like painting with shadows.
Ironically, the 1973 update now feels more dated than the 1944 original -- and if you listen carefully early on, you'll realize the first film was actually set in the late 1930s!
Billy Goldenberg's piano-and-strings music is somber enough, though it certainly won't make you forget Miklos Rozsa's brassy, powerful score for the original.Apart from Eggar's forgettable performance, the good cast helps make DI v2 fairly watchable, though far from a must-see except for completists like me.
Cobb's portrayal of Barton Keyes is good, but quite different from Edward G.
Don't get me wrong, though -- Cobb's approach is quite effective in the context of the remake, especially since the remake as a whole has a lot less snap, crackle, and pop than the original.
:-) With a script by Steven Bochco and direction by TV crime-show veteran Jack Smight (who also did a nice job with theatrical suspensers HARPER, KALEIDOSCOPE, and NO WAY TO TREAT A LADY), you'd think DI v2 would still be worth watching, but despite the occasional gripping moment, this '70s show is still just polyester while the original is pure silk..
You can't help comparing this 1973 TV version to the 1940s original directed by Billy Wilder and starring Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck, and Edward G.
As expected, the original comes out light years ahead, a classic of genuine film noir.The story line is still here.
An insurance salesman connives with a manipulative seductress to murder her husband and collect double indemnity on the insurance policy they've just taken out on him.
Well, there are a couple of problems, and some other changes that aren't necessarily problems but don't add anything to the experience of viewing the film.The story belongs in the 1940s.
When Wilder and Raymond Chandler (in his sober period) put the thing together it had a good, old-fashioned black-and-white pizazz in its dialog and setting that just doesn't fit well into the 1970s.Phyllis Dietrichson belongs in a slightly cramped but very comfortable old house, a slightly dated mission-style multi-story dwelling with honeysuckle around it and windows that can be closed and shuttered.
Phyllis (Samantha Eggar) lives in a modern house that resembles a cement box on the outside.
Walter Neff (Richard Crenna) lives in a pad in Marina del Ray with a view of the yacht moorings, instead of the somewhat seedy hotel flat in the original.
So Lola's no-good boyfriend (a med-school dropout in the original, a law student here) is no longer Nino Sachetti but somebody with a barbaric and WASPy name like Don Franklin.
Otherwise the dialog is almost identical to the original, except for the addition of a wisecrack near the beginning, when Neff tells Phyllis, "I gave up a Rhodes scholarship to peddle insurance door to door." Performances.
Crenna is probably as good as MacMurray was in the original.
Cobb as Keyes isn't the human buzz saw that Edward G.
Robinson was in the original, he carries the part in his own exasperated way.
Samantha Eggar, alas, is no Barbara Stanwyck.
When someone remakes a classic movie, the remake is always unfavorably compared to the original.
Also, there's a chance that the remake is so radically different that it is just too unfamiliar to audiences.Well, the 1973 TV version of "Double Indemnity" has almost identical scenes and dialogue as the 1944 original.
Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering insurance agent Walter Neff in the original; Richard Crenna just seems world-weary and tired.
Robinson brought great manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton Keys; Lee J.
Samantha Eggar is all wrong as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while Barbara Stanwyck was just superb in this wicked role, Eggar is overly polite and mannered and just seems way out of place.Robert Webber, in the old Richard Gaines role as Robinson's boss Norton, and John Fiedler taking the Porter Hall role as the crucial witness, bring some life to the movie.
However, this great plan doesn't play out exactly as they'd anticipated when the husband and agent begin wondering whether or not they can trust their new co-conspirator.The idea of remaking the classic 1944 version of this film is pretty pointless.
After all, why remake a film that is considered a classic?!
Perhaps they were easy and cheap to make and even if they were bad they were guaranteed a certain audience...but it still seems wrong to have done this.Richard Crenna plays the part originally played by Fred MacMurray.
Samantha Egger plays the part originally played by Barbara Stanwyck.
Cobb plays the part originally played by Edward G.
All of these are reasonably good actors...but certainly not up to the quality of the originals.
What's worse, however, is that the original director (Billy Wilder) was a genius...yet here the film is helmed by 'Jack Smight'?!?
Now if there never had been an earlier version of this film, then it would have been a made for TV movie that would have been worth seeing--one you'd probably remember.
It can't possibly compare to the 1944 Billy Wilder Film Noir classic as anyone in their right mind ought to know -sight unseen- but that doesn't mean this update should be seen as a separate entity, either.
Cobb was able to hold my interest as a world-weary, tired-looking Keyes but Richard Crenna's affable and inoffensive Walter Neff only reminded me of Bill Bixby on a bad day.
The completist in me is thankful this speeded up "Me Decade" update was included as part of the DOUBLE INDEMNITY DVD extras but the experience not only made me long to see the original, it had me nostalgic for any episode of the better-made COLUMBO TV series.
Like DOUBLE INDEMNITY, it was needlessly remade with TV movie queen Virginia Madsen as the titular vixen and Richard Thomas as the milquetoast husband..
(Seriously, he was 81, and kicked the bucket four years later.) Be that as it may, if you watch both the original and a remake from decades later for the first time because the film studio is making more money on a deluxe DVD set than it would by packaging the original alone, it usually turns out to be a case of a defendant providing the rope with which they should be hoisted up, figuratively speaking.
Superior 1970s remake far outshines the 1944 original..
ATMOSPHERIC THRILLER directed by Jack Smight exceeds the 1944 original.
Richard Crenna mantains his reputation as a major 60s/70s leading actor teamed with the excellent Samantha Eggar in this vastly superior remake of the 1944 "classic film noir" that had an inferior team of Fred McMurray and Barbara Stanwyck.
Richard Crenna is totally head and shoulders above the fumbling and uncertain Fred McMurray and Samantha Eggar adds real style, glamour and sexiness in her role. |
tt3863552 | Bajrangi Bhaijaan | In Sultanpur, a picturesque village in Azad Kashmir, villagers gather to watch a televised cricket match between India and Pakistan. Among them is a pregnant woman (Meher Vij) who, after giving birth, names her daughter Shahida after Shahid Afridi, the player who wins the game for Pakistan. One afternoon, Shahida (Harshaali Malhotra), now six years old, falls off a cliff as she plays, and is saved by an overhanging tree, but was not able to call for help as she was mute. Since Shahida's father, a former Pakistani army man, is unlikely to be granted an Indian visa, her concerned mother takes her to the shrine of Sufi saint Nizamuddin Auliya in Delhi, hoping it will restore Shahida's speech.
Returning from Delhi, the train stops for repairs just short of the Wagah crossing and Shahida gets off to save a lamb. The train drives off before Shahida can re-board it. Shahida boards a freight train, and winds up in Kurukshetra, Haryana. There, she meets Pawan Kumar Chaturvedi alias Bajrangi (Salman Khan), a devout Brahmin and an ardent devotee of the Hindu deity Hanuman. He calls Shahida "Munni" and tries in vain to find where she lives.
In sequences of flashbacks, it is revealed that Bajrangi has been a disappointment to his father, after failing his school exams ten times. When he finally graduates on his eleventh try, his father dies of shock. Bajrangi, looking for a job, he follows the advice of his father and goes to the house of his father's friend and wrestling coach, Dayanand (Sharat Saxena), in Delhi. Having spent time together with his daughter Rasika (Kareena Kapoor Khan), they fall in love with each other and Dayanand promises Rasika's hand in marriage on the condition that Bajrangi get a job and a separate house for himself.
In the present, Bajrangi brings Munni to meet Dayanand, who lets Munni stay, believing that with her fair complexion, Munni must be a Brahmin as well. Munni gets accustomed to being part of the household. It is eventually revealed that Munni is a Pakistani Muslim as she performs Salah at a mosque, and cheers for Shahid Afridi and kisses the Pakistani national flag during a televised India-Pakistan cricket match. An enraged Dayanand orders Bajrangi to make arrangements to have her sent to Pakistan through the Pakistani High Commission, where Bajrangi's pleading fails. He is betrayed by a local travel agent who claims to be able to take Munni to Pakistan without a passport but actually takes her to a brothel, causing him to destroy the brothel and beat up several of its occupants. Bajrangi then vows to take Munni to her parents in Pakistan, in person and without a passport and visa.
Bajrangi and Munni are able to enter Pakistan. Shortly after their arrival, Bajrangi is arrested under suspicions of being an Indian spy. He escapes with Munni and meets Chand Nawab (Nawazuddin Siddiqui), a journalist who works for a Pakistani television channel. Nawab has closely been following the developments. Moved by the story, Nawab joins Bajrangi to help him find Munni's parents. They are joined by an Islamic religious scholar (Om Puri), who helps them avoid capture by police. He directs the group to Azad Kashmir after Munni recognizes an area similar to her hometown in a photo from a calendar.
Nawab documents their journey on video, but his television station channel head (Harssh A. Singh) refuses to air it. Disappointed, he uploads the video to YouTube. While reviewing the footage, Munni recognizes her mother walking by in the background. With a bus driver's assistance, the trio identify Sultanpur as Munni's hometown. They board a bus to Sultanpur, and are stopped by police who are looking for "the Indian spy". Devising a plan to divert their attention, Bajrangi gets off the bus and runs toward the jungle in full view. He gets tracked down, beaten, and shot in the arm. Meanwhile, Nawab and Munni reach Sultanpur, where Munni is finally reunited with her mother.
The videos uploaded by Nawab go viral throughout India and Pakistan. A compassionate senior officer, Hamid Khan (Rajesh Sharma), realizes that Bajrangi is innocent, and has him released, defying the order to keep him in jail, which he felt would be petty on the part of Pakistan. Responding to a call by Nawab, thousands of Pakistanis and Indians congregate at Narowal Check Post, where Bajrangi is to return to India. As Bajrangi crosses the border, Shahida, who is also in the crowd, runs toward the fence and cries out for him with her now regained speech. Bajrangi and Shahida run towards each other and embrace. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5142214 | Il trovatore | Place: Biscay and Aragon (Spain)
Time: Fifteenth century.
=== Act 1: The Duel ===
Scene 1: The guard room in the castle of Luna (The Palace of Aljafería, Zaragoza, Spain)
Ferrando, the captain of the guards, orders his men to keep watch while Count di Luna wanders restlessly beneath the windows of Leonora, lady-in-waiting to the Princess. Di Luna loves Leonora and is jealous of his successful rival, a troubadour whose identity he does not know. In order to keep the guards awake, Ferrando narrates the history of the count (Aria: Di due figli vivea padre beato / "The good Count di Luna lived happily, the father of two sons"): many years ago, a gypsy was wrongfully accused of having bewitched the youngest of the di Luna children; the child had fallen sick and for this the gypsy had been burnt alive as a witch, her protests of innocence ignored. Dying, she had commanded her daughter Azucena to avenge her, which she did by abducting the baby. Although the burnt bones of a child were found in the ashes of the pyre, the father refused to believe in his son's death; dying, he commanded his firstborn, the new Count di Luna, to seek Azucena.
Scene 2: Garden in the palace of the princess
Leonora confesses her love for the Troubadour to her confidante, Ines (Tacea la notte placida / "The peaceful night lay silent"... Di tale amor / "A love that words can scarcely describe"), in which she tells how she fell in love with a mystery knight, victor at a tournament: lost track of him when a civil war broke out: then encountered him again, in disguise as a wandering troubadour who sang beneath her window. When they have gone, Count di Luna enters, intending to pay court to Leonora himself, but hears the voice of his rival, in the distance: (Deserto sulla terra / "Alone upon this earth"). Leonora in the darkness briefly mistakes the count for her lover, until the Troubadour himself enters the garden, and she rushes to his arms. The Count challenges his rival to reveal his true identity, which he does: Manrico, a knight now outlawed and under death sentence for his allegiance to a rival prince. Manrico in turn challenges him to call the guards, but the Count regards this encounter as a personal rather than political matter, and challenges Manrico instead to a duel over their common love. Leonora tries to intervene, but cannot stop them from fighting (Trio: Di geloso amor sprezzato / "The fire of jealous love" ).
=== Act 2: The Gypsy Woman ===
Scene 1: The gypsies' camp
The gypsies sing the Anvil Chorus: Vedi le fosche notturne / "See! The endless sky casts off her sombre nightly garb...". Azucena, the daughter of the Gypsy burnt by the count, is still haunted by her duty to avenge her mother (Aria: Stride la vampa / "The flames are roaring!"). The Gypsies break camp while Azucena confesses to Manrico that after stealing the di Luna baby she had intended to burn the count's little son along with her mother, but overwhelmed by the screams and the gruesome scene of her mother's execution, she became confused and threw her own child into the flames instead (Aria: Condotta ell'era in ceppi / "They dragged her in bonds").
Manrico realises that he is not the son of Azucena, but loves her as if she were indeed his mother, as she has always been faithful and loving to him - and, indeed, saved his life only recently, discovering him left for dead on a battlefield after being caught in ambush. Manrico tells Azucena that he defeated di Luna in their earlier duel, but was held back from killing him by a mysterious power (Duet: Mal reggendo / "He was helpless under my savage attack"): and Azucena reproaches him for having stayed his hand then, especially since it was the Count's forces that defeated him in the subsequent battle of Pelilla. A messenger arrives and reports that Manrico's allies have taken Castle Castellor, which Manrico is ordered to hold in the name of his prince: and also that Leonora, who believes Manrico dead, is about to enter a convent and take the veil that night. Although Azucena tries to prevent him from leaving in his weak state (Ferma! Son io che parlo a te! / "I must talk to you"), Manrico rushes away to prevent her from carrying out this intent.
Scene 2: In front of the convent
Di Luna and his attendants intend to abduct Leonora and the Count sings of his love for her (Aria: Il balen del suo sorriso / "The light of her smile" ... Per me ora fatale / "Fatal hour of my life"). Leonora and the nuns appear in procession, but Manrico prevents di Luna from carrying out his plans and takes Leonora away with him, although once again leaving the Count behind unharmed, as the soldiers on both sides back down from bloodshed, the Count being held back by his own men.
=== Act 3: The Son of the Gypsy Woman ===
Scene 1: Di Luna's camp
Di Luna and his army are attacking the fortress Castellor where Manrico has taken refuge with Leonora (Chorus: Or co' dadi ma fra poco / "Now we play at dice"). Ferrando drags in Azucena, who has been captured wandering near the camp. When she hears di Luna’s name, Azucena’s reactions arouse suspicion and Ferrando recognizes her as the supposed murderer of the count’s brother. Azucena cries out to her son Manrico to rescue her and the count realizes that he has the means to flush his enemy out of the fortress. He orders his men to build a pyre and burn Azucena before the walls.
Scene 2: A chamber in the castle
Inside the castle, Manrico and Leonora are preparing to be married. She is frightened; the battle with di Luna is imminent and Manrico’s forces are outnumbered. He assures her of his love (Aria, Manrico: Ah sì, ben mio, coll'essere / "Ah, yes, my love, in being yours"), even in the face of death. When news of Azucena’s capture reaches him, he summons his men and desperately prepares to attack (Stretta: Di quella pira l'orrendo foco / "The horrid flames of that pyre"). Leonora faints.
=== Act 4: The Punishment ===
Scene 1: Before the dungeon keep
Manrico has failed to free Azucena and has been imprisoned himself. Leonora attempts to free him (Aria: D'amor sull'ali rosee / "On the rosy wings of love"; Chorus & Duet: Miserere / "Lord, thy mercy on this soul") by begging di Luna for mercy and offers herself in place of her lover. She promises to give herself to the count, but secretly swallows poison from her ring in order to die before di Luna can possess her (Duet: Mira, d'acerbe lagrime / "See the bitter tears I shed").
Scene 2: In the dungeon
Manrico and Azucena are awaiting their execution. Manrico attempts to soothe Azucena, whose mind wanders to happier days in the mountains (Duet: Ai nostri monti ritorneremo / "Again to our mountains we shall return"). At last the gypsy slumbers. Leonora comes to Manrico and tells him that he is saved, begging him to escape. When he discovers she cannot accompany him, he refuses to leave his prison. He believes Leonora has betrayed him until he realizes that she has taken poison to remain true to him. As she dies in agony in Manrico's arms she confesses that she prefers to die with him than to marry another (Trio: Prima che d'altri vivere / "Rather than live as another's"). The count has heard Leonora's last words and orders Manrico's execution. Azucena awakes and tries to stop di Luna. Once Manrico is dead, she cries: Egli era tuo fratello! Sei vendicata, o madre. / "He was your brother ... You are avenged, oh mother!" | revenge | train | wikipedia | Dmitri Tcherniakov deconstructs 'Il Trovatore' to musically impressive but often dramatically puzzling effect. 'Il Trovatore' is not one of Verdi's best operas. The story is very convoluted (still in a muddle trying to sum up the whole business with Azucena and her given circumstances), and it has also been criticised understandably for being improbable and having over-the-top motivations.This said, 'Il Trovatore' is phenomenal musically, possessing some of Verdi's most memorable arias ("Di Quella Pira", "Stride La Vampa", "D'Amor Sull'Alli Rosee" and "Il Balen"), one of his most famous choruses that has sometimes been used effectively in films in "The Anvil Chorus" and overall it is one of his most melodically rich scores. The opera is also memorable for the character of the gypsy Azucena.Some may say that 'Il Trovatore' despite a solid-in-quality recording history that it is not well-served on DVD. For me, there are some great productions on DVD (1957, 1978, 2002, 2012 and 1988, the last one is probably going to be met with raised eyebrows, last year's Met production when released on DVD will also apply here) but also others that do not come off well (the Parma, Bregenz and Berlin performances, if the 2014 Salzburg production is released that for me was another misfire). This production does have a good amount going for it, all of it musically, but this reviewer didn't really care for it.Granted, there are some fine things with this 'Il Trovatore'. The orchestral playing, whether dramatically powerful, energetically sprightly or intimately nuanced, is first rate. Loved that there was more prominence on the woodwind section, which is not always heard. The chorus sing beautifully and are well-balanced, but robbed of a chance to show off their acting skills. Marc Minkowski makes his debut in Verdi, being a French repertoire, Baroque and Mozart specialist, and while there were concerns as to whether he would be out of his depth this is actually a pretty magnificent first attempt, being authoritative and sympathetic, with lots of swift energy and dynamic contrast and intensity.Principal singing is a very mixed bag here, but three come off very well. Sylvie Brunet as Azucena is especially good, she has a riveting stage presence that's menacingly imperious but also poignantly conflicted and, while there was the worry as to whether her voice was big enough for the role (out of everything this reviewer has heard her in Azucena is the heaviest role Brunet has done), she sings quite powerfully with a rich bottom and a gleaming top. Scott Hendricks has a sonorous and generously-sized voice that is used intelligently, and he acts DiLuna very well, he is undermined a little by Tcherniakov deciding to over-emphasise DiLuna's villainy and make him less subtle and dimensional than he actually is but Hendricks does act with plenty of dramatic intensity and succeeds in trying to give DiLuna a conflicted edge. Giovanni Furlanetto is a very authoritative and dark-toned Ferrando, the production starting on a promising note from the viewer still being compelled to listen to Ferrando's dark tale.Misha Didyk however sounds massively taxed as Manrico, much of his vocal production is throaty and strained with very little sensitivity and nuance especially at the end of Act 3 (not in a long time has this reviewer heard a more strained "Di Quella Pira"), and he is at best an indifferent actor. Marina Poplavskaya is a little better, at least she shows an involved dramatic ability with a radiant and very moving stage presence and unlike Didyk there are some beautiful sounds in her middle register, it is just a shame that too many of the high notes sound shrieked and there is a lack of legato.Visually, it isn't ugly but it's just too one-dimensional and was in need of more variety, it's also quite cluttered and claustrophobic too. Tcherniakov's stage direction didn't work for me, from past experience Tcherniakov has sometimes worked (i.e. his Met 'Prince Igor', which was a great attempt at making something interesting of an incomplete opera) and at other times he doesn't (his incredibly bizarre and at times offensive 'Dialogues Des Carmelites', which did the seemingly impossible task of ruining the most poignant final scene in all opera and completely ignored that opera's specific time period and Poulenc's equally explicit directions).Here, the stage direction thankfully doesn't reach the offensiveness of 'Dialogues Des Carmelites', but, as well as logical lapses and making DiLuna too much of a villain, like the other disappointing DVD releases available it does fail to make the story clearer (some of the staging actually confused the action more), less over-the-top (as seen with DiLuna the over-the-top-ness was more here) and less improbable, which really restricts the drama so any intensity or emotional impact doesn't come through enough. It is also a real shame that the chorus were resorted to singing off-stage, one can understand Tcherniakov when he says that while their role in the opera is big it's not dramatically active, but surely he could have found a way to work around that (like David McVicar for the Met managed to), this just felt old fashioned and lazy.Overall, musically impressive but too often dramatically puzzling with a very weak Manrico. 5/10 Bethany Cox |
tt4847546 | Blood Feast | In the midst of a series of gruesome murders, a young woman is killed inside her suburban Miami house by a grey-haired, wild-eyed man. He stabs her in the eye and hacks her leg off with a machete, bagging the leg before he leaves. At the police station the next day, detective Pete Thornton investigates the killing, noting that it is the latest in a series of four murders by a homicidal maniac who has yet to leave any clues. The police chief advises him to continue to pursue the case.
At Fuad Ramses Catering store, wealthy socialite Dorothy Fremont arrives, where she arranges for Fuad to cater a party for her daughter Suzette. Fuad agrees and tells Mrs. Fremont that the Egyptian feast that he is preparing has not been served for over 5,000 years. Mrs. Fremont wants the catering done in two weeks, and Fuad assures her that he will have enough time to procure the last of his needed ingredients. After Mrs. Fremont leaves, Fuad ventures to the back storage room where he has displayed a large gold statue of his "Egyptian goddess" Ishtar. Fuad is preparing a "blood feast" – a huge vat containing the dead women's body parts – that will ensure the goddess's resurrection. That evening, teenagers Tony and Marcy make out on a nearby beach. Fuad attacks them, subduing Tony and slicing off the top of Marcy's head. He removes her brain to serve as the latest ingredient. Thornton arrives on the scene with the police chief. After failing to obtain any useful information from the distraught Tony, they interrogate Marcy's mother, who can only tell Pete that her daughter belonged to a book club.
Staking out a local motel, Fuad sees a drunken sailor drop his wife off at her room. Fuad knocks on the woman's door and attacks her when she opens it. Fuad rips the woman's tongue out through her throat as another ingredient to his "blood feast". Pete continues to investigate this latest killing, and discovers that the latest murder victim also belonged to a book club.
Pete attends his weekly Egyptian Studies lecture at the local university with his girlfriend, who happens to be Suzette. The lecturer tells them about the cult of Ishtar, and describes how virginal women were sacrificed to the goddess on an altar as a blood offering to the Egyptian goddess. When the lecture is over, Pete takes Suzette out for an evening drive. She becomes worried about the recent attacks and fears that a serial killer is loose in the area. Their date is interrupted by the car radio announcing that another victim has been found near death. Pete drops Suzette home and races to the hospital. The police chief informs him that the maniac has struck again and hacked off the face of another woman named Janet Blake. Pete questions Janet in her hospital bed. Her face bandaged, Janet tells the detectives that the man who attacked her was old, with wild eyes, and that he said something which sounded like "Etar". Janet then dies and Pete can't shake the feeling that this word sounds familiar. Fuad receives a letter from Trudy requesting a copy of the book Ancient Weird Religious Rites, written by Fuad Ramses. Fuad calls Trudy's home phone number and learns that she's staying with Suzette. That afternoon, Fuad stakes out the Fremont residence, kidnaps Trudy from the grounds and takes her to his store. He whips her savagely and collects her blood, the final ingredient in his bloody potion.
With Trudy missing, Mrs. Fremont insists that the party continue. Pete calls Suzette to inform her that he will be late. Meanwhile, Fuad arrives with the food that he has cooked at his store. Elsewhere, Pete calls upon the college lecturer and gets more information about the cult of Ishtar and Fuad's book. He deduces that Fuad is the killer, since all the victims were women who personally called upon him to send them copies of his book. Pete and the police race over to Fuad's store and find Trudy's chopped-up body in the back. Pete tries to call Suzette to warn her, but Fuad cuts the phone line to the Fremont house.
At the Fremont party, Fuad's meal is ready, but he first asks Suzette to come into the kitchen to help him. He has Suzette lie on a counter, which he makes his altar, and says a prayer to Ishtar as he prepares to decapitate her with his machete as a final offering to his goddess. This takes forever because she can't take him seriously. Dorothy Fremont interrupts Fuad just as he's about to decapitate Suzette, and Fuad escapes as the police arrive. Pete and the rest of the police chase Fuad through a nearby garbage dump, where he attempts to escape by climbing into the back of a departing garbage truck. The truck's compact blades turn on and Fuad is crushed to death. The police stop the truck, noting that there's not much left of Fuad. As Pete puts it, "He died a fitting end, just like the garbage he was." | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | Horrible.
One of the worst pieces of garbage I have ever seen..
I've seen some terrible movies in my lifetime, and this one is no different.
Talent-less actors, weak special effects, the movie takes forever to get going and when it does it looks like a bad porn film.
Really, this movie is just terrible and everyone involved should be embarrassed.
Tragic film making at its worst..
WTF?.
Two really negative reviews yet it has a rating of 7.6.
Appears that a lot of shills have been tapping star keys to push the score up.
Pretty obvious really that they are shills..
Thanks to Blood Feast 2016, I've found a new appreciation for HGL's original..
Fuad Ramses (Robert Rusler) moves to Paris with his wife and daughter (Caroline Williams and Sophie Monk) where he has spent every last cent opening an American diner in the suburbs.
To make ends meet, Fuad also works as a nightwatchman at a museum, where he encounters Egyptian goddess Ishtar, who promises him life eternal as her lover.
But first he must serve up a special feast in her honour...Herschel Gordon Lewis' influential splatter classic Blood Feast is undeniably amateurish and quite dull, but at least it's gory; Marcel Walz's 2016 version of the film is even more boring than the original and almost as inept, but doesn't even deliver on the blood and guts.A full fifty minutes of dreary, badly scripted, poorly acted build up precedes the film's one and only genuinely gory moment, a juicy throat slashing, after which the film settles back into 'dry' mode.
The remainder of the movie is uneventful and, despite its handful of recognisable 'stars', the whole thing lacks professionalism.What this film needed was a better supporting cast (the European performers are terrible), a degree of intentional cheeze, a sense of fun, and, most importantly, lots of graphic gore so that it could at least live up to the title.Worse than the original film, worse than Blood Feast 2: All U Can Eat (2002), much worse than Mardi Gras Massacre (1978), and even worse than Blood Diner (1987), about the only thing going for this mess is the suggestion that Ishtar is a figment of Fuad's imagination, the restaurateur having neglected to take his daily medication for an unspecified ailment - an interesting idea, but it's not enough to prevent me giving this garbage the lowest possible rating..
This is a scurvy film.
Ryan Nicholson, the fx guy did some good job but the lingering gory n cannibalism scenes were a put off..
Saw this on a dvd.
I got enticed due to Sadie Katz n the trailer.
What a disappointment this film turned out to b.
Ther was absolutely zero suspense n tension.
This movie is completely devoid of any atmosphere.
The plot is about an owner of a diner who is also moonlighting as a watchman in a museum of Egyptian artefacts.
He stops taking his pills n during one of his work shift he sees the Egyptian goddess who demands him of blood n sacrifice which will enable their reunion.
Ther was too much gore n i fast forwarded some scenes, especially of the cannibalism.
The effects by Ryan Nicholson is noteworthy but the lingering gory scenes were a letdown for me.
Also the abrupt ending added more fuel to its already awful screenplay.
It is a remake of the 1963 film which i hav completely forgotten.
Mayb will revisit soon.
The original was directed by the father of gore films, Herschell Gordon Lewis.
They say the original was the first splatter film n one of the earliest to enter video nasties..
How did this movie get such high rating??.
Such big disapointning, pathetic acting, not bad idea of story but such poor way this story was told.
Didn't even had pation to watch it till end, canceled at midle of the movie..
Plain wrong.
One thing this got right is the amount of blood it has.
And without having seen the original this is based on (I can only assume that it wasn't a masterpiece either, but still way better than this, it has to be), I can say, that this is really bad.
Now I do see the rating this received from others (though none wanted to comment on their rating?) and I can only assume that they were enjoying how bad this is.Like having a blast watching a bad movie with mates/friends.
Kind of like "Tulpa" where I had a really good time, despite (or because) the movie was awful.
Now this is more or less aware of how bad it is, it actually tries to play into that fact.
But just by acknowledging that you are doing something intentionally, doesn't make it fun.
There is also a craft in being bad by purpose.
This just is infantile (in more than one way).
One example is a sign at the diner, that has a joke, but is being shown for way too long.
It's in your face, waving with both hands jumping up and down, right in front of your nose.
Again, this may be able to entertain in times (for all the wrong reasons), but it's not good - no pun intended.
I Waited 2 Years For This...
I rarely write reviews, but I must save the viewing audience.
I waited 2 years for this disappointment!
Poor script and pointless Gore..
Oh and the worst part, it ends abruptly as if they ran out of film or money...
Don't waste your time or you'll be sorry.
I can promise you that...
A strong finale, once you finally get to the blood feast....
This movie is a remake of a classic Herschell Gordon Lewis film.
Lewis, known as the Godfather of Gore, did extreme and extremely silly high concept horror films like The Gore Gore Girls and 2000 Maniacs (remade as a Robert Englund flick about a decade ago).
I'm not a huge fan of his and my interest in this movie had more to do with its marketing, which swore it was a hardcore, over-the-top gore film.
Honestly, though, this movie seems almost apologetic for its intense content.
It tells the story of an unstable, American restaurant own that moves to Paris with his wife (Caroline Williams of Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 and Hatchet 3) and college aged daughter (Sophie Monk of The Hills Run Red).
He is going broke and goes off his meds then promptly begins hallucinating, believing he has been ordered by an Egyptian goddess to perform a blood sacrifice in her name.
He begins murdering and cooking young people while his suspicious wife noses around and his oblivious daughter is romanced by a local cop.
Blood is spilled but it's often slightly off camera, which is disappointing.
The opening is pretty awesome and the finale is great but the entire middle is a snooze.
A lot of this has to do with a dull supporting cast and a stilted leading man.
Caroline Williams and Sophie Monk, the only two actors I had heard of beforehand, are great but they're kind of peripheral to the movie for the most part.
I can't really recommend this movie.
The trailer is stronger than the actual film and I found it kind of boring overall.
There's certainly worse out there right now so I guess, if you're desperate, give it a look.
Just don't expect too much..
Disappointing.
I donated to this film around 2015 , after that the film was released a while later so l brought a DVD copy of Blood Feast .
Hmmmmm is the film scary or suspenseful !
Not really , is the film boring unfortunately it is & the acting !
Not so great , the film stars Australia's own Sophie Monk & Caroline Munroe , l would have to say even the silly Blood Diner (1987 ) way more entertaining than movie very forgettable.
Historically inaccurate.
Ishtar was Sumerian, not Egyptian.
This is a sad attempt to make Goddess worship about sacrifice, which it isn't..
A Boring Disappointing Remake to a Cheesy Classic!!!.
I was really let down by this remake.
You'd think in today's time with movies like Saw and Hostel, this would be gorier because it's based on one of the original classic splatter films, but no.
The gore was kinda 'meh' The movie is a slow burner with generic characters like Penny Ramses and her boring friends.
The original was great for its time; it was so cheesy and corny that it's pretty epic.
The gore was bright and colorful and showed the classic look of the 1960's, but this movie's color is off.
It looks like it was made by a low budget independent company, and honestly I couldn't even see how it ended.
The lighting was too off.
There was a flashlight and some screaming and next thing I know, it's over.
The movie is about Fuad Ramses, an American living in Paris with his wife and daughter.
Fuad owns an American Diner and is a security guard at a museum.
For some reason, he starts seeing hallucinations of the goddess, Ishtar, who tells him to offer her a 'blood feast' so he goes around killing people.
Just do yourself a favor and skip this movie and re-watch Hershell Gordon Lewis's original classic.
I would not recommend the remake of BLOOD FEAST!!! |
tt0823463 | Gears of War | === Setting ===
Gears of War 2 takes place six months after the detonation of the Lightmass Bomb at the end of the first game. Though most of the underground army of the Locust Horde was destroyed, the explosion also caused much of the liquid Imulsion underground to vaporize, causing a fatal disease called Rustlung to spread among the diminished human population. After months of peace, the cities of Tollen and Montevado suddenly and mysteriously disappear underground, leading the Coalition of Ordered Governments (COG) to suspect the resurgence of the Locust. Soon after, the once impenetrable Jacinto, one of the last remaining safe havens for humans, begins to show signs that the same fate awaits it. To stop the fall of Jacinto, the COG responds with a large-scale counter-offensive against the Locust. Senior Producer Rod Fergusson says "In order to save Jacinto, [the COG] have no choice but to take the war to the Locust."
=== Characters ===
Returning characters includes the main protagonists of the series Marcus Fenix and Dominic (Dom) Santiago and others from the first game, including Marcus and Dom's fellow Delta Squad COG soldiers, Augustus 'Cole Train' Cole and Damon Baird. Also returning in supporting roles are radio dispatcher Anya Stroud and senior officer Colonel Hoffman. Lead designer Cliff Bleszinski confirmed that the character Carmine would be returning, but did not reveal how or in what capacity as Carmine was killed in the original Gears of War. It was later revealed that the original Anthony Carmine would not be present in the Gears of War 2 campaign, but rather his brother, Benjamin, would make an appearance. The game also introduces several new characters. They include Chairman Prescott, the noble, yet near-dictatorial military leader of COG; Tai Kaliso, "a spiritual and meditative warrior from a tradition of honor bound fighters;" and Dizzy Wallin, a former Stranded who joined the COG to keep his family safe. Dom's wife Maria also makes an appearance, and Dom's search for her plays an important part in the story.
=== Plot ===
As Gears of War 2 begins, the COG army is mobilizing to send forces into the depths of Sera to assault the Locust directly. The COG deploy several units into the Locust Tunnels, known as 'The Hollow', despite sustaining heavy casualties. Delta Squad, consisting of Marcus Fenix, Dom Santiago, Benjamin Carmine and later Augustus Cole and Damon Baird, continues to search the Hollow and discovers that the Locust are using a giant Riftworm to sink the human occupied cities. The Locust plan to destroy the rock structures at the outskirts of Jacinto, the last major Human city, in hopes of sinking it into the ground.
Delta Squad kills the Riftworm before it can sink Jacinto and returns to the surface. They are ordered to investigate a nearby abandoned COG outpost where they encounter experimented creatures of unknown origin and learn of a back door entrance to the Hollow in the nearby Kadar Mountains. They find prisoner cages and Dom convinces Marcus that Maria (Dom's wife) must be inside one of them. They manage to find her, but the Locust imprisonment and torture has left her severely disfigured and traumatized, unable to communicate. Faced with the nigh-vegetative state Maria is in, Dom tearfully chooses to euthanize her. Marcus and Dom then charge into the Locust stronghold.
Inside, Delta Squad discovers the Locust Horde is locked in a civil war against the "Lambent," or a group of Locust who have been exposed to Imulsion. They decide to destroy both the Locust and Lambent forces by detonating a bomb under Jacinto, which will sink the city and flood the Locust tunnels. Marcus and Dom battle their way through the Locust tunnels, while Cole and Baird use a helicopter to transport a bomb into the cavern. A Lambent Brumak destroys the bomb before it can be detonated. Marcus improvises by using a satellite targeting solution to bombard the Brumak with an orbital laser, which causes it to violently explode. Jacinto begins to sink and sea-water floods into the sinkhole, destroying the remaining Locust forces. As the COG forces and civilians evacuate, a voiceover of the Locust Queen talks about unintended legacies. After the credits, a last voice over of Adam Fenix is heard, a radio transmission of a call for help, and a cry of desperation, revealing he is still alive. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | In GEARS OF WAR you control Marcus Fenix, a disgraced squad leader of the forces of the Coalition of Ordered Governments (COG).
An optional second player can join in and control comrade Dominic.In this third-person shooter, you must make judicious use of all available cover in order to succeed without being wiped out very quickly.
There is even an option to run lower and more quickly towards the next bit of cover (provided that it's not too far away), which can be advisable if you are in the open too long as being lower and quicker makes you harder to hit.You have a multitude of weapons at your disposal, most of which have limited ammunition (which can be picked up if it's lying on the ground, or you can top up a lot of weapons for which you do not have full ammo).
There is quite a bit of gore in GOW, but by far the chainsaw bayonet is among the goriest imagery in the game.Other bigger guns include (but are not limited to) the shotgun and the sniper rifle, although its chamber can only accommodate one bullet, so you have to reload after every shot.Reloading presents an extra facet which, when mastered, will allow quicker reloading and more powerful shots.
When you use these you can either just throw them or you can aim using an on-screen arc that shows where your grenade will bounce and where it will explode.There are also some other more powerful weapons, which I won't give away, but these should understandably be saved for the more troublesome foes.When you take a hit you start to see a red cog appear on the screen; the more complete it is the closer you are to dying, so get under cover quickly!
Another complaint involves the grenades in multiplayer mode; some details of the aiming arc can be off-screen if playing using two-player split-screen, which can make them harder to use than normal.However, GOW stands out as a brilliant game in its own right, and is probably the main reason for investing in an XBox 360, especially in multiplayer mode..
This is a game that is beyond good, even beyond great, even beyond awesome.this awesome is derived from the unbelievably addictive online play that is worth the 14.99 price tag.
it isn't really all that good and the story is the same as many other games but it is still fun.get this game for the single player and be entertained, play the multi-player and be astonished.
Gears of War is an epic game created by..
The controls may take a bit time getting used to but once you figure them out aiming and shooting will be simple.Overall- Great game.
the game-play itself is deeply entertaining, although some may find it a little repetitive, they will also tell you it is fun!
the average player will not be impressed with the opening events in the game, but then again, you have choice's of which paths to take, and the range of decision making is outstanding!The graphics are no less than great, but then again this is on the Xbox 360.
Gears is the best xbox360 game that i have ever played.
Gears Of War is the best game on xbox360 maybe even best game I've played all year.With the best graphics i have ever seen on any system.The environments and surrounding ruin of cities looks great like an actual bombed out city.The A.I. in G.O.W is decent not to great though they are kinda dumb all they do is attack and take cover.Sound is awesome on it the guns sound great and the voice acting is really good done by professionals.The story is great just too short for my liking but its well done and when the soldiers talk they talk like real soldiers would by making jokes and trying to keep the morale up.Its a little sad to say but the way the soldiers act in this fictional war game is more real than they act in a real war game(my friend in the army told me thats exactly the way him and his company act).Actual game play of G.O.W is very easy and simple to get into and the firefights you'll be having are amazing just intense fire fights with taking fire and returning fire a decent variety of weapons makes the games fire fights fun.Taking cover is crucial to game play but its not as bad as it may sound you don't have to take cover for minutes at a time there are plenty of chances to run out and gun the Locusts down.All in all this is a great game worth buying if your a shooter fan or want a fun game to play its a most own for any 360 owner if they like action games at all..
This game started a revolution in video games because it creates a whole new world based on not-so real humans battling aliens in an Apocalyptic scenario.The visuals are just impressive and you won't get better.
The single player, while the story wasn't exactly amazing, and the campaign wasn't exactly that long, the game play is amazing.
The thrill of pulling off that head-shot with the sniper rifle or killing three people from the same blast from the Hammer of Dawn, it never gets old.Oh, the Hammer of Dawn is a giant space laser.The only complaint is that you can't break the chainsawing animation, so when you clearly could've dodged the blade in real life, you aren't allowed to move, unless it glitches, and even then, you die when they're not near you.Overall this game will make you tear your hair out.
Gears of War's biggest weakness is a interesting but bare bones plot but what it makes up for it is it's addictive and (very)gory intensely fun shooting action.What Epic Games has done is nothing short of brilliant and although not really original, the core gameplay mechanics are very well-done.
The lack of any real development sucks what little life remains from the characters and it makes it a little depressing.Gears of War is a great action game marred only by a weak, paint by numbers plot with emotionally devoid characters..
Great graphics, weak storyline and game play....
Don't get me wrong Gears of War is a good game, but its not as good as people say it is, it doesn't live up to the hype, the graphics however are beautiful and are a joy to watch, the cinematic scenes are cool to,but the game play gets a bit boring, you find yourself doing the same through out most of the game, ducking covering, shooting,walking, ducking covering ,shooting, walking.
I can only imagine what the experience was like to play the game for the first time in 2006, but in 2018, though it lacks the wow factor to compete with an AAA game now, I don't regret finally catch up..
The game forgoes a good chunk of the explanation and dialogue that games use to try and quickly fill players up on the plot and instead unceremoniously toss them into the boots of Marcus Fenix and sends them off to fight.
characters and locations still look unique and visually interesting even without the graphical fidelity of newer games and really go the extra mile to set up a cool world to play through.
Despite Gears of War not being the first game to use the mechanic they were the first to popularize it and make it the stable of shooters that are grounded a bit more in the bounds of reality.
This game is one of the best the Xbox has to offer, With such gorgeous Visuals and fun gameplay that it's nearly a masterpiece, here's why this game is the Xbox's killer-app.The story is forgettable and simplistic but not awful, the game follows Marcus Fenix, a Heavy armored man With his crew must stop the Locust horde from taking over humanity and the planet Sera, With their guns and strongness, they must defeat Raam, the leader of the Locust, to stop the Madness.The game is a third-person-shooter With a cover system-based gameplay, you play as Fenix who must cover his way through the Locust and kill every one in sight, the cover system is very good, it Works perfectly.
The guns are very varied, even though they have similarities, they have a good selection, the Lancer is the highlight, it's chainsaw bayonet and damage makes it a useful but brutal weapon, in the game, you find COG tags scattered through each Level, while tricky is still rewarding.The Graphics still hold up to this day, detail and textures are all wonderful, the Controls are good as well, you use RT to shoot and you know the rest from there, the sound is brilliantly designed and one of the best in a 2006 game.The downsides is the game's length, it only has 5 Levels, despite it's long Levels, the game doesn't have a significant amount of Challenge, the multiplayer maps are small but the multiplayer is enjoyable at best.
The story is tedious and the game doesn't deliver anything New to the core gameplay of this game.Gears of War is a spectacular game and a killer-app for the Xbox 360, Graphics, gameplay, Controls, sound and multiplayer is great despite map design issues, story is forgettable and short campaign, this game should not be overlooked 10/10.
I fail to recognise the last time when playing 2 player was necessary to beat the game.
This on the other hand, while it is probably just as generic as Halo, is a lot better.The plot is that Marcus Fenix is taken out of jail in order to help contribute to a fight that humanity is losing to with an alien race, The subterranean Locusts.
So the Bezerker naturally charges Dominic, sabotaging his own life and all chance of the plan working because the Bezerker will charge what is nearest and if you're like me, you will try your best to avoid the monster that kills in one hit.So for all intents and purposes while Gears Of War is just a generic shooting gallery, the combat is probably the smoothest of the time and while the partner AI jeopardizes you to the point where you HAVE to get a second player (Shouldn't that just be an option?
I would say if what you would like is a game to play with a friend then this might be a good choice..
Gears of War has some truly great moments in its 6+ hour campaign, but therein lies the problem: it is too short!
It may sound like I don't like the game much, I do, but it is just a bit disappointing.The graphics are just as good, if not better, as you have probably heard.
In my opinion, a shooter just isn't worth buying if it doesn't have an in-depth multiplayer aspect to it (Bioshock being an exception.) Thus, I am glad to tell you that Gears of War has a great multiplayer component.
The multiplayer would have greatly benefited from a Halo 2/3 style matchmaking system, in my opinion.Overall, I would recommend this game to any adult who is looking for a great shooter with a good single-player campaign and great multiplayer.Gameplay: 9/10 Graphics: 10/10 Sound: 8/10 Value: 10/10.
Gears of War is probably the best game on XBox 360 and definitely my favourite games.Every thing in the game has been done brilliantly and there's nothing i would change i'm not really a massive gamer so i can't say a lot but the game play and story are all excellent and i enjoyed every moment playing it, the co-op multi-player was great too.The graphics like most XBox 360 games are great and i really liked the characters and the locust hoard were really well designed, the idea of a chainsaw on a machine gun was cool and i love how the blood splash's on the screen when you use it.I would recommend Gears of War to anyone who likes third person shooter/horror games and would say it's the best around on console at the moment.I hope they don't make a Gears of War movie because most that get turned into movies are rubbish like Doom which wasn't that good.9 out of 10.
The graphics were superb, the music was outstanding and matched the game-play.
Gears of War is a game that will be a classic.
The actual storyline is a bit too short, but the nice thing is that once you beat the game, you can play again on harder levels.
Gears is the most addictive game i have ever played other than Guitar Hero II.
Sound effects makes the game-play intense.
Gears of war is also the best 2 player game I've ever played.
after first picking up this game at my local video games store for 40$ i went home eagerly waiting to see if the game lived up to the hype.i played for about 15 minutes before i turned it off in disgust and boredome because of how mindless and repetitive it was.but an hour or so later i had the uncontrollable urge to shoot some aliens in the face.i have to admit there isn't much to the game play.its mostly run,take cover,shoot,kill,repeat and occasionally having some crazy boss fights.the story isn't anything special or new either.aliens are trying to kill us OH CRAP LETS GET THE RAIL GUN AND SHOOT THESE ALIEN COMMIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!but i think the developers new this and im sure story was not there concern.there concern was making one of the most fun,violent and innovative tactical shooters I've ever played in my life.the depictions of violence are really cool.especially with the sniper rifle and chainsaw(it never gets old).but it really does bring really cool weapons to kill things with.and thats always fun.the graphics are stunning also and i first played the game on a non hdtv and it STILL looked great.and then when i did see in high def.i nearly crapped my pants.and not to mention the multiplayer is FANTASTIC.in my opinion the best xbox live game you can play.bottom line is if your looking for story and depth and not much action or violence you might wanna think twice.but if you wanna blow something in half shoot someones head off kill something with a laser beam from space or blow someone up with a rocket launcher or a bow with exploding arrows and are willing to sacrifice a good story and a a lot of repetitiveness.then you'll LOVE this game.....final score 10/10.
You are later released by one of his good friends, now, they set out with 2 more soldiers to save the earth.Single player: Don't play this game by yourself!
Your AI-soldiers are stupid, if you play this on Insane, the only thing you do is running around bringing them back on their feet.The single player was meant to be played in co-op, thats a lot more fun.As for the Multiplayer: It's an excellent time killer!
I love the different variations the player has to be pitted against, including Beserkers, Krylls and of course, the Lord of the Locust, General RAAM.The only thing that disappointed me was the fact Private Carmine and Lieutenant Kim were killed off so early in the game, not a lot of time in between their deaths.
It's the same in Gears of War 2, with his brother, Ben, being killed early in the game.
Anyway, killing the Locust Horde (your enemies) is exceptionally enjoyable, so is ripping someone to shreds with the one-of-a-kind Chainsaw Bayonet.9/10 Graphics- The graphics are pretty good.
The storyline is pretty good, but some parts of it are quite maddening, like the end of Act 3 in the campaign.10/10 Overall- All in all, Gears of War is a great game, something all PC and Xbox 360 gamers should buy.
Marcus and his team of hardened soldiers, Delta Squad, must save humanity and destroy General Raam and his Locust forces before the planet Sera goes under their control.
5/5 Gameplay: Epic Games wanted to make sure Gears of War isn't gonna be a death-match style run and gun game.
Another best part of Gears is the camera following Fenix whenever he runs for cover like in the war documentaries.
Gears of War truly is the game of 2006 and may Microsoft and Epic continue with the success of their new franchise.Final Review: 5/5.
It is now officially in your best interests to play the Game of the Year as soon as possible.Good job, Epic.
As in the example above, sometimes they just don't work and at other times your men mill about and getting them to move to, say, a door that one of them needs to open can involve a frustrating amount of running around trying to get them to "wake" up to the fact that it is their action that is needed.For me, though, the repetitiveness is what drove me to put the game aside.
Gears of War, this brings a whole new definition to shooter games.
The graphics are amazing, the game play is awesome.
The plot was terrible, it was not realistic, it did not excite me enough to keep playing but the graphics were quite good.One of the main reasons I disliked this game for is the plot (if it had one).
The second time I noticed how unrealistic the game is when I was shooting someone I used up at least sixty bullets on one person (or alien or creature or whatever it is meant to be).The other main reason why I did not like this game is that it did not excite me enough to keep playing.
Yet, I was still somewhat disappointed with Gears of War. For the most part, the gameplay was good.
I did feel like I was playing to save the world, but I think it was more because of the scenery, the destruction, the pain and the characters rather than the battles themselves.Storywise, the game lost a lot of points for me. |
tt0041275 | Daffy Duck Hunt | Continuing from Porky's Duck Hunt, Porky with Barnyard Dawg (from the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons) are hunting ducks. Daffy sneaks up behind them in a giant fake duck and empties the shot from their shells, then walks off with a silly laugh and the phrase "Duck hunters is the cwaziest peoples!" (a reference to Lew Lehr's Fox Movietone News catchphrase, "Monkeys is the cwaziest people."). Daffy taunts Porky into shooting at him. Porky shoots at Daffy but turns out to have missed him (Daffy flies by with a banner that says "That's What You Think!").
Daffy again taunts Porky by breaking out into a can-can dance and singing "Latin Quarter" from Gold Diggers in Paris. Porky shoots at Daffy again as Daffy finishes his routine by bending over to reveal a bulls-eye painted on his backside. Daffy pretends to have been shot, but leaves the scene.
Porky sends his dog to get Daffy, and the dog decides to trick Daffy, crying loudly that Porky will torture him if he doesn't come back with a duck. Daffy agrees to let the dog "capture" him and plays dead. The dog carries him back to a delighted Porky and they leave the pond.
Once they get back to Porky's house, Porky throws Daffy in the freezer and goes upstairs for a nap. Once out of sight, Daffy starts knocking on the freezer door to be let out. After a brief fight between his good and bad conscience, the dog lets Daffy out of the freezer. Daffy tries to leave the house---claiming, in a non sequitur, "There's a guy waitin' for me!"---but is blocked by the dog. After making a bunch of noise, Daffy jumps into the dog's mouth just as Porky comes to see what all the noise is about. Upon coming down, Porky thinks the dog is trying to steal the duck for himself, and subsequently beats him.
Porky then throws Daffy back in the freezer. The dog now wants to get revenge against Daffy, but Daffy continues to act silly around him (dressed like a superhero, wearing mittens and a towel for a cape, re-enacting the 1925 serum run to Nome concluding with a loud scream, then dead-panning, "How's things been with you?"). When Porky appears, wondering what all the noise is about, Daffy once again jumps into the dog's mouth. A furious Porky once again thinks his dog is stealing Daffy, and pounds him once again. Porky then places Daffy back into the freezer.
Finally, the dog has had enough and grabs an axe to finish Daffy off. Daffy runs to Porky's bedroom, where the pig is asleep. Daffy puts a flower pot on Porky, and barks. When Daffy ducks down and crawls away out of the room, the dog accidentally hits the flower pot with the axe, and an enraging Porky calls him a "Benedict Arnold" and a "traitor".
After a chase through the house Porky, finally having enough of the dog's shenanigans, comes into the kitchen and threatens the dog's life if Daffy isn't in the freezer. Porky opens the freezer, but both are shocked when Daffy, dressed as Santa Claus, jumps out and starts singing "Jingle Bells". Both Porky and the dog start singing along with Daffy, until Porky sees that the current month is April on the calendar. As the dog looks in horror and runs behind the freezer, Porky angrily knocks Daffy down onto the floor and is ready to use the axe until he sees a stamp on Daffy: "Do not open 'till Xmas." Daffy smiles at the camera and says to the audience, "Christmas—by that time, I'll figure a way out of this mess!". The cartoon ends with an iris out around his left eye which closes. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | First Four Minutes As Funny As I've Ever Seen In A Cartoon.
Porky is in the blinds duck hunting.
Daffy sneaks up from behind and empties his shotgun shells, saying, "Duck hunters is the cwaziest people."The cocky Daffy then flies overhead and announces, "Here I am, fat boy.
Here's your target!" Then, even more of an outrageous scene, Daffy reappears in back of Porky, dons a frilly skirt and sings a can-can.
He then "moons" the pig with a bullseye drawn on his butt (knowing the shells are blanks).
Porky shoots, Daffy dramatically pretends he is hit, but flies away laughing.
Porky is ticked off, to say the least!!!
He sends his dog out after him.The dog is smarter than Porky and fools Daffy and a couple more minutes of fantastic material is presented.
The first four minutes of this seven-minute short are about as good as it gets.
The last three minutes are so-so.
Overall, still very entertaining..
One of McKimson's best.
Starting out as a variation on Daffy Duck's debut cartoon, 'Porky's Duck Hunt', Robert McKimson's 'Daffy Duck Hunt' quickly develops into something quite different.
McKimson's Barnyard Dog character from the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons plays the role of Porky's hunting dog who tricks Daffy into surrendering on the understanding that he'll let him go when they get home.
This plot development is almost immediate, meaning the majority of the cartoon is unexpectedly set in Porky's kitchen.
A late example of the crazy version of Daffy at work, 'Daffy Duck Hunt' is one of McKimson's greatest cartoons.
Daffy is on top form, making up for his early duping with some inspired zaniness which invariably lands the dog in trouble with his master.
McKimson overcomes the possibility of a cartoon set in a kitchen becoming dull by virtue of some extremely lively animation to compliment Warren Foster's brilliant script.
All in all, 'Daffy Duck Hunt' is a thoroughly unexpected classic full of brilliant moments and an especially energetic Daffy performance..
Daffy is manic and hilarious.
Porky Pig and his loyal dog are out hunting duck.
However, of all the possible ducks they could go after, it's just bad luck that they go after the craziest duck in the swamp - Daffy Duck!
And Daffy is too much of a wise-quacker to get caught easily by anyone.I'm a big fan of Daffy Duck but I vastly prefer him when he is in fully `crazy' mood, doing all sorts of manic things; I find that much funnier than his later greedy & selfish personae.
Here he is spot on in his crazy personae and he totally makes this cartoon work.
The plot is split between the hunt and Porky's house (where Daffy gets taken in an agreement with the dog).
While the hunt section is funny, the stuff in the house is much better and is a perfect forum for Daffy to do his stuff.
It is funny and imaginative throughout.Daffy is great here and his manic actions and delivery are hilarious.
Porky is not a great character but he is good in a solid partnership; here then, he works and reacts well to the action.
The downtrodden dog is good but I must admit that I didn't like some of his voice work here in comparison to some other Daffy shorts I have seen him in.Overall, for true Daffy Duck fans (i.e. those who appreciate him when he is daffy) this cartoon will be hilarious.
For those who have yet to be won over by the little black duck, this will surely help you come round to my way of thinking.
Personally, `I like him; he's silly.'.
Wacky Daffy.
Daffy Duck lets a dog take him home, under the pretense that the dog caught him for Porky Pigs supper, only to be trapped there when the dog won't let him leave.
This is vintage wacky Daffy all the way.
Almost makes me forget that McKimson directed it.
Actually in this short Daffy may be even a little too nuts for my liking in some respects.
But the film does move at a pretty good clip and is frequently quite funny indeed, so i'll recommend it, just steer clear of McKimson's Bugs Bunny shorts.
This animated short can be found on disc 4 of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 1.My Grade: B.
Well worth watching for especially the first four minutes!.
I really enjoyed Daffy Duck Hunt, even if it is a little uneven at times.
The first four minutes are absolutely hilarious, with razor-sharp dialogue and hysterical visual gags.
The last half or so is still entertaining, but one or jokes aren't as well timed and come off as predictable.
The animation is absolutely excellent, as is the music.
Plus Mel Blanc's characterisations as Daffy, Porky and Barnyard Dog are simply brilliant!
Daffy himself is still his outrageous and manic self, and man isn't he hysterical here?
The end line and the part with the can can especially had me in stitches.
Porky once again isn't given as much to do, but he is solid, and Barnyard Dog is a worthy foil here.
Overall, hugely enjoyable, uneven at times, but it is still very funny and Daffy is stellar.
9/10 Bethany Cox. Daffy Duck Hunt brings the duck and Porky back to their original adversarial relationship.
In the late '40s and early '50s while Chuck Jones was making Porky and Daffy cartoons that had the latter the "hero" while the former the "sidekick", Robert McKimson was bringing back the adversarial relationship they originally had when they first met in Tex Avery's Porky's Duck Hunt.
This short is similar to that in that Porky is once again a hunter who's looking for ducks.
Daffy, of course, becomes the target but because he emptied many bullet shells of pellets, the shooting Porky does won't hurt him.
At this point, the dog makes a deal with the duck for him to surrender to him so his master won't throw him out.
Many funny gags involving the duck and dog follow.
And dig the holiday twist that ends this short.
So on that note, I highly recommend Daffy Duck Hunt..
Hasty la vie-sta!.
I always suspected that the name "Daffy" was adapted from "daft".
"Daffy Duck Hunt" certainly suggests that.
It portrays Porky Pig and his dog - presumably Barnyard Dog from the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons - going duck hunting, and they bring back Daffy, who made a deal with the dog that the dog wouldn't actually kill him.
Once in Porky's freezer, Daffy proceeds to make life a living hell for the dog and Porky (needless to say, Porky thinks that the dog is making the noise).
Finally at the end, there's a Christmas party like you've never seen before - namely because it happens in April!
Part of the cartoon's humor derives from Daffy just being as crazy as he can.
Part of the humor derives from Porky being how Leonard Maltin once described him: he wasn't as much an actor as a reactor.
And of course, there's what happens to the dog.
But overall, just watching a classic Looney Tunes cartoon is enough to elate anyone.
It's pleasure to the max.
Merry Christmas and hasty la vie-sta!.
"Why the copious flow of lacrimal fluid, my querulous canine?".
Funny Porky & Daffy short, directed by Robert McKimson.
The plot has Porky and his dog out duck hunting, which leads to Daffy deciding to screw around with them.
There seems to be some debate about whether or not Porky's dog here is actually supposed to be Barnyard Dog from the Foghorn Leghorn cartoons.
They look very similar but this dog doesn't sound like Barnyard at all or have his personality.
Whether it's Barnyard or not, the dog's a fun character.
Love his "angel & devil" bit.
Really the whole show belongs to Daffy here.
He's at an 11 on a 10 scale the whole time, being as wacky and kooky as possible.
The animation is fluid with well-drawn characters and backgrounds.
Love the Technicolor.
Carl Stalling's music is very nice.
Mel Blanc's voice work is flawless (as usual).
It's a good cartoon but, as other reviewers have noted, the first half is much better than the second.
Fans of Daffy should love it..
Decent Short.
Daffy Duck Hunt (1949) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Porky Pig goes hunting and ends up bringing Daffy Duck back with him.
However, Porky's dog decides he has his own plans for the duck, which includes accidentally letting him out of the freezer.
This is a decent short from the Merrie Melodies gang but it's certainly no classic.
This is certainly fairly entertaining but when you've got Daffy and Porky together I expect a lot more.
The best sequence in the film happens towards the start when the dog and Daffy come up with an agreement to make the dog look good.
When the action heads back to Porky's house things get a little weak but this is still worth watching at least once..
...I thought it would be too much of a remake of "Porky's Duck Hunt", which is what this episode is partly based on.
P'sDH was Daffy's debut and I was afraid that this episode would just redo it as "Dough for the Do-do" did.
Luckily - the plot turned dramatically and most of the episode was hardly like P'sDH at all!
:-)In this episode, we first see Porky and his dog out hunting ducks.
Daffy, of course, comes along and ruins Porky's chances without him realizing it by taking out the gunpowder in his cartridges.
Despite this, Porky's dog manages to catch Daffy and he is taken to Porky's house, where his two new enemies plan to eat him...I thought some of the jokes here were pretty good - in addition to a good plot line.
There were a few repeated jokes became very boring for me, but the end is one of the best I have yet seen in Looney Tunes.
The animation was good as well.
It may be a shock for certain people to see Porky with a darker heart, but I can tell you, he is like this in many previous episodes and it does make him a stronger character.I recommend this to people who like Daffy, Porky being mean and faithful cartoon dogs.
Enjoy "Daffy Duck Hunt"!
a great short.
I think this is the only short where The barnyard dog does not co star with Foghorn Leghorn.
I like it when daffy calls the dog lassie.
I find the plot where daffy is making noise in order to get porky's attention to the pluto cartoon 'Pantry Pirate'.
I like the ending where the iris closes on daffys eye..
Without question my ALL-TIME FAVORITE Looney Tune!.
"Daffy Duck Hunt" takes first place on my list of all-time favorite Looney Tunes, with "Napoleon Bunny-Part" (Bugs Bunny) and "Guided Muscle" (The Road Runner) tied for second place and "Bewitched Bunny" (Bugs Bunny and Witch Hazel) getting third.But what especially makes me crack up about this short is that in the spring of 1973, when I was living in Lansing, Michigan, and was then 11, a station in Grand Rapids ran the Looney Tunes every weekday at 4:00 P.M. Opposite the Looney Tunes on a Lansing station was a locally-produced puppet show which my younger sister loved but I despised; they kept doing frequent Alvin and the Chipmunks takeoffs, which drove me crazy!
(Anybody from Lansing, Michigan reading this who was a kid back then will know what I'm talking about, but everybody else can deduce the puppet show's title by reading between the lines: its lead character was named Aloysius E.
Khatt.) One day, I raced my sister home from school so I could get to the TV before she could (you have to remember that in 1973 - at least, not for the next seven years - there weren't any such things as VCRs); when I beat her home, my sister left the house in frustration.
Shortly after she left, "Daffy Duck Hunt" came on, and remembering the part where Daffy banged on the washtub to needle the dog and wake up Porky, I took a pot lid and wooden spoon from our kitchen and "clanged" along in unison with Daffy beating the tub (it sounded like a firehouse alarm!).About fifteen minutes later, my sister came back in the house and inquired, "The neighbors want to know what all that noise was in here!" Needless to say, I blushed then, but every time I see "Daffy Duck Hunt" again now I can't help but crack up when I think of this childhood incident!
(I also know the entire script of this short by heart to this day.)Also, every time I hear "Jingle Bells" now - and want to sing along with it - I have this strange compulsion to shout "APRIL?!" before singing the last line (thanks, Robert McKimson and Warren Foster - may you both rest in peace)!
All told, "Daffy Duck Hunt" certainly was worthy of a "Blue Ribbon" shown in the opening titles - too bad it didn't win an Oscar as well.
Still, this short is a winner in my book!.
That darn duck!.
Directed by Bob McKimson, "Daffy Duck Hunt" is a wild and wacky Daffy Duck/Porky Pig cartoon.
As with some other Warner Bros.
cartoons, Porky is cast as a hunter in this film, but perhaps he should have chosen a target other than the silly, crazy, mischievous Daffy.Highlights: As Porky and his dog hunt for Daffy, Daffy sings and dances a cancan while wearing a Parisian skirt; he then flashes his derrière, which contains a bull's-eye mark.
Daffy emerges from Porky's deep-freeze unit dressed up in a Santa outfit, and he leads Porky & the dog in singing "Jingle Bells"; Porky's stuttering, and his discovery that the current month is April, make the song a lot funnier.
The dog's good and evil consciences appear, as an angel and devil, of course; the angel wins against the devil but in a very non-angelic manner.Daffy is quite uncontainable in "Daffy Duck Hunt," willing to do or say almost anything for a laugh.
I do find it surprising that Porky is very physically abusive to his dog, repeatedly punishing him for Daffy's loud racket..
Weak character choices hurt this one.
"Daffy Duck Hunt" (really generic title) is another Warner Bros cartoon that has the legendary McKimson, Foster and Blanc work on it and it runs for slightly over 7 minutes liked they usually do.
This one's from 1949 and it means it will have its 70th anniversary next year already.
Of course it is despite the age a color and sound cartoon.
Interestingly enough, this one has Daffy play the character that gets away with it all, usually Bugs' spot and the mostly competent barnyard dog has not much too laugh in here as he gets tricked again and again by the feisty dog.
Maybe Foghorn Leghorn should ask Daffy for a lesson in how to deal with the doggy.
Anyway, the third on board here is Porky, but his days of being a lead character were long over by the end og the first half of the 20th century, so he is basically just a victim of circumstance that suffers from Daffy's shenanigans thinking the dog did it all.
That's all there is to it basically.
Not one of WB's best, not even close, not even from its particular year.
I guess they realized this was not the right role for Daffy and they gave him roles afterward again more frequently that resembled the dog character in here where he is the one getting fooled.
All in all, I give this cartoon a thumbs-up.
Not everyone can be a winner.
Also finally still an interesting note of what I had to think of when seeing Daffy.
He is probably so black that people would not even come close to comparing him to Donald.
Oh well, I am more of a Disney guy, so my bias may have to do with my rating here.
That's all folks..
There was a time when America's kids ate twice as much duck .
. as they did chicken.
Then, as Today, ducks roamed U.S. skies free as birds, just there waiting to be taken by any True Blue American Parent with a musket.
Chickens, on the other hand, were relatively rare, and a commodity to be bought and paid for with cold, hard cash, to boot.
Male chickens (that is, roosters) served as the family alarm clocks in Pre-Cell Phone Days.
Females, or hens, were needed for their eggs.
Therefore, regardless of their sex, the Chickens of Yesteryear were too precious to be eaten until they expired from Natural Causes.
Ducks, on the other hand, were six for a nickel, as hunters with good aim retrieved and reused most of their shot.
Then, in the 1940s, the idea for an American Domestic Chicken Industry was hatched, and these chicken schemers commissioned Warner Bros.
to produce animated shorts such as DAFFY DUCK HUNT to portray free fowl as aggravating and inedible.
Foghorn Leghorn, on the other hand, was carefully crafted to make U.S. kids crave drumsticks, while the Tweety Bird cartoons were deviously designed to drum up a market for mashed-together chicken by-products, fiendishly renamed McNuggets.
It took a decade or two to lay this subliminal cartoon groundwork, but now Domestic Chicken is one of America's top Success Stories. |
tt0453533 | Unrest | The film revolves around a cadaver who seems to bring misfortune on those who come in contact with it.
Although there is very little corporeal manifestation of the ghosts, people seem to die when they enrage the spirit which is linked with a special cadaver—by disrespecting it or otherwise. The story takes place mostly inside a hospital, where a young medical student, Alison Blanchard, comes to learn anatomy. By observing the cadaver she was assigned, she discovers that the body had self-inflicted wounds and also had a child. She soon discovers that there is something wrong with the cadaver, which they have nicknamed "Norma." Mysterious deaths occur in the hospital, which include the fiancee of one of Allison's team members and several hospital employees.
It is revealed that the cadaver is a person named Alita Covas, who once led an archaeological expedition on an Aztec sacrificial site. There she uncovered 50,000 bodies which were offered to Tlazolteotl, the Aztec god of fertility and prostitution. Afterwards, she herself became a prostitute, and started showing symptoms of mental imbalance. Later in her life, she committed murders and was subsequently put in a mental asylum where she died—presumably by her own hand.
Once Alison learns of the true nature of the cadaver, she decides the corpse must return to Brazil to satisfy the Aztec god. After a series of gruesome events, Alison and her classmate/love interest take Alita's now dismembered corpse and cremate her in the hospital. In the end, Alison heads to Brazil to spread the ashes in an attempt to put the spirit at rest; however, it is suggested in the final scene that the spirit remains in the hospital. | insanity, violence, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0038190 | A Tree Grows in Brooklyn | The film covers several months in the life of the Nolans, an Irish American family living in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn in 1912. The film is much shorter than the book, which covers the time from before Francie is born until after she turns 16. The film focuses on the time when Francie is around 13 years old.
Katie Nolan (Dorothy McGuire) is a hard-working housewife who scrubs the floors of her tenement building and collects rags for sale to a scrap fabric dealer in order to provide for her family. She's married to Johnny Nolan (James Dunn), a happy-go-lucky, charming man who means well but dreams his way through life rather than find steady employment. He is also an alcoholic. On the rare occasions he finds work as a singing waiter, everything he earns usually ends up in his drinking, much to the despair of his disillusioned wife. The couple have two children, 13-year-old Francie (Peggy Ann Garner), who idolizes her father, and 12-year-old Neeley (Cornelius) (Ted Donaldson). Tense and frustrated, Katie is often sharper with the children than she means to be, while Johnny is gentle, generous, and indulgent, especially with Francie.
Katie's sister, Sissy (Joan Blondell), is a sassy, free-spirited woman who has, unbeknownst to her sister, recently remarried for the third time. Katie learns this news not from Sissy herself but from a gossipy insurance agent, Mr. Barker, when he comes by to collect the Nolans' weekly premium. Scandalized and embarrassed, Katie cuts off her relationship with Sissy, which makes the children, who love their wild and wacky aunt, unhappy. Francie is also worried that the building's landlord has cut too many branches off the one tree growing in the tenement's courtyard, which Francie and her father call the Tree of Heaven, and that it may die. But when she points out the altered tree to Johnny, he explains that the cutting back is necessary, and that the tree will grow again.
In the meantime, a police officer new to the neighborhood, Officer McShane (Lloyd Nolan), encounters Aunt Sissy and the children one afternoon. When he meets the children's mother, he is enchanted by the beautiful Katie. A few days later, however, he learns that Johnny (drunk after an argument with his wife) is Katie's husband, and is devastated to realize Katie is married.
The children's grandmother Rommely (Ferike Boros), often tells them about her immigration to the United States, and how important education is in life. While Neeley isn't interested in books and school, Francie is a bright child who is always reading, thinking about what she reads and observes, and eager to learn. Every night, she reads to the family from the thick book of Shakespeare her grandmother let them buy, even though they don't understand what they read.
One Sunday afternoon, Francie indirectly persuades her father to go for a walk instead of sitting at home. She accompanies him and shows him the school she wants to attend. It's a nicer school in a nearby neighborhood, with wealthier, well dressed students. When he sees how much the better school means to Francie, Johnny "borrows" a home address within the correct district, so that Francie can claim she is eligible to attend. Katie is opposed, but Johnny persuades her to go along with the lie, and in the end, Katie supports her daughter's ambition by tailoring an old dress into one Francie can wear to school. Once she becomes a pupil at the school, Francie impresses her new teacher with her creative writing.
Meanwhile, Katie moves the family into a smaller, cheaper apartment one floor up, angering her husband. Johnny believes she is merely being stingy. In fact she is pregnant and very worried how they will live with another child. Sissy, too, becomes pregnant, and she and Katie reconcile shortly before Christmas. The families celebrate a happy, poignant Christmas together, and later that night Katie tells Johnny she is pregnant. She suggests that Francie drop out of school to work. Since Johnny understands how much being in school means to his daughter he feels desperate to find a job. Despite the fact that it's snowing hard Johnny goes out that night, determined to find work. Instead, he fails to return.
After Johnny has been missing for a week, Officer McShane comes to the apartment to deliver the bad news that Johnny is dead. He died from pneumonia while looking for a job in Manhattan during the terrible January snowstorm. Francie blames her mother for her father's death, but the births of, first, Sissy's baby, and then Katie's, help to ease tensions in the household. To provide the family with extra financial help a sympathetic tavern owner, Mr. McGarrity (James Gleason) gives Francie and Neeley after-school jobs.
During Katie's labor, at home because they cannot afford the hospital birth that Sissy had, Francie is her mother's greatest help and comfort. Katie asks Francie to read some of her creative writing essays to her, and confides to her daughter how much she misses Johnny. The shared experience brings mother and daughter closer. When the baby is born, a little girl, Katie names her Annie Laurie after the song Johnny once sang to them.
The following June, both children graduate from their respective schools on the same day. Katie attends Neeley's graduation while Sissy goes to Francie's. Using graduation day money that Johnny gave her for safekeeping back in December, Sissy gives Francie a bouquet of flowers from her father along with a card of congratulation that Johnny wrote himself. Francie, who has bottled her grief in stoic silence for many months, finally breaks down.
After the graduation ceremonies, the family reunites at the ice cream shop to celebrate. While there, some boys who know Neeley come by their table. One teenager in particular is very interested in Francie and asks her to a movie for the next day, her first date.
When the Nolans return home, they find Officer McShane babysitting along with Sissy's husband. He has been waiting to propose to Katie, who accepts. Officer McShane also asks to adopt Annie Laurie and give her his last name. Francie and Neeley think that Annie Laurie's life with McShane as a father will be much easier, but not nearly as much fun.
The film ends as Francie sees the courtyard tree begin to grow again, just as her father said it would. | autobiographical | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0083779 | Cymbeline | Cymbeline, the Roman Empire's vassal king of Britain, once had two sons, Guiderius and Arvirargus, but they were stolen twenty years earlier as infants by an exiled traitor named Belarius. Cymbeline now discovers that his only child left, his daughter Imogen (or Innogen), has secretly married her lover Posthumus Leonatus, an otherwise honourable man of Cymbeline's court. The lovers have exchanged jewellery as tokens: Imogen now with a bracelet, and Posthumus with a ring. Cymbeline dismisses the marriage and banishes Posthumus, since Imogen, as Cymbeline's only child, must produce a fully royal-blooded heir to succeed to the British throne. In the meantime, Cymbeline's Queen is conspiring to have Cloten, her cloddish and arrogant son by an earlier marriage, married to Imogen, to secure her bloodline. The Queen is also plotting to murder both Imogen and Cymbeline, procuring what she believes to be deadly poison from the court doctor, Cornelius, who, suspicious, switches the poison with a harmless sleeping potion. The Queen passes the "poison" along to Pisanio, Posthumus and Imogen's loving servant, who is led to believe it is a medicinal drug. No longer able to be with her banished Posthumus, Imogen secludes herself in her chambers, away from Cloten's aggressive advances.
Posthumus must now live in Italy, where he meets Iachimo (or Giacomo), who challenges the prideful Posthumus to a bet that he, Iachimo, can seduce Imogen, who Posthumus has praised for her chastity, and then bring Posthumus proof of Imogen's adultery. If Iachimo wins, he will get Posthumus's token ring. If Posthumus wins, not only must Iachimo pay him but also fight Posthumus in a duel with swords. Iachimo heads to Britain where he aggressively attempts to seduce the faithful Imogen, who sends him packing. Iachimo then hides in a chest in Imogen's bedchamber and, when the princess falls asleep, emerges to steal from her Posthumus's bracelet. He also takes note of the room and Imogen's partly naked body to be able to present false evidence to Posthumus that he has seduced his bride. Returning to Italy, Iachimo convinces Posthumus that he has successfully seduced Imogen. In his wrath, Posthumus sends two letters to Britain: one to Imogen, telling her to meet him at Milford Haven, on the Welsh coast; the other to the servant Pisanio, ordering him to murder Imogen at the Haven. However, Pisanio refuses to kill Imogen and reveals to her Posthumus's plot. He has Imogen disguise herself as a boy and continue to Milford Haven to seek employment. He also gives her the Queen's "poison," believing it will alleviate her psychological distress. In the guise of a boy, Imogen adopts the name "Fidele," meaning "faithful."
Back at Cymbeline's court, Cymbeline refuses to pay his British tribute to the Roman ambassador Caius Lucius, and Lucius warns Cymbeline of the Roman Emperor's forthcoming wrath, which will amount to an invasion of Britain by Roman troops. Meanwhile, Cloten learns of the "meeting" between Imogen and Posthumus at Milford Haven. Dressing himself enviously in Posthumus's clothes, he decides to go to Wales to kill Posthumus, and then rape, abduct, and marry Imogen. Imogen has now been travelling as "Fidele" through the Welsh mountains, her health in decline as she comes to a cave: the home of Belarius, along with his "sons" Polydore and Cadwal, whom he raised into great hunters. These two young men are in fact the British princes Guiderius and Arviragus, who themselves do not realise their own origin. The men discover "Fidele," and instantly captivated by a strange affinity for "him" become fast friends. Outside the cave, Guiderius is met by Cloten, who throws insults, leading to a sword fight during which Guiderius beheads Cloten. Meanwhile, Imogen's fragile state worsens and she takes the "poison" as a hopeful medicine; when the men re-enter, they find her "dead." They mourn and, after placing Cloten's body beside hers, briefly depart to prepare for the double burial. Imogen awakes to find the headless body, and believes it to be Posthumus due to the fact the body is wearing Posthumus' clothes. Lucius' Roman soldiers have just arrived in Britain and, as the army moves through Wales, Lucius discovers the devastated "Fidele", who pretends to be a loyal servant grieving for his killed master; Lucius, moved by this faithfulness, enlists "Fidele" as a pageboy.
The treacherous Queen is now wasting away due to the disappearance of her son Cloten. Meanwhile, despairing of his life, a guilt-ridden Posthumus enlists in the Roman forces as they begin their invasion of Britain. Belarius, Guiderius, Arviragus, and Posthumus all help rescue Cymbeline from the Roman onslaught; the king does not yet recognise these four, yet takes notice of them as they go on to fight bravely and even capture the Roman commanders, Lucius and Iachimo, thus winning the day. Posthumus, allowing himself to be captured, as well as "Fidele", are imprisoned alongside the true Romans, all of whom await execution. In jail, Posthumus sleeps, while the ghosts of his dead family appear to complain to Jupiter of his grim fate. Jupiter himself then appears in thunder and glory to assure the others that destiny will grant happiness to Posthumus and Britain.
Cornelius arrives in the court to announce that the Queen has died suddenly, and that on her deathbed she unrepentantly confessed to villainous schemes against her husband and his throne. Both troubled and relieved at this news, Cymbeline prepares to execute his new prisoners, but pauses when he sees "Fidele," whom he finds both beautiful and somehow familiar. "Fidele" has noticed Posthumus' ring on Iachimo's finger and abruptly demands to know from where the jewel came. A remorseful Iachimo tells of his bet, and how he could not seduce Imogen, yet tricked Posthumus into thinking he had. Posthumus then comes forward to confirm Iachimo's story, revealing his identity and acknowledging his wrongfulness in desiring Imogen killed. Ecstatic, Imogen throws herself at Posthumus, who still takes her for a boy and knocks her down. Pisanio then rushes forward to explain that "Fidele" is Imogen in disguise; Imogen still suspects that Pisanio conspired with the Queen to give her the poison. Pisanio sincerely claims innocence, and Cornelius reveals how the poison was a non-fatal potion all along. Insisting that his betrayal years ago was a set-up, Belarius makes his own happy confession, revealing Guiderius and Arviragus as Cymbeline's own two long-lost sons. With her brothers restored to their place in the line of inheritance, Imogen is now free to marry Posthumus. An elated Cymbeline pardons Belarius and the Roman prisoners, including Lucius and Iachimo. Lucius calls forth his soothsayer to decipher a prophecy of recent events, which ensures happiness for all. Blaming his manipulative Queen for his refusal to pay earlier, Cymbeline now agrees to pay the tribute to the Roman Emperor as a gesture of peace between Britain and Rome, and he invites everyone to a great feast. | tragedy, comedy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1457765 | The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia | The film is set in 1993. Andy and Lisa Wyrick, along with their daughter Heidi, move into a rural home after receiving a deal from the bank. They are told that no one had previously lived on the land, which is why they are getting such a great deal. Shortly after moving in, Heidi begins to experience visions. After a visit from Lisa’s sister Joyce, it is revealed that Heidi, along with her mother, aunt, and grandmother, was born with a veil over her face, allowing the women of the family to have visions. Joyce embraces her visions, but Lisa tries to prevent them with the help of medication to no avail as she begins to have nightmares and visions of her mother.
One of Heidi’s visions is of a man she calls Mr. Gordy, who tells her things to prove his existence, such as money being buried in the garden, and a swing being deep in the woods. When these things turn out to be true, it is revealed that Mr. Gordy had in fact owned the house before the Wyricks. To test Heidi’s knowledge, Joyce and Lisa do some research and ask Heidi to pick Mr. Gordy out of a bunch of old photos, which she does. Lisa begins to have visions of a figure coming after her and her daughter and starts to worry about the sanity of herself and that of her daughter, which leads her to tell Heidi not to speak to Mr. Gordy anymore.
One day, the family receives a visit from the local pastor, who tells them that their property was once part of the Underground Railroad and that a stationmaster lived on their land. He tells them of all the good that the stationmaster brought about and warns the family that they may get some visitors wishing to pay homage to the stationmaster, and asks them to be kinder than the previous owner, Mr. Gordy, was.
Andy comes home with a dog for Heidi named Chief, trying to alleviate some of the tension that has built up in their family since moving into the new house, but soon after Chief follows something into the woods. When Andy and Heidi go to look for him, they can hear him crying from the woods and find him trapped in a snare. Andy tells Lisa that the snares would have been perfect for a taxidermist, because they would catch and kill animals without leaving a mark. While destroying the snares to prevent Chief from getting caught again, Andy finds Heidi talking to someone who is not there. When he asks her about it, she says that Mr. Gordy says that some people are coming. These people turn out to be Mama Kay and her grandson who buy a quilt from Joyce that she had found at the old station. Mama Kay tells Heidi that she is special and to be careful of what she sees, while her grandson tells Andy the true story of the stationmaster. He was primarily a taxidermist and would enlist the help of guides called Conductors to help guide slaves to a meeting place. He would hold them somewhere secret, then when it was safe, he would move them to the next location. Two of the slaves he had hidden were Mama Kay’s ancestors, Nell and Levi, but they were never heard from after they stopped at the station. When the townspeople found out about his involvement, they blindfolded him, filled his abdomen with stuffing and hung him from the tree where the swing once was that Heidi had seen.
Andy relays this information to Joyce and Lisa, who then relays it to Heidi, but tells her that the stationmaster was a good man and helped a lot of people. When Heidi insists that an evil exists in the woods, Lisa becomes frustrated and tells her that she cannot believe her because she cares about her and orders Heidi to get out of the bathtub. When Heidi takes too long, Lisa returns to the bathroom as the lights flicker. The stationmaster is seen standing next to Lisa as Heidi is face down in the bathtub. Lisa pulls her out and attempts to heimlick the water from her lungs, only for Heidi to cough up sawdust and insects. Concerned, the family takes Heidi to the hospital, where her story is questioned. Heidi seems to have no memory of what happened and tells the doctor that when she didn’t get out of the tub like she was supposed to, her mom pulled her out of the tub really hard, making it even harder to believe Lisa’s story. As Lisa is leaving, Heidi tells her that it is hard when people don’t believe you, indicating that she knew what she was doing.
Later, the family asks the pastor to come out and bless the land and Heidi. During the blessing, Joyce experiences frightening visions of slaves being taken to the station by the stationmaster, along with the conductors, and she sees the bodies of her family members decomposing during the blessing. That night Heidi follows a ghost out of her house, who turns out to be Nell. She leads her out into the woods, where she disappears. Meanwhile, Lisa is having nightmares and awakens to find out that Heidi is missing and Andy runs out into the woods to look for her. Somehow, Heidi falls to the bottom of the station and begs her father not to leave her down there with “them”, but she is alone. In a frantic attempt to rescue his daughter, Andy reveals a heavy slab covering the entrance, which leads him to wonder how Heidi got down there and he realizes that is where the stationmaster hid the slaves and Heidi reveals the “them” she was talking about were corpses that had been forgotten. When the stationmaster was murdered, there was no one to let the slaves out and they died in the station. Heidi tells her father that she thinks something else is in the station too. She tells her family that she wishes to leave the house. Joyce tells her that she released the spirits and that the bad things are gone, but Heidi insists that Mr. Gordy told her she let something bad out. When Andy takes his daughter’s side, it causes a rift between him and Lisa. Lisa tells Heidi that the stationmaster was a good man, to which Heidi replies, “No he wasn’t”.
Andy decides that the family will leave because he doesn’t want Lisa filling Heidi’s head with the idea that she is sick and needs to be on medication. As they are packing up to leave, the ghost of the stationmaster can be seen watching them. Joyce decides to stay and the ghosts of the slaves alert her to the stationmaster’s presence. She sees him walking towards Heidi and when she attempts to warn her niece, the stationmaster turns his attention on her. Joyce coughs up a needle and begins to become sutured from the inside. Meanwhile, Lisa notices that Heidi has disappeared from the truck and she decides to check Joyce’s trailer. She finds her sister strung from the ceiling and cuts the sutures just before the stationmaster is able to get them. When Lisa asks her sister where Heidi is, Joyce replies that “they know”, which leads Lisa to accept her visions. She follows the guidance of the conductor’s ghost, which leads her to the station. There, she finds a hidden door and discovers many animals that had been stuffed by the stationmaster. It is revealed that the stationmaster had kept many slaves and stuffed them for his own keeping, including Nell, Levi, and the conductor. She finds Heidi tied to the stationmaster’s table and when she attempts to escape with her daughter, she finds the way blocked, except by going straight up through the ground. Heidi begins to climb and then is pulled up through the ground. When Lisa attempts to follow her, she is pulled back down by the stationmaster. She is confronted by the ghost, but experiences a vision of her mother who tells her to “let them in”. She finally embraces her visions and finds out that the Stationmaster had told Nell, Levi, and the Conductor that he would be back for them, but traps them instead, leaving them to starve so that he could stuff them. Learning the truth, it allows their spirits to be freed and have their vengeance on the Stationmaster. The Stationmaster’s death is visited, but instead of it being the townspeople who murder him, it is the spirits of all those he had killed. This allows Lisa to escape and the Stationmaster’s spirit to be destroyed. It is then revealed that the person who had pulled Heidi through the ground was actually the spirit of Mr. Gordy, who had been the Stationmaster’s descendent and had been there to act as a protector to the Wyrick family.
Two weeks later, Andy attempts to hang a tire swing for Heidi. Lisa and Joyce speculate about why Mr. Gordy hadn’t wanted people on his land and come to the conclusion that he wanted his ancestor to be remember for the good that he did and not the bad. Meanwhile, Heidi is struggling to ride her bike when it suddenly straightens up. She turns around to see Mr. Gordy and he sends her off to ride happily where she sees the spirits of Nell, Levi, and the Conductor heading off into the woods, finally free. She turns around and sees Mr. Gordy waving goodbye to her before he turns and walks away into the afterlife, satisfied that the Wyricks were safe.
In a text epilogue, it is revealed that the Wyricks remained in that house for another five years, Lisa’s visions have not returned, and that Heidi never saw Mr. Gordy again. The final shot shows photos of the real-life Heidi and Mr. Gordy, and then the entire Wyrick family. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | Research into the Wyrick hauntings won't ruin the film for you however as the only comparison to recorded events are the names of the characters.As with any horror movie these days there are plenty of stock thrills: ghosts in white dresses, waking from a dream to find you are still in a dream, swings that move by themselves etc.
Was "Ghosts of Georgia" any more generic than "The Haunting in Connecticut?" The reason I sound so frustrated is because it deserves better.The Wyrick family moves into a country house in Georgia.
The souls of the slaves are restless and begin haunting the family for unknown reasons.Director Tom Elkins and writer David Coggeshall put together quite an impressive ghost story with "The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia." While "based on a true story," it's obvious some creative license is utilized to spice things up.
Let's just say Elkins and Coggeshall know our innermost fears and exploits them.The entire cast of "The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia" put forth their best efforts and embrace their individual characters.
She embraces the role straight-faced with an air of authentic innocence."The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia" is a good supernatural tale that should have been released in theaters like its predecessor.
For the beginning, the cast was a perfect match, they were flawless for a horror movie, not too bad-ass neither too dumb-bass.I wasn't expect much thing after read the plot, but guess what!
If you are looking for gore, blood and extreme horrifying things this one is not for youI don't know why low rating, but I think it is because the first movie wasn't so good as this one and everyone expected the worst.If you don't want a blockbuster movie with a remade and same history give it a try.PS: My review is most directly to people who are involved with horror movies and enjoy all kinds in the genre.
Claiming to be based on a true story, "The Haunting in Connecticut 2" follows a young family who have just moved into a new home in Georgia.
Direct-to-VOD horror movie sequels are usually pretty bad as it is, but with a first time director, I definitely didn't expect much.
Plus the constant switching from black and white to color at the end got annoying and nauseating very quickly.Overall, "The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia" was an above-average horror sequel, with many exciting twists and turns.
I think the title should just be Ghosts of Georgia because the film has no relation to the first movie and it's not even based in Connecticut, it seems obvious that was a cash grab decision.
Katee gives a lively performance but like Chad's character there wasn't much to her role even though she has one of the more memorable moments in the film, which involve needle threads coming out of her mouth.
The elements of a good ghost story is there because of the true story aspect of the film, but David Coggeshall didn't put it into good use and created something uninspired and vague.Overall, forget about the beginning of the movie's title and just go with Ghosts of Georgia because it's not a sequel to The Haunting in Connecticut, it's a completely different story.
"Ghosts Of Georgia" was the directorial debut of Tom Elkins who worked on several other movies about ghosts.The film stars Abigail Spencer, Chad Michael Murray, Katee Sackhoff and Emily Alyn Lind all of whom give a pretty standard performance except for Emily who played Heidi.
Her performance was far exceeding of the standard capabilities and almost showed the young actress to possess talent like such actresses' as Chloe Moretz or Dakota Fanning.I wasn't expecting much going into this film mostly due to the ridiculous title of the picture but I actually enjoyed the film.
I would tell people to see it and expect a better movie than "The Haunting In Connecticut" or "The Apparition" but don't expect the same amount of fright that you get with "The Amityville Horror" or even "Grave Encounters"..
Lisa (Abigail Spencer) is a medium that uses pills to avoid seeing dead people; her husband Andy (Chad Michael Murray) is a ranger and their little daughter Heidi (Emily Alyn Lind) has inherited the gift of her mother.
Feels like half the film is scenes of the family running around screaming "HEIDI!!!!!" trying to find the girl, who is only found to get lost again.Sound effects, cinematography and acting are all actually good and very suitable for a Ghost-Story.
This is just another case of Hollywood making a movie and fictionalizing a reportedly true story, watering it down or altering it so it bears no resemblance to the one that the fans (like me) sincerely love.
The daughter(Emily Alyn Lind) is adorable but mark my words, if you watch this from beginning to end, you WILL despise the name "Heidi", it is only yelled about 500 times in this movie.
The based on a true story thing (hype) is so far fetched to reach connecting this movie to the Wyrick haunting is also laughable.
I've seen the actual original interview/depiction on the "A Haunting" T.V. series, and although the main ghost was true, the rest of the story line was complete BULL!!!
I'm not really sure why they called this movie The Haunting in Connecticut 2 when all of it takes place in Georgia, other than to tie it to the equally not scary The Haunting In Connecticut from a few years back, but my best advise is to pass on this one until you can see it for free on cable because you will get more scares out of this story on cable on Destination America.
Let me begin by saying this is the worst horror title since "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer."In this "true story," two psychic sisters and a psychic girl (in the sense that they see ghosts) relocate (not from Connecticut) to a former Georgia plantation with one sister's redneck husband, who is some sort of police officer/security guard.
I've already mentioned the historical artifacts waiting to be found, but the redneck father seems far more a danger than the station agent when he tears out of his house with a gun tracking his daughter, or drives crazily through the woods in the dark without looking behind him.The ending has clearly been exaggerated, and we are left to wonder how much has been a hallucination, especially since the mother was already revealed to be on medication for mental illness (or accurate ghost visions, if you prefer).
I really liked this movie, I found this movie a lot more creepier then first movie,There was some really good scare scenes in this movie that last long then one Second, there not there just to make you jump.There some really strange effect in this movie, which I am not sure what to think of at the moment.Actually liked the fact this movie dose focus on, the same old route, Kid seeing a strange things,most of people in the movie see thinks, I liked the fact they do believe way before the end, which I think was nice change.I liked how the plot came to end was really good, there were really good tense moment in this movie.The ending was fitting end, Nice and sweet ending to this movie.The acting from everyone in cast was really good and the some of effect were really good in this movie.A lot better then I thought it would be, I going to give this sequel 7/8 out of 10.
At the end I almost felt like I watched a rough draft of a great film.Even though the movie seemed lacking I thought it was very good and it game me just the right amount of scare..
The film for some reason is a sequel to 2009's The Haunting of Connecticut, but has no connection in story and characters, other then being based in the same state.
The fact that it was based on a true story made this movie that much better.For a horror movie, this is by far, one of the best I've seen in a long, long, long time.
Good 'ghost' movie - Don't judge a film by its title.
Also it didn't feel like a 'based on a true story for the sake of it' kind of movie and I was surprised, but din't really care to find out at the end..
All I can say about this movie is what a complete and utter load of rubbish!This contains all of the haunted clichés and I cannot believe I wasted 90 mins of my life watching it.Apparently I'm supposed to write 10 lines as a minimum to submit this review?What can you say in 10 lines about this movie without repeating the word "Rubbish" a 1000 times!Far too many non-scary ghost scenes, poor acting and a very cliché plot.Wait for it to appear on the TV before you watch it..
'THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: GHOSTS OF GEORGIA': Two and a Half Stars (Out of Five) Sequel to the 2009 supernatural horror film 'THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT' about a family haunted by supernatural beings when it moves into a house in upstate Connecticut (due to the son's health issues) and later finds out it was a former funeral parlor, where a young man also communicated with the dead.
Both films are supposed to be based on true events (or at least on the stories of actual families).
Neither film is that scary or memorable but I'd say the original was a little more effective than this one.Spencer plays Lisa Wyrick and Murray plays her husband Andy, a couple that moves into a historical home in Georgia with their daughter Heidi (Emily Alyn Lind).
Several other spirits become noticeable to all three women as well as they learn that a taxidermist freed slaves there and hid them underground (as well as much more).The movie has surprisingly good production values for a limited release film like this and given the $9 million budget it was able to pull off some pretty good effects and imagery as well.
This wasn't a bad ghost story but if you really want to get creeped out watch the documentary on the case that started the TV series "A Haunting".
Better Than What I Was Prepared For. Haunting In Connecticut 2 is based on reportedly true events of a young family - Lisa Wyrick, her husband Andy, and young daughter Heidi - who make a fresh start in a new home in the woods of Georgia.
As time passes Heidi starts seeing more & more of a horrible event that took place there some 150 years prior and the evil behind it all.The main thing that struck me about this movie was the title, A Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia.
It's not really that big a deal I suppose, but if you're hoping for a sequel (as I did) then you may be disappointed.I've never seen the original interviews or 'A Haunting...' TV series either so I don't know how true the movie depicts the family's events, but as an actual movie it's not too bad and I actually enjoyed it slightly more than the first.
This Ghosts of Georgia sequel is handled by a completely different creative team, utilizing similar "Based on a true story" tricks, and a premise based on a haunted house, with everything after being fairly decent and makes for an average horror flick at best.Director Tom Elkins shows his inexperience in handling atmosphere and mood, with the creation of suspense almost found wanting.
The presentation styles, while well-meaning to show the audience the different worlds seen by the characters - real, and the ghostly, the constant flitting about does get on the nerves, as does the MTV styled quick-cut editing that ultimately shadowed what should be seen.If the Wyrick family was Chinese, they would feel they were one of the most unluckiest folks in the world, having Lisa (Abigail Spencer) and her sister Joyce (Katee Sackhoff) gifted with the ability to see spirits whether they like it or not, and this gift being passed down to Lisa's daughter Heidi (Emily Alyn Lind), who begins communicating with a certain Mr Gordy (Grant James), the previous owner of the new house in the middle of nowhere that they moved into.
But yeah, she's on drugs to deny what she knows, with the entire gift versus curse issue being played out for far too long.Like its predecessor in the series, writer David Coggeshall managed to weave a decent back- story into the reasons behind the haunting, that contained neat plot developments involving the story of Mr Gordy the previous owner of the property, and that of his ancestor known as the Station Master (Wayne Pere), at a time where slavery was the norm.
After moving into a historic Georgia home, a family's increasing concerns for their daughter's continued claims of an imaginary friend prove true when the location's brutal history comes back to life to haunt them.This turned out to be quite the enjoyable and exciting effort that has a lot going for it.
Despite all other criticism i have found this movie well made(small lacks but nothing important) and good.I don t know why people gave such a low rating because this movie has everything it needs for this genre.It reminds me of "The ring".I liked it very much.All the effects of this movie are well made .There are scary events.I really think it has all it needs.The actors did a very good job.About the thing that this film wasn't filmed in Georgia,that is OK.Everybody knows that is not so easy to find a filming spot where you need,so you just shoot the scenes where you can.Anyways:Good scenario,good actors(all of them...ghosts included) and good movie.Perhaps is not excellent but is sure very good for it s genre.
Very realistic acting for this talented little girl, I must say.Overall, I felt this was a pretty good horror film.
I did like the little girl in this movie, who put the adults to shame, but the script wasn't good enough to make me think that it was a classic.
The film centers on the true story of a family who moves to a small home in the middle of Georgia and begins to discover it has a rich history of being a beacon for runaway slaves on the underground railroad.
That scene well worth sitting through the entire movie just to get to watch.Ultimately, then "The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia" wasn't too bad, but on the other hand, don't get your hopes up to high, because there isn't really anything that much impressive here either.I had expected more ghosts and less physical manifestations.
The Haunting in Conneticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia (2012) It wasn't until about halfway through the film that I realized this sequel, in a bold/confusing/weird move, has absolutely nothing to do with the original, aside from the very tenuous plot connection of a family moving into a house where they experience the paranormal consequences of the actions of the previous tenants.
On the one hand, not much more could likely have been milked out of the first family's story- on the other hand, we've seen sequels try to continue and up the ante on the paranormal activities of the same ghosts on different people.
This was definitely a different choice- and apparently one that will be continued in the 3rd installment in the series, apparently set in New York.In this sequel, ('inspired', 'based on', whatever, a true story) a family with a history of paranormal sensitivity moves to Georgia, followed shortly by the mother's sister, who is also prone to seeing spirits.
Well as i Watch this movie,i actually enjoy acting was pretty good, especially Emily Alyn Lind & Chad Michael Murray,there was one thing if it wasn't about true story, audience love to see in this movie Chad Michael Murray as Lead role instead of Abigail Spencer, because she certainly couldn't handle her role as good as she should have,in fact Katee Sackhoff had rare appearance but she done really good job in her role.
Firstly, why this is called The Haunting in Connecticut 2 is a mystery as it has nothing whatsoever to do with the first movie.If you want a scary ghost story, steer well clear of this mess.
By the end of this film it's nothing more than a ridiculous monster flick, with the character played by Abigail Spencer running and squealing around a standard creepy cellar filled with (shock horror) all manner of taxidermy and about 20 ghosts in tow.The concept of the underground slave railroad run by the evil taxidermist station master is a baffling plot line, which completely ruined the film.
The main thing I do remember was all the mummified bodies falling out of the walls towards the end of the film, which made me think that it wasn't really based on a true story at all – apart from the fact that a family moved into a house in Connecticut.So, as you can imagine, with a title like "Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghost of Georgia", you know it's not going to be good, even more so, when it's not even set in Connecticut, yes, you've guessed it, it's set in Georgia and has nothing to do with the first film.
its not even good for people who don't watch horror, there was no suspense what so ever not even a plot so to speak just a family who see dead things roaming about the woods i got to just over an hour of watching before i gave up i would get more enjoyment from the new nightmare on elm st film and that was bad enough! |
tt0427954 | Tom yum goong | Kham is the last of a family line of guards who once watched over the King of Thailand's war elephants. Traditionally, only the most perfect elephants could successfully defend the throne, and very great care was taken in raising them. Kham grows up forming close relations to his elephant, Por Yai and his calf, Kohrn. During Songkran festival, the elephants are stolen with help from Mr. Suthep, a local MP and his son who are collaborating with elephant poachers. Kham discovers that they are in the hands of Johnny, a Vietnamese gangster who runs a Thai restaurant named Tom Yum Goong Otob in Sydney, Australia.
Kham arrives in Sydney, and is stalked by the police as soon as he leaves the airport. Kham coerces a gangster to lead him to Johnny's hideout, interrupting a drug deal. Outraged, Johnny summons countless extreme sports enthusiasts, who arrive to fight Kham.
Exhausted, Kham falls asleep in an alley. A prostitute brings him to her apartment. In his sleep, he dreams of an epic battle involving war elephants and the Jaturangkabart, the elephant protectors. When Pla leaves, Kham wakes up to the sound of police sirens and must escape.
Two officers, Mark and Rick are taken off the case and reassigned to provide security for the Police Commissioner's meeting with Mr. Sim. In that meeting, Pla acted as a hostess girl to the two men. During the meeting, Mr. Sim and the Commissioner are murdered. The murder is instigated by Vincent, who kills Rick and puts the blame on Mark. Mark escapes, but is later captured.
With Pla's help, Kham enters Tom Yum Goong Otob. He fights his way into the VIP area and reaches the dining hall at the top. Kham demands, "Where are my elephants?" and is met with the laughter of Johnny and his men. Johnny taunts Kham with Kohrn's bell. This enrages Kham and he fights and defeats his opponents. He enters the storage area, containing various exotic animals ready to be butchered and eaten. Kham finds and frees Mark and Kohrn, escaping minutes before the police arrive. Meanwhile, Madame Rose is made the new leader of the Chinese gang after she murders two other possible successors.
Inspector Vincent initiates a search for Kham and Mark, who are hiding in a Buddhist monastery. Soon after their departure, the monastery is set on fire. But then Kham returns, and he defeats a fierce capoerista and a sword-wielding wushu exponent. However, his third opponent, a giant wrestler, proves way too much for Kham. When the police arrive, he flees with Mark. By morning, Kham goes on his way. Mark is discovered by several policemen and sent to deal with Inspector Vincent, whom Pla has revealed to be the murderer.
Kham arrives at a conference hall where Madame Rose is having a press conference. Kohrn runs in, scaring off everyone while Kham engages the gangsters. He later finds Kohrn in an elevator lobby, where Vincent threatens to shoot him.
Kham finds himself with Kohrn in a huge room, and he is shown the skeleton of Por Yai, encrusted with jewels as a gift to Madame Rose. Her men then attack Kham, and he attacks them more brutally than previously seen, by breaking many of the men's arms and legs. The wrestler from the monastery is called in, along with three others. Kohrn is thrown through a glass wall, and Kham is knocked into the elephant ornament, causing two leg bones to fall off. Kham ties them around his arms and uses them as clubs to knock the wrestlers out. He stops Madame Rose before she can escape in a helicopter, and crashed.
Back in the lobby, Mark is shown Pla, and forgiven by his boss, Inspector Lamond. He is given a new partner who speaks Thai. Mark is then interviewed by a reporter about Kham. Finally, a narration from Mark is heard, with scenes of Kham's childhood shown. Mark explains that Thai people treat elephants like they are their brothers, and they hate people who hurt them. Thais love peace, but dislike people who take liberties. Kham is finally reunited with Kohrn. | cult, revenge, murder, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | Several other IMDb members commented on the repetitiveness of the movie, comparisons to Jackie Chan/Jet Li and its use of Kung Fu.First of all martial arts flicks will always be redundant to some extent since there are only so many ways to pick a fight, but stories do vary as does the quality of action.
Anyway, if you go to a martial arts flick looking to pick it apart and analyze the acting skills then your a fool and should never leave your American Hollywood watering hole.As to comparing Tony Jaa to Jackie Chan or Jet Li, are you insane?!
I think this may be because of different stuntmen - in Ong Bak, a lot of the people that got beaten up were probably amateur Thai stuntmen or retired muay thai dudes (scene in cave, for example) who don't mind taking a very heavy kick or punch to make a few Baht and be in a movie.
Now if only he can learn passable English, he'll really have a chance of becoming the next big thing in Martial Arts action movies.The (intentional) comic relief was much better than in Ong Bak - Mum Jok Mok plays a Thai policeman in Sydney.
Deserving of an Animal Oscar.To sum up, Tom Yum Goong has a decent plot, a good cast with better acting than was to be expected, good cinematography, and of course, plenty of cracking, beautifully choreographed action that will not fail to impress any Martial Arts action movie enthusiast.Highlights: Kham learning how to fight the Capoeira guy in a very well choreographed scene, and the bone-crunching extravaganza that was like Kill Bill Vol. 1's restaurant scene without the swords.An excellent achievement in its genre.
The action in tom yum goong is phenomenal to say the least - tony jaa proves that ong bak was no fluke!The part where jaa does battle with a gang of bikers and roller bladers is an exciting sequence , reminiscent of jackie chan in his police story days.
The fight where he battles his way to the top floor of a restaurant in one continuous tracking shot, is a truly amazing piece of work that demands to be re-winded more than once .The fight that pits jaa against dozens of suited henchmen is a bone crunching, applause worthy spectacle that proves what ong bak fans already know- TONY JAA IS THE MAN !!!!!
I know that we don't watch these sort of films for plot, but tom yum goong takes the cake with its "one man looking for his elephant" story!And don't get me started on the acting, particularly the lines spoken in English.Tony jaa needs to work with a decent script writer in future....Weak on pretty much everything else except the fights , tom yum goong has Superior action and confirms that tony jaa is an amazing performer..
But if you want to see Tony Jaa in some pretty cool fight scenes, then you might as well watch this movie.
Ong Bak was a fantastic achievement by the young Thai fighter America has come to embrace as Tony Jaa. Fantastic stunts, amazing fight choreography, and an overwhelming sense of brutal martial arts action that has been missing in fight films since Jackie Chan's Rumble in the Bronx.
Tom Yum Goong starts off on the same foot, but then takes the viewer in an entirely different direction
an example of one of the most explosive and entertaining martial arts movies of ALL TIME.To go into intricate detail about the plot outlines of TYG will do you no good, it will not make you want to see this movie.
Goliath
it is quite a sight to behold.Overall, Tom Yum Goong is an awesome spectacle of Tony Jaa's fighting ability, and if you truly enjoyed Ong Bak, then be ready to be blown away by something far better..
It's an idyllic Thai village scene where Kham (Tony Jaa) grows up and bonds together with herds of elephants, and it might even looked as if it came right out of Kipling's The Jungle Book.It's a picture of calm before the storm, and the first 10 minutes set the scene, as the elephants will play an important aspect in this movie as it gets elevated into mythical status (check out the CGI scene, looks like Jackie Chan's The Myth, with its historical fights).
Bridging the fights from Thailand to Australia is a short boat chase scene that looked right out from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, but that's the only weak action sequence in Tom-Yum-Goong.There are plenty of fights in Sydney to keep all action fans happy - like the massive battle with the Aussie streetgangs (on roller blades and bikes) in an abandoned warehouse, which also showcased Jaa's agility and acrobatic ability.
Petchtai Wongkamlao, who plays Inspector Mark, and has been featured in all of Jaa's movies, returns to add his comedic touch to the film as a Thai-immigrant policeman in Sydney, and fans of Ong Bak will also be pleased that this movie is helmed by the same director Prachya Pinkaew.While Hollywood struggles to find worthy successors to its 80s and 90s action heroes like Stallone, Van Damme, and Schwarzeneggar, Asia has already found one to takeover the mantle from Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan and Jet Li (as the latter two seemed to have drifted and indicated a preference for dramas).
The script is full of age old Hollywood clichés such as cops being taken off the case, only to go vigilante, gold-hearted prostitutes and a whole host of colourful looking gangsters (former WWE reject Nathan Jones makes a hilarious cameo) that wouldn't look out of place in a straight-to-video Steven Seagal flick.And yet despite the glaring faults with a film as silly as this, none of the criticisms truly matter for one simple reason: Tony Jaa is absolutely amazing.
some of them just didn't like the story.In my honest personal opinion, I thought the movie was much BETTER than Ong Bak in terms of action sequences and fight scenes.
Columbia Tri-star has already bought distribution rights to this movie and I am sure that all you Tony Jaa fans outside of Thailand will definitely get to see this great action flick SOON.
Tony Ja plays a role of Kham, a character who pursed a gang that has kidnapped his elephants.He fought with so many great fighters, which includes the BMX and the roller skate gang, Johnny, the Brazilian guy with cool kicks, the sword-man and those huge guys and of course the leader.One of the few scenes i consider great are: the continuous fighting shot from the basement up to the higher level of the building (which was taken at one shot without editing and somewhat reminds me of Bruce Lee End of Game) and the bone crackling scenes with all the gangs!
The action scenes with Tony Jaa are incredible and I believe he will likely continue to bring the Muay Thai style of fighting to the big screen worldwide.
Now, I really liked the first one: it was an innocent, original, fresh, visual and funny action flick; as well as a good moral guideline for Thai teenagers.This sequel is a very very painful mish-mash of Hollywood cringe-worthy clichés, with a bad plot, and ludicrous fight scenes.
- You like elephants and sappy animal movies (I made it to the end to know what happened to them, I confess) - You like mindless Hollywood action flicks.(think those turkeys poor Jet Li got involved in, just not quite as good)Don't even go near it if you haven't seen the first one, please.This was a sequel made for the money, as is too often done.
Kham travels to Australia to recover his elephants a path that brings him into the lives of police officer Mark, call girl Pla and crime boss Madame Rose.I'm not entirely sure why this flopped because, like Ong Bak, although everyone knows the plot and acting will generally be weak, few will be in the cinema for anything other than impressive action.
Perhaps it is not PC to say it, but the use of English with Thai helps as well I find the latter a very ugly language and the way it is scaled back does make it more accessible to a western audience.The lack of a really engaging plot does rather mean that the action exists as a separate entity and is not part of a gripping total film the temple fights being a good example as they are more like baddies in a video game than a film.
All in all I had a great time, but I am still not convinced it is better then Ong-bak, I guess I am already used to Tony Jaa and the things he can do.Leaves me 1 thing, was the guy Kham sees at the airport the real deal or a lookalike?.
I found that the film still delivered the same amount of high flying, bone breaking combat which made Ong Bak what it was, albeit delivered in a different way.Kham (Jaa) is a village boy leading a peaceful life in Thailand, alongside his beloved elephants, Poor Yai and Korn.
From then on, the 2 confront deadly martial artists, police corruption, shady business and lots of thugs in black.Earlier I mentioned the fight scenes being slightly different to Ong Bak, mainly because they were served in a slightly more 'Jackie Chan-esquire' way than the brutal bar room knockouts we saw in OB.
Why did they feel the need to take the tried and tested formula of Ong Bak and add English dialogue in a foreign country i don't know, i mean the story is crud and i'm sure they could have written one based in Thailand!Poor acting/dialogue aside there are some good moments 12 foot high kicks, joint breaking and a Muay Thai vs Capoeira scene that is awesome, then there is the scene with the skaters and the bikers that just reeks so bad that u find yourself laughing at it, WOOO Gen X man, lol.All in all a thorough disappointment lets hope Ja gets to work with different people so we can see a better end product..
As martial arts actors go Anno 2007 you will find it extremely hard to do better than watch Tony Jaa (also see Ong Bak) at work.
The story, in short, is about a boy trying to rescue his pets, 2 Elephants, which was kidnapped and transferred to Austrailia at a restaurant called Tom Yum Goong.Tony Jaa shows you an array of martial art techniques used in Muay (Moo-way) Thai and how his style competes against other fighting styles.
The best thing about the movie is that their are no strings attached, all the action and fighting scenes were actually done by Tony Jaa, so basically what you see is what you get.
The story line is fantastic which will also give you goose bumps all over due to the emotional bond between the elephants and Tom. If you enjoyed Ong Bak then believe you me you have not seen anything yet, Tony Jaa is definitely going to be the next best thing, step aside Jet Li and Jackie Chan, Tony Jaa is the next Bruce Lee of Martial Arts..
He goes after him and searches for revenge.Last year (over here anyway) Muay Thai expert Tony Jaa made his blistering debut with Ong-bak, a blistering martial arts film with a lame plot and dismal acting but spectacular martial arts stunts and excitement.
Warrior King is less fun because while it's no doubt the same deal with Jaa genuinely performing his own fight scenes and stunts, it just doesn't look as though he is like it did in Ong-bak.
The film has been charged with having repetitive fight sequences and despite the counter argument that there is only so many ways people can fight (which I understand) I have to agree with the argument that most of the action suffer from repetition.Look at the early fight scene in Sydney where Jaa breaks up a drug sale and is set upon in the tram warehouse.
Nothing is there without a reason (vase, chair, table, wall decoration etc) and often can one predict course of a fight in the first second or two after hero walks in the room.In the age of cheap CGI which can make even Mila Jovovich do triple somersaults while killing a bunch of armed guards in "Ultraviolet", "Ong Bak" and "Tom Yun Goong" come as very pleasant refreshment and i really hope Tony Jaa gets to star in films with more decent technical/acting/story/etc background, but let's keep some amount of perspective here.You can't really compare someone like Tony Jaa with his few years of martial arts training solely for the purpose of starring in films with Bruce Lee, who did films as a mean to popularize Kung Fu and Jeet Kune Do after getting training from early age from Wing Chun legends (Yip Man) and for whom combat experience was base of everything.
Tony Jaa returns in this hi-action fast pacing movie which will truly blow away your mind.No stunt doubles, no computer images, no strings attached.This was the tag-line of the first movie and Jaa sticks to it.He again proves himself as a great successor to Bruce Lee in movements and Jackie Chan in stuntman ship.Prachya Pinkaew returns with a similar story to that of Ong Bak, but with better direction and much much better fights.His fights with three fighters in a row in the Buddha Temple is just too GOOD.The way he fights the dancing guy is a classic and a fight which can be seen again and again.The story revolves around our hero Jaa as Kham,who is in love with his elephants.He grows up with them and loves them more than his own life.But by chance,poachers kidnap his elephant and take it away,far away.Then the game begins.To get back his elephants,Jaa fights through a lot.I really mean a LOT!!!
I don't know how the director could let this happen with such a good action-star like Jaa. The rest of the fighting scenes look a bit better but are still far from the quality of the ones seen in Ong Bak. Way too much slapstick action and quickly done moves.
(Remember Woo even managed to make Van Damme look good!)I'm a huge action-movie fan and I gave Ong Bak a 10 but since the movie contained so many downs including nearly all the action scenes I rate it 4.5 and an extra point for Tony Jaas performance even if he can't save this mess.
Just like all of Tony Jaa's movies they all use the style of Muay Thai fighting over the more used arts of Kung Fu and Karate, which is a nice change of pace and adds a bit different of a style to the fight scenes.
If you go to this movie expecting to see what the movie promises to deliver(a bunch of bad ass fights and acrobatic action) then thats exactly what this movie provides for you.Tony Jaa is basically the modern day Bruce Lee or the same as what Jet Li and Jackie Chan did in their primes..
The one and only thing that makes this film bearable, are the great stunts and Tony Jaa's inexplicable martial arts skills.
The best of these sequences is when Kham takes on all comers as he ascends a winding four-story staircase, and the camera follows him in an impressive unbroken tracking shot that captures ALL of the action.Ever since being introduced to the West in "Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior" (2003) last year, Jaa has quickly become the talk of the martial arts community, since Jet Li is set to retire from the genre with "Fearless" later this year.
To be honest I was not that amazed with Ong Bak, although it seems everyone else loved it, I was thinking there are still better out there like Jet Li. After seeing a few scenes on adverts I had to watch this film.
This Tony Jaa martial arts film follows Kham; a Thai villager whose father's elephants have been stolen with the help of corrupt local officials.
Also, the amount of bones Jaa breaks in the end is thrilling to watch and though that scene goes on for long, it is never tiring.Just like Ong-bak, Tom-Yum-Goong rides heavily on Jaa's raw agility & precision combat skills and the renowned martial artist leaves no stone unturned this time, even managing to earn some points on acting scale.
Do take into account that is it a very milked recipe; one man against countless scores of bad guys.Yeah, there are some similarities between "Ong Bak" and "The Protector", which were a bit weak plot-wise and in originality.The story is about Kham, a peaceful guy tending to elephants, who has to go to Sydney in order to get his two beloved elephants as they have been stolen, but the road is full of obstacles and the opposition is bountiful.As for the action, well if you are familiar with Tony Jaa then you know what you will get, and he doesn't fail to deliver.
Hands down, BEST martial arts stuntman today is Tony Jaa. I have never commented on a film until today because I HAVE to tell people to watch this guy.
In other words, you basically go to watch a Tony Jaa's film ONLY for the action and fight scenes.
The plot of Tony Jaa's first big movie, Ong-Bak, was insanely simple: sacred statue stolen and taken to the big city, rural martial arts master goes to retrieve it, kicks butt along the way.
It was a well put together movie, fight scenes were The plot was pretty much identical to Ong Bak, with an elephant instead of a statue head, stolen by a gang and poor tony having to fight lots of people to get it back. |
tt0090073 | Stick | Ernest "Stick" Stickley, a former car thief, has just been released from prison. He meets up with an old friend, Rainy, whose "quick stop" near the Florida Everglades before they go home is an illegal drug deal that goes sour. With his friend dead, Stick needs to hide out for a while to elude the killers who must eliminate him as a witness.
While lying low, Stick finds himself in the right place at the right time when he helps a wealthy eccentric named Barry get into his locked car. Hired as a driver, he has a comfortable home with a stable job and tries to make up for lost time with Katie, his teen-age daughter. He also finds a new flame in Kyle, a financial consultant who acts as a business adviser for Barry, who must decide what of Stick can be salvaged.
Before he can move on, however, Stick confronts drug dealer Chucky to demand the money owed to his murdered friend. Chucky refuses and sends albino hit-man Moke after the ex-con. Stick can't get on with his new life without cleaning up old business first. He becomes the target of Moke as well as the cartel that employs Chucky, led by the voodoo-obsessed Nestor.
A three-way confrontation on a high-rise balcony ends in Chucky's and Moke's deaths. Stick must then rely on his quick wit and fists to deal with his final enemy, Nestor, who has kidnapped Stick's daughter. | revenge, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0033477 | Come Live with Me | Johnny Jones (Lamarr), a native of Vienna, Austria who escaped after its annexation by Nazi Germany, is having an affair with the married Barton Kendrick (Ian Hunter), a publisher. One night an officer from the Department of Immigration finds her and tells her that she will be deported because her temporary passport expired three months ago. The investigator tells her that if she can be married within a week, she can stay.
Bill Smith (Stewart), a down-on-his-luck writer, runs into Jones in a diner during a rainstorm. She explains to him that she needs to marry an American citizen within a week and since he is broke, she could pay him and they would both get what they need. She pays him $17.80 a week in exchange for marrying her. Two months later, Smith is writing a book about the odd circumstances of his marriage and becomes curious about Jones, considering he only sees her once a week when she gives him a check.
Meanwhile, Jones is continuing her affair with Kendrick, but refuses to tell him how she has remained in the country. He tells Jones that he is leaving his wife and wants to marry Jones within two months. She tells Bill she wants a divorce right away, which he reluctantly agrees to. Smith finishes his book and sends it to Kendrick's publishing company, where Kendrick's wife Diane (Verree Teasdale) explains the book to Kendrick and he realizes that Smith is Jones' husband. Kendrick's chooses to publish the book and gives Smith $500 up front. After seeing Kendrick's reaction to the book, his wife realizes that he has been having an affair and that the book is real. Mrs. Kendrick decides to divorce him, but wants to make sure that Jones is actually in love with her husband first.
Meanwhile, Smith buys a new car and coerces Jones to go on a trip with him before he will sign the divorce papers. She ends up falling in love with Bill while on vacation, after meeting his family. Kendrick comes to Smith's grandmother's house in the middle of the night and Jones is forced to make the decision about who she wants, and she picks Bill. | romantic | train | wikipedia | This is a wonderful Jimmy Stewart and Hedy Lamarr movie.
I loved every frame of this 1941 light romantic comedy when Hedy Lamarr is paired with Jimmy Stewart.It has been said so many times before but Hedy had such beauty both in body and spirit that it is almost worth seeing a film with her in it just to gape in awe at her.I am gradually building up my collection of Hedy's films which include Exctacy (1933), Algiers (1938), Her Highness and the Bellboy (1945) and Dishonored Lady (1947).We must not forget that she also had intelligence and invented in 1942, at the height of her Hollywood career, a frequency-switching system for torpedo guidance that was two decades ahead of its time which with a colleague, she patented.In this film Hedy has overstayed her visitor's visa and the immigration officials are on to her.This is unfortunate for her in war time as she would have to return to her native Vienna.Of course as the good natured immigration official suggests, if she could find a husband within the week he decides to turn a blind eye, she could stay in America.Cue Jimmy Stuart failed writer who has the rejection slips and pawn tickets piling up in his flat.Can he meet this week's rent?Hedy has an idea.She requests he writes down his weekly expenditure and she will pay him regular amounts based on this budget in consideration of a civil marriage of convenience, thus avoiding deportation.Jimmy Stewart will regard as an accumulating loan until such time as his novel is sold to the publisher's and he will have enough money to pay off the debt.The coincidence is that his publisher (Ian Hunter) is simultaneously having an affair with Hedy.She only visits him at his flat to pay him his regular instalment, so despite being husband and wife, at least in the eyes of the law, they never really have got to know one another.As time goes by Jimmy is starting to care for Hedy and he invites her to visit his grandmother in the country where passions deepen.Hedy is still unsure at this stage and uses a ruse to phone her married sugar daddy Ian Hunter giving him directions where she is.It is night and Hedy and Jimmy both must go to their respective bedrooms but Jimmy keeps making excuses to stay in her bedroom before reluctantly leaving.Their bedrooms have a partial wall over which light can be seen so they can converse with one another when both in their beds.The Grandmother has a hobby of embroidering sayings all around her home some of which humorously fit the action on the screen.When Ian Hunter arrives at the address to fetch his mistress, guess who Hedy selects?
Hedy Lamarr is a foreign born showgirl and kept mistress of publisher Ian Hunter.
Immigration has gotten on her case and before Hunter can get his influence peddling machine in gear, Hedy's having some anxious moments.But as Hollywood fate must have it she meets up with aspiring writer James Stewart and they agree to a marriage of convenience to keep her in the country.
And to seal the bargain Lamarr actually agrees to pay Stewart a "salary" so that romance won't creep into things.Well wouldn't you know it, Stewart writes about the arrangement in a prospective new novel that he takes to publisher Hunter.
The rest of this film is rather obvious.What I find curious about this film is that the plot I described could easily be the basis for some sophisticated screwball comedy or a tender romance, given the writers, director, and players.
Stewart and Lamarr are just fine in their roles as is Hunter.
Please note the performances of Verree Teasdale as Hunter's wife, Adeline DeWalt Reynolds as Stewart's grandmother and the whimsical Donald Meek, just being Donald Meek in a Donald Meek part.The title Come Live With Me is the first line of a Christopher Marlowe sonnet, a romantic piece that fits the tone of the whole film.
I was a little bored with the first half hour of this film, but a well-written turn of events sends this movie in the right direction.
However, formula goes out the door with Jimmy Stewart's charm and Hedy Lamarr's stunning beauty.
The grandmother's calm voice, the sound of crickets chirping, and the other country nuances slow down the pace to a level that seems so foreign to an actress like Hedy Lamarr.
Virginia Van Upp and Patterson McNutt have written one of the best theories on this subject.Bill Smith (James Stewart) is an unsuccessful writer who is literally down to his last dime.
Johnny Jones, played by the gorgeous Hedy Lamarr, has just found out some devastating news.
Bill is very much opposed to the idea but in the end she talks him into it with the understanding that when he sells his novel, he will pay back everything.Johnny visits Bill once a week to give him the check and Bill begins to write about their situation.
"In my opinion it's perfectly alright for two strangers to get married but you've got to know each other before you get a divorce," he says.The title of the movie comes from the first line in Christopher Marlowe's The Passionate Shepherd to His Love.
Come Live With Me is more than just another typical romantic comedy.
COME LIVE WITH ME manages to be a charming trifle of a romantic comedy that gives HEDY LAMARR and JAMES STEWART a chance to prove that they may have seemed like an unlikely pair but have sparkling chemistry with each other.Hedy is incredibly beautiful (as always) as a woman who must find a husband quickly or be deported.
She makes a strictly business proposition with the man, a writer down on his luck, which he rather readily accepts--and a loveless marriage is negotiated so that she can wed Stewart, stay in the country longer, and then wed IAN HUNTER, who intends to divorce his wife.It's all rather silly and highly improbable.
The deepening relationship between Stewart and Lamarr is never really fleshed out so that the viewer can expect to see hints of romance developing.
Instead, after his story is accepted by a publisher (Hunter), Stewart decides to whisk Lamarr off to the country to meet his grandmother in a picture perfect rural setting.
Naturally, love develops quickly and before you know it, Ian Hunter is out of the running as Hedy's prospective mate.The most original element in the story has to do with fireflies and Hedy's decision to use a flashlight "to attract a mate".It's an unassuming little comedy/romance, nicely played by the two leads and given good support by ADELINE DeWALT REYNOLDS as the grandma with her platitudes on plaques, VERREE TEASDALE as the publisher's open minded wife, DONALD MEEK as a park bum and FRANK FAYLEN as a tough talking counterman at a diner.Clarence Brown must be commended for getting a relaxed and assured performance from Lamarr, who never looked lovelier.
This film started off rather poorly, as you learn that Hedy Lamarr is the mistress of Ian Hunter--a married man who has a "modern marriage".
In an odd bit of casting, the immigration agent (Barton MacLane) liked Hedy and suggested that she could get married to an American and thereby stay in the country.
So, a bit later, when she meets down-and-out Jimmy Stewart, she suggests they get married in name only.
Unfortunately, over time, Jimmy finds himself falling for Hedy--though they hardly know each other.I could talk more about the plot, but don't want to ruin it.
This is exactly the sort of romance that MGM did best and it's well worth a look--just don't get turned off by Ian Hunter's character--it does get better..
Hedy Lamarr is as dazzling as ever with a wardrobe to match in "Come Live with Me," a 1941 light romantic comedy directed by Clarence Brown and also starring James Stewart.
Lamarr is Johannes "Johnny" Jones, a showgirl who has immigrated from "what was Austria"; however, her visa has run out.
Her boyfriend, publisher Barton Kendrick (Ian Hunter) has an open arrangement with his wife (Veree Teasdale); he also has connections, but immigration shows up too soon.
The immigration officer takes pity on Johnny and gives her one week to get married so she can stay in the country.
Obviously, she can't, but then she meets a down and out writer, Bill Smith (Stewart) and talks him into marrying her.
She agrees to pay him $17 a week, which equals his living expenses."Come Live with Me" is not a rip-roaring screwball comedy but a nice romantic one with some fine performances from Lamarr, Stewart, Hunter, Teasdale, Donald Meek, and Adeline De Walt Reymolds as Bill's grandmother.
Vienna refugee Hedy Lamarr, living in a swank apartment in Manhattan, finds herself in a spot: her visa has run out and immigration is giving her one week to marry an American or be deported.
Since her married lover can't get a divorce that quickly, Lamarr proposes to down-on-his-luck writer James Stewart; she'll pay his expenses while keeping her own address, he'll work on his new story, which is extremely autobiographical!
Stewart overdoes the loud yammering shtick, but he also has some funny bits (especially one with a cigarette) and a sweet moment near the end where he recites Hedy a poem.
A very nice vehicle for a good cast, and Lamarr is, of course, stunning to look at.
Jimmy, Hedy, goofy Ian Hunter, and "sensible" Verree Teasedale make a wonderful primary cast for this nice film.
Clarence Brown directed a lot of fantastic films, so I'm guessing the script/story faults are partly from Virginia Van Upp (story) and Patterson McNutt (screenplay); who knows what the role producers at MGM had in trimming the movie for release..
Austrian refugee (Hedy Lamarr) asks a penniless writer (James Stewart) to marry her so she won't be deported.
The problem is she's already in a relationship -- with a married man (Ian Hunter).This was a pleasant surprise.
The only 'bad' character in the movie is Ian Hunter's and even he's played mostly for laughs.
Wealthy Manhattan publisher Ian Hunter (as Barton "Bart" Kendrick) has an "open marriage" with attractive blonde wife Verree Teasdale (as Diana) and loves beautiful brunette mistress Hedy Lamarr (as Johanna "Johnny" Janns).
If more illegal aliens looked like Hedy Lamarr, the support for leniency and amnesty would grow.
Because she is pretty, Lamarr is given one week to find an American husband...To avoid being deported, Lamarr offers struggling writer James Stewart (as William "Bill" Smith) a deal.
Then, Mr. Stewart can continue writing and Lamarr can continue her affair with Mr. Hunter.
The most valuable player, producer/director Clarence Brown works wonders with this material.****** Come Live with Me (1/29/41) Clarence Brown ~ James Stewart, Hedy Lamarr, Ian Hunter, Adeline de Walt Reynolds.
But, things didn't work out as La migra comes knocking on the door and wants to throw poor Johnny (Hedy Lamarr) out of the country because her Visa expires.
She and Barton (Ian Hunter) are in love, and he wants to leave his wife for her.
The immigration officer feels sorry for her (Call Lou Dobbs!) and gives her a week to find an American husband.Enter Jimmy Stewart, a failed writer that is literally down to his last dime.
She finances his novel and they get married, but Stewart is not happy to leave it that way, so he plans a trip home to Granny's house to make a final pitch.It was a little silly at times.
The wronged wife was even willing to let her man go if Hedy really loved him.
But more of that later.COME LIVE WITH ME deals with a man with a "modern" view of marriage.
Mr. Barton Kendrick (Ian Hunter) is a wealthy in New York, whose wife is his chief friend and critic and assistant in the firm.
Barton girlfriend is Johnnie Jones (Hedy Lamarr), and their relationship is fine, but soon an immigration officer (Barton MacLane, playing a rare nice guy role) comes to inform her that she has to go to the Immigration Office in New York City because her visa has run out - and she is facing deportation.
But MacLane learns from Hunter that Lamarr will be killed if deported back to Austria as her father was an opponent of Hitler and the Nazis who was killed for his opposition.
MacLane tells Lamarr to go and find someone to marry within one week, and the deportation problem will disappear.
After MacLane leaves Hunter explains he can't divorce Teasdale in a week to marry Lamarr.
So Hedy goes out for a walk to think things through clearly.(It is funny to recall that this film was made a year after Mitchell Leisin's film HOLD BACK THE DAWN, about immigrants trying to enter our country from Mexico within our impossible post 1924 immigration quotas.
See the modern Gerald Depardieu comedy GREEN CARD to see the change in the rule.)Lamarr, in walking past Central Park, runs across a man named Bill Smith (Jimmy Steward) that she thinks is a bum.
Interestingly he calls the novel WITHOUT LOVE (a title that would one day be that of an MGM film with Tracy and Hepburn having another of convenience).
When she describes the plot to Hunter, he realizes it is his relationship with Lamarr that is at the basis of the novel.
Teasdale also notices that Hunter's protests of the novel's plot are too deep to be sheer literary criticism, and realizes that it must be about her husband.Steward uses the money to reimburse Lamarr for her weekly payment of his use as a make-shift husband.
Then he forces her (politely) to accompany him to his country home (she wants him to sign the divorce papers, and he won't unless she accompanies him), and slowly wins her over by the beauties of the countryside, and his grandmother's (Adeline De Walt Reynolds) lovable and strong character.
We watch Lamarr gradually note Steward's strong points, and even hear him recite Christopher Marlowe's poem "Come Live With Me and Be My Bride...." which is the basis of the film.
Will Hedy stick with Ian or go with Jimmy.The film is certainly quite charming, but what I find most interesting at the end is the business of the Grandmother.
But if so or not COME LIVE WITH ME is good enough to be liked on it's own merits as an entertaining movie..
No doubt many moviegoers were intrigued by the film's theme as well as enjoying seeing James Stewart and Lamarr, who had fast become a star.
Lamarr is Johnny Jones, a foreign citizen with money who wants to stay in the U.S. after her visa has expired.
She is the love interest of a married wealthy American publisher, Barton Kendrick (played by Ian Hunter).
She runs into Bill Smith (played by Stewart) who is an out-of-work, down on his luck writer.
Barton Kendrick (played by Ian Hunter) is a wealthy publisher.
His wife, Diana (played by Verree Teasdale) reads the manuscript of a story Smith has written and sent to Kendrick publishing.
It's a story about an out of work American who meets an Austrian immigrant who wants to stay in America
One can guess where the story goes from there, and the best funny stuff in the film happens toward the end.
It's an OK film that's mostly a light comedy romance.
And, the way the characters play their roles – especially Lamarr, it's hard to believe the romance.
This film is far down on the list of Stewart movies, but it's about in the middle of Lamarr's.
Even though she was for some time labeled the most beautiful woman in the world, and she had some talent, Lamarr's films mostly were forgettable.
Still, this is a film that most people should enjoy, Lamarr quit acting after 1958.
She was unlucky in love and married and divorced one more time.
Jimmy Stewart recites the first and last stanzas of Christopher Marlowe's poem, "Come live with me and be my love." Bill, "My name's Smith." Johnny, "My name's Jones." Taxi driver, "Let's see – Smith and Jones, and I'm Snow White."Johnny, "Mr. Smith, it's such a wonderful thing." Bill, "Why?" Johnny, "That you haven't any money." Taxi driver, "And I thought I'd heard everything." Bill, as he and Johnny enter his apartment, "It's just a little place, but its dreary." Pointing out his empty book case, "If you want to browse among my books, the pawnshop's just around the corner." Bill, "Would you like to have some music?
A woman who escapes Nazi controlled Austria must marry an American or face deportation.
This is the problem facing Hedy Lamarr but she can't make the most of it due to the inept writing.
They certainly could have made her romance James Stewart more during the week she had before facing being removed.
Why in heaven's name didn't he do this before her marriage to Stewart.Going up to grandma's house at the end of this film does nothing either.
A nice romantic comedy about a marriage of convenience between Hedy Lamarr and Jimmy Stewart where an illegal Austrian woman is subject to deportation and looks for a US citizen to marry to avoid being deported.
The weak points in the movie is how a woman would go to a near perfect stranger's apartment to discuss the marriage proposal and how she could have allowed herself to be "forced" to accompany her husband of convenience to his family farm for a visit.
I think the film needed a bit of more development between the two characters as they were falling in love.
The woman's original lover just driving away that quickly after she decided to stay with her husband did not seem plausible given the relationship that the former lovers had at the beginning of the movie. |
tt0023396 | Ride Him, Cowboy | John Drury (John Wayne) is passing through when townsfolk are about to kill Duke, a horse they believe to be dangerous. He convinces them to reprieve the animal if he can ride it. He does, earning the gratitude of Ruth Gaunt (Ruth Hall).
He then volunteers to deal with an outlaw known as the Hawk who has been terrorizing the area. Solid citizen Henry Simms (Frank Hagney) volunteers to guide him to the Hawk's territory. But Simms is actually the Hawk and he ties Drury to a tree, leaving him to die. Simms then leads a raid on a ranch, kills a man and plants Drury's harmonica at the scene. With the help of his horse Duke, Drury manages to free himself.
However, a group of vigilantes, believing that he is the Hawk, accuse him of murder and take him to face a hanging judge. Fortunately, Ruth shows up, with the news that a wounded witness has regained consciousness and confirmed Drury's claim that Simms is the real bandit. Simms' men burst in and hold everyone at gunpoint. Simms takes Ruth with him to his hideout, but Drury manages to escape and follow them. The posse overpowers Simms' henchmen and captures the rest of the gang. Simms and Drury fight; when Drury is distracted by the arrival of help, Simms knocks him out and tries to flee, only to run into the deadly hooves of an enraged Duke. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | It was a very interesting short film that was done very well.It had action, comedy, romance and suspense all packed into a movie less that lasted only 55 minutes.
It had a convincing nasty villain, a pretty girl, a talented horse named "Duke," and a crooked-but-funny judge.
The horse was able to untie rope and acted almost human.The only thing that looked a bit dated - but applied to all classic westerns - is when they broke chairs over the good guy's head and it never seemed to faze him.
"Ride Him Cowboy" was the first of six westerns that John Wayne made for Warner Bros.
Most were remakes of Ken Maynard silent westerns pf the 1920s thus giving the studio the opportunity to use stock footage from those films (which they did).
To match any stock footage used, the studio costumed Wayne in Maynard's costume and used a horse ("Duke") that looked the same as Maynard's "Tarzan".This first film gets the series off to a good start.
Since the series was made at WB, the production values were far superior to those in Wayne's later "Lone Star" westerns.The story centers on how Wayne came to acquire his horse "Duke".
The attack, for some reason, is made to look like Webb was trampled by Gaunt's prize palomino "Duke".The horse is about to be destroyed after a "trial" in town when a stranger, John Drury (Wayne) rides into town.
Gaunt allows Drury to take the horse as he also becomes attracted to Ruth.Drury offers his services to the town to track down the mysterious bandit.
In the desert, Sims reveals himself to be "The Hawk" and ties up Drury and leaves him for dead.
"Duke", however, is able to free his master.While attacking another ranch, Sims plants Drury's harmonica and later cites him as "The Hawk".
A mock trial before Judge Clarence "Necktie" Jones is held, Drury is found guilty and..................................A good series opener with little obvious use of stock footage..
John Wayne (as John Drury) saves a Devil-horse ("Duke") from execution, after the horse's murder trial.
The already inferior "Ride Him, Cowboy" swipes its most exciting material from Ken Maynard's silent "The Unknown Cavalier" (1926).
*** Ride Him, Cowboy (1932) Fred Allen ~ John Wayne, Ruth Hall, Henry B.
Early Wayne western is a good B-film....
A smart horse and a pretty girl are the hero and heroine of RIDE HIM, COWBOY, in which a very young JOHN WAYNE is a drifter mistaken for "The Hawk", a ruthless villain who's the leader of a bunch of gunfighters.
Its plot sounds like something that Mel Brooks could make into one of his western satires about a villain called "The Hawk" and a weak sheriff, as well as the hero mistaken for a villain.It plays well, fast and furious with some plot devices that have become clichés over the years but manages to hold the interest throughout despite some obvious flaws and the dated look of the film itself.RUTH HALL is the pretty young woman and the smart horse is "The Duke", an amazing animal used well as the critter who identifies the masked man known as "The Hawk" and takes his revenge for the final scene.
He's also involved in a clever rescue when Wayne is left strapped to a tree to die in the desert with the horse nearby, able to free himself and Wayne from the predicament.Summing up: Surprisingly good, unpretentious little western that winds up its tale in less than an hour.
This film was the first of a series of B westerns that John Wayne did for Warner Brothers and it was decided to give him a horse companion named Duke.
He went after the villain and the villain who is masked bandit known as the Hawk says the horse is a mankiller who attacked him for no good reason.
Since by day the villain is a respectable town citizen everyone believes him, almost.One of the almost is young cowpoke John Wayne who says he can tame the stallion and proceeds to do so.
He even offers to track down the Hawk.It starts to get a little ridiculous here especially in the way that the villain gets the drop on Wayne.
Of course in the tradition of Trigger, Champion, Topper, and Robert Taylor's horse Varick in Knights of the Round Table, Duke rescues his friend John Wayne.
Doesn't that sound a little odd.Otis Harlan has a very funny bit as the country judge before whom Wayne is tried when he's accused of being the Hawk.
This movie starts with a horse named Duke coming to the rescue of a man being bushwhacked.
Before he's sentenced to death, a cowboy (John Wayne) shows up and offers to ride the horse to prove he's not wild.
After he does and saves Duke, the horse's owner (great character actor Henry B.
Walthall) asks Wayne to help the town catch a masked bandit named the Hawk.
He was named John something-or-other in every movie and always had his horse Duke.
John Wayne got top billing although he shared it with Duke, his horse.The action moves quickly enough for kids to follow it to see if Wayne caught the bad guy or at least exposed him to the law.
Solid supporting cast with both Harry Gribbon and Otis Harlan providing the humor; a little gallows at times but no doubt that was for any adult who wandered in.
You have to feel sorry for Wayne's character, John Drury, who goes from horse saving hero to wanted outlaw in the blink of an eye.
Ride Him, Cowboy (1932) *** (out of 4)Duke, a horse, is on trial for killing a man and the judge is about to put him to death when cowboy John Drury (John Wayne) makes a deal.
Of course the cowboy comes through and soon the two of them are trying to track down the real murderer.RIDE HIM, COWBOY was Wayne's shot at stardom as this was the first of the six picture deal that he signed with Warner.
The film is certainly a step up from movies like TWO FISTED LAW, which featured Wayne in supporting parts.
On a technical level this might still be a "B" movie but it's still better than what we had seen the now legend in up to this point.The best thing about the picture is actually Wayne and his supporting cast of actors.
I thought that laid back approach of Wayne's worked pretty well here including the scenes where he trying to smooth talk the leading lady played by Ruth Hall.
Walthall turns in another fine supporting performance.As you'd expect, there's a lot of gun play as well as other Western trappings but they're all handled quite nicely by director Fred Allen who keeps the film moving at a nice pace throughout its 55 minutes..
I really liked this short movie (55 minutes on TNT), mostly because of a very young John Wayne and a lovely Ruth Hall.
There are some serious flaws (like when the villain leaves Duke with John Wayne out in the desert), but overall a very enjoyable film..
As a fairly early Western, this picture has many of the classic ingredients...bad guys, good guys, romance, lively crowds of town folks,and even a horse for a hero.
However, even with these faults whatever possible enjoyment Western fans might have found is ruined by the incredibly poor acting of John Wayne.
John Drury (Wayne) is new in town but wastes no time taming an angry horse (Duke), making sweet time with Ruth (Hall), and going after the film's villain (Hagney).Folks seem a little harsh in judging the acting and plot.
For drama there are some double-crosses (Drury is framed for being the murderer) and tough talking.John Wayne is nowhere near as polished as we see him in later (and more successful) movies.
John Wayne In His First Starring Turn at Warner Brothers .
Director Fred Allen's "Ride Him, Cowboy," a remake of the 1926 Warner Brothers' Ken Maynard western "The Unknown," toplined John Wayne in his first oater for the Burbank company as a harmonica playing hero out to break up a ring of range thieves terrorizing ranches.
Essentially, "Ride Him, Cowboy" was a B-movie sagebrusher where the star's horse shows more sense than most of the characters and behaves like a resourceful canine rather than a skittish mount.
Aside from a cowboy orchestra strumming a tune, "Ride Him, Cowboy" contains no orchestral soundtrack, but this western boasts better than average production values and looks more expensive than Wayne's later Lone Star westerns that he made after Jack Warner turned him loose some five westerns later.
Predictable from fade-in to fade-out, "Ride Him, Cowboy" is nothing distinguished, but director-turned-editor Fred Allen makes interesting use of dolly shots and there is an interesting point-of-view shot of the sun boiling down on our hero when he is tied to a tree in the desert."Ride Him, Cowboy" opens during one dark, rainy evening as the notorious outlaw 'the Hawk' (Frank Nagney of "The General") a.k.a. Henry Sims and his henchmen attack the Gaunt ranch to steal money.
Meanwhile, the doctor thinks that Webb will pull through without harm, but the ranch hand remains in a coma for three days.The next day in the frontier town of Cattlelow in Maricopa County around the year 1900, Judge Bartlett (Charles Sellon of "Baby Face") convenes court to decide whether to destroy Duke or let the horse live.
Ruth rushes to Duke's defense and pleads with the judge not to destroy a horse as gentle as he is.
About that time, wandering cowpoke John Drury, late of the Tumblin' Ace Ranch in Texas, rides into Cattlelow on his horse 'Buddy' playing a harmonica without a care in the world.
When Drury leans about the impending demise of Duke, he intervenes and persuades Judge Bartlett to let Duke live if he can ride the ornery horse.
Sims makes a one-hundred dollar wager with Gaunt that Drury cannot stay aboard Duke and loses.
Ruth and Gaunt are overjoyed that Drury saves Duke and a bystander observes that Drury would be a great addition to the vigilantes in their fight against the Hawk.
Gaunt invites Drury to their meeting after our hero says that he loves excitement and gives Ruth a loving eye.At the vigilante meeting, Drury suggests that the best way to handle the Hawk is for one man to tackle the villain.
Drury learns that nobody knows what the Hawk looks like, except the man has ridden roughshod over the county for years now.
John Gaunt persuades Sims to escort Drury into the Hawk's bailiwick.
One of the best dolly shots in "Ride Him, Cowboy" occurs during this scene when Allen dollies out from a close-up of Sims to show the entire with several western characters seated around a table.
Later that evening at the Gaunt ranch, John and Ruth get to know each other and Ruth insists that John take Duke when he leaves to track down the Hawk.
At the same time, Duke trots up and strips the saddle off Drury's horse Buddy.
Drury rides off on Duke and meets Sims the following day at Eagle Pass.
They compare their ability to make difficult shots look easy and Sims tries out Drury's six-gun and gets the drop on our hero.
He ties Drury to a tree while Duke restlessly pulls at his own reins after Drury has knotted them to nearby tree.The Hawk gathers his men, attacks a ranch, and kills the son of the owner and wife.
Meanwhile, Webb recovers from his coma and informs Ruth that it was Sims as the Hawk who attacked their ranch.
Ruth mounts up and rides like the devil to save Drury's life.
Ruth arrives in the nick of time to save Drury from an inevitable hanging.Clocking in at a lean, mean 55 minutes, "Ride Him, Cowboy" moves at a brisk pace and never bogs down.
SYNOPSIS: John Drury (Wayne) is a wandering cowboy who saves a spirited wild horse ("Duke") from being put down after a killer, whose identity the horse knows, tries to cover up his crime by laying the blame for the rancher's death on the animal.
The first of six "B" westerns Wayne was to make for Warner Bros, all of them co-starring "Duke" (variously billed as "The Devil Horse" and "The Miracle Horse").
COMMENT: A fascinating little western with great production values (augmented by a few stock shots from the 1926 Ken Maynard version), a suspenseful story, a few offbeat characters and some great acting, particularly from "Duke" the horse, "Duke" the star, Otis Harlan the judge (repeating his role from the 1926 film), and Frank Hagney the villain.
During the 1931/1932 movie release season, Columbia Pictures had Buck Jones under contract to do a series of Westerns.
However with the signing of yet another Western hero, Tim McCoy, Wayne became expendable after appearing in three films that featured Jones and McCoy.So Wayne was picked up by Leon Schlesinger over at Warners, resulting in a series of six films; "Ride Him, Cowboy" was the first.
Long after seeing all sixteen of Wayne's Lone Star Westerns (1933 to 1935) he made right after the Warners gig, I've been diligently seeking them out, and lo and behold, all six appeared on the Turner Classic Movie Channel this past week, aired in the order of their original release.
Sometimes the movie gods smile down favorably.The film opens with Wayne galloping into view atop his horse 'Duke', perhaps not as dramatic an entrance as he made in the opener for "Stagecoach", but impressive nonetheless.
What's interesting is that the picture serves as the origin story for Wayne's horse, who appeared in all six of the Warners sagebrush yarns and released as 'Four Star Westerns'.
The film's captioning stated the town's name as 'Catalog', but I use another reviewer's description since it seems to make more sense.Duke, who's owned by the Gaunt's (Henry B.
Walthall and Ruth Hall), is saved by harmonica playing John Drury (Wayne) after successfully staying on board the bucking Duke to prove that the horse is manageable.
That scene of Drury taming down Duke was handled using stock footage from an earlier Ken Maynard film atop his horse Tarzan.
One more note of interest - Duke appeared to have some sort of brand or mark on his left hindquarter, and depending on the camera angle, the mark looked like 'A1' or '/H', a little difficult to tell, although in the follow up picture, "The Big Stampede", it definitely looks more like 'A1'.Duke proved invaluable in the later going when it became necessary to save his new master from dying in the desert after the villain Hawk (Frank Hagney) tricked Drury into giving up his gun.
Duke managed to uproot the tree he was tied to and undid the rope securing Drury so he could bring the Hawk and the rest of his rustling gang to justice.
Before that though, Drury had to stand trial for a raid on the Gordon Ranch, having been implicated by his harmonica placed at the scene by Henry Sims, the Hawk.
A newspaper headline touting 'Dewey Captures Manila' in the office of Judge 'Necktie' Jones (Otis Harlan), places the date of this story some time after May 1st, 1898.Riding hard to make the save, because Duke couldn't actually speak, one of the few things he wasn't capable of, Ruth Gaunt arrived just in time after outwitting a trio of Hawk's henchmen.
In a story made credible only by the standards of these early B Westerns, Drury and his gal Ruth close things out with a kiss, establishing a tradition that would carry through the remaining Four Star Westerns as well as the Lone Star films to follow.Addendum**** 6-7-2016 - Doing a little research on 'Duke', you can see a pretty good screen capture of the brand noted in my review here at: http://www.b-westerns.com/hoss-jwayne.htm.
Wayne's Warner Brothers' Vitagraph Debut Forgettable.
Ride Him, Cowboy was John Wayne's debut film for Warner Brothers from 1932.
Wayne stars as a drifter who happens upon a small town besieged by the "Hawk", a vandal terrorizing the townsfolk for a reason that's never fully revealed.
A horse named Duke (of all names) joins up with Wayne in thwarting the "Hawk".
The film moves at a brisk pace, but Wayne never gets to show his stuff much and is upstaged by Duke the horse, as is everyone else in the film.
Film is not up to later Wayne standards, even for a programmer.
In the 1930s, John Wayne made a very long string of low-budget westerns.
Heck, Duke the Horse is MUCH smarter than everyone else in this silly film!
No one in town seems to know who the local villain, 'the Hawk', is, but Duke sure knows--and might pay for his life because of this!
A bit later, it turns out that Wayne's character is also amazingly stupid.
In a badly written scene, it's obvious to every single person in the audience (including the babies) that the guy in the desert with Wayne is the Hawk.
I guess the Hawk knew Wayne was the hero and, as such, was invulnerable!
Later still, it's obvious that Wayne is a good guy.
Overall, this is a pretty terrible film--even for a B-western.
Wayne went on to make some very good Bs, but his early ones for Leon Schlesinger Studios were amazingly bad.
It's bad enough that a 25-year-old John Wayne is almost strung up for possession of a harmonica, before he's done anything in Real Life to earn his nickname of "The American Anti-Christ." But the heartless bozos who populate the U.S. West go too far in putting Wayne's Wonder Horse "Duke" on trial, with an eye toward dropping the white stallion on the Gallows.
Both "Dukes"--man and horse--are nearly doomed on the say-so of the local crime-lord, a top honcho on the town's Vigilante Council. |
tt0042609 | The Jackie Robinson Story | The film begins with Robinson as a boy. He is given a worn-out baseball glove by a stranger impressed by his fielding skills. As a young man, he becomes a multi-sport star at UCLA, but as he nears graduation, he worries about his future. His older brother Mack was also an outstanding college athlete and graduate, but the only job he could get was that of a lowly street cleaner.
When America enters World War II, Robinson is drafted, serving as an athletic director. Afterward, he plays baseball with a professional African-American team. However, the constant travel keeps him away from his college sweetheart, Rae.
Then one day, Brooklyn Dodgers scout Clyde Sukeforth invites him to meet Branch Rickey, president of the Major League Baseball team. At first, Robinson considers the offer to be a practical joke, as African Americans are not allowed to play in the segregated major leagues. When he is convinced that the opportunity is genuine, he and Rickey size each other up. After thinking over Rickey's warning about the hatred and abuse he would have to endure without being able to strike back, Robinson signs with the Dodgers' International League farm team, the Montreal Royals. Though he wants to delay marrying Rae to shield her, she insists on an immediate wedding so she can support her man in the trying times ahead.
Robinson leads the league in hitting in his first year, and despite the grave concerns expressed by the Commissioner of Major League Baseball, Rickey goes ahead and promotes him to the Dodgers. Reviled at first by many of the fans and some of his own teammates, Robinson gets off to a shaky start, playing out of position at first base and going through a hitting slump, but then gradually wins people over with his talent and determination. The team goes on to win the pennant, with Robinson driving in the tying run and scoring the winning one in the deciding game.
At the end, Robinson is invited to address the United States House of Representatives in Washington, D.C. | autobiographical | train | wikipedia | Too much exposition by characters who should have more interesting stories (wouldn't you want to know more about the USC athletic director who said the only color he cares about is "blue and gold?" Also, Louise Beavers gave a very subdued performance considering it was one of her few roles where she wasn't playing someone's maid.
Other hallmarks of the B production were about two minutes of running used for the stock footage of calendar leaves falling to mark the passage of time, the old "spinning headlines" of newspapers with the same articles beneath, the fact that Jackie's baseball scenes were shot at just two ballparks (I'm not even sure his Dodgers scenes were shot at Ebbets Field; the field doesn't quite match the long shots of Ebbets) and the "flashback voices" that ran through Jackie's head when he was set to fight with some white hecklers.
Branch Rickey, who in real life did spend several years trying to get pro baseball to desegregate, has a lot of "let's behave like real Americans" dialogue, but tempered with his admission to Jackie that he scouted him because we wants the Dodgers to win a pennant.
<i>Note: Jackie's Dodger uniform number, 42, had been officially retired by every team in Major League Baseball.
So, they had to gloss over the fact that his brother Mack (Joel Fluellen), with a college education and an Olympic medal was a milkman; didn't touch on the Army at all; and left out Satchel Paige.What was worth watching was Robinson'e play for UCLA and branch Rickey's (Minor Watson) valiant efforts to get him into major league baseball.
Of course, as Ringo Starr said, "All I have to do is smile and act naturally." Well, he did much more that that.So, head on over to the Internet Archive and check it our: http://www.archive.org/details/Jackie_Robinson_Story_The. Sometimes Athletes Can Be True Heroes..
A wonderful film that acts as a homage to Jackie Robinson (played by himself).
The early life of the first black Major League baseball player is shown in a way that makes the picture wholesome and appropriate for all audiences.
I have been wanting a movie to be made that goes into greater detail about this individual's life as Robinson was just as important to Civil Rights as people who fought vehemently for equality in the 1960s.
When I say sanitized, I mean some parts of Jackie's life are omitted because they didn't portray the image some folks wanted to give in the film.
The Jackie Robinson/Branch Rickey Story.
After Jackie Robinson had his career year in 1949(batting champion and National League Most Valuable Player, he was apparently talked into appearing in this cheaply made autobiographical story by Dodger President Branch Rickey.
According to a recent biography of Robinson the film was made in California in the early months of 1950 and rushed into movie houses in time for the 1950 baseball season.Jackie Robinson was one of the most gifted athletes of the last century.
I won't go into that story, a television movie was made of it.There's no real explanation of just WHY it was Robinson who Branch Rickey selected to integrate the Brooklyn Dodgers and major league baseball.
A book and/or movie should be done about that man as well.Ruby Dee got her first real notice on the screen in this film as Rachel Robinson, Jackie's wife.
No stories about him running around and nightclubbing would occur to ruin Rickey's great experiment.In fact other than the Robinson family and Branch Rickey the only other real characters in the story are Dodger coach and scout Clyde Sukeforth and Montreal Royal Manager Clay Hopper.
Another example of the skimpiness of the screenplay.Ruby Dee said that Robinson was a very nice man who felt out of place in the film.
I can see Denzel Washington in the part.Having seen the film 42 I can recommend that one as a far better telling of The Jackie Robinson Story..
True story of Brooklyn Dodger ballplayer Jackie Robinson the man who broke the color barrier in professional Baseball and made it possible for future black ballplayers, like Willie Mays Hank Aaron and Frank Robinson to name a few, to follow him.After the end of WWII it was Brooklyn Dodger owner Branch Rickey, Minor Watson, who saw what a reservoir of talent there was in the then segregated Negro League and attempted to tap in on it.
It was Jackie Robinson who was not only a star in collage football basketball baseball and track and field but was educated and well spoken, unlike most Negro players at that time, who was chosen by Rickey's top scout William Spaulding to be the man to do it: Brake Baseball's color barrier.
Jackie not at first believing that he's to play in the major leagues is surprised when Spaulding knocked at his hotel room while he was playing with the Black Panthers Negro Baseball team and convinced Jackie that he was the real thing, a scout or the Brooklyn Dodgers, not someone trying to play a joke on him!
Like Jackie and his fellow Black Panthers at first thought.In knowing that it was far more important for him to succeed for his race not just for himself Jackie not only had to be able to hit run and field on the baseball diamond but put up with the insults and threats to him and his family.
Not just by the racist fans but his fellow baseball players, some on his own team, to make his and Branch Rickey, who put his reputation on the line in giving Jackie a chance, dream come true.It was in the Triple A Brooklyn farm team the Montreal Royals that Jackie got his first taste of what he was to run into being the only black not on the team but in the entire league.
Jackie instead of whacking the guys in the mouth like he should have got up out of the dugout and took the cat, with those who were holding it running for safety, back into the dugout with him petting the cute litter kitzel as if he somehow knew that it was suffering the same kind of abuse that he was going through at the time.Finally making it to the big leagues in 1947 with the Brooklyn Dodgers who lost the 1946 National League Pennant on the very last day of the season in a two out of three game playoff, with the Dodgers losing the first two games, to the World Champion St.Louis Cardinals he in fact was the extra ingredient that was able to get the Dodgers to become the 1947 National League Champs.
It was that, Jackie's ability to stand tall and not give into his pent up emotions, far more then his baseball playing ability that made Jackie Robinson the Baseball legend that he is today.P.S Jackie Robinson #42 uniform was retired not only from the Dodger team but from all of Major League Baseball in 1997 making him the first and only Major League Baseball player to have that honor.
Maybe Rickey deserves such status for seeing it through with Robinson, but I don't think his motives were as altruistic as portrayed in this movie..
The Jackie Robinson Story gives the title star his own inspirational movie.
Continuing to review African-Americans in film in chronological order for Black History Month, we're now at 1950 when the first black to play baseball in the major leagues, Jackie Robinson, stars in his own life story in a motion picture made three years after becoming a player in the Brooklyn Dodgers.
No, the real acting challenge came to Minor Watson who-as the actual President of the Brooklyn Dodgers, Branch Rickey-has to present authority and conviction as someone who truly believes in baseball as the democratic sport meant to give fair chances to all Americans of all races and creeds, which was convincing enough to me.
So on that note, The Jackie Robinson Story was an inspirational enough movie that can still touch some heartstrings, old-fashioned though some of it may be.
P.S. Since it is Black History Month, I'd like to note some of the supporting performers that happen to be people of color: first off, there's Ruby Dee as Jackie's wife, Rae, in one of her earliest roles.
Robinson was a great baseball player, a pioneer, and a true hero of the civil rights movement.
There was nothing about the Kansas City Monarchs and his playing on the same team as legendary hurler/baseball showman Satchel Paige (see movie "Soul of the Game.")While there was an attempt made to show the racial injustices Robinson faced, first as a member of the Triple-A Montreal Royals of the International League, then with the Dodgers, this movie was more of a feel-good, 1950s, African-American Horatio Alger piece of public relations.
Ironically, forty years later, she would play Robinson's mother in "The Court Martial of Jackie Robinson." As for Robinson himself, those who only know him from Black History month can see firsthand that he was an intelligent, articulate human being, despite being ill at ease on the movie set.
While handsome, he was not drop dead movie star gorgeous as Blair Underwood, who played him in "Soul of the Game." But he was a real athlete, who had been a four-letter man at UCLA (baseball, football, basketball and track), and who had also been the best black amateur golfer in California.
I feel The Jackie Robinson Story comes much closer to depicting the true Robinson, and the black experience in the early and mid-20th century.
Helgeland makes it seem like Robinson is encountering racism for the first time when he enters major league baseball, and he has to exercise enormous restraint.
The re-enactment of the plays by Robinson were, of course, first rate, and worth the price of admission.But several things make this movie important: the subject matter - a great, inspirational story in itself; the role Robinson played not just in sports, but in setting a model for peaceful civil rights protests to come; a record of a not so proud time in our history we need to remember; and the actions of many people like Branch Rickey who courageously did what was right, without flinching - a lesson for ours and future generations.It's interesting that Robinson was agonized about signing on with the Dodgers, and first talked to his mother and a preacher.
Jackie Robinson Story, The (1950) *** (out of 4) Surprisenly very entertaining bio of Jackie Robinson (who plays himself) and his struggle to become the first black baseball player in the majors.
The film only runs 75-minutes, which means it's not as thick with information as I would have liked but the movie runs at a great speed and shows the importance of Robinson very well.
In 1950, when this movie was made, Robinson was still very much an active player in the league, and the people who made life miserable for him, including players on the Montreal and Brooklyn teams, were very much alive, some still Robinson's colleagues.
In that sense, "42" can name names and give facts that this movie could not.On the other hand, what this movie offers is the chance to watch the real Jackie Robinson relive some of the difficult, terrible moments he had to go through to stay in major-league baseball - and pave the way for other Blacks to do the same.
But if you look at his face, you see that there is real power there, fighting any man's urge to strike back.The best parts of this movie are not easy viewing, but they allow us to experience, to some extent, the injustices against which Robinson had to fight with him.
Made as I understand while Robinson was still actively playing baseball, it covers a very recent time-span of his emergence into big-league baseball where he broke the "colour bar" in becoming the first black player to play for a major team, the Brooklyn Dodgers.
If nothing else, it was certainly quite a brave film to make, I'd imagine, as the bigger civil-rights breakthroughs of the 50's hadn't yet been accomplished and wouldn't for some time, by the likes of Rosa Parks or Martin Luther King of course.Chosen by Dodgers manager Branch Rickey, Robinson has to endure loathsome racial discrimination from fans, opponents and even fellow team-mates and I would imagine in real life, he suffered far worse than the watered down treatment we see depicted here.
Jackie Robinson actually acts in a leading role in this essentially B movie.
It was fun to see this the day after Major League Baseball honored Jackie Robinson Day, and I'm glad I saw the black and white version, and not the colorized one!
I've always thought Rachel Robinson was one of the most beautiful women in the world, and Jackie gets another gorgeous lady to play his wife in a movie!
I feel bad that it was a ruff ride into the Major League for Jackie Robinson.I believe he was much better than many of the white players of his day.
While Jackie Robinson was never in danger of Oscar consideration for this performance as himself, within the confines of a low-budget movie with a creaky script he does a creditable job.And perhaps more to the point, his charisma is palpable ...
He's just so damned likable!Also: I have to say that the heart of the movie -- and I don't think *any* actor could have done a better job here -- is the sequence where Robinson shows up for his first practice with the Montreal Royals.
Made only a few years after Jackie Robinson joined the Major Leagues, this film is a truly inspirational story of the first man who broke baseball's color barrier, paving the way for future stars like Mays, Aaron, Clemente and the rest.
Along the way, even Robinson had to be convinced that a black player would ever get the chance - "Baseball's one sport that'll never let me in".
To his credit, executive Branch Rickey stayed true to his principles in signing Robinson, and a number of scenes in the picture spotlight Rickey (Minor Watson) waxing philosophically about fair play and sportsmanship, and a man's right to make a living no matter what his color.
The situations for the most part didn't appear life threatening, but I'm sure there must have been more serious incidents directed against the ball player during his early career.The movie is certainly no award winner, and Robinson exhibits a surprising lack of charisma portraying himself.
Keep an eye on the advertising billboards in center field during one of the Montreal Royals games; you'll see ads for Admiral TV, White Rock beverages, Auto-Lite, and Wildroot Hair Cream Oil. A later view (presumably from the same stadium) adds a couple more for Rayve Home Permanent and Coca-Cola.What I'd really like to see is a modern day version of the Jackie Robinson story that does a more thorough job of his college and military years, with a lot better look at his International League and Dodgers career.
A story of Jackie Robinson's uphill battle to the big leagues began when he was given a mitt and a chance.
This film explores and shows the era of prejudice against any changes or differences.*Special Stars- Jackie Robinson, Ruby Dee, Richard Lane, Jimmie Todd.*Theme- The American game of baseball should reflect the population in the USA.*Trivia/location/goofs- B & W.
Jackie Robinson gives color to baseball..
THE JACKIE ROBINSON STORY is a straight-on look at the beginning of a baseball legend and one of the monumental changes in the history of Major League baseball.
In 1947, after being given the chance to play ball for Montreal, Jackie Robinson, became the first black man to play big league baseball playing with the Brooklyn Dodgers.
Branch Rickey(Minor Watson), President of the Brooklyn Dodger franchise, is the man that has the confidence that Robinson is the right choice to break the color line.
This black and white feature was filmed just three years after Jackie began his fabled career dealing with racial issues as well as the rest of society.
Louise Beavers gives a wonderful portrayal of Jackie's mother and a young Ruby Dee is cast as Robinson's wife.
Some white, some black, but like my father, a fan during Robinson's era, said, they are all our heroes.Perhaps too nice and missing much of the racial tension concerning his being named as the first black pro ball player, it lightly deals with serious issues and eliminates much of the controversy.
The recent movie about Robinson's life was freer to show all the issues and present all the people involved as real human brings.
I think that it could have made the list if (1) someone other than Jackie Robinson was playing Jackie Robinson, and (2) they would have made the movie with a more complete look at his life.
I think it would be in great interest to have this movie redone, showing his entire career (including the Brooklyn Dodgers' only championship in 1955) and his future work to build up the black community.
So, to conclude, it's not a bad movie, but it lacks the full story of his life to be really great..
This Eagle Lion film release is a sincere effort and it speaks volumes that the real Jackie Robinson played himself.
Green's "The Jackie Robinson Story" isn't necessarily unforgettable, but it is entertaining.
Jackie's performance on the diamond as a baseball player convinces Brooklyn Dodgers scout Clyde Sukeforth (Billy Wayne of "The Sniper") to bring him to the attention of Brooklyn Dodgers' President Branch Rickey (Minor Watson of "Yankee Doodle Dandy) who is willing to put him on the roster.
Eventually, after he distinguishes himself on the field again, Jackie winds up playing for the Brooklyn Dodgers.
Naturally, life is rocky for Jackie, but he puts up with the racism and shows the world that he is a great baseball player. |
tt0039243 | Captain from Castile | In the spring of 1518, near Jaén, Spain, Pedro de Vargas (Tyrone Power), a Castilian caballero, helps a runaway Aztec slave, Coatl (Jay Silverheels), escape his cruel master, Diego de Silva (John Sutton). De Silva is el supremo of the Santa Hermandad, charged with enforcing the Inquisition, and Pedro's rival for the affections of the beautiful Lady Luisa de Carvajal (Barbara Lawrence). Later, Pedro rescues barefoot barmaid Catana Pérez (Jean Peters) from de Silva's men. At the inn where Catana works, Pedro becomes acquainted with Juan García (Lee J. Cobb), an adventurer just returned from the New World to see his mother.
Suspecting Pedro of aiding Coatl, and aware that Pedro's influential father Don Francisco de Vargas (Antonio Moreno) opposes the abuses of the Santa Hermandad, de Silva imprisons Pedro and his family on the charge of heresy. Pedro's young sister dies under torture. Meanwhile, Juan becomes a prison guard to help his mother, also a prisoner. He kills her to spare her further torture. Juan frees Pedro's hands and gives him a sword.
When de Silva enters Pedro's cell, Pedro disarms him in a sword fight, then forces him to renounce God before stabbing him. The trio flee with Pedro's parents. Forced by their pursuers to split up, instead of going to Italy to be reunited with his family, Pedro is persuaded by Juan and Catana to journey to Cuba to seek his fortune.
The three sign up with Hernán Cortes (Cesar Romero) on his expedition to Mexico. Pedro confides in Father Bartolomé (Thomas Gomez), the spiritual adviser to the expedition, about what occurred in Spain. The priest had already received an order to arrest him, but tears it up and gives Pedro a penance in praying for the soul of de Silva, neither aware that de Silva survived.
The expedition lands at Villa Rica in Mexico. Cortez is greeted by emissaries of Emperor Montezuma, along with a bribe to leave Mexico. Against the opposition of one of his captains, Cortez persuades his men to join him in his plan for conquest and riches.
Catana seeks the aid of charlatan and doctor Botello (Alan Mowbray). Botello tries to dissuade her, but in the end gives her a ring, supposedly with the power to make Pedro fall in love with her, despite their vast difference in social status. When Pedro kisses her, she rejects him, believing he is under the ring's spell, but he convinces her otherwise and marries her that very night.
Cortez marches inland to Cempoala, where he receives a bribe of gems from another Aztec delegation. He places Pedro in charge of the detail guarding the gems in a teocalli. Pedro leaves his post, however, to calm down a drunk and menacing Juan. When he returns, the gems are gone. Cortez accuses Pedro of theft. When Pedro finds a hidden door into the teocalli, Cortez gives him 24 hours to redeem himself. Pedro tracks the thieves, the captains opposing Cortez, back to Villa Rica, where they have incited mutiny. With the aid of Corio (Marc Lawrence), a loyal crewman, he recovers the gems, although he is seriously wounded in the head by a crossbow bolt during their escape.
Cortez promotes Pedro to captain. Then, to remove the temptation of retreat, he orders their ships burned. They march on to Cholula, where they are met by another delegation, led by Montezuma's nephew, who threatens the expedition with annihilation unless they leave. When Cortez protests that he has no ships, the prince reveals that more have arrived. Cortez realizes that his rival, Cuban Governor Velázquez, has sent a force to usurp his command. Cortez takes half his men to attack Villa Rica, leaving Pedro in command of the rest.
Cortez returns victorious, bringing with him reinforcements and Diego de Silva, the King's emissary. De Silva is there to impose the Santa Hermandad on Mexico. Juan challenges de Silva to a duel, but is turned down. Father Bartolomé reminds Pedro of his vow, and Cortez holds him personally responsible for de Silva's safety. When de Silva is strangled that night, Pedro is sentenced to death for the murder. Just before the execution, Coatl confesses to Father Bartolomé that he killed de Silva. Before Pedro can be notified, Catana stabs him with a knife to spare him the degradation of being hanged. Fortunately, Pedro recovers. Cortez and his followers march on the Aztec island capital. | revenge, murder, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | Shellabarger reads very much like Bernal Diaz, a common soldier under Cortez who wrote a history of the Conquest of Mexico.
Of course, there will never be another Tyrone Power, Jean Peters or Cesar Romero, but do it anyway -- and use Alfred Newman's original music score (adopted by the USC Trojans as their own "Conquest" march), and let Newman's son and nephew add the remainder of the score!
I fell in love with Jean Peters as Catana when I was only six years old in 1950; which is when I first saw the film.
Swordplay, battle scenes, triumphal marches and a bittersweet love story combine to make this the kind of adventure-romance Tyrone Power inevitably found himself in at Fox. The color photography is gorgeous and the music, by Alfred Newman, is outstanding, ranging from tender love themes to dances and the march for Cortez.
It's a shame that 20th Century Fox has yet to have released DVD editions of many of the films of the studio's biggest star, Tyrone Power.
Almost impossibly handsome, enormously popular, and with excellent acting credentials, Power nearly singlehandedly kept the studio solvent in the traumatic transition years following WWII, with costume epics like "Captain from Castile" showcasing his strengths."Castile" echoes Power's earlier films, "The Mark of Zorro" and "Son of Fury", as again he plays a gallant standing against an arrogant aristocratic class, but this time he runs afoul of the Inquisition, and must flee Spain to re-establish his wealth and reputation, accompanied by loyal friend Lee J.
Recruited into the service of the charismatic Hernando Cortez (Cesar Romero, who nearly steals the film), it's off to Aztlan (Mexico, today) with a small army to face the overwhelming but naive Aztec civilization.While the film frequently drifts into melodrama, shooting on location in Mexico (with the permission and support of the Mexican government), in glorious Technicolor, gives even the most mundane moments a sense of spectacle, and the cast is in top form.
Worth singling out is a terrific supporting performance by Thomas Gomez, as a soldier/priest who dispenses common sense as well as religion, and helps Power realize that the woman he truly loves is not on a balcony, in Spain, but beside him, as they march towards their destiny.Two aspects of the film deserve special recognition; Alfred Newman's score, featuring the vaulting 'Conquest' march, is one of the finest of his long career, and is even more popular today than when the film was released; and Arthur E.
It fired my young imagination and encouraged me to read the book by Samuel Shellabarger upon which it was based.It has a wonderful cast including Ty Power, Jean Peters, Lee J.
Alfred Newman's score is good.Power was great as usual and Jean Peters turns in an excellent performance -- this was her first film.Much of the film was shot in Mexico following the actual route that Cortez followed when he was conquering the Aztecs.
The Spanish inquisition and the invasion of Cortez into Mexico...Henry King style!A film firmly split in two halves, Captain From Castile may over stretch its aims on the page at times, but the sweepingly gorgeous texture is quite something to behold.
Tyrone Power takes up the lead role of Pedro De Vargas and firmly cements his star status with a wonderful performance, handsome and brave, he carries the film easily on its joyous course from Spain to Mexico, whilst stoic male support comes from Cesar Romero (Cortez), Lee J.
Head female duty falls to a vibrantly young Jean Peters (in her film debut) as Catana Perez, pretty and beguiling, her gorgeous green eyes shining bright in this Technicolor spectacle, she is the perfect foil to Power's dash and swagger.Production costs are thought to have been over $4 million, yet even though the film sadly lost money, the money spent is still evident at every turn and it proved to be very popular with critics and film lovers alike.
It's a far from perfect film for sure (the no battle pay-off at the finale is a great disappointment), but the harking back to old historical days of yore can induce a tingle on the spine, and in that respect the piece delivers handsomely.
This movie has it all love,action,betrayal,adventure,misery,loyalty,jealousy,honor and Tyrone Power.
If anyone else likes Tyrone Power in this film be sure to check out "the eddy duchin story" and "the razor's edge" he acts better in these films .
The conquest of Mexico by Hernan Cortez in the early 16th Century is the backdrop of a story of love,courage and adventure in this entertaining swashbuckler.
The movie was Jean Peters's first and she's a beguiling creature in this ,although her acting leaves a lot to be desired at this point in her career.Cesar Romero as Cortez paints an entertaining portrayal of this ruthless opportunist.
Tyrone Power does his usual competent job in this kind of adventure story.The movie is very entertaining but it does drag a bit in its 2 and a half hour running-time..
In the spring of 1518, in Spain, the nobleman Pedro de Vargas (Tyrone Power) helps the Indian slave and his friend Coatl (Jay Silverheels) to escape from the cruel Diego de Silva (John Sutton) and then he rescues the plebeian Catana Perez (Jean Peters) from two men of Diego de Silva.
Diego's executioners torture and kill Pedro's twelve years old sister but Juan Garcia and Catana help Pedro and his the family to escape from prison: Pedro's parents go to Italy and Pedro, Juan and Catana go to Cuba and join Cortez' expedition to Mexico.
They participate of the fall of the Aztec Empire in the beginning of the Spanish colonization of the New World."Captain from Castile" is a melodramatic and romantic epic adventure having the historic conquest of Mexico by Hernando Cortez as background.
Tyrone Power is excellent in the role of a Spaniard nobleman that joins the first expedition of Cortez to Mexico and is promoted to captain for his loyalty and efficiency.
Tyrone Power in the type of role he made his own,supported by an excellent Cesar Romero as Cortez.
The music by Alfred Newman and the direction together with the competent performance by the entire cast makes this film a most satisfying experience.I doubt whether there are any actors today who can emulate the style and screen presence of Power.
The most exciting part of "Captain from Castile" should have been the least exciting, the beginning of the story that takes place in Spain when the De Vargas family is wronged at the hands of Diego De Silva (John Sutton) in the name of the Spanish Inquisition.
Pedro De Vargas (Tyrone Power) seeking a runaway servant from the New World, happens upon two of De Silva's men tormenting a tavern girl, Catana Perez (Jean Peters), by sicking dogs on her to tear the laundry she is carrying to shreds.
Pedro's mother and father hide out in Italy, but Garcia persuades Pedro and Catana, who has aided in the escape, to accompany him on an expedition headed by Hernando Cortez (Cesar Romero) to seek gold and adventure in the newly discovered West Indies.
Too much time is spent on the romance between Pedro and Catana, making this part of the film melodramatic soap opera, with a few exceptions such as the theft of the gems and the confrontation between Pedro and his old nemesis, De Silva, who reappears on the scene as an emissary from the King of Spain seeking to introduce the Inquisition to the New World.
Second, the acting is top notch with standout performances from Tyrone Power, Jean Peters, Cesar Romero, and in particular by John Sutton who plays the nasty villain De Silva with élan.
(Jay Silverheels shows great potential in the small but significant role of Coatl, before he became typecast as Tonto.) Third, the musical score by Alfred Newman, which was deservedly nominated for an Academy Award, adds much to the overall effect of the film, especially the "Conquest" march.
Of significance is the emphasis on the class system that existed in Spain and was brought to Mexico by Cortez and his army along with the Catholic religion, still powerful forces in Mexican culture today..
The conquest is put in the background with the surface story of a young aristocratic Castillian officer, one Pedro De Vargas (Tyrone Power) who in trying to defend his family against the evils of the Inqusition endangers his ambitions with an attempt on the life of Diego De Silva (John Sutton).
Tyrone Power is one hot Castilian as the "Captain from Castile" which costars Jean Peters, John Sutton, Cesar Romero, Thomas Gomez, Jay Silverheels, and Lee J.
Zanuck, in a panic when he saw Tyrone Power against type and looking like a washed-up drunkin Nightmare Alley, pulled that film from distribution and substituted it with this one.Power is a man who flees with his family during the Spanish Inquisition to the new land, Mexico, along with Cobb and Peters.
Another classic and convincing performance from Tyrone Power, as he goes from Royalty to villain and escapes the Spanish Inquisition.
Tyrone Power (De Vargas) has a rivalry with the Spanish Inquisition in the form of John Sutton (De Silva).
Instead, the film curiously ends with the blood-thirsty Spanish pirates marching on to carry out their criminal pillaging of Mexican culture whilst we get an American message of how the good and great are just around the corner.
Cool move.The cast are all fine and if Caesar Romero had been given a larger part as the invading leader Cortez, he would have walked away with the film as his star power seems to project itself more than main man Tyrone Power.
The only thing that redeems this terrible picture is the irresistibly gorgeous Jean Peters (whose acting is fine, although it can't hope to measure up to her looks).Major flaws that put this picture beyond saving:1) Tyrone Power terribly miscast as Pedro de Vargas.
Power is at his best but perhaps a little long in the tooth to be playing against the young Jean Peters(Catana)and equally young and gorgeous Barbara Lawrence(Luisa de Carvajal).
Captain from Castile shot in Cinemascope, and particularly with the last scene in mind, would have been sublime photography for this most entertaining film, one of the last of its kind, I believe..
If you want to see a great Tyrone Power movie, check out The Mark of Zorro.
Captain from Castille was not a great example of a Tyrone Power movie..
What happens to Power's little sister is shocking for a mainstream film seen by general audiences, even though the deed occurs off-screen...Power's allies include pretty Jean Peters (as Catana Perez), enterprising Lee J.
However, the story is wearisome.****** Captain from Castile (12/25/47) Henry King ~ Tyrone Power, Jean Peters, Cesar Romero, Lee J.
Nevertheless the hero Pedro De Vargas (Tyrone Power) is a loyal soldier of Cortes, and his real enemy is the Inquisition, the horror of which is well described by the film.
Cesar Romero is great as Cortes in this mega budget film with great colors, directed by the excellent Henry King..
It reminded me that in 1948, students still learned and knew more of history than is common today and would have already had a knowledge of the time period.The dangerous mix of secular and religious motives in the Inquisition, different motives between the Conquistadores and the priests, the burning of the ships under Cortez, the addition of native Indians siding with the Spanish (as shown by their ever growing presence with the Spanish armies, but never actually discussed) and the march of the Spanish through Aztec territory followed history to a T.Much of the later Indian culture was destroyed from differing immune systems.
This film was set in the tormented years of the Spanish Inquisition, and because of their wicked dealings a young lord (Tyrone Power) is brought to a horrible plight of hate and revenge.
....With his galleons and guns Looking for the new world And the palace in the sun.Neil Young,"Cortez the killer","Zuma " album (1975)De Vargas (Power) escapes from Spain plagued by the Inquisition (the Holy Office!)The construction of the movie strongly recalls "prince of foxes" an earlier King work :a long prologue: Andréa Orsini helps Borgia with his problem :his sister's marriage in "prince" ;the horrors of the inquisition ,which culminate with Pedro's sister's murder-then the main story:Andrea Orsini tries to do away with an old lord whose valuable dukedom is coveted by Borgia;In the wake of Cortez,Pedro comes across the water on a galleon,looking for the new world in the sun.And at the end ,the final confrontation hero/villain."Captain of Castillo" is an absorbing storybook film ,with a lot of action, romance,treason and ,like "Prince of foxes" ,it was filmed on location.Jean Peters makes an impressive debut in a part close to those of Virginia Mayo.Lee J.Cobb is also effective particularly in the scene he goes crazy.Tyrone Power is par excellence the Latin -although his ancestors were Irish- swashbuckler hero.Cortez is a balanced character:whereas his attitude towards the Indians may seem obnoxious -although he was a great conqueror,like Colombus,his death was not glorious;both died left alone-he nonetheless does not side with the Inquisition's decisions."Here it does not mean anything" he tells De Silva.This is excellent entertaining stuff.Trust King when it comes to tell a story!.
The storyline, to reiterate briefly, centers on the young Spanish nobleman, Don Pedro de Vargas (Tyrone Power), who offends an official of the Inquisition and is forced, as are his parents, to flee from its net.
I feel Jean Peters carried this film, although it was perfectly suitable for Tyrone Power and he acted admirably, but where was the accent.
With rich vibrant 3 strip Technicolor Samuel Shellabarger's classic novel about the young Spanish nobleman who joins Cortez' Conquistadores in the New World to escape the inquisition comes mightily to the screen.
Tyrone Power is terrific in it and Caesar Romero gives a striking performance as the all conquering Cortez.
Also from the score is the sumptuous music for Catana the peasant girl (The lovely Jean Peters making her debut) and the equally gorgeous theme for the lady Luisa (Barbara Lawrence).
Captain from Castile is a Tyrone Power swashbuckler made under the shrewd eye of Darryl F.
Here, in Spain, we learn about how noble is young Pedro de Varga (Power), how noble his father and mother are, how noble the serving wench Catana (Jean Peters) is, how noble Juan Garcia (Lee J.
In addition to being a great role for Tyrone Power, it was also the feature film debut of Jean Peters (not to mention Jay Silverheels, who later portrayed Tonto).The first of the film follows Tyrone Powers' aristocratic background to the point where he gets in trouble with the Spanish Inquisition, resulting in the death of his young sister and the imprisonment of his mother, father, and himself...although, of course, they escape.
I was interested in noting Roy Roberts, who later ended up in many t.v. sitcoms (e.g., "The Lucy Show").Fine locales (including a real erupting volcano), good acting, lavish color photography...but all that doesn't equal a superior film.
All scenes of the Cortez Expedition were photographed in Mexico, wherever possible on the actual locations.Copyright Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.
145½ minutes.SYNOPSIS: Effete young caballero escapes the Spanish Inquisition by joining up with Cortez and the conquest of Mexico.COMMENT: Dull.
Cesar Romero's genial Cortez is an odd characterization to say the least, while John Sutton's stiff, callow villain is no match for the likes of a Robert Douglas, a Claude Rains or a Basil Rathbone.But the film's greatest problem is actually its script: Wordy and garrulous in dialogue, superficially off-hand in background, casual in pace, one-dimensional and dull in characterization, repetitious and incredible in melodramatic plot.The worst sin of all is that the story lacks a climax.
Prince of Foxes and The Black Rose come to mind.In Captain, that conflict is downplayed in favor of 'Epic Scope' and Power's character actually seems to like and approve of Cortez as an admittedly greed-driven but basically decent good-guy whose heart is in the right place, once you get past his greed, genocidal tendencies and psychopathology.For most of the movie that actually works thanks to Romero's performance and the script's soft-soaping of Cortez's negative personality traits.
Not as classic in my opinion as the other Samuel Shellabarger book that was made into a Tyrone Power film, "Prince of Foxes".
I don't have all that much to add to what you've read here in the comments already, but for what it's worth here are a few more impressions: *Tyrone Power was quite good.
Very good-if unexpected.*Jean Peter-very young and pretty eye candy.*Cesar Romero as Cortez, not shown as being anything but what he was-a pirate, a soldier and a greedy one at that.
Instead, he decides to travel with the Cortez expedition and to make his fortune in Mexico.*Special Stars- Tyrone Power, Lee J.
Film's memorable heroic Alfred Neuman music features what was to become the University of Southern California (USC) 'fight' song played during the conquest of the Aztecs scenes with Cortez.
Always a film that uplifts the viewer's spirit with the plot's drama and action.*Based On- Loosely follows Captain Cortez histories in his conquest of Mexico..
While his parents head for the safety of Italy, Pedro along with Juan and Catana Perez (Jean Peters), a young woman Pedro helped when De Silva's men were upon her, all decide to join an expedition to the new world.
Hoping to change their fortunes they sign on with Hernando Cortez (Cesar Romero) and his search for gold possessed by the Aztecs.The film shifts to their adventures there in the new world and there are plenty of them.
Power is at his best here and Peters makes it hard to believe that this was her first film.Twilight Time has released the film with the cleanest picture ever offered for this title. |
tt0007361 | Snow White | At the beginning of the story, a queen sits sewing at an open window during a winter snowfall when she pricks her finger with her needle, causing three drops of red blood to drip onto the freshly fallen white snow on the black windowsill. Then, she says to herself, "How I wish that I had a daughter that had skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood, and hair as black as ebony." Some time later, the queen gives birth to a baby daughter whom she names Snow White, but dies shortly thereafter.
A year later, Snow White's father, the king, takes a new wife, who is very beautiful, but a wicked and vain woman. The new queen possesses a magic mirror, which she asks every morning, "Magic mirror in my hand, who is the fairest in the land?" The mirror always replies: "My queen, you are the fairest in the land." The queen is always pleased with that, because the magic mirror never lies. But as Snow White grows up, she becomes more beautiful each day and even more beautiful than the queen, and when the queen asks her mirror, it tells her that Snow White is the fairest.
This gives the queen a great shock. She becomes envious, and from that moment on, her heart turns against Snow White, whom the queen grows to hate increasingly with time. Eventually, the angry queen orders a huntsman to take Snow White into the deepest woods to be killed. As proof that Snow White is dead, the queen demands that he returns with her lungs and liver. The huntsman takes Snow White into the forest. After raising his knife, he finds himself unable to kill her and he spares her life. Snow White is told that her stepmother wants her dead and to get far away from the kingdom as possible. He instead brings the queen the heart of a wild animal.
After wandering through the forest, Snow White discovers a tiny cottage belonging to a group of seven dwarfs. Since no one is at home, she eats some of the tiny meals, drinks some of their wine, and then tests all the beds. Finally, the last bed is comfortable enough for her and she falls asleep. When the dwarfs return home, they immediately become aware that someone snuck in secretly, because everything in their home is in disorder. During their loud discussion about who snuck in, they discover the sleeping Snow White. She wakes up and explains to them what happened, and the dwarfs take pity on her and let her stay with them in exchange for housekeeping. They warn her to be careful when alone at home and to let no one in when they are away delving in the mountains.
Meanwhile, the queen asks her mirror once again: "Magic mirror in my hand, who is the fairest in the land?" The mirror replies: "My queen, you are the fairest here so true. But Snow White beyond the mountains at the Seven Dwarfs is a thousand times more beautiful than you". The queen is horrified to learn that the huntsman has betrayed her and that Snow White is still alive. Planning to kill Snow White, the queen disguises herself as an old peddler. The queen appears at the dwarfs' cottage and offers Snow White colorful, silky laced bodices and convinces Snow White to take the most beautiful laces as a present. Then the queen laces her up so tightly that Snow White faints, causing the queen to leave her for dead. But the dwarfs return just in time, and Snow White revives when the dwarfs loosen the laces.
The queen then consults her magic mirror again, and the mirror reveals Snow White's survival. The queen dresses as a comb seller and convinces Snow White to take a beautiful comb as a present. She brushes Snow White's hair with the poisoned comb and the girl faints again. She is again revived by the dwarfs when they remove the comb from her hair. When the mirror again indicates that Snow White still lives, the queen makes a third and final attempt on Snow White by disguising herself as a farmer's wife, an offering a poisoned apple to her. The girl is at first hesitant to accept it, so the queen cuts the apple in half, eating the white (harmless) half and giving the red poisoned half to Snow White. The girl eagerly takes a bite and falls into a state of suspended animation. This time, the dwarfs are unable to revive Snow White. Assuming that she is dead, they place her in a glass casket.
After a short period of time, a prince traveling through the land sees Snow White. He strides to her coffin. Enchanted by her beauty, he instantly falls in love with her. The seven dwarfs succumb to his entreaties to let him have Snow White. The moment he lifts the coffin to carry it away, the piece of poisoned apple falls from between her lips and Snow White awakens saying "Where am I?" The Prince then declares his love for her and soon a wedding is planned. Snow White and the prince invite everyone to come to their wedding party, including Snow White's stepmother.
Meanwhile, the queen, still believing that Snow White is dead, again asks her magic mirror who is the fairest in the land. The mirror says: "Thou, lady, art loveliest here, I ween; but lovelier far is the new-made queen", which enrages the queen. Not knowing that the Prince's bride is her stepdaughter, the queen arrives at the wedding and sees that the bride is Snow White, whom she thought dead. She chokes with rage, falls down, and dies. Snow White and the prince reign happily over the land for many, many years and sometimes traveling into the mountains and visiting the dwarfs, who had been so kind to Snow White. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0337592 | Love Don't Cost a Thing | Alvin Johnson (Nick Cannon) is an extremely intelligent nerd under consideration for a General Motors scholarship, as he is skilled in designing engines. He has also taken up a job as a pool cleaner, to raise money to buy an expensive car part. He's always dreamed of hanging out with the popular kids, especially Paris Morgan (Christina Milian), a beautiful, popular cheerleader dating NBA star Dru Hilton. When Paris crashes her mother's expensive SUV during an argument with Dru, Alvin agrees to repair the car in return for two weeks of dating. Alvin uses money he had saved all summer for his project, jeopardizing his scholarship.
After a few missteps, Alvin begins to integrate himself with the popular crowd. He and Paris grow closer as she shares with him her secret love of music. As they draw close to the end of the two weeks, Alvin takes Paris out on their last day being "together". Paris hints that she would like to kiss Alvin, showing that she does in fact have feelings for him, but he misinterprets her feelings and instead stages a break-up planned for the next day at school. Paris was really in love with him after spending two weeks together, even though Alvin was unaware of it. Alvin continues to grow in popularity, alienating his former nerd friends and dating Paris's friends. In the meantime Paris starts to realize just how shallow and vapid most of her popular friends really are and she starts to question being a part of this group. At the end of the year on Senior Ditch Day, Dru returns, but leaves after he finds out Paris had been dating Alvin. In an attempt to get him back, Paris exposes her deal with Alvin to the whole school, returning him to mediocrity and being a geek.
Alvin's father Clarence (Steve Harvey) agrees to pay for the part, explaining to Alvin that he'd supported his sudden transformation because he wanted him to have some of the same experiences he did in high school. Alvin fixes a car he and his nerd friends had been working on the duration of the film. There is a school basketball game, and the nerds are threatened by the athletes to move to sit somewhere else. At the basketball game, Alvin stands up for his nerd friends against the basketball players. Alvin finally redeems himself in front of everyone. Alvin's nerd friends begin dating popular girls too. Alvin leaves the gymnasium, and as Paris follows him out, she is stopped by Dru, but Paris blows him off for Alvin and they kiss. | blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0037650 | Doll Face | "Doll Face" Carroll is an entertainer looking to expand her reportoire. After a failed audition, where she is recognized as a burlesque performer from the Gaiety Theatre, her manager and fiancé Mike Hannegan suggest she writes an autobiography to project a more literate image and he hires Frederick Manly Gerard as a ghostwriter. Doll Face agrees on the condition she is allowed to dedicate the book to Mike with "For the love of Mike".
Another performer in the burlesque show, Chita Chula, remarks that if the book is a success and Doll Face leaves the show it will probably have to close down. Mike then decides to produce a Broadway show of his own with the financial aid of the performers themselves. Frederick offers to put up any money missing. Chita Chula (portrayed by Carmen Miranda) is skeptical she can pull it off, but Mike assures her she'll "probably wound up being another Carmen Miranda!", something Chita Chula perceives as an insult.
Mike leaks word on the book to the press and, riding the publicity, argues the show got all the press it needs and that the book, although all but finished, needs not to be published. Doll Face, however, decides to go through with it and goes to Jamaica with Frederick for some final touch-ups. Boat engine trouble leaves them marooned on an island and, when Mike finds them, he misreads the situation and breaks up with her. Without "Doll Face" as headliner, the Gayety Theatre struggles and Mike is forced to finally shut it down.
Doll Face releases her book The Genius DeMilo and when Mike sees she dedicated the book to Frederick instead of him, he regrets leaving her. After Doll Face refuses to talk to Mike, he sends a lawyer to stop her show in the middle of opening night, since she is under contract not to appear in any show not produced by him. She agrees to see him and he asks her forgiveness. After they reunite, she tricks the producer of her show to give Mike a 25% share and co-producer credit so the show can continue.
=== Differences from play ===
The film is based on the 1943 play The Naked Genius written by Gypsy Rose Lee. | autobiographical | train | wikipedia | A wartime soufflé from a play by Gypsy Rose Lee (as Louise Hovick), DOLL FACE features a lightweight plot with some snappy dialogue and delivery among the clichés, while director Lewis Seiler's vision is properly focused upon contemporary swing music, highlighting the vocal skill of Vivian Blaine, Perry Como, Carmen Miranda and Martha Stewart (no, not that one).
The scenario has as its primary business a rocky romance between Doll Face Carroll (Blaine), a burlesque queen, and her manager, Mike Hannegan (the stalwart Dennis O'Keefe), along with the latter's efforts to boost his proletarian protégé into the realm of operetta.
Seiler manages to remain faithful to the story line while seamlessly blending in the many musical numbers which, interestingly enough, prove more of a showcase for the perky Stewart and smooth Como than for the top-billed and certainly very pleasant Blaine; the production number for Miranda is a wild one, indeed..
Doll Face Carroll is the woman rejected and Mike Hannegan, the man that is in love with her, wants to show the theater world she is worth the attention.
A grateful Doll Face will make everything possible to give him the recognition he deserves.This 20th Century Fox feature of 1946 gives us a dose of nostalgia.
The musical numbers are well executed, especially the hit song, "Somebody's Walking in my Dream".
All the songs were composed by the team of Harold Adamson and Jimmy McHugh.Vivian Blaine appears in the title role.
In addition we see the irrepressible Carmen Miranda doing "Chico Chico" with a big production number.
Perry Como and Martha Stewart are in hand to do some songs.
Stephen Dunne has a good opportunity."Doll Face" although not a great film, has some enjoyable songs and is entertaining..
He then hits on the idea of using the pre-publicity to stage his own musical starring her at his own theater, rather than give the pleasure to the man that rejected her.
The ghostwriter grows sweet on her, and there's a bit of an idiot plot involving a misunderstanding when they get stranded in a boat en route to the publisher.Carmen Miranda is underutilized, apparently she had a number cut.
I came across this movie only as an inclusion in the Carmen Miranda Collection, and I am commenting here for those in the same situation, who are wondering if this is worth having.As for Carmen: she sings one number, "Chico Chico (from Porto Rico!)", which features a lot of dancing with the chorus.
The main drawback as far as Carmen is concerned is that the film is in black and white, and we are deprived of some of the gaudiness and festiveness that we expect from her participation in a movie.
I know that Technicolor was expensive, but it seems bizarre for Fox to have made black and white musicals after the public came to expect color, and to cast the colorful Carmen Miranda in them!
A better number was excised from the movie, but included in the Special Features --- Carmen wears her famous outfit with the phallic lighthouse atop her head (which lights up on the downbeats at the end of the song), and the number is done in a burlesque style on a runway.
Carmen gets quite a bit of dialogue in this movie, and is actually integrated into the plot, not just a nightclub performer as in some films (like "Down Argentine Way").
Vivian Blaine lacked the spark of an Alice Faye or Betty Grable, the other Fox stars of the day, and came across as brittle and not particularly likable.
The leading men, including Perry Como, were also uninteresting, and there is even a misogynistic undertone to the movie, with male characters bragging about beating their girlfriends to keep them in line.
Como and Blaine's "Hubba Hubba" duet was the only number which for me was fresh and fun, and not overdone.In general, this is not a terrible or unpleasant film, but is not one many would want to rewatch.
Burlesque queen Doll Face Carroll is dismissed from an audition for a legitimate Broadway show because she lacks culture.
He hires a ghost writer to do all the work, but doesn't count on the possibility that Doll Face and her collaborator might have more than a book on their minds.
It's a good watch, if dated and unfortunately Carmen Miranda already was looking haggard only in her 30s.
She sings one song I think in this movie based on a book written by Louise Hovick AKA Gypsy Rose Lee. You see, there's this stripper, played by Vivian Blaine, who can't get a job out of the business to go legitimate, because, in auditions when they find out who she is, they don't want an ex-stripper in their stage play/musical.
So, she and her boyfriend/manager Dennis O'Keefe decide she needs to write a book to get respect and hire a ghost writer to help her.Perry Como is on hand with his smooth voice, but while the movie has its moments, there aren't enough good songs or Miranda to get really excited about or to really recommend it..
Although it is also loosely based on the life of burlesque queen Gypsy Rose Lee, this uninspired film is much less interesting than the 1962 musical Gypsy with Natalie Wood in the title role.
The best reason to watch this film is to see Perry Como, later to become a crooning television superstar, in a rare film role and Carmen Miranda dancing and camping her way through "Chico Chico." Como and Blaine bring some culture shock to the film when they sing "Dig You Later (A-Hubba Hubba Hubba)," mocking Japan for losing World War II and homogenizing African-American hep-cat style for a white audience.
Available on DVD in the 20th Century Fox "Marquee Musicals" series, Doll Face is a curiosity, not a classic..
This film wastes the talents of Vivian Blaine and Carmen Miranda.
Evidently produced right after the end of World War II, Fox didn't care to spend the money on Technicolor, and "cherry blonde" Blaine and flamboyant Miranda should have never been photographed in black and white.The score is ho-hum.
The composers did a much better job on the previous film "Nob Hill" also produced in 1945 in Technicolor and also starring Blaine, with two superb ballads, even though the songs are nearly forgotten today.Miranda is given only one performance, with the typical tropical theme, a boring song, again losing a lot without Technicolor.So why did Fox bother?
'Doll Face' is watchable, mostly for curiosity or for any musical fan who wants to continue to find more to watch, but while there are good things here one couldn't help feeling that it could have been better than it turned out.'Doll Face' is nicely photographed, and has very professional-looking set and costume design.
Would have preferred for it to be in colour, and numbers like "Chico Chico" cried out for it, but depending on budget and such not every musical or film can have the benefit of being in colour.
It would have been more preferable but it made do, the film still looks nice enough (if not giving the wow factor) without it.The songs are lovely and pass the memorability test, the highlights being "Walking in My Dreams", "Dig You Later" and "Here Comes Heaven Again" and all three are sung beautifully and performed with spirit.
The cast are a very mixed bag, but faring best are a hilariously sparkling Carmen Miranda and vivacious Martha Stewart.
Dennis O'Keefe also tries hard and does have moments of amusement.On the other hand, Vivian Blaine is a polished but passionless lead, and while Perry Como looks handsomely and sings exquisitely (then again when did he ever not?) he's pretty bland and doesn't look very at ease.
That is true with much of the male cast actually, the roles are underwritten and people may also object to the way they're written too, sexism has been brought up in a couple of comments and understandably (the male characters' attitudes towards women doesn't really hold up now and be a sour note for a fair few)."Chico Chico" aside, the choreography is very routine aside, most of the numbers being so indifferently choreographed and directed, as well as confined, that the one with the most energy and the most cinematic-feeling feels over-produced in comparison.
The story makes thin ice seem thick and feels plodding and dreary in the non-musical scenes, and was expecting more energy and wit from the script here which felt bland.Overall, worthwhile enough curiosity but unremarkable and had a lot of room to be much better.
And third, and most egregious, lyrics of one song celebrate the bombing the Japanese.Vivian Blaine, called Doll Face, real name Mary Elizabeth, plays a queen of burlesque who auditions for a Broadway musical, only to be recognized by one of her patrons.
Nowadays they would put a chimpanzee in a Broadway musical if they thought he could make money, so there's another indication that this is an old movie.Her boyfriend (O'Keefe) decides she should ghost-write her autobiography and, after using a lot of high-faluting language, she'll be classy enough for Broadway.
The man he hires, however (Michael Dunne), becomes interested in Doll Face, and not just as a client.
He had a beautiful voice, singing "Red, Hot, and Beautiful," "Here Comes Heaven Again," and "Dig You Later." Martha Stewart, a vivacious performer, did an energetic job as someone wanting to take Doll Face's place.
And Carmen Miranda was...Carmen Miranda, singing "Chico Chico."There were lots of numbers in this film and not much story.
Though not as good as Pal Joey, Doll Face is a pleasant and snappy musical about a stripper who gets involved with her manager and a ghost writer.
And who wrote the play on which this is based on, none other than Gypsy Rose Lee. She certainly exploited her literary talent and persona to the max.Vivian Blaine plays our Queen of Burlesque who wants very much to break into Broadway and the legitimate theater.
I think you see the basis for the romantic triangle.Though the three leads do fine the plot is an excuse to display some musical numbers that songwriters Jimmy McHugh and Harold Adamson wrote for this film.
And Perry Como is our lead singer and he's got a secondary romance going with Martha Stewart.Which brings me to the big hit of the show A Hubba Hubba Hubba (Dig You Later).
Though those atomic bombings are not mentioned we have such lyrics about a B-29 pilot dropping another load for luck and then turning away saying Yuk Yuk. There's still controversy about whether the atomic bomb use was right or not, but there sure ain't reason for any Yuk Yuks.I'd probably rate Doll Face higher because over all it's a pretty good musical.
Veteran song and dance beauty Vivian Blaine plays Mary Elizabeth Carroll, better known as burlesque star 'Doll Face', has her sights set high for the legitimate stage.
Her boyfriend manager Mike Hannegan(Dennis O'Keefe)is her number one booster; and convinces her to hire a ghost writer, Fredrick Manly Gerard(Michael Dunne), to help with an auto-biography to prove she has attained 'class'.
Of course, the writer comes between the songstress and her guy.Blaine sings "Somebody's Walking in My Dream" and reprises a couple of nice tunes, "Here Come's Heaven Again" and "Red, Hot and Beautiful" with crooner Perry Como, who sings one of his break-through songs "Dig You Late(A-Hubba Hubba Hubba)".
And the one and only Carmen Miranda as Chita Chula sings "Chico Chico".
This fun over-looked musical is based on a play by Gypsy Rose Lee..
"Doll Face" is a minor musical which would undoubtedly have enjoyed greater appeal if it had not been saddled with a repertoire of pleasant but totally unmemorable songs.
Louise Hovick's stage play is that old chestnut about the guy who hires a male teacher for his fiancé and suspects the two are two-timing him!However, I must admit that if you're not expecting anything special and your mood is indulgent rather than critical, you will probably enjoy the movie to some extent.
It is certainly enthusiastically played by a surprisingly good cast headed by Dennis O'Keefe, Vivian Blaine, Perry Como and Carmen Miranda.All in all, "Doll Face" certainly passes an agreeable - if unmemorable - 80 minutes..
Nothing spectacular about it, although the story is fairly decent, and is based on the life of Gypsy Rose Lee (played here as "Doll Face" Carroll by Vivian Blaine).
Lewis's wife -- Martha Stewart -- plays Como love interest; also she does "okay", it's clear she was not destined to have a very extensive movie career.But as I mentioned, for nearly 2 years Perry Como had been a rapidly rising singing star with multiple million sellers.
But his voice here is a strong baritone, and he does nicely soloing or dueting on several numbers -- Perry Como and Martha Stewart on "Somebody's Walking in My Dream", Perry Como solo on "Red Hot and Beautiful", Perry soloing on "Here Comes Heaven Again", Perry and Vivian Blaine on "Here Comes Heaven Again", and Perry Como and Martha Stewart on "Dig You Later (A-Hubba Hubba Hubba)" (which became a Como solo and million seller on RCA Victor records).So, sit back and enjoy a rising Como, a halfway decent story, and a nice performance by Vivian Blaine..
Doll Face proves the point that all old movies aren't classics.
In fact, Doll Face proves the point that most movies, whether made 60 years ago, 30 years ago or last week, are deservedly forgotten because they age so badly.
This guy-has-doll, guy-loses-doll, guy-wins-doll-back story gives us Doll Face Carroll (Vivian Blaine), a burleyque star with a great voice and a big following among the bald- headed set, and Mike Hannegan (Dennis O'Keefe), her manager and the impresario of the burlesque house where she stars.
Doll Face wants to go legit as a singer on Broadway and Mike wants to help her...but her notoriety as a burlesque queen gets in the way.
So Mike cooks up an idea to have a noted author ghost Doll Face's memoirs and smooth over the rough spots.
Doll Face will get culture and that will get her legit stage offers.
A producer puts on a Broadway show based on Doll Face's hit memoirs.
Doll Face not only stars but so do all her pals from Mike's burlesque show, which means Perry Como, Carmen Miranda and Martha Stewart.
And Mike manages to win back Doll Face's love, along with 25 per cent of the smash show.
We get Como and Stewart singing and sort of dancing to "A-hubba, Hubba, Hubba," Blaine, Como and Stewart separately and in various combinations singing "Somebody's Walking in My Dreams," Como fronting the girls with "Red, Hot and Beautiful" and crooning "Here Comes Heaven Again," plus Carmen Miranda rolling her hips and eyes while trilling her r's through "Chico Chico," the big production number.
The songs by Jimmy McHugh (music) and Harold Adamson (lyrics) are professional but that's about it.
The only song that became a hit was Como's recording of "A-hubba, Hubba, Hubba." The big Latin production number with Miranda looks like 20th Century Fox was economizing.
For about half the movie, when guy loses doll and before guy gets her back, Doll Face the movie flops into angst and anguish, with over-acting by Blaine and far too much screen time with her and her ghostwriter, Frederick Gerard (Steven Dunne).
Dennis O'Keefe was a versatile guy, but even he can't make Mike Hannegan interesting.
Vivian Blaine, on the other hand, was an actress who, at least to me, always came across on film as so polished and professional as to be bloodless.
Blaine made a big hit on Broadway four years later as Adelaide in Guys and Dolls, so perhaps movies simply didn't do her talent justice.
The back of my DVD jacket features a large picture of Carmen Miranda wearing a lighthouse attached to a turban.
Perhaps the thinking at Fox was that Carmen, as an established star, could guarantee an audience for films otherwise featuring their "B" leads.
This is the 3rd of a series of 4 musicals released in 44-46, in which Carmen was teamed with new "B" musical leading lady Vivian Blaine, who basically replaces Alice Faye or Betty Grable in Fox's "A" team, getting to sing the romantic ballads and participate in the main romantic entanglements.
Also, established singer, but newcomer to Hollywood, Perry Como was included in 3 of these films, as either primarily a singing specialist or a leading character in the plot.
She again upstages Perry, following his staid 2nd rendition of "Red Hot and Beautiful", with an appropriate sexy version, while prancing around the burlesque stage in mimicry of Vivian's prior performance.
Unlike most of her other Fox films, Carmen doesn't have anyone with comedic talent to interact with.
Yep, the male leads and supports were all pretty faceless, save for Perry, and their romance with 'Doll Face' unconvincing.
"Women are like rugs---you gotta take 'em out and beat 'em every once in a while"--Dennis O'Keefe from DOLL FACE.In many ways, this film reminded me of BORN YESTERDAY--though this film came out a year before Garson Kanin and Ruth Gordon's hit play debuted on Broadway--and five years before the movie version of BORN YESTERDAY debuted.
However, BORN YESTERDAY was a comedy and DOLL FACE was an unconvincing musical...and I can see why it has sunk into the public domain--it just isn't that good a film.
Part of this is the poor script, part of it is too much dull musical numbers and part of it is because the male love interest, Dennis O'Keefe, is a rather abusive and neglectful man--and seeing him getting the girl (Vivian Blaine) in the end was a bit disturbing.
Regardless, it's a very forgettable film that started off well enough but really bogged down as the film progressed.If you care, Perry Como and Carmen Miranda also starred in the film but their talents (particularly Como's) were rather wasted. |
tt0004972 | The Birth of a Nation | === Part 1: Civil War of United States ===
The film follows two juxtaposed families. One is the Northern Stonemans: abolitionist U.S. Representative Austin Stoneman (based on the Reconstruction-era Representative Thaddeus Stevens), his daughter, and two sons. The other is the Southern Camerons: Dr. Cameron is married to his wife, Mrs. Cameron. The couple also has three sons and two daughters.
Phil, the elder Stoneman son, falls in love with Margaret Cameron, during the brothers' visit to the Cameron estate in South Carolina, representing the Old South. Meanwhile, young Ben Cameron idolizes a picture of Elsie Stoneman.
During the Civil War, the young men from both families enlist in their respective armies for the war. The younger Stoneman and two of the Cameron brothers are killed in the war. Meanwhile, the Cameron women are rescued by Confederate soldiers who rout a Black militia, after an attack on the Cameron home. Ben Cameron leads a heroic charge at the Siege of Petersburg, earning the nickname of "the Little Colonel". But he is also wounded and captured. He is then taken to a Union hospital in Washington, D.C. During his stay at the hospital, he is told that he will be hanged. Also at the hospital, he meets Elsie Stoneman, whose picture he has been carrying; she is working there as a nurse. Elsie takes Cameron's mother, who had traveled to Washington to tend her son, to see Abraham Lincoln, and Mrs. Cameron persuades the President to pardon Ben.
When Lincoln is assassinated at Ford's Theater, his conciliatory postwar policy expires with him. In the wake of the president's death, Austin Stoneman and other Radical Republicans are determined to punish the South, employing harsh measures that Griffith depicts as having been typical of the Reconstruction era.
=== Part 2: Reconstruction ===
Stoneman and his protégé Silas Lynch, a mulatto exhibiting psychopathic tendencies, head to South Carolina to observe the implementation of Reconstruction policies firsthand. During the election, in which Lynch is elected lieutenant governor, blacks are observed stuffing the ballot boxes, while many Whites are denied the vote. The newly elected, mostly black members of the South Carolina legislature are shown at their desks displaying inappropriate behavior, such as one member taking off his shoe and putting his feet up on his desk, and others drinking liquor and feasting on stereotypically African American fare such as fried chicken.
Meanwhile, inspired by observing white children pretending to be ghosts to scare black children, Ben fights back by forming the Ku Klux Klan. As a result, Elsie, out of loyalty to her father, breaks off her relationship with Ben. Later, Flora Cameron goes off alone into the woods to fetch water and is followed by Gus, a freedman and soldier who is now a captain. He confronts Flora and tells her that he desires to get married. Frightened, she flees into the forest, pursued by Gus. Trapped on a precipice, Flora warns Gus she will jump if he comes any closer. When he does, she leaps to her death. Having run through the forest looking for her, Ben has seen her jump; he holds her as she dies, then carries her body back to the Cameron home. In response, the Klan hunts down Gus, tries him, finds him guilty, and lynches him.
Lynch then orders a crackdown on the Klan after discovering Gus' murder. He also secures the passing of legislature allowing mixed-race marriages. Dr. Cameron, Ben's father, is arrested for possessing Ben's Klan regalia, now considered a crime punishable by death. He is, however, rescued by Phil Stoneman and a few of his black servants. Together they flee, along with Margaret Cameron. When their wagon breaks down, they make their way through the woods to a small hut that is home to two sympathetic former Union soldiers who agree to hide them. As an intertitle states, "The former enemies of North and South are united again in defense of their Aryan birthright."
Congressman Stoneman leaves to avoid being connected with Lt. Gov. Lynch's crackdown. Elsie, learning of Dr. Cameron's arrest, goes to Lynch to plead for his release. Lynch, who had been lusting after Elsie, tries to force her to marry him, which causes her to faint. Stoneman returns, causing Elsie to be placed in another room. At first, Stoneman is happy when Lynch tells him he wants to marry a white woman, but is then angered when Lynch tells him that it is Stoneman's daughter. Undercover Klansmen spies discover Elsie's plight when she breaks a window and cries out for help, and the Klansmen go to get help. Elsie falls unconscious again, and revives while gagged and being bound. The Klan, gathered together at full strength and with Ben leading them, rides in to gain control of the town. When news about Elsie reaches Ben, he and others go to her rescue. Elsie frees her mouth and screams for help. Lynch is captured. Victorious, the Klansmen celebrate in the streets. Meanwhile, Lynch's militia surrounds and attacks the hut where the Camerons are hiding. The Klansmen, with Ben at their head, race in to save them just in time. The next election day, blacks find a line of mounted and armed Klansmen just outside their homes, and are intimidated into not voting.
The film concludes with a double wedding as Margaret Cameron marries Phil Stoneman and Elsie Stoneman marries Ben Cameron. The masses are shown oppressed by a giant warlike figure who gradually fades away. The scene shifts to another group finding peace under the image of Jesus Christ. The penultimate title is: "Dare we dream of a golden day when the bestial War shall rule no more. But instead — the gentle Prince in the Hall of Brotherly Love in the City of Peace." | melodrama | train | wikipedia | The second part, set in the reconstruction era, contains almost all of the disturbing material, and it also is really not all that great in terms of cinematic quality.Then also, the degree to which "The Birth of a Nation" may have influenced the development of cinema has very likely been overstated .
The controversy that it generated may very well have helped it to remain better known than other films of the era that were equally innovative and/or lavish, or nearly so.If the movie had ended shortly after the memorable and well-crafted Ford's Theater scene, the anti-war sentiment and similar themes would remain the main focus, since the effects of war on families and individuals is depicted convincingly and thoughtfully.
He may well have been ahead of the pack in terms of appreciating their possibilities, but that does not mean that cinema would not have developed as it did without this particular movie.Just as one example, the Italian epic "Cabiria", from the previous year, has the same kind of lavish scale, is quite resourceful in its techniques, and is quite entertaining, without causing so much controversy.Other early feature-length films also include some creative efforts to adapt film-making techniques to longer running times and more complex stories.
He tried to apologize with the making of his next film, the masterpiece "Intolerance." He certainly had black friends on the set during the making of "Birth of a Nation" but this harks of the classic case of the good man who doesn't realize that some of the things he is saying are hurtful.
When "The Birth of a Nation" came out, people began to take film much more seriously and wanted to see more high quality movies when it was brand new.
1) It shows how far the movie making process has come, and gives us all a way to truly appreciate some of the other early films, and how far the moviemaking technology advanced between 1915 and the 1930's.
Many of the other reviewers have labeled this film as racist garbage, but it truly does represent one group's view of society at the time, and gives us a great way to understand some of the driving factors behind the race relations problems we would have later.
When taken in context, you can only be impressed by Griffith's storytelling abilities, no matter what you thought of the story.While the movie is no great work by today's standards, and I actually found it very hard to watch considering it's simple style as compared to today's movies, I think this is a movie you definitely must see.
For this reason and others, Birth of a Nation's claims to historical accuracy would be comical, if not for the horrific implications of the film.That said, this film should be seen, mainly because it provides a document of a poisonous way of thinking that is by no means dead.
Some of the innovations of BOAN (it should be noted that while Griffith didn't originate all of the techniques used in BOAN, he was the first to integrate them all so seamlessly in a feature-length film) included night-time photography-Billy Bitzer achieved by firing magnesium flares into the night for the split-screen sequence of the sacking of Atlanta, being the first film to have an original score, the first film to employ hundreds of extras for the battle scenes, flashbacks and parallel editing, and extensive use of close-ups, long shots, dissolves, etc.
It is now 60 years later and I see "The Birth of A Nation" is scheduled to be screened on TCM next month, so probably the time has come to watch it again; and perhaps comments based on my original viewing so long ago may be appropriate at this time as the impressions I now have of this film will be those that have been with me for most of my life.Films showing conflicts must present both sides as believing utterly in the righteousness of their cause; but historical films also have at least a moral responsibility to ensure the material shown has some reasonable approximation to historical accuracy, and whenever possible the convictions of both sides should be equally fairly presented.
This film is sometimes denounced as racist, and it appears to be when judged by a time following the race riots and black civil rights movement.The black citizens are often shown as illiterate and ignorant.
This also must be judged both by the situation at the time, and with the realization that there were real wrongs to be righted (the carpetbaggers again).Now that a DVD with essentially the whole movie is available, watch it again, trying to put yourself in the place of someone who has heard stories of the civil war (the Southern viewpoint) and reconstruction all your life, and who probably had a father or uncle(s) who fought for the Confederacy.
(Some of which are believed to have been suggested by the cameraman, and not Griffith himself).The history (Reconstruction): For those who argue that this film is historically accurate, I can only guess that you have another agenda, much like those who argued the same at the time.
This film production is controversial , but his plot is exciting, the story is touching, all the performances are excellent , the film presents us a cynical way , is direct with historical facts , all production is most blatant , but Griffith 's narrative is sweet and conveys feelings .Part 1: the American Civil War , displayed strongly with a dramatic charge, the actors express emotions with their eyes , and her patriot message shows in the sharpest scenes.Part 2: reconstruction offers tragedy , justice and revenge , here feelings are more acute , the Ku Klux Kan glorifies , everything is so brutally racist, the struggle for survival is overwhelming.Here African Americans are the villains , they show threatening looks , are murderers, his eyes are sexual threats; Heroes white men are always in constant struggle , they apply their justice from the very personal point of view , they protect their wives and families, the film starts with two families separated by the war , and ends with a spectacular rescue where African Americans are defeated.There is a shocking scene , a white girl commits suicide to avoid being raped by an African American , this scene is this scene is memorable, the music is fine, Griffith defends freedom of expression through his film, but what matters most is the film quality.
Lillian Gish's performance was, for me, simply sensational while Mae Marsh's character of the 'young, hyperactive teenager' was Oscar-winning material.That said, I wanted to challenge each and every one who watches this film and who looks at the obvious racism (although it tends to be overly stated by many) to do some research for themselves on the circumstances surrounding the time setting of the film.Many will shout long and hard (as is their right) that the film is racist - that it makes generalisations about people and groups that can't be substantiated.
To be honest, in spite of my research into the matter myself, I have also been unable to determine just what exactly 'happened' and what the 'truth' was.To see the insertion of the KKK in this film immediately gets one's back up (it did me) - but it wasn't til I did some research that I found out that the original sect ceased to exist by 1871 and was only reformed along *different* lines in 1915 (and partly as a result of this film).I have no doubt that Griffith misrepresented many of the 'facts' of history but my appeal to each watcher here is to research the matter for themselves - especially those interested in studying film-making - and to see what the true state of affairs was in post-Civil War America, compare it to that portrayed in 'Birth' and see where Griffith chose to re-write history.Film making is influential.
It wipes-away the view of "the Silents" as having consisted of either overheated melodramas or "screwball comedies" played out against cardboard sets.I bought a DVD version of this several months ago and I will admit that it's difficult to watch, simply because it has so little in common with our modern films- black-and-white, no sound, no totally gratuitous violence or sex, no fast-cuts or digital special effects.
benefits of a home education, i presume?to those who praise this movie...let's say a black director makes a film depicting whites as ignorant, violent, subhuman heathens, but hey, its a cinematic masterpiece.
That said, current audiences should concentrate on the amazing achievement of this film.Griffith was a master story teller, and Birth of a Nation is a great story, following two families (one Southern and one Northern) as they lurch through the Civil War and the following Reconstruction period.
but no more than 90 percent of Westerns, almost all American movies about war (against Germany or Japan or Vietnam), or "Gone with the wind" (which also praises the KKK and it shows black people as good servants and bad free citizens).The difference with any other racist artwork is, of course, that this is the best of the best.
The "KKK" in this film are shown as the Heroes but they are the real evil in this film.another thing the burns me is that all the Black Characters in this film are played by white actors in black make-up, I know this because no African-American would ever participate such racist Garbage like this one..
The recurring criticisms towards the film's portrayal of racism oftentimes include the use of black-face makeup on white actors, the limited portrayal of black people being shown in a negative and sexually aggressive manner, historical inaccuracies to favor the South's point of view, and the glorification of the KKK.
It falls into that category of "Movies That Are Technically Important but Hard to Watch," and that much smaller category of "Really Evil Movies." Every critic recognizes that, yes, this is probably the most racist film ever made, a terrible revision of post-Civil War history, and a glorification of the KKK - ah, but it's so innovative, and so wonderfully shot!
At a running-time of over three hours it was the longest film to ever be released back in 1915.Obviously, due to its racist portrayal of black people this movie is not for everyone but if you are interested in the history of Hollywood you've got to check it out, while ignoring the historical inaccuracies and racist bull crap Without this movie Hollywood wouldn't be what it is today.
A spectacular, elaborate production covering the Civil War era of American history, with an unfortunate last half drawn from Thomas Dixon's fictional novel "The Clansman." Made in 1915, the film makes a sincere and documented attempt to recreate several signal events of the period including Lincoln's call for volunteers, battle scenes, Lincoln's assassination, and the signing of the end of the war by Grant and Lee. Unfortunately, it's hard to believe that the last half of the film is in any way historically accurate with blacks shown taking over government, dispensing justice, and running amok all over the South.
Yes, I found a three hour long, silent, racist propaganda film quite entertaining at times, but that's just because I found the overall story very interesting and the previously mentioned battle scenes are quite incredible.Of course, it isn't a film that deserves ONLY praise.
While I gave it a 10/10 star rating, it probably doesn't deserve the honor because of it's brutal racism.As I said, it gets much more racist during the second half of the film in which the forming of the Klu Klux Klan is shown, and how they save the day from the "depressing" period of time in which the "poor" slave owners lost their slaves by killing African Americans.The most dreadfully racist scene in the film includes the Klan getting cheered on as they salute their fellow southerners .
As disgustingly and disturbingly racist as it is, with its black face actors, glorification of the KKK, and victimizing of all African American characters, D.W. Griffith's war epic also manages to be a thrilling, engaging, and action packed epic that has influenced later films for decades to come, and is required viewing for any student of film..
At the base of Griffith's film, for all its importance to early American cinema, is a ridiculous, unbelievable, perverted distortion of history which champions the Ku Klux Klan as the "saviors" of the "endangered" white race.
It is no wonder that studies showed that in many areas where "The Birth of a Nation" was shown, racist attacks against African-Americans increased sharply.Griffith was nothing better than a racist savage who knew how to make movies.
A good film for me is one I keep thinking about, for its story or its images,or both.And this is certainly the case with Birth of a nation.I understand that many people will say,how can you like a film in which the Ku-Klux-Klan are the saviors,that is plain racist and historical wrong?
It got to me from the very beginning.Griffith knew how to mix the big events and the more common,everyday-ones.In this case the American civil war and the influences on two families,the Stonemans who live in the north and the Camerons from the south.Two families that are connected through their sons and daughters who are friends.Maybe a bit predictable but Griffith makes you care.He pictures the battlefield and the horror of this war perfectly.On the front where the soldiers die but also on the homefront, where families are attacked in their homes, and of course the powerlessnes of women when they lose their dear ones.The second part of the film is more politic.The action shifts to the south in a period of reconstruction.
After this event the Ku Klux Klan takes matters in hand.Now the question remains if Griffith was a racist.He certainly was hurt when he was accused of racism and he removed some scenes from the film after the release.I'm no specialist in American history, but I was surprised to hear that what Griffith portrays in this film was written down by famous American historians from that time.So it could be that Griffith was genuinely misinformed about what happened in these troubled years after the Civil War. Being said that there are many other examples of 'creative' people who were judged as racist, sometimes only years later.
W. Griffith, including modern-day columnists of know-nothing newspapers (such as the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette) have condemned it as "racist" or as something else ugly.One must take into account the times in which it was made; and one must also realize that neither the movie nor the director in any way intended an attack on black Americans or even on Yankees.As it would probably be foolish to accuse the director of "Natural Born Killers" of promoting murder, it is more than wrong to accuse Griffith of promoting racism.The movie needs to be viewed as the entertainment spectacle it tried to be; and it needs to be viewed as having some tiny bit of historical veracity, if not in the details, at least in the overall picture.There are scenes, such as the Little Colonel's homecoming, that never fail to bring tears to my eyes, as often as I see the film.And there are other scenes that bring chuckles, however often I see them.Griffith actually got better in his later films, but there are so many instances of genius in "Birth of a Nation," that this film is absolutely a classic.Anyone who has not seen it just does not know the history of Hollywood..
It is really difficult to look objectively at this key moment in movie history, almost 90 years down the line.Griffith's greatest achievement has to be seen in its historical context to understand its lauding of the Ku Klux Klan; here was someone who saw the Civil War and the movements within it with glory and affection, and who undoubtedly had very different values to today's viewers.
While I'm sure that the cinematic effort shown in this film is quite worthy of praise, the result is a film that spits in the face of decency.This piece of fiction, under the guise of telling the story of the Civil War and the birth of the KKK (or a nation), is so fundamentally flawed with a racist depiction of elected blacks during reconstruction (who, among other things, are responsible for our public education system) that I can't imagine anyone not finding it disturbing.As a descendant of two Michiganders who were among the first troops to defend Washington in 1861 (and later died), I'm revolted..
This beautiful piece of racist propaganda centers around the moving story of how the heroic Ku Klux Klan saved the South from being ruled by the terrible immoral Negroes after the Civil War. It includes such unforgettable scenes as the one in which a group of Klan members race into town to save a white girl from being raped by an evil black pervert--of which there are a great many in this film.
Griffith made "The Birth of a Nation" at the outset of World War One. It is the product of a bygone age and should be viewed as such.The arguments about racism spewed upon this film by so many who should know better are completely out of place.
If you can't understand that, then this film is not for you.If you hate this movie because of its racism then you hate America because that's what it was like at the time.
The majority of Americans in 1915 were NOT supporters of the KKK, "Like history written by lightning," Wilson's famous quote, actually was in reference to the huge spectacle of the film in general more than a political comment, (and indicates the President's lack of historical knowledge) and sure, racism did abound at the time.
I have only a brief comment: Birth of a Nation seems interestingly to be paradigmatic of American film ever since: a truly passionate and emotionally involving movie, full of brilliant shots and great cinematography, groundbreaking in every way, that is interesting to watch and fun to enjoy. |
tt0442632 | Bleak House | Sir Leicester Dedlock and his wife Lady Honoria live on his estate at Chesney Wold. Unknown to Sir Leicester, Lady Dedlock had a lover, Captain Hawdon, before she married and had a daughter by him. Lady Dedlock believes her daughter is dead.
The daughter, Esther, is in fact alive and being raised by Miss Barbary, Lady Dedlock's sister. Esther does not know Miss Barbary is her aunt. After Miss Barbary dies, John Jarndyce becomes Esther's guardian and assigns the Chancery lawyer "Conversation" Kenge to take charge of her future. After attending school for six years, Esther moves in with him at Bleak House.
Jarndyce simultaneously assumes custody of two other wards, Richard Carstone and Ada Clare (who are both his and one another's distant cousins). They are beneficiaries in one of the wills at issue in Jarndyce and Jarndyce; their guardian is a beneficiary under another will, and the two wills conflict. Richard and Ada soon fall in love, but though Mr Jarndyce does not oppose the match, he stipulates that Richard must first choose a profession. Richard first tries a career in medicine, and Esther meets Allan Woodcourt, a physician, at the house of Richard's tutor. When Richard mentions the prospect of gaining from the resolution of Jarndyce and Jarndyce, John Jarndyce beseeches him never to put faith in what he calls "the family curse".
Meanwhile, Lady Dedlock is also a beneficiary under one of the wills. Early in the book, while listening to the reading of an affidavit by the family solicitor, Mr Tulkinghorn, she recognises the handwriting on the copy. The sight affects her so much she almost faints, which Tulkinghorn notices and investigates. He traces the copyist, a pauper known only as "Nemo," in London. Nemo has recently died, and the only person to identify him is a street-sweeper, a poor homeless boy named Jo, who lives in a particularly grim and poverty-stricken part of the city known as Tom-All-Alone's.
Lady Dedlock is also investigating, disguised as her maid, Mademoiselle Hortense. Lady Dedlock pays Jo to take her to Nemo's grave. Meanwhile, Tulkinghorn is concerned Lady Dedlock's secret could threaten the interests of Sir Leicester and watches her constantly, even enlisting her maid to spy on her. He also enlists Inspector Bucket to run Jo out of town, to eliminate any loose ends that might connect Nemo to the Dedlocks.
Esther sees Lady Dedlock at church and talks with her later at Chesney Wold – though neither woman recognises their connection. Later, Lady Dedlock does discover that Esther is her child. However, Esther has become sick (possibly with smallpox, since it permanently disfigures her) after nursing the homeless boy Jo. Lady Dedlock waits until Esther has recovered before telling her the truth. Though Esther and Lady Dedlock are happy to be reunited, Lady Dedlock tells Esther they must never acknowledge their connection again.
Upon her recovery, Esther finds that Richard, having failed at several professions, has disobeyed his guardian and is trying to push Jarndyce and Jarndyce to conclusion in his and Ada's favour. In the process, Richard loses all his money and declines in health. He and Ada have secretly married, and Ada is pregnant. Esther has her own romance when Mr Woodcourt returns to England, having survived a shipwreck, and continues to seek her company despite her disfigurement. Unfortunately, Esther has already agreed to marry her guardian, John Jarndyce.
Hortense and Tulkinghorn discover the truth about Lady Dedlock's past. After a confrontation with Tulkinghorn, Lady Dedlock flees her home, leaving a note apologising for her conduct. Tulkinghorn dismisses Hortense, who is no longer of any use to him. Feeling abandoned and betrayed, Hortense kills Tulkinghorn and seeks to frame Lady Dedlock for his murder. Sir Leicester, discovering his lawyer's death and his wife's flight, suffers a catastrophic stroke, but he manages to communicate that he forgives his wife and wants her to return.
Inspector Bucket, who has previously investigated several matters related to Jarndyce and Jarndyce, accepts Sir Leicester's commission to find Lady Dedlock. At first he suspects Lady Dedlock of the murder but is able to clear her of suspicion after discovering Hortense's guilt, and he requests Esther's help to find her. Lady Dedlock has no way to know of her husband's forgiveness or that she has been cleared of suspicion, and she wanders the country in cold weather before dying at the cemetery of her former lover, Captain Hawdon (Nemo). Esther and Bucket find her there.
Progress in Jarndyce and Jarndyce seems to take a turn for the better when a later will is found, which revokes all previous wills and leaves the bulk of the estate to Richard and Ada. Meanwhile, John Jarndyce cancels his engagement to Esther, who becomes engaged to Mr Woodcourt. They go to Chancery to find Richard. On their arrival, they learn that the case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce is finally over, but the costs of litigation have entirely consumed the estate. Richard collapses, and Mr Woodcourt diagnoses him as being in the last stages of tuberculosis. Richard apologises to John Jarndyce and dies. Jarndyce takes in Ada and her child, a boy whom she names Richard. Esther and Woodcourt marry and live in a Yorkshire house which Jarndyce gives to them. The couple later raise two daughters.
Many of the novel's subplots focus on minor characters. One such subplot is the hard life and happy, though difficult, marriage of Caddy Jellyby and Prince Turveydrop. Another plot focuses on George Rouncewell's rediscovery of his family, and his reunion with his mother and brother. | murder | train | wikipedia | Gillian Anderson as Lady Dedlock is maybe a bit too icy (frozen solid?), but that's what the role calls for, I suppose.Another excellent feature is the period atmosphere.
Half-way through this version of Charles Dickens' weighty novel seems a good time to comment on it.
The BBC have taken the view that, as Bleak House was originally presented to its reading public in short magazine instalments, it is a good idea to present it in half-hour segments twice a week in the soap opera tradition.Andrew Davies, who has adapted other books before such as Pride and Prejudice and House of Cards, has done an excellent job here - tweaking and inventing as you must to make television drama work, but without losing the context of the piece.Despite the jarring camera work and bitty scenes, there are some outstanding performances here - Charles Dance as the scheming lawyer Tulkinghorn; Denis Lawson as John Jarndyce, attracted to his ward Esther despite having paid for her upkeep since she was a child; Pauline Collins as Miss Flyte, ever twittering on alongside her caged birds about 'the day of judgement'; Gillian Anderson as Lady Dedlock, who tries to hide her mysterious secret; Johnny Vegas, who fits the character of drunken landlord Krook like a glove; and many others.There are also witty and perceptive cameos from the likes of Richard Griffiths, Matthew Kelly, and Ian Richardson.I would have preferred to see hour-long episodes but that is only a small quibble (the other would be the invention of a character - Clamb - who seems to serve no useful purpose).
The directing is excellent, producing uniformly good performances from the actors - even from the likes of Johnny Vegas - and particularly from Charles Dance as Tulkinghorn and from the actress playing Esther Summerson (a tiresomely one-dimensional character in the book).
Gillian Anderson is luminous as Lady Dedlock in this adaptation of Dickens's Bleak House.
I can't remember the last British costume drama I saw which showcased as much acting talent as this, whether it is the dastardly lawyer played by Charles Dance or the slatternly mother who is Lisa Tarbuck; watch out especially for Pauline Collins (a known talent) and Johnny Vegas (a revelation) who are both really rather good.
Bleak House works on every single level, and certainly left this viewer alternately gripped or moved, as Davies rolls out the parallel stories of the Jarndyce wards and their companion Esther Summerson, and the slow, horrible destruction wrought on Honoria Deadlock.Casting is absolute perfection, right down to the minor characters, and Chadwick, White and Rhode James have enabled the most delicious characterisations from every player.
However, singling these two out in no way lessens the performances from other cast members - each in turn creates an incredibly believable character.So one of the BBC triumphs of the decade, and unmissable in every respect!.
I disagree, though, with those who feel that the wonderful actress who plays Esther Summerson rescues "a tiresomely one-dimensional character in the book" - rather, I think she awesomely expresses what Dickens meant us to understand her to be, in the book.
Dickens creates a fascinating world of characters in Bleak House and Davies does an excellent job of capturing the essence of those characters while bringing the production into the realm of 21st Century viewing.
The camera work with the quick changes was distracting at times but sometimes accentuated the fast pace of this drama or emphasised plot points.Watching for well known faces was fun but didn't detract anything from the performances of this superb cast.
Anna Maxwell Martin gave a wonderful performance as Esther; outwardly stronger than in the book but this focused the viewer on Esther's strength of character, her compassion, common sense, loyalty and love.
Lawson's Jarndyce was touching and gentle; Burn Gorman's Guppy a revelation and Charles Dance was eerily scaring and deliciously malicious.Gillian Anderson also demonstrated her extreme talents as the aloof, lonely, bored, haughty yet vulnerable Lady Dedlock.
We've seen enough already to suggest that it's going to be full of gems And Anna Maxwell Martin, almost a TV débutante, may just be about to turn in one of the top central performances of recent times.Set your videos and PVRs and don't miss a minute.It'll be better than Rome.(Update) We're halfway through and it's brilliant.
Gillian Anderson is brilliant, Charles Dance is memorable, Carey Mulligan, Pauline Collins and Johnny Vegas are outstanding, but Anna Maxwell Martin and Burn Gorman are just out of this world.
At the forthcoming request for Charter renewal by the BBC, the Governors could do no better than to sit MPs comfortably on their green benches and screen the entirety of Andrew Davies' magisterial adaptation of Dickens' Bleak House.A TV series that can afford to throw away a consummate actress like Sheila Hancock as a giggling ninny with almost no dialogue who occupies just seconds of screen time must, by definition, be supremely confident in its ability to entertain.
Stalwart of epic dramas like The Jewel in the Crown, Charles Dance is hypnotically dreadful as the wicked Tulkinghorn, glowering and scheming with real menace, and without once resorting to camp.For me though, the performance of the series (and that is saying something) is Gillian Anderson's Lady Dedlock.
Shot in an eerily bleak blue light, and seeming always on the verge of cracking like a porcelain vase, she is nothing short of mesmerising.In short, the finest TV adaptation of a Dickens novel ever made and another triumph for Andrew Davies and the BBC..
This has got to be one of the most intriguing dramas the bbc might have ever done.They set the tone with the brilliant funky ads with ladytrons witching hour setting the tone with its mysterious base pumping rhythm.This is everything a popular drama should be.Relevant,beautiful, fun,informative and clever.Anyone whos ever said Andrew Davies is unoriginal obviously hasn't read the books he bases his adaptations on and I am so happy Anna Maxwell Martin(Esther summerson) is finally receiving the credit she deserves.I saw her a few years ago in the dark materials trilogy and have followed her career since then.
Having never read "Bleak House" this series as encouraged me to now read the Dickens novel.My only criticism, is that I wish there were more episodes!
Love, which I think is the centrifugal element of Dickens from which ALL other social ills flow, has been, through no real fault of her own, denied Lady Dedlock in her life.
Bleak House is certainly one of the best adaptions of Dickens brought to the TV screens.
An truly excellent cast including perhaps surprisingly Gillian Anderson (The X Files) who impresses as the cool Lady Dedlock, Charles Dance as the sinister Tulkinghorn, Denis Lawson as kindly John Jarndyce, Alun Amstrong as Bucket, Nathaniel Parker as Skimpole, Pauline Collins as Miss Flute, Burn Gorman as poor Guppy, and particularly Philip Davis as the dreadful Smallweed, all wonderful Dickensian characters.
This version of 'Bleak House' is simply one of the best films ever made.It is the best adaptation of any Dickens work that I can remember, going go back to the wonderful 'A Tale of Two Cities' and 'Great Expectations' of the Golden Age of Hollywood.
I have a big hair up my butt about overuse of hand-held cameras and this production is particularly guilty of this, given that the look of the sets, actors, and period would be wonderful were it not spoiled by being filmed almost 100% by someone standing there with a hand-held, wavering, moving, too close in, no scene composition, good editing not a factor.
A very effective television adaption of Dickens dark "Bleak House"..
But it is the writing and the acting, when put together, that enabled "Bleak House" to rise way above most other television and screen work.
Special mention must be given to Charles Dance (Mr. Tulkington), Philip Davis (Smallweed), Burn Gorman (Guppy) and Nathaniel Parker (Skimpole) for assembling into one of the greatest most repugnant, morally reprehensible group of humans that ever populated a single television or movie production.
Excellent music as well.Another high point was the acting, with outstanding performances from Gillian Anderson as Lady Deadlock, Charles Dance as Tulkinghorn as Dennis Lawson as Jarndyce.
They have provided the space for some great characterizations, from the saintly Esther Summerson (Anna Maxwell Martin) to the mendacious Tulkinghorne (Charles Dance), from the good and generous John Jarndice to the extremely nasty Smallweed (Phil Davis).Dickens, though great at creating memorable characters, was not very good at explaining them.
But Dennis Lawson and Charles Dance are also great, and the supporting cast is full of actors who get Dickens' tone just right; a touch larger and more colorful than life, but always real enough to believe in, care about, be frightened by or pity.
In the end I decided to watch Bleak House with my eyes closed, which heightened my appreciation of the language, characterization and story far more than the theatrical gimmickry that the production employed..
The film as a whole, and Esther Summerson in particular, should make you a better person if you watch and give it your close attention.Finally, since most people, understandably, won't want to read the novel because they know so many of the important plot developments, I would like to recommend enthusiastically another great Dickens' novel, Little Dorrit--this is another underread, yet great, novel with many characters and plot lines and twists etc.
Although literary analysts often point to Great Expectations as Dickens' greatest novel, I strongly disagree and would say Little Dorrit is his best with Bleak House a close second.
I know Gillian Anderson spent some of her childhood in England, but even so I found her English accent a tad contrived, but apart from that she played the part brilliantly throughout.I've always been a fan of Andrew Davies's work, and this adaptation is no exception to his excellence.
This movie is a superb adaptation of the book that many believe is Dickens' best novel.The plot follows the fortunes of a young woman, Esther Summerson, after she arrives a a country mansion called Bleak House.
And, intimately involved in everything is the lawyer Mr. Tulkinghorn, played by Charles Dance.The film succeeds because of the strength of the novel, the strength of the adaptation, the strength of the BBC production values, and the strength of the minor characters.However, what lifts this movie above the basic excellence of other BBC adaptations is the extraordinary acting of Dance and Anderson.
It just goes to show, if you pick the right cast and a decent (you don't need a great one with C.D.'s books) script writer, you cannot fail.Anna M.M. is one of the best actors on the planet - as she has shown many times since Bleak House.
This adaptation is outstanding - for me, it is on a par with the BBC's Pride and Prejudice (which has to be one of the best TV adaptations of all time), albeit a much darker and sadder tale.I hadn't read the book and didn't know what to expect, but from the first episode was completely addicted and had to stop myself from watching all 15 episodes on one go.Gillian Anderson is perfect as the brittle Honoria - her performance brought a tear to my eye on many occasions.
Charles Dance is also particularly compelling, as is Anna Maxwell Martin as Esther and Denis Lawson as Jarndyce.I also loved the theme music.It really does feel so right to be watching this excellent drama at this cold and dark time of year.
Nearly all aspects of the production of 'Bleak House' (2005) are first rate - direction, casting, sets and costumes, cinematography, acting, organization and pacing of the storyline.
Once Dickens introduces a character - or any detail - it sticks and builds - like a snowball rolling downhill and looming to boulder size.This is a mystery wrapped up in a love story wrapped up in a portrait of England circa 1820's.Gillian Anderson's portrayal of Lady Dedlock is minimalist and very effective; she displays a surgeon's skill with words, timing, pauses, emphasis, gestures, letting a glance, the crumble of her shoulders, and the shadows of her past tell the story.I bought the boxed set and watch it every now and then.
Worthy of special note is the work of 'Charles Dance' as the grim Mr Tulkinghorn, 'Denis Lawson' (caught our eye in the old 'Local Hero' flick) as the affable Mr Jarndyce, 'Gillian Anderson' as the tragic Lady Dedlock, and 'Philip Davis' as the grotesque, psychopathic moneylender, Mr Smallweed.In addition to the above, the sound-editing and camera angles help create the dark under-currents and suspense in this presentation of the brilliant Dickens novel, outlining the frustration of the old Chauncery court system which plagued the Brits for decades.'Alun Armstrong' (of 'New Tricks' fame) also shows his versatility as a detective from another era (I believe the first true 'detective' in English literature).
Having watched a lot of BBC productions on cable lately, these practices seemed like an attempt to jump on the current film technique bandwagon (which I hope will soon disintegrate).So many of the cast members were outstanding: Jarndyce, the judge, Smallweed, Tulkinghorn, Guppy and his mother, Sgt. George, Pauline Collins' Miss Flyte, the dancemaster's father, and Alun Armstrong's detective (remember him as the schoolmaster in Nickelby?).
(and where did the radio version and the book go right?) In part the adaptation - Davies' dialogue sometimes stands out like a sore thumb - sometimes as needless padding, sometimes as not-Dickens and sometimes distinctly not-Victorian.
This adaption of Charles Dicken's Bleak House is the best.
The poor truly lived wretched lives, which Dickens portrays so well in his novels.Anyone who enjoys British period pieces will love "Bleak House.".
"Bleak House" happens to be my favourite Dickens novel, and I would have thought it impossible to make a truly successful film of this vast work on the power of goodness in a rotten world.
Anna Maxwell shines above all others as Esther Summerson, but hard on her heels are Charles Dance who avoids making an out-and-out villain of Tulkinghorn, Burn Gorman's wonderfully touching Guppy (extra credit to him for hitting the mark in a role that begs to be grotesquely overacted) and Harry Eden's Jo. But then again, there's not a false note in this entire production.
450+ minutes of a film is a long time to have your breath taken away but that's what happened when I first watched this magnificent adaptation of my favorite Dickens novel 'Bleak House.'I always liked the earlier version starring Denham Elliot, Diana Rigg and Peter Vaughan, but this new version, adapted by Andrew Davies is superlative to the former in every way.
I'm not always a fan of Davie's work but Bleak House is a masterpiece of screen adaptation, even better than his Moll Flanders, which has long been one of my old standbys for a rainy evening or two.Anna Maxwell Martin looks unprepossessing with her whey-face and funny lisp, but quickly her strength and intelligence waylay any doubts as to her being nigh-perfect as Esther Sommerson.The only minor quibble with her in this role is that she looks nothing like Gillian Anderson's Lady Dedlock or John Lynch's Captain Hawdon, Esther's parents.
The entire cast is beyond reproach, and with two classic performances by Burn Gorman, the very embodiment of Mr Guppy, and Pauline Collins' bird-like Miss Flyte, I can't imagine Bleak House ever being more perfectly cast.Even the cat playing Mr Krook's Lady Jane is a brilliant actor.
Anna Maxwell Martin and Gillian Anderson are dynamite, and their one and only scene together is second only to Jo's Death in impact.Being Dickens there is also some fine humor along the way.
It's hard-hitting stuff, Bleak House, and very pertinent to our times.The cinematography, music, costumes, everything are great.I can't think of a greater Dickens film adaptation.
I would say only the 1995 Beeb Pride and Prejudice comes close to keeping the top spot.It is a hard toss up for which is my favorite Dickens book, and perhaps this miniseries proves that Bleak House is the champion of the Most Adaptable book, in that many of the characters are very relatable to today's average person.
But her illness spurs a person keeping a secret to reveal things that may cause exposure--and many are circling around the strange mystery of the origins of the law writer, Lady dedlock, Esther.There are some love-to-hate-em villains in this like Smallweed (funny and repulsive), Krook (he is) and Mr Tulkinghorne who is not funny and very much a villain.When I first got the series I thought I would watch one or two a night, but I basically canceled my life and viewed it within a 24 hr period--basically like a book you can't put down, I didn't stop.It is worth it, and it is worth noting that the votes for the miniseries herein garnered fewer than 10 votes below the rating of 8 which is pretty phenomenal.It is a phenomenal series--at first the direction appears a bit unorthodox for a Victorian novel, but it soon settles in as natural.Hats off to everyone--Gillian Anderson did herself proud, something I never expected.The quote in the summary line above summarizes Dickens' view that God and his mismanaging adult humans of Means have much to answer for in how they inflict suffering on the young, weak and poor..
Bleak House has everything that a Dickens-novel should have: an involving story, great characterizations, an abundance of figures who are either hilarious (young Guppy and his mother, Mr. Turveydrop), extremely sinister (attorney Tulkinghorn, old Smallweed, slimy Skimpole) or endearing (Mrs. Flite, little Jo), and a very outspoken criticism on the abominable situation of the poor underclass of London.
I found this a rather unsatisfying adaption of the Dickens book (which I just re-read).
Anna Maxwell-Martin manages to make Esther convincingly good without being sickly, Dennis Lawson is thoroughly sympathetic without being too quirky, and Gillian Anderson and Charles Dance work together in their tragic fencing match outstandingly.There isn't a single character that looks or feels wrong. |
tt1180329 | Antoine et Colette | Antoine and Colette catches up with Antoine as a solitary 20-year-old who works at Phillips manufacturing LPs to support himself. He lives in a furnished room by himself in Place Clichy, listening to opera and classical music and spending time with René (Patrick Auffay), his school friend from The 400 Blows.
One day, while attending a Berlioz Music Programme with René, he spots Colette (Marie-France Pisier), a secondary school student, and falls in love for the first time.
Colette is his own age, but unlike Antoine has a warm, supportive family with whom she still lives. Antoine forms a strong friendship with Colette and, eventually, also her parents who begin to treat him as if he were a part of their family.
Colette's feelings for Antoine are at first ambiguous and, harbouring some hope that she might grow to return them, he leaves his apartment at the Place Clichy and moves into an apartment across the road from her family's. Although she continues to treat him kindly, it slowly becomes apparent that she is not interested in him romantically. He sulks about this and at first refuses to see her, but he is lured back by a dinner invitation. It is clear that her family still consider him a surrogate son and are possibly hoping for something romantic to happen between the two teenagers.
All of these hopes are dashed, however, when the pretty Colette is met at the front door by an older man. Her parents and Antoine look helplessly on as she disappears off with her date. They are all left to watch television.
Doinel's adventures follow with Stolen Kisses, Bed and Board and Love on the Run. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0067976 | When Eight Bells Toll | British Treasury secret agent Phillip Calvert (Anthony Hopkins) is sent to investigate the hijacking of five cargo ships in the Irish Sea, tracking the latest hijacked ship—the Nantesville, carrying £8 million in gold bullion—to the Scottish Highlands and the sleepy port town of "Torbay" on the "Isle of Torbay" (patterned after Tobermory, on the Isle of Mull).
Posing as marine biologists, Calvert and his partner Hunslett (Corin Redgrave) find the local inhabitants suspicious and hostile. They suspect that Cypriot tycoon and shipping magnate Sir Anthony Skouras (Jack Hawkins), whose luxury yacht Shangri-La is anchored off the coast, may be behind the pirating of the gold bullion. While searching the surrounding area in a Royal Navy Helicopter, Calvert makes contact with a group of remote shark fishermen who appear more friendly than Torbay's locals. Calvert also meets the occupants of a castle, Lord Kirkside and his teenage daughter, who behave strangely as well as being hostile.
As the helicopter brings Calvert back to Torbay it comes under attack from the shore and the Royal Navy pilot is killed. The helicopter crashes, explodes and plummets into the sea. Calvert escapes from the helicopter after it sinks to the bottom. When he returns to his research yacht Firecrest he finds Hunslett is missing.
Operating out of his yacht, Calvert is joined by his boss Sir Arthur Arnford-Jones, known as "Uncle Arthur" (Robert Morley). Together, they combat boarders and make ready for sea. On raising the anchor they find the dead body of Hunslett tied to it.
They are joined by Skouras's wife, Charlotte (Nathalie Delon), and when a pirate speedboat approaches, Calvert rams it, shoots the occupants and blows up the boat in vengeance for Hunslett's death.
Calvert recruits the shark fishermen to deal with Skouras and his modern day pirates. Guessing that the missing bullion ships are being sunk to allow the gold to be offloaded invisibly, Calvert dives in the bay and finds the Nantesville. He fights and kills one of the divers, whom he has previously encountered and who he suspects killed Hunslett.
He then secretly enters Kirkside's castle and questions the Lord's daughter, discovering that Skouras is an innocent victim whose real wife is being held hostage along with other locals down in the castle's dungeons. He then sneaks into the underground dock of the castle where the gold is being offloaded.
At midnight (eight bells) the shark fishermen ram the gates of the underground dock with their boat. The pirates are expecting them because Charlotte has been transmitting Calvert's plans to them by secret radio. A fire fight ensues in which the pirates are wiped out, after which Calvert lets Charlotte escape with a single bar of gold in her possession. | comedy, revenge, intrigue, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | The cast perform their roles well, Anthony Hopkins and Robert Morley particularly playing mutual antagonism with some nice comic touches.One reviewer mentioned that Charles Gray's dubbing of Jack Hawkins's voice seemed a bit slapdash.
It seems that the whole world and their dogs know of Commander Bond, who takes his martinis shaken and not stirred, has his dalliances with the ladies, and manages to save the world before dawn.Agent Calvert (played most suitably by Anthony Hopkins) is how I believe Bond should have been.
Don't get me wrong, I really am a fan of the Bond genre, but this performance by Hopkins seems gritty and more realistic a character and compares quite favourably to the Bond character played by other actors.There is some great dialogue between the upper middle class boss of Agent Calvert (Uncle Arthur played by Robert Morley) and Agent Calvert, which helps keep interest in the film between the action scenes.
Compared to many of the scenes produced by action heroes of the last 10 years, some are a little dated, although there were still enough to keep me interested.Nathalie Delon was a great choice as the leading lady requiring rescue from the sea (were her intentions good or bad?), and its a pity that most outside of her native country did not see much more of her in other things.One of my personal favourite pieces of work by Anthony Hopkins.If you're an action fan, I still think this is worth a look.
In fact, a review at the time of his performance in When Eight Bells Toll proclaimed he played his character Calvert in a way that "made James Bond look like a lounge lizard." The film is a fondly remembered actioner from my childhood (well, early teens).
Although there's no way in which the pyrotechnics on show could bear realistic comparison with the CGI-dominated eye-candy extravagance of today's equivalents (witness the studio bound finale in the boat house if you really need convincing), it remains a brisk, fun way to idle away the best part of two hours.The script is sharp, the dialogue cynical, the action belts along nicely - and Robert Morely's Whitehall mandarin thrust into the field is an eccentric delight.
Add Old Vic stalwart Corin Redgrave as Calvert's pragmatism-challenged sidekick and you have a recipe for some top fun.The plot (McGuffin) is some nonsense about missing bullion ships, but it's no more than a hook to hang the action on.
I just love it.For anyone who likes the early seventies Bond movies, it's almost an essential accoutrement.Right, next stops on the Alistair MacLean '70s movie DVD trail - Fear Is The Key, Caravan To Vaccares and the sublime Puppet On A Chain..
At my age, It just seems about right to remark films that left decided impressions on me, many years ago.As one reviewer remarked, this film was released shortly after Sean Connery's last appearance in the original James Bond series, with "Diamonds Are forever".
I can still see his walk, how he carried a machine-gun, and his wry, somewhat jaded smile.Everything about the film is "Bond on a low budget"; and the fact that MacLean actually wrote the script tells me that this was probably intentional - the Bond films, after all, had borrowed heavily from earlier films based on Maclean novels, while at the same time effectively burying them - "The Guns of Navarone" is well-remembered, but only brought out of mothballs for the Turner Movie Channel every now and again, but everyone owns a copy of "Goldfinger".Yet it is this quality - which I recognized at once on initial viewing - that endeared the film for me forever - Producer Albert Brocolli had turned Bond into a clown; MacLean returned my hero to me as I always imagined him.I think that says something positive about this one..
watching this film for the first time, I'm enjoying this flick enormously, Philip Calvert as a hard man who gets the job the done, isn't afraid to disobey orders and with the wonderful Robert Morley as his boss.as i write it its all very James bond, Hopkins handling the job very well, Morley hamming it up as only he can.like all Alastair McLean films - I'm finding it very watchable, a pity no more films about Calvert's exploits have been made, as he is everything James bond is, without the gimmicks, and its all home based, no flash locations - just a man with a job to do and he ain't afraid to bend the rules to do it.I'm half way in to the film - i don't want it to end ...
No-nonsense and a hero in a sense, Calvert as a character is very entertaining and likable and Hopkins is exactly that too.
Even better is Robert Morley who provides a deliciously comic turn as Calvert's spy-master, while Nathalie Delon is beautiful and luscious as the lovely Charlotte.Overall, an entertaining film.
"When Eight Bells Toll" is a very decent and entertaining action/adventure movie, just don't expect the same dazzling tempo, ingenious gimmicks or impressive stunts as you would in an actual James Bond film.
The Rank Film Corporation figured that Alistair MacLean's maverick secret agent Philip Calvert would be the best to take his place.Obviously that didn't work out.
I think it would have befitted considerably from a slower pace and an extra twenty minutes.Still, it's fun to see a young Anthony Hopkins doing the action hero thing, even if I have do damn clue what the title means..
I love this film, because I think it is pretty true to McClean's book and Calvert is suitably downmarket to be a more believable agent than James Bond ever could be.
The film is actually a pretty good bit of action hokum, but it's Hopkins that makes it memorable.
In all, well worth a watch for the Hopkins, a delicious Robert Morley, good location work, and a brisk plot..
While adaptation of Alistair MacLean's books been popular few have been successful, and this is one of the less successful.Even with a great script (screenplay by MacLean) the film just doesn't take off, not least due to the fights and in various dark surroundings, where you really can't tell what is supposed to happen.Anthony Hopkins as the undercover man, and Corin Redgrave as his clumsy pal, works great, less sure about the bad guys.
Robert Morley, as Hopkin's boss, is marvelous, and Leon Collins, as the shark fisherman, not bad at all.So great script, nice scenes from around Skye & Torbay, from the water, from the air and from land, buy much of the lighting and cinematography stinks!
Hopkins rocks as the no no nonsense Calvert and gives a very convincing performance, and the rest of the cast don't disappoint either.Seen this for the first time as a kid and I guess it just clicked.
Hopkins rocks as the no nonsense Calvert and gives a very convincing performance, and the rest of the cast don't disappoint either..
As soon as a successful new thriller appears in the bookstalls, movie studios compete to buy up the film rights.
Not all the books for which film rights have been purchased actually finish up as movies but many of them do; so we now have movies, readily available for home viewing, which are based on novels from such highly respected writers of thrillers as Hammond Innes, Alistair MacLean, Tom Clancy and many others.
I find that the prominence given to the shoot-out action sequences in such movies usually means that there is no time for gradually revealing the complexities of character that made the original novel interesting.
I particularly enjoyed the interplay of character between Anthony Hopkins playing a very dour investigator, Corin Redgrave playing his sidekick, and Robert Morley who gives a great performance as their superior officer.
"When Eight Bells Toll" is an early look at British actor Anthony Hopkins.
Certainly not for playing a James Bond role.And that's precisely what he is in this film.
Still, he adds a little humor to some situations, as James Bond is wont to do.Robert Morley and Jack Hawkins have supporting roles, but there's nothing special about their characters.
In almost a Bond type film, Sir Calvert does encourage the audience to think of our hero as a spy.
Unusual for Hopkin, but nevertheless, he performs convincingly and is insured by his cast members which include Jack Hawkins and Robert Morley.
All in all, this is one film which should allow audiences to believe that young Hopkins could and did establish himself as a man of action.
He gets to find himself not very well welcome.I think Robert Morley is magnificent in his role as Uncle Arthur, and so is Anthony Hopkins as agent Philip Calvert, which have naturally bad manners, according to his boss, being born to a lesser class.
Uncle Arthur's Lines are hilarious, and much wittier than his equals in James Bond-movies.Agent Calvert kills off bad guys like puppets on a chain (!), and the film keeps the mystery for a long time, making the ride an interesting one.
This tells me Hopkins could have been a great Bond.The film is very time typical of early 70'ies, and it's a lovely coast and salty water film.
It gets more entertaining and exciting as the film proceeds, and I think that it's a great period piece to watch.Recommended for those enjoying classics!.
I've loved all of them and When Eight Bells Toll came out it joins the list albeit in a more minor vein.This film gave a young Anthony Hopkins a chance to be an action hero.
When Eight Bells Toll is no exception.Robert Morley plays the spymaster supervisor of Hopkins and is less avuncular than usual.
Whoever dubbed him sounded to me remarkably like Alec Guinness.When Eight Bells Toll is not as good as some of the other McLean inspired films I mentioned before.
James Bond like action thriller with evil villain.
A young handsome Anthony Hopkins is sent to investigate the pirating of ships transporting gold.A Scottish Island has been taken over by a villain using hostages.
Anthony Hopkins is rough naval agent type sent to work out what's going on with a missing ship off Scotland.Hopkins is good in his first lead role as the touch guy agent.
Instead, it's a routine, if tidily efficient modern-day thriller with a young Anthony Hopkins as a maverick Government agent tasked with finding out why a series of boats carrying gold bullion are disappearing off the west coast of Scotland.While you can't quite imagine Hopkins as a budding James Bond, in fact for the opening action sequences he's more like the Man from Milk Tray older TV viewers might remember, once he settles into the part, he's a more than capable action hero, with that little bit of extra added intensity which later became his hallmark.As main support he's surrounded by the experienced Robert Morley as his nagging, bumptious boss, a fish out of water when out in the field and Jack Hawkins as the titled lord inveigled into events beyond his control.
There are plenty of action sequences, in the air, on the ground and underwater, a lot of fisticuffs and random killings and a big shoot-em-up finale plus naturally time for Hopkins to bed the gangster's moll.Being a Scot, I was quite at home seeing the grey, grainy locations and hearing identifiable local accents.
Anthony Hopkins is perfect as the hero avenging his best friend's death (Corin Redgrave) with a vengeance, gunning people down without hesitation whenever necessary or when he feels like it, and you don't object, since in MacLean's actually very realistic thrillers you generally feel the executions taking place as justified.
Anthony Hopkins was best in his early films, and this was one of them – as a possible James Bond he would have landed somewhere between Sean Connery and Timothy Dalton, the two best.
But MacLean for his realism, intelligent plots and great characterization is much better than Ian Fleming and his heroes much more interesting than Bond, since they always have to go a very hard way to get out alive in the end – James Bond is a snug playboy in comparison.
Here, as so often in MacLean's stories, the hero Anthony Hopkins has to take everything on himself, as he gets very little help from his boss, the ridiculous peacock Robert Morley, who only thinks of his dissatisfaction with what he has to eat under the circumstances, but in all his exaggerated pedantry he always caps all his films by his splendid diction and eloquence – he is ridiculous, but very eloquently so.This MacLean thriller differs from his normal intrigues by adding a very spicy romance to it, as the lady comes swimming across cold waters a long distance just to get to Anthony Hopkins, but he does well in not feeling flattered or jumping at the opportunity but rather, as the experienced veteran he is, regard the invitation with some misgivings.It's a small but great adventure film and you get to see a great deal of the Scottish wildest archipelago..
Finding the ship again is the first step but soon Calvert has uncovered a bigger scheme involving the disappearance of many other smaller boats.As a teenager I read Where Eagles Dare and, from there, got quickly into other Alistair McLean books and still would tend to enjoy them now.
The character development is poor; Calvert is a cardboard cut out and the film really suffers from the lack of a bad guy with any sort of screen presence because there isn't any tension built up other than in the odd scene.
Morley is at least quite funny in his role and is a welcome injection into the film; he may not help build tension but he at least provides a bit of life or animation into things.
When this movie was produced James Bond was still fashionable and you can't help thinking the studio was trying to muscle in on a market for a series of gritty , more down to earth and more realistic secret agent anti-hero in the shape of Phillip Calvert .
In the meantime When Eight Bells Toll was released, scripted by Alistair MacLean from his own novel, and gave audiences a chance to see a different actor in a similarly adventurous role.
Whether or not it was intended as an action 'calling card' for the young star (whose fourth film it was) Eight Bells certainly owes a lot of its inspiration to the 007 series, not least in that its hero Philip Calvert (Anthony Hopkins) is tough, naval officer, a "professional bastard," used to killing in the course of duty, working undercover against some widespread criminal combine.
north of England grammar school, working his way through life..." Of course the central irony of the film is that the main villain of the piece is exactly the sort of person that Uncle Arthur welcomes onto the wine committee of his club with open arms, while the insubordinate and independent Calvert proves an essential part of the operation's success.Calvert's closest friend - and the only genuine relationship he maintains during the film, is Hunslett (Corin Redgrave), a bespectacled intelligence man whose faces a somewhat predictable demise.
The frequently adapted MacLean was on a roll at this time, having seen his work made into such successful projects as the early Guns Of Navarone (1961), then Ice Station Zebra and Where Eagles Dare (both 1968).
Her scenes with Hopkins are adequate, but this is a film that has little time for the sexual shenanigans of Bond, (in fact she has to directly proposition the hero while there is no bedroom scene) saving Charlotte's best scene for that at the very end of the film.
With some fine airborne photography as Calvert searches the Scottish coastline for ships as well as some effective settings in and around Torbay harbor, Eight Bells is a film which manages to be very atmospheric on what must have been a modest budget.
Hopkins turns in a fine performance as the single-minded Calvert, made even more resonant when one remembers the notoriously hard living the actor was famous for at the time.
Those who have only seen Hopkins in later years as the most famous celluloid serial killer will be in interested in this unmannered early role.Among other highlights is Morley's fussily upper-crusted Uncle Arthur, whose eventual, grudging acceptance of his wayward officer is convincing - and he even makes a fair pass at waving a gun and defending the boat with a timely use of an open hatch.
Even at 34 Anthony Hopkins made an unlikely hero for a rousing adventure thriller such as When Eight Bells Toll, based on the book by Alistair Maclean.
Still, Hopkins carries off the role of Commander Philip Calvert, an agent for British Naval Intelligence, with aplomb.
When Eight Bells Toll isn't a great adventure thriller, but within its own limits it's entertaining.
Anthony Hopkins makes a credible man of action, more than ably supported by Corin Redgrave as his intelligence officer sidekick.
Oscar-winning actor Anthony Hopkins was slim and trim back in 1971 when producer Elliott Kastner cast him as Royal Navy scuba diving expert Commander Philip Calvert for this ocean-going opus about five hijacked British bullion ships in the Irish Sea. At one point, the grim but indestructible Calvert informs his peremptory superior that he doesn't have guests and friends, just enemies.
Interestingly enough, "When Eight Bells Toll" was Hopkins' first role as the leading man.
As Sir Arthur Artford Jones ('Uncle Arthur'), Robert Morley is good as Calvert's supercilious superior.
"When Eight Bells Toll" contains all the ingredients of a sturdy Maclean thriller: mystery, surprises, a hero competent on land, sea, and beneath water, and a sterling cast that includes Jack Hawkins and Ferdy Mayne.
Hopkins star in an average Alistair Maclean thriller.
But sometimes it just get silly, for example when a wooden small boat explodes upon crashing on some rocks.Starring in this movie is Anthony Hopkins in a very early role. |
tt0071502 | Il fiore delle mille e una notte | The story starts at a harem in Persia, where the elderly overseer bids his young charges to read the story of Haroun al-Rashid (Hall) and his wife Sherazade (Montez), unfolding the film's plot in the process.
Sherazade, a dancer in a wandering circus owned by Ahmad (Billy Gilbert) - whose troupe also includes Sinbad the Sailor and Aladdin, who have seemingly fallen on hard times -, had captured the attention of Kamar (Erickson), the brother of caliph Haroun al-Rashid. In his infatuation with her, and because of a prophecy which names her as the future queen, Kamar had attempted to seize the throne, but was captured and sentenced to slow death by exposure. As Haroun visits his brother, for whom he feels pity, Kamar's men storm the palace and free their leader; outnumbered, Haroun is forced to flee. He manages to get near the plaza where Sherazade's circus is performing and is spotted by the young acrobat Ali Ben Ali (Sabu), who finds out his identity and decides to hide him in the circus, confiding only in Sherazade (though he does not tell her about the fugitive's true identity). Upon awakening from the wounds he had received in his flight, Haroun beholds Sherazade and instantly falls in love with her.
Meanwhile, Kamar, thinking that Haroun is dead, assumes the throne of Baghdad, but to his chagrin Sherazade is not to be found, and he orders the captain of his guard (Turhan Bey) to find her. But then the scheming Grand Vizier Nadan (Edgar Barrier) approaches the captain with the order to make Sherazade 'disappear', and upon finding them the captain decides to sell the troupe into slavery. But due to a witness the captain is exposed, and in order to preserve his plans, Nadan first gets him to confess and then murders him.
Haroun, Sherazade, and the acrobats manage to escape the slave pens and flee to the border, where they are found by Kamar's army and taken to a tent city in the desert. Kamar proposes to Sherazade, but she has in the meantime fallen in love with Haroun. Also, Nadan recognizes the caliph and his affection for Sherazade, and he uses this knowledge to blackmail Sherazade into helping him in his scheme: in exchange for Haroun's freedom, she is to poison Kamar during the wedding ceremony, upon which Nadan would assume rulership for himself. In secret, however, he plans to have Haroun killed once he has crossed the border.
Upon learning of this insidious scheme, Ali confides in his fellow performers, and they rush to free Haroun; then Haroun decides to free Sherazade with the help of the acrobats, while Ali is to summon the troops still loyal to him. Haroun and the others are quickly captured, and Sherazade and the retainers learn of his true identity. Kamar engages his brother in a sword fight, while Ahmad and the acrobats set the tents on fire; the arrival of Ali and the caliph's army triggers a massive battle with Kamar's men.
Finally, as Kamar prepares to deliver the deathstroke to Haroun, Nadan shows his true allegiance by assassinating Kamar personally. But as he prepares to finish Haroun, Ahmad and Ali interfere, forcing him to flee. But a spear thrown into his back stops him, and he dies in a burning tent; Haroun, Sherazade, their friends and the loyal subjects celebrate victory. | fantasy, murder, violence, flashback, psychedelic, tragedy, romantic, storytelling | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0036780 | Duck Soup to Nuts | Daffy is relaxing in a pond with a group of mallards. Suddenly a gunshot goes off and all the ducks dunk their heads underwater for cover (Daffy puts a swimming cap on his head before similarly dunking his head). Porky enters and lets off another shot, which sends the other ducks flying away.
Porky then takes aim at Daffy and orders him out. When Daffy comes out (still with his feet in the air), he quickly disarms Porky and tells the hunter that he's no ordinary duck and then shows this off by "singing", "dancing", and "acting" (flashing his contract with Warner Brothers). When this gag is over, Daffy offers to read the bumps on Porky's head, providing the bumps himself! Porky then tries holding a shotgun to Daffy, but Daffy responds to this threat by looking inside the shotgun to see a woman in a bathing suit. When Porky takes a look, he sees Daffy in the same pose! Porky shoots Daffy out, and Daffy runs back to the pond, where Porky cannot chase him.
Daffy is underwater singing when he notices Porky has jumped in with a diving helmet. Daffy then walks up to Porky as "the Fuller Brush Man!", and knocks on Porky's helmet. When Porky tells him to "come in," Daffy opens the front of the helmet, causing Porky to jump out and start bailing out the water from the lake with a bucket. Eventually, all the water is gone, and Daffy flips around like a fish out of water. When Porky refuses to 'believe' that Daffy is a fish, Daffy counters that he doesn't believe Porky is a pig - he believes that Porky is an eagle. After the gag where Daffy switches what Porky says, Porky decides to prove that he's an eagle by jumping off a tree. When this doesn't work, Porky uses up all his ammo trying to shoot Daffy. However, he still has his "trusty six-shooter."
Before Porky can kill Daffy, Daffy asks to say goodbye to his wife and kids. Letting out a Tarzan type yell (and then coughing at the end), his wife and three kids come to say a tearful goodbye. Porky then walks away, feeling that he'd be a rat if he were to shoot Daffy. Just as he's out of sight, the "wife and kids" reveal themselves to be four friends of Daffy's, all with derbies and cigars. Their laughter is interrupted by Porky's shooting at them with his shotgun, and all five of them jump around, "hoo-hoo"-ing as they jump into the distance. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0460665 | Night Stalker | In the opening, Kolchak is sitting on the bed of a sleazy hotel room, listening to a replay of his dictation on his portable tape recorder. The notes are about a series of murders that have plagued the Las Vegas Strip, and a cover up of those events by the authorities. All of the victims had their bodies drained of blood. When a meeting is conducted with the sheriff's department, the DEA, the police and others, they discover the suspect's true identity is Janos Skorzeny, who is the prime suspect in multiple homicides involving massive loss of blood extending back years. When Skorzeny attempts to rob a hospital, the police are called to stop him. Skorzeny is shot multiple times without effect, and manages to escape by outrunning a police car and motorcycle.
Kolchak has a girlfriend named Gail Foster (Carol Lynley) who earns her living as a dancer, which Kolchak attempts to get her to give up. At Gail's urging, Kolchak looks into vampire lore. The evidence persuades Kolchak to suspect that Skorzeny is a vampire, much to the disbelief of his boss Anthony Vincenzo (Simon Oakland). Kolchak is able to convince the police that they are fighting a vampire, as the suspect possesses incredible strength and cannot be harmed by gunfire. Kolchak ultimately destroys the vampire, and unlike subsequent productions, he does so with the help of his friend in the FBI (a credible eyewitness).
Kolchak writes his version of the story for the newspaper, and proposes to his girlfriend, telling her that they will both move to New York City. However, in quick succession, the authorities print a false version of the newspaper story with his byline, and threaten to charge Kolchak with first degree murder unless he quietly leaves Las Vegas. Kolchak is told that his girlfriend Gail has already been forced to leave the city for "engaging in unsavory activities". Carl exhausts his savings placing personal advertisements across the country in a futile attempt to find her.
The final scene is of Kolchak in the sleazy hotel room, finishing his book. He explains that if anyone tries to verify the events in the book, they will find that everyone involved in the incident in even the slightest way has either left town, is not talking, or is dead, there is no file on the suspect, all of the evidence has been destroyed by the authorities, and all of the bodies were cremated. | paranormal | train | wikipedia | When the show was first announced it sounded promising, mostly because producer Frank Spotnitz was a veteran of "The X Files"...and as we all know, several "X Files" veterans were big fans of the original "Night Stalker" movies and series.Now, whenever a cultural icon is reinvented for a new era, one always expects a few changes.
The police, not wanting to look stupid, were not about to admit that there really might be things that go bump in the night running around their city...and Vincenzo (being not exactly akin to Ben Bradlee) was only too happy to quash the story in order to keep the authorities happy.
Watching a young, handsome Kolchak investigate a story with his capable partner Peri and wide-eyed photographer Jain, you get the feeling you're actually in Metropolis with Clark, Lois and Jimmy.Those changes alone are enough to alienate a number of the "Night Stalker" faithful.
But there's an underlying feeling, a style, that's also very different from the original books, movies and series.Whereas the "old" Kolchak used to narrate events in a snappy, factual way, Spotnitz has fallen back into his "X Files" habit of just using opening and closing narration which, even then, is more on the philosophical than factual side.
Unfortunately, it served only to remind the viewer of the big difference between the original Kolchak and Spotnitz's Kolchak.And finally -- without giving away spoilers -- there's the puzzling shot of Kolchak's hand at the end of the episode which ties in with the murder of his wife.
This was a good idea (bringing back Kolchack: The Night Stalker) unfortunately everyone who bought the rights to the name completely ignored what made the original a great show.
But why would writers with some ability(from The X-Files - a great show I might add)change everything except the names The Night Stalker, Karl Kolchak, and Vincenzo.
When this was announced I knew there would be trouble.Kolchak is one of TV land's most beloved and remembered supernatural-themed shows.One of the reasons being the superb casting of the Late,greats Darren McGavin,and Simon Oakland.As a big fan of the original I was looking forward to a faithful updating.The studio just used the name to launch a generic x-files wanna-be.This time we get Sturt Townsand and Gabrielle Union.They are not bad.The stories that aired had a little promise.The whole thing played like a wake.None of the charm or wit of the original to be found,and ended up very disappointing.Townsend is a bit underrated in my book.He could have grew into the role if given time and better writing.A bit too young for the character in my book.With Time this might have developed into something good.The show needed to start with a BANG;Not on mute.They just went for a serious tone with nothing to balance it out.How could the network have the stomach to green-light this and send it out into the public.It was clear from the start they had no idea of the following the original had.I expected more..
and i really liked it i liked how Stuart Townsend portrayed Carl Kolchak, and the best part is that the character is different from the first series.
Network: ABC; Genre: Remake, Horror; Content Rating: TV-14 (horror violence, blood and gore); Available: DVD; Perspective: Contemporary (star range: 1 - 4); Season Reviewed: Series (1 season) I've got to admit right off the bat that I'm not familiar with the original Jeff Rice series "Kolchak: The Night Stalker" starring Darren McGavin.
For those not familiar with the story, it follow Carl Kolchak, a newspaper crime reporter who obsessively hunts down all things supernatural after the brutal murder of his wife by a beast that left a mysterious mark on her (and other victims) after she died."Night Stalker" is a disaster from head to toe.
Instead of a hardboiled crime reporter he looks like a soft WB TV star sleepwalking through a slasher movie.While I may not know "The Night Stalker", I do know "The X-Files" where "Stalker" developer Frank Spotnitz hails from.
The violence and use of (quote/unquote) creature effects is chopped to hell in the editing - an obvious attempt to hide a low budget rather than to meet the network standards."Night Stalker" is one of several network potholes on the long, boring road between the time when the masterful "The X-Files" held nerds in suspense over alien conspiracies and now, when the unbridled funhouse ride "Supernatural" has brought the TV horror genre back from the dead.
Calling a program "Night Stalker" and the main character Carl Kolchak, does not mean that this program bears any resemblance at all to the earlier series.
The brief appearance of Darren McGavin, star of the original series, in the first episode, seems to have been an unsuccessful attempt to give the new show some kind of official approval.
To begin with, there's not even a single episode of the old Night Stalker of the seventies that I missed and that because I'm a huge fan.This new series has very little in common with the original ,old series.
An eager young journalist trying with enthusiasm and diligence to get into the gist of reporting he is all the time swayed between the 2 protagonists with the equally strong character trying to built the right profile of the pro he wants to be at the same time maintaining a balance with where his own instinct leads him.Finally a very solid and convincing performance from the actor Cotter Smith who plays the role of the experienced,sometimes tough editor who however has a genuine love and interest in his reporters whom he wishes to succeed in their missions every time.All in all I find this series very thrilling and really hope it goes on forever..
I personally like it a lot better than CSI at the moment, so I'm going to keep watching it.Also, what a lot of people don'r realize is that Darren SKIPPED OUT on the original show because he didn't like the humor in it.
Don't get me wrong, the writing is good, and most of the cast, Townshand included, can act, but the problem lies within its name.I have no idea what possessed these people to give it the Night Stalker license.
The original was set in Chicago and that's fine, but the new one just becomes "Yet another supernatural tale set in LA." If it were set in any other city, maybe it'd have more merit.Also, this just doesn't feel like Night Stalker.
It's supernatural and the first ep was thrilling, but this just doesn't feel like the original.So while this show is good, its not Night Stalker and it would have been better if it were something else..
I loved the original "Night Stalker" TV series.
This show is an insult to the makers of the original (though I did see Dan Curtis listed as an Executive Producer; I hope he simply allowed them to use his name and didn't actually have any involvement in this atrocity).I remember when movies and TV cast actors like Darren McGavin, Elliot Gould, George Segal, Shelly Winters, Richard Roundtree, Warren Oates, Jill Clayburgh...
As I young teen I used to faithfully watch the original series, but just wasn't sure if Stuart Townsend could pull off the character or hold up as the focal point of TV series.Compelling probably best describes his work on this show.
Don't you realize what made the original "The Night Stalker" movies and series such a classic was the wonderful interplay between Kolchak (Darrin McGavin) and his boss (Simon Oakland)?
Instead, this series is starting off as a rejected "X Files" episode."Night Stalker" needs, at least, a quirky Kolchak, say, Matthew Lillard or David Schwimmer.
I understand that Chris Carter and his *The X-Files* crew were inspired by the original *Kolchak: The Night Stalker* TV movies and series.
Humor and irreverence were the lifeblood of the original Carl Kolchak, and Spotnitz sucked it out of this incarnation of Kolchak as thoroughly as Janos Skorzeny, Dracula, Nosferatu, Lestat or any other vampire who appeared on the big or small screen.Many are touting *Night Stalker* as "the new X-Files," and I can't disagree with that; Stuart Townsend's Kolchak doesn't resemble Darren McGavin's original Kolchak so much as he does Fox Mulder-- if Mulder were taken off Prozac.
It's obvious that the Generation Xers (pun definitely intended) like their TV shows about the supernatural dark, depressed and humorless; this show may be the new X-Files, but don't try to pass it off as the new *Kolchak: The Night Stalker*!Somebody stake this vampire before it hurts anyone!.
This new Night Stalker totally sucks from every angle that you can possibly consider.I don't like any of the actors.
I enjoy the story and think that Stuart Townsend is a great actor and enjoy the entire ensemble.This show does not have the same "feel" to me as X-files had, which is good.
I am looking forward to see how this show grows.At this time the stories seem to have many loose threads, which I assume will come together later in the series.Seems like most of the disappointment around this is with people comparing it to the original.
Very much a worthy companion to X-FILES and even forgotten fare, such as Anthony Quayle's STRANGE REPORT, this new NIGHT STALKER will find an audience that appreciates thoughtful horror and interesting investigations.
IF Spotnitz had hired, say, Paul McCrane as Kolchak and Hector Elizondo as Vincenzo, and IF he had tried to emulate the same balance of chills and humor exhibited by the original pilots, and IF the new approach weren't such a transparent blueprint of the unending story arc of Byzantine conspiracy that was "The X-Files," it might have worked as a respectful homage.
If Spotnitz wanted to make this radical a departure from the original, he really should have said "no" to the idea of a remake and just composed a whole new series without trying to shoehorn this sad Chris Carter retread into a classic format.Update: Those crappy ratings can't be ignored.
ABC Night Stalker ( new series).
If the makers of the show didn't want a comparison, they shouldn't have called it Night Stalker and named its leading character Carl Kolchak.
The "new" Battlestar Galactica is a wonderful show, light years ahead of its infantile predecessor.)Aside from its failure as a true descendant of the original series (that honor goes to this season's WB series, Supernatural), Night Stalker is a clunker because of its too loose story lines, its cast members who look like fashionistas, and its failure to come to grips with an interesting Carl.
Take a series with fine character actors playing quirky, interesting roles, inject it with an equal mix of horror and humor, and you have the original 1974 "Night Stalker" series.
This show was absolutely nothing like the original Kolchak: The Night Stalker.
Carl wants to know but it seems the FBI agent investigating Carl's wife's death already has his mind made up that Kolchak did it...no matter what the evidence says.Despite tough competition The Night Stalker seems to slowly but surely be winning fans approval, including that of the original Kolchak himself, Darren McGavin according to his son York McGavin.
I think if this was a direct remake with re-hashed stories, this wouldn't have worked.Back when the original show came out people didn't really have to see the gore or the killings, etc..., because of great set-up, but times have changed since shows like Law and Order and C.S.I. show all of gore, which really kills the dramatic aspect of a story.
Sure sometimes its necessary, but sometimes just seeing a shadow of someone will work just as well.If you haven't seen Night Stalker yet, I really recommend watching at least one episode, before you make up your mind..
I don't understand these old people that complain..the show is not supposed to be like the original Night Stalker.They talk about how great the original was..yet it ONLY LASTED ONE SEASON.
The original series in 1974 starred Darren Mcgavin as Carl Kolchak.
I think we will all miss him.I purchased the DVD of 'Kolchek: The Night Stalker' complete series, (all 20 episodes) as my wife had never seen the original, only this remake.
Hey there, I was a fan of the original Night Stalker as a kid and was excited that a remake was being done - sure it wasn't just like the old one but some great suspense.
Running just one season is an extra big drag because it gets to the point where all kinds of questions are asked but not answered - good series, good writing, (much like X-Files feeling-some same writers I think) - if you liked X-Files, you'll like Night Stalker but there's only one season so take it slow!!
Stuart Townsend is a great, he's a reporter who brings mystery when he's on the screen (a little reckless, but you know he believes & so will you) Gabriel Union plays his rival, (who shoots straight from the hip)who wants to trust him, but just cant grip all the supernatural occurrence's this show brings(kind of similar to the x-files(which made it famous & millions as well)you know the story - Scully is always fighting Mulder with his far fetched ideas of the supernatural) This is a great show with good acting, but it just hasn't gotten the proper publicity it deserves to have..
I wasn't all that crazy about the new Night Stalker the first time I saw it because I still had the original with Darren Mac. lodged in my head.
i first noticed a new series of Night Stalker was coming out through i tunes and i was bored so i decided to download the pilot episode.
it drew me and many other of my friends in well and was a good twist of the older night stalker i give this series a 10 without a doubt and also hope that this review contributes to the show coming back 2 the air or at least ABC to release the last 2 episodes of this awesome show.
I watched the original Night Stalker each week and for my then wife and me it was one of our must see shows.I will start this review with a thank you for superimposing a scene of Darren McGavin in the news rooms since he had just died previously.
X files was running hot and this would have been a good time to bring back Night Stalker.
How great it would have been if Kolchak had made an appearance on X Files and passed the torch to Maulder and Sulley along with all of his data.Returning to the "new" Night Stalker.
I did not see any episodes when this series (of 2005) originally aired in the US (I bought a second-hand DVD copy) but evidently the ratings were not that good and the ABC executives decided to cut the series after its sixth episode (the official DVD includes also four additional unaired episodes).Stuart Townsend stars now as Carl Kolchak an inquisitive journalist/reporter working for the LA journal 'Beacon' and covering the crime column of this newspaper.
Kolchak believes that sometimes dark forces are lurking behind some unexplainable events but his theories are always met with suspicion or openly scrutinized by his boss (Tony Vincenzo, the senior editor of the newspaper) and by his dynamic and more down-to-earth colleague Perri Reed (played by Gabrielle Union).I liked the series to be honest, especially its X-files-like theme, and I thought could be given another chance to develop a bit more its ideas and themes.
Night Stalker is about a guy named Carl Kolchak (Stuart Townsend) who is a detective figuring out these cases about this mysterious murders and other freaky stuff that is happening along with his partner Perri Reed (Gabrielle Union).
if the producers had made a completely new show with no reference to the original series OR if they had made this a show about the son of Kolchak being laughed out of journalism like his dad I think the show would have gone for a few years.
No, this was not supposed to be a continuation of the original series (which I love and feel that it did not last as long as it should have) it is a new take on Kolchak.
I absolutely loved and still love Darren McGavin's Karl Kolchak, the 2 movies and the series...This is the same and different and that's fine - it does what i want it to - it entertains me and keeps me wanting more...The new Battlestar Galactica cured me of wanting exactly the same thing if something is remade...to be sure, i want it to have the essence and the spirit of the original and the names and the motivations and the settings and the conflicts and the surprises.
Watching this new Night Stalker just because I'm a fan of the old one and curious to see how it goes.
BE FOREWARNED FANS OF THE OLD NIGHTSTALKER SERIES, YOU WILL NOT LIKE THIS UPDATED VERSION IF YOU ARE EXPECTING THE OLD CHARACTERS AND STORY LINES OF THE 1970'S MOVIES AND SHOWS..
Whether on its own terms or as an update of the '70s series, "Night Stalker" ultimately deserved to be chopped by ABC after seven episodes (although as is often the case, all ten produced shows turned up over here, via Bravo this time - bravo!
This version of the Night Stalker more closely resembles X Files than the original Night Stalker films and series with the wonderful Darren McGavin as Carl Kolchak.While the story lines are reasonably realistic and interesting, the primary problem with this series are the lead actors.
This show is one of the best shows of the season.Stuart Townsend does a suspenseful role as Kolchak, a reporter who enjoys doing stories on crime. |
tt0390073 | The Halfway House | During the Second World War, various people converge on the Halfway House, an inn in the Welsh countryside. In Cardiff, the famous orchestra conductor David Davies is advised by his doctor to cancel a tour and rest, otherwise he will live only about three months more. In London, Richard and Jill French argue about the education of their young daughter Joanna. Joanna overhears them agree to divorce. Then Mr. French and Joanna go on vacation. Captain Fortescue is released from Parkmoor Prison; he was court-martialed for stealing the regimental funds. In a Welsh port, merchant captain Harry Meadows and his French wife Alice quarrel about their deceased son, a victim of the U-boats. Black marketeer Oakley departs from London for some fishing, while Margaret and her Irish diplomat fiancé Terence take a train from Bristol.
Oakley and Fortescue meet on the road; it turns out they know each other. Though Fortescu had scanned the countryside thoroughly with his binoculars in vain for the Halfway House, it mysteriously appears. When they reach it, the proprietor Rhys also seems to materialise out of thin air. He tells a puzzled Fortescu he was expected. When Oakley signs the register, he notices a long gap after the last signature, dated 1942, it being 21 June 1943. (The newspapers are exactly a year old.)
Others arrive. The Meadows request separate rooms. Rhys serves a still grieving Alice tea in her room. She is shocked to see no reflection of Rhys in the mirror when he leaves. Mr. French notices his wife's handwriting in the register and suspects that Joanna arranged for them to stay in the same place. Later, Fortescu is sitting outside when he notices that Gwyneth, Rhys's daughter, casts no shadow, though Joanna, standing nearby, does. Joanna arranges a fake near-drowning, with the help of Captain Meadows, to try to reunite her parents; it nearly goes fatally awry. Margaret and Terence quarrel when he is eager to accept a posting in Berlin (Ireland being neutral).
At dinner, Rhys relates that the inn was bombed by an aeroplane exactly a year ago and burnt down. While helping Gwyneth wash the dishes afterward, Davies is told by her that he is "coming our way". He understands.
Then Alice arranges a seance, much to her husband's disapproval. The table moves of its own volition, but the captain turns on the radio, breaking the mood. After Alice storms out, he explains to the others that he wants his son to be allowed to rest in peace. Rhys suggests he tell his wife the same; he does, and the couple reconcile.
Radio broadcasts from 1942 convince everyone that somehow they have gone back in time one year. Rhys explains that they all needed a pause to consider their lives. The air raid proceeds as Rhys described. Richard French's paramount concern for his wife and daughter's safety and Terence's newfound hatred of the Germans reunite them with the women in their lives, while both Fortescue and Oakley repent their criminal ways. The guests leave behind a demolished inn. | good versus evil, violence, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | The tide turned again in the Bush, Sr. era as politically correct movie makers like Wes Craven cleaned house, ditching gratuitous nudity and sleaze to appeal to the more conservative leaning Gen X American teens.THE HALFWAY HOUSE, made in 2004, is a welcome leap back in time, a tongue-in-cheek tribute to the bad ole days, when horror films were a spit in the eye of the self-proclaimed Moral Majority.Cult mistress Mary Woronov toplines a thoroughly charming and capable cast, who play a motley assortment of delinquents, psychopaths, and cops.
A stableful of budding scream queens light up the screen, eating up the pulp dialog and brightening many an adolescent boy's silver dreams by generously flaunting their bodies.With its gleefully perverse jabs at Catholicism, including one prop gag that will have Legion of Decency crusaders reaching for their heart pills, this film is not for Bible Belt soccer moms or unreformed altar boys, but fans of 80s B classics like "REFORM SCHOOL GIRLS" or "NIGHT OF THE DEMONS" will be rolling in the aisles.Low budget, set mainly in one location with judicious breaks throughout, the film delivers some cool sets and nicely done Lovecraftian EFX.
But frame for frame, it delivers more entertainment value than most Hollywood movies made for thirty times the budget..
I've seen a lot of bad movies but this one is total crap.
The girls are pretty,the lesbian scenes are pretty, the special effects are bad, the acting is bad, the whole movie is bad.
People don't waste your money on this, there are lots of good horror movies you can buy.
So many horror films these days are such a disappointment, but man was I surprised by this little low budget gem!
They should have had Hall write more of their films.Anyway, I managed to catch a screening of "The Halfway House" at the North Hollywood Film Fest.
It seems like a tribute to all the fun exploitation horror movies I loved in my youth, filled with sexy juvenile delinquents (played by much older girls), weird characters, and a Lovecraftian monster.
Pseudo-Lovecraftian garbage with very little gore, a few tits (but NO full-frontal), horrible acting - oh Christ, I give up - the list of negatives about this film is just way too long and encompasses just about every aspect of this piece of trash.The super-condensed version (because that's all this crap deserves): Girls are disappearing around an all-girl halfway house and being fed to a monster that lives in the basement by the head nun.
The police and one of the missing girls' sisters gets involved in the "investigation"...In case you haven't already gathered- I pretty much hated this "film".
Posing as a modern exploit film but not having the balls to take the concept all the way - THE HALFWAY HOUSE is a let-down all the way through.
I am a video store owner and I urge all video stores to stock this movie, especially if you have customers who like the classic Hammer or Castle films, as well as John Waters.
In these times of religious extremism (in the U.S.), it's good to see a movie deal with the real issues of spirituality and the sanctity of religious symbols, most importantly in regard to the very,very personal pleasure of prayer.
I have seen some pretty poor movies in my time, but this takes the biscuit, it is truly terrible ...
the plot is dreadful, the acting is diabolical, the monster is laughable, everything about The Halfway House is awful !!!I am not sure, either, exactly what this movie is supposed to be, or what it is trying to be.
If it's supposed to be a horror movie it fails spectacularly, I only jumped once in the entire film and that was in a part that I think was supposed to be funny !!!If it is supposed to be titillating, it also fails spectacularly.
I'm not going to complain about seeing numerous half naked women, even if only 2 of them were remotely good looking, but what was the point of most of the nudity if not to titillate and entertain, it certainly did neither !!!In summary, it was like a cheap porn movie without the porn !!!.
Nasty Nuns, One-Eyed Monsters and Cherry Pie. Fans of "USA Up All Night" will love "Halfway House" for two reasons:1.
This campy tale about a home for wayward girls who constantly go missing has everything that those classic films of the 70s and 80s do - There's sex, violence and monsters aplenty along with enough smart, brassy dialog to fill another three films.2.
"Halfway House" is written and directed by Kenneth Hall who was no stranger to the classic late night movie show.
Hall wrote "Puppetmaster" and "Nightmare Sisters" as well as directing such choice fare such as "Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout" and "Evil Spawn"."Halfway House" takes a refreshing approach to the Women-In-Prison genre with a story about Larissa (Janet Tracy Keijser) who is searching for her sister when she goes missing after a jog by the ominous house.
Larissa seduces a well-meaning but horny cop (Shawn Savage as Sgt. Dick Sheen HA!) into helping her infiltrate the house as a delinquent teen.
Once inside, our Nancy Drew runs afoul of Sister Cecelia (Mary Warnov in wonderfully subtle performance) and her handyman Lutkus (the hilarious Cleve Hall, Kenneth's brother) along with a slew of sexed-up, bitchy 'inmates', who constantly try to escape the house without much success, for what lurks in the basement isn't very pretty and apparently very hungry.Hall is in fine form here, recapturing much of what was so great about spending Friday nights glued to your TV.
And like wine, he's aged well and brings a fearless sense of thematics to "Halfway House", making it a must for repeat viewings.I caught a screening of "Halfway House" at the Valley Film Festival last year and was blown away by this independent movie's tenacity to please a crowd.
Hall spoke afterward, proving he may be L.A.'s answer to John Waters smart, irreverent and completely charming, it's no wonder that his films have endured all this time.
Yeah this is Pretty Bad. I saw some of this movie last night on SHowtime, and it's def nothing to jump around about.
It's nothing more than a C class horror movie with a predictable plot, sprinkled with lesbian love.
I actually caught this movie back at the Valley Film Festival and thought it was great.
Sure it's in the vein of Skinamax, but unlike most of the drab late night flicks, Halfway House is DAMN amusing.I was combing the shelves of my video store and saw it.
That is if Lucas and ILM were making a exploitation boobie creature feature.The acting is rock solid for a movie that takes itself tongue in cheek.
At least the movie does not take itself seriously, making it watchable if taken as camp, but I estimate that only one out of every ten (or even twenty) people will find this entertaining.After her sister disappears one afternoon, Larissa Morgan turns to the cops for help.
She suspects something to do with, Sister Cecilia's halfway house for troubled girls, and comes up with a twisted plan to get some answers.
Everything goes bananas; we get silly sex scenes, extreme profanity, sadistic morons, and a hungry alien in the cellar.The Halfway House is junk, but it is not the worst movie out there.
**SPOILERS** Ridicules as well as insulting soft-core porno horror movie that has Catholic Nun Sister Cecelia ,Mary Moronov, who became secretly involved in the Black Arts through the Satanic book of the dead Necronomicon.
Sister Cecelia ends up conjuring up this creature from another dimension who looks like the rubber octopus in "Bride of the Monster" with a ferocious set of teeth.Working behind the back of Father Fogerty (Joseph Tatnen), who runs the halfway house for runaway girls where she's assigned to, Sister Cecelia together with the halfway house's creepy handy-man Lutkus, Cleve Hall, secretly have the girls fed to this creature.
So that the blessed couple would produce a race of half-human half-octopus-like off-springs to take over and rule the world.Father Fogerty himself is anything but innocent in the movie having a faddish of not only reading and looking at the photos of girly magazines where young, and well endowed, women get spanked.
That's were Father Fogerty gets the idea of disciplining the girls at his halfway house by spanking them silly in the privacy of his office for any infraction that they commit.After jogger Annie Morgan, Ashley Rgea, is reported missing by her older sister Larissa, Janet Tracy Keijser, she with the help of police Sgt. Dick Sheen, Shawn Savage,goes undercover at the halfway house where Annie was last seen jogging.
It's also suspected that a number of other girls reported missing over the last few months also disappeared there.Getting to know what's really happening at the halfway house by getting very friendly with one of the runaway girls Cherry Pie, Stephanie Leighs, Larissa plans to get the goods on both Sister Cecelia and her accomplice in crime Lutku.Larissa ends up getting caught by the Satanic trio when Cherry Pie was too slow to inform her that Sister Cecelia was coming as the two were about to escape from the place.
Down in the basement of the halfway house Sister Cecelia, in a witch-like outfit, is about to bring out of the dungeon the one-eyed octopus-like creature to devour Cherry Pie for lunch only to have Father Fogerty pop up.
Fogerty does this by reciting passage's from the bible only to have his hand, holding a crucifix, cut off with a pair of shears by LutkusComing back from the dead Sgt. Sheen, with a two foot long knife protruding from his chest, takes out Lutkus where the creature for some strange reason attacks Sister Cecelia now dressed up like some kind of Demonic Wizard.
The creature ends up swallowing her down whole like actor Robert Shaw was in the movie "Jaws" with Larissa, also like in the movie "Jaws", throwing a plastic container of gasoline into it's mouth and blowing the creature to kingdom come.The movie "The Halfway House" is not only dopey with bad acting and a lot of it's story not making any sense at all it's not even intentionally or unintentionally funny.
The usual ruffians and lesbians populate 'The Halfway House' as well as the strict nun, perverted handyman and porn loving, butt smacking priest.
'House' doesn't let a thing like story dampen the fun of catfights and lesbo loving.
a good Sunday movie if you are hungover from the night before, great for zombie-ing out to on an overcast afternoon.i found myself wondering if these actors have made it in Hollywood, or whether they still are waitressing.
gore, comedy (not intentional), and tits!To be honest I didn't see the first part of the film as I was working down a mine at the time.
I have watched this film several times, own the nun and girl dolls and have a huge poster on my roof that can be seen from space.
I must give off the impression that I'm the kind of guy who would enjoy a woman's prison movie set in a Catholic Halfway House with copious amounts of nudity and a horny one-eyed monster.
So do you."The Halfway House" is a shameless exploitation flick with a little Catholic bashing thrown in.
She goes undercover in the Halfway House to get to the bottom of it.
The Halfway House has plenty of bad girls that want to get naked.
The house is run by a priest who likes to give out spankings to the misbehaving delinquents and Sister Woronov who applies her own demonic discipline to the unruly ladies.Yeah, it's all here.
The thing about "The Halfway House" is that it's sleazy, but not overly so, (at least by my standards).
She got naked a couple of times and those were good times.Overall, I was very pleased with "The Halfway House".
Just don't expect a serious monster/horror movie.
The monster in the basement is just another excuse to get more naked women into the movie.
The absence of full frontal nudity is a disappointment, of course, and this is why I have only awarded 9 points out of ten.Apart from the let-down when the briefs were not ripped off the quivering tasty bodies of the lovely young victims, I imagine that having to swallow the victims' panties might, possibly, have given the Creature indigestion.
The Halfway House starts with Annie Morgan (Ashley Fires) getting kidnapped as she goes about her business, if that wasn't bad enough her kidnapper ties her to some sort of sacrificial alter before ripping her clothes off & letting some demonic creature eat her, I guess it just wasn't her day.
Annie's sister Larissa (Janet Tracy Keijser) becomes worried about her & goes to the police, Sergeant Dick Sheen (Shawn Savage) fees there is a connection between Annie's mysterious disappearance & reports of several other young women going missing from the 'Mary Magdalan halfway house for troubled girls' situated in the same area where Annie was last seen but can't convince his boss Inspector Hinds (Michael Gaglio) so Larissa volunteers to go undercover unofficially in an attempt to try & find her sister, simple eh?
It's not long before she unearths sinister secrets at the halfway house...Co-executive produced, written & directed by Kenneth J.
Hall I thought The Halfway House was total complete & utter crap, it's as simple & straight forward as that.
The script feels like an exploitative WIP (women in prison) film with a touch of a 50's monster film thrown in there for good measure, the problem is it's never really that sleazy, the females are rather unattractive & the monster appears for all of 4 minutes.
Answers on a postcard please...Director Hall was obviously working on a low budget but I still don't think that's an excuse for turning in such a crap film.
The acting isn't so hot, sorry.The Halfway House is just another totally forgettable, dull rubbishy no budget straight-to-video horror film that fails to inspire or impress in any way.
I just picked up the unrated directors cut of Halfway House and I wasn't disappointed.This is a fun, campy movie, sort of in the same spirit as The Hazing, only instead of Brad Dourif we get Mary Woronov, and instead of a demon we get a Lovecraftian "old one" in all it's practical FX goofiness, no bad CGI monster in this baby, this is old time monster cheesiness!
And it all takes pace at a halfway house for wayward girls so there is a sort of WIP buzz also going on You want gore?
Best character name: Cherry Pie If you like campy, cheesy horror, with gore and boobs and monsters that don't come out of a computer then give this baby a shot..
"The Halfway House" is a rather great guilty pleasure.**SPOILERS**After her sister goes missing, Larissa Morgan, (Janet Tracy Keijser) decides to go looking for her at the local halfway house, run by Sister Cecelia, (Mary Moronov) a highly religious nun.
Thinking the best way to get information is to go undercover in the house, she and Sgt. Dick Sheen, (Shawn Savage) she is snuck in and made a member of the house with the other women there, 'Cherry Pie' Polowski, (Stephanie Leighs) Eddie, (Monica Shere) Angelina, (Athena Demos) Sheila, (Tomi X.) and Shelby, (Saye Yabandeh) and begins looking into the house's past.
Discovering a dark secret in the house, she races to save the others from the horrible truth present.The Good News: Rarely has there been a film more concentrated on having fun.
Highly recommended for those that enjoy this kind of film, while those that like it a bit more serious are expected to exercise caution with this one.Rated R: Nudity, Graphic Language, several sex scenes of both sexes and Graphic Violence.
The Halfway House.
Larissa(Janet Tracy Keijser, who has a smokin' body)is looking for her missing sister who went out jogging one day and got fed to something in a basement thanks to a demented handyman who kidnapped her.
She calls on Sgt. Dick Sheen(Shawn Savage)to assist her in going undercover within a Catholic half way house for troubled girls ran with an iron fist by evil nun, Sister Cecelia(Mary Woronov).
Father Fogerty(Joseph Tatner)loves to paddle his girls who misbehave while Larissa(who is snooping for possible leads regarding not only her own missing sister but other girls as well)finds porno mags and a sex doll in his office cabinet.
She also helps out a quiet, sad lesbian, "Cherry Pie" Polowski(Stephanie Leighs)who lost her tough sista lover to the same monster that ate Larissa's sister, who gets picked on by a group of nasty girls who blame her for losing privileges.
Also, Cecilia went to Miskatonic University and working there was none other than the handyman, Lutkus(Cleve Hall)who now is employed at the half way house, often peeping at the girls taking showers.
The monster is crap, but I think it's looking extremely fake was intentional.
The film isn't nothing to write home about, but Woronov is as fun as always in an unusual part.
Their search takes them to the Mary Magdalen Halfway House for Troubled Girls, where Larrisa goes undercover.
This is just like a B-movie love song to grind-house films of the '70's and '80's.
You have your women in prison film atmosphere, a return to trashy '80's schlockfests, throw in some HP Lovecraft, Andy Warhol find and B-movie mainstay Mary Woronov, rampant nudity, and cheap practical effects.
But though it's gratuitous, it's also kind of annoying - like watching a porno with anything of interest edited out.So to sum up - the clear intended audience of this movie is the male (or lesbian) horror comedy fan that has no concern about low budget or bad production values. |
tt3398048 | Tevar | Pintoo (Arjun Kapoor) is a young Kabbadi player who goes to factionism-hit Mathura to take part in practice. There, in a twist of fate, he saves Radhika (Sonakshi Sinha) from Gajendar Singh (Manoj Bajpayee), a dangerous faction leader, who is in love with Radhika and wants to marry her against her wishes. Pintoo tries to comfort her because Gajendar Singh killed her brother. When he saves Radhika, he humiliates Gajendar into taking his pants off. Ganjendar refuses to put them back on until someone finds Radhika and brings her back. Pintoo helps Radhika escape and takes her to his house in Agra, hiding her in his room with the help of his sister, Pinky (Gunjan Malhotra).
Soon, his parents find out she is hiding in their house. Radhika and Pintoo run away again and she falls in love with him. The next day, after taking care of Gajendar and his men, Pintoo and his friends drop Radhika off at the airport to go to America. Radhika cries on the way there, not wanting to leave Pintoo. They bring her parents to see her one last time before she leaves. After Radhika is past airport security, Pintoo realizes he loves Radhika. She shows up behind him, saying that she was waiting for him to stop her. She turns to leave when Pintoo is silent, taking it as a refusal, but Pintoo calls her back, and they confirm their love with a hug.
Pintoo's police chief father (Raj Babbar) and Gajendar show up at the airport, and Pintoo's father arrests him while Gajendar takes Radhika away. While under Gajendar's jurisdiction, Radhika taunts him and says that Pintoo will definitely come for her. Gajendar goes to the jail and asks Pintoo to come with him. Here, Pintoo and his father solve their relationship, when Pintoo's father expresses that he's not worried Pintoo will come home hurt; rather, he's worried for Gajendar.
Gajendar and his men get Pintoo injured in front of the whole town. The Home Minister, who is the reason Gajendar has not gotten in trouble all this time, tells him to stop making a scene, as he's ruining his political party, but Gajendar slaps the minister and goes on to fight Pintoo. He is further enraged when he sees how much Radhika loves Pintoo, and stabs him with a knife. Pintoo falls to the ground. Radhika tries to run to him, crying his name, but Gajendar drags her away. Pintoo is able to get up again, picking up the scarf that Radhika dropped. He ties it around his waist where the knife wound is, and fights and defeats Gajender's men. He also defeats Gajender until Gajendar gets back up with a gun. However, he is shot down by Kakdi, his own right-hand man on the instructions of the Home Minister who has had enough of Gajender's antics and insubordination and it is implied that Kakdi has now been appointed as Gajender's replacement. With Gajender dead, his goons have no interest in Pintoo and Radhika who are now reunited. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0014107 | The Gunfighter | A young, reckless cowboy named Eddie (Richard Jaeckel) deliberately provokes an argument with the notorious gunfighter Jimmy Ringo (Gregory Peck). Ringo is widely known as the fastest draw in the West, making him the perpetual target of every young gunslinger eager to become famous as "the man who shot Ringo". When Eddie ignores Ringo's warnings and draws his weapon, Ringo has no choice but to kill him. Eddie's three brothers pursue Ringo as he leaves town, seeking revenge, but Ringo ambushes them, takes their guns, and drives off their horses, telling them to walk back to town; instead, they follow him on foot.
In the nearby town of Cayenne, Ringo settles into a corner of the largely deserted saloon. The barkeeper (Karl Malden) alerts Marshal Mark Strett (Millard Mitchell), an old friend of Ringo's. Strett urges Ringo to leave, since his presence has already created a sensation in town, and it is only a matter of time until the brothers show up. Ringo agrees to go as soon as he sees his wife, Peggy (Helen Westcott), whom he has not seen in eight years, and the son he has never met; but Strett says that Peggy has changed her surname to conceal their relationship and has no interest in seeing him.
Meanwhile Ringo, who has been sitting bent over, has to deal with Hunt Bromley (Skip Homeier), another young gunslinger keen to make a name for himself, and Jerry Marlowe (Cliff Clark, uncredited), who mistakenly believes Ringo killed his son. Although his hands are empty he tells Bromley that he is holding a gun under the table and orders him to leave. With Marlowe he slips around the building, catches him and takes him to the jail. There he meets a group of women who are looking for the marshal. They do not know him but are happy to discuss how to get rid of the "murderer" who has come to town.
Shortly afterwards the bar girl, Molly (Jean Parker)—another old friend—eventually persuades Peggy to talk to Ringo. Ringo says that he is now older and wiser, and wants to leave his gunfighting past behind. He intends to settle down to a peaceful life in California, where people do not know him, and he wants Peggy to come with him. She refuses, but agrees to reconsider in a year's time, if he has kept his word and abandoned his past for good. Ringo meets his son at last, although he does not reveal that he is his father.
Ringo's business in Cayenne is finished, but he has lingered too long. The three vengeful brothers have arrived, and lie in wait, but Strett and his deputies intercept them and bring them in. Ringo bids farewell to Peggy, his son, and his friends; but as he departs the saloon, Bromley shoots him in the back, mortally wounding him. As Ringo lies dying, he tells Strett that he wants it known that he drew on Bromley—that Bromley shot him in self defense. Bromley protests that he doesn't want Ringo's help—but Ringo explains to his killer that he is doing him no favors. Bromley, he says, will soon know how it feels to have every hotshot two-bit gunfighter out to kill him. He will become a magnet for trouble. He will learn, as Ringo did, that notoriety as a gunfighter is a curse that will follow him wherever he goes, making him an outcast and a target for the rest of his life. Strett orders Bromley out of his town, punctuating his order with a beating, which he warns is "just the beginning" of what Bromley has coming.
In death, Ringo has finally found what he sought for so long: his wife's forgiveness and reconciliation. At his funeral, as Peggy proudly reveals to the townspeople for the first time that she is Mrs. Ringo, a silhouetted, unrecognizable cowboy rides off into the sunset. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0096246 | The Terror Within | In a post-apocalyptic future, human survivors are fighting a group of mutant monsters they refer to as "Gargoyles".
Two of these survivors Michael and John are out surveying the world after a chemical or biological attack which left a large portion of the population mutated or dead. The survivors are part of the Mojave Lab and have lost contact with their sister Rocky Mountain Lab.
Over the radio Sue and David hear John and Michael fall under attack from the gargoyles while investigating a large group of buzzards. In order to find John and Michael, David and Linda go out of the bunker but find John and Michael dead. They also find a live girl named Karen who they bring back to their bunker.
While under anesthesia Karen gives birth to a gargoyle which gets loose in the bunker. Hal develops a plan to kill the gargoyle in which Andre and Neil fall prey to the gargoyle. The gargoyle then proceeds to wound David and injure his dog Brutus while also kidnapping Sue with the intentions to reproducing with her.
These creatures reproduce quickly by raping human women and impregnating them. The gestation period is short and deadly. The creatures are very strong and able to heal after some wounds such as burning, beating, and electrical shock. They are vulnerable to the high-pitched frequency of a dog whistle (used by a lead character to ward them off).
Sue becomes impregnated by the gargoyle; she later kills herself via drug overdose. Linda and David then hatch a plan to kill the gargoyle by luring him into the ventilation system where he becomes trapped and falls into a running exhaust fan dismembering him. David and Linda re-establish radio contact with the Rocky Mountain Lab and along with Brutus leave the bunker with a high frequency megaphone to brave the outside world. They lie and wait for a number of gargoyles to enter the open bunker and implode it.
Linda and David leave the bunker; it is implied that they are on their way to the Rocky Mountain Lab. Abortion becomes a topic of debate between the humans when one of the characters is raped by one of the creatures; they are unsure if the woman is pregnant by her human partner or the monster. | violence | train | wikipedia | But what else would expect from the likes of Roger Corman?Chemical warfare experiment kills of most of the world's population.
There are a few 'normal' people left like our protagonists (Andrew Stevens, George Kennedy, Teri Treas, etc..) and then there are the gargoyle-like creatures who impregnate female humans in order to procreate their own kind.See, Andrew Stevens & Co. are left inside an underground lab that spared them from the effects of the plague, so in one of their reconnaissance patrols out in the desert, they bring back a wounded human female (Yvonne Saa) to the complex in order to treat her.
It's an ok scene but we've all seen it before.Stevens & Co. then spend the rest of the movie trying to hunt down the creature as they are slowly being killed off one-by-one.
Pretty good although I wish it were more graphic.It looks like Corman & Co. spent a little bit of money on the set design but don't expect any of the fanciest gizmos from STAR WARS or any of the ALIEN sequels.
At least the sets don't look too much like cardboard.Released on DVD the same time as THE NEST (Teri Treas appears in both), you could do a lot worse on a Saturday night.
Enter THE TERROR WITHIN, one of the better ALIEN rip-offs that Corman has made(next ot GALAXY OF TERROR, of course).The story is old, and to discuss it would just waste space, and not surprise anyone.
This is wholesale gore, and there is a little bit(very little) suspense as well.For a post-apocalyptic slant on ALIEN, this one isn't bad..
A Roger Corman quickly produced cheapie that wears its influences proudly, as many elements (character descriptions to lifted sequence ideas) just reek of Ridley Scott's 1979 feature ''Alien''.
Instead of being set in space like that classic, the action takes place in a post-apocalyptic setting due to a chemically induced plague wiping out the majority of the earth's population.
What the story lacks in imagination (as it does draw upon a predictable amalgam) and coherence, it makes up for in durable performances (a likable Andrew Stevens, George Kennedy, John Lafayette, Starr Andreeff and Terri Treas all keeping it straight) and gruesomely tacky splatter (even though it doesn't have much impact in engineering the deaths and tawdry jolts).
The Terror Within (1989) *** (out of 4) Yet another ALIEN clone from producer Roger Corman.
Their good lifestyle takes a turn for the worse when a large monsters gets inside and starts a killing rampage.
THE TERROR WITHIN is in no way, shape or form an original movie but fans of mindless monster movies should really enjoy it as we get a fun cast, a great monster, several gory death scenes and an all around good time.
The film not only has elements of ALIEN but we also gets bits and pieces taken from THE THING and also several very important "moments" from HUMANOIDS FROM THE DEEP.
It's clear the goal of this film was to deliver an old-fashioned monster movie that you'd see at the drive-in in the 1950s but they took it a step further by adding in the gore and nudity that you'd expect to see in an exploitation film from this era.
I think the most surprising thing is that a monster movie like this could get made and released in 1989 because this type of film pretty much died out at the start of the decade when slashers arrived on the scene.
The cast includes a fun lead performance from the one and only Andrew Stevens and we get nice support from Starr Andreeff, John Lafayette and Oscar-winner George Kennedy who was square in the middle of his exploitation days.
THE TERROR WITHIN isn't a classic but I think it's a very good monster movie that has a lot going for it..
It's impossible to spoil this movie but I hate to mention the many times it blatantly rips-off Alien, a far superior film.
The acting is vastly inferior, along with effects and sets, I'm sure I've seen the same rubber suited creature in at least one other low-budget film.Oh, sorry, I did notice one major difference.
some really cheesy effects at times (the pregnant belly looks pretty bad), but maybe you like cheese.
It is a good and enjoyable film.not the best or great of the lot but still good.the actresses are pretty good but alas none had a long career,which is a curse for actresses working in such B-movies,especially terri treas i just loved her in this movie.but it is good anyway.p.s check out alien screw sue scene..
Everyone has to get paid somehow and these movies were being pressed out a lot.A few moments into this picture and you can start to see the low-budget sleaze oozing through the cracks.
Stupid thing-that-would-not-die mess has George Kennedy (no idea why he is in this) leading a group of humans who live underground in a post-apocalyptic future.
The opening scene of The Terror Within takes place at the Vasquez Rocks in California, perhaps the most overused location in sci-fi cinema and TV, which gives an idea of just how fresh and innovative this Roger Corman produced Alien rip-off is.
The familiar plot sees a group of scientists, survivors of a plague that has all but wiped out humanity, finding a woman in the wilderness surrounding their underground lab complex.
While performing the operation, the 'baby' tears itself free from the womb in a blatant crib of the chestburster scene from Alien, and scuttles off to the air vents where it quickly grows into a full-sized man in a really bad rubber monster costume.The rest of the movie sees the plucky scientists constructing a flame-thrower and some handy-dandy laser weapons and hunting down the monster, which is keen to get its claws on the female members of the group so that it can impregnate them.
The action that ensues is poorly executed, and completely devoid of suspense and tension, largely thanks to the laughable monster, but also due to unconvincing performances from all involved (I can't really blame them; I imagine that it's hard to look scared when faced with such a silly creature).
The Beast Within (notice the title similarity), which was a decent horror movie for it time, has the same theme of a monster trying to mate with every woman it comes across.
It also never hurts to have the caliber of a go-to character actor like George Kennedy in the cast, either.The integrity of an underground installation is compromised when abnormal humans (nicknamed "gargoyles") who seemed to have developed into monsters due to radioactive fallout thanks to war that wiped out 99% of mankind, find out their entrance (a shack in the middle of the Mojave desert).
Two of the members (the handsome Andrew Stevens and cherubic Starr Andreeff) find a female human survivor of the plague, bring her to the lab, and it is soon discovered that she is pregnant.
The fetus is actually a monster, a victim of the plague, abnormal because of the radioactive effects of the outside atmosphere (it is also possible she was raped by one of the gargoyles).
The Terror Within has a monster fetus "exit" very similar to the infamous chest bursting scene, this time fleeing from the surgical stomach cut by the installation's chief medical officer.
Aimed with a laser (its use is limited to four shots) and a blow torch (yes, quite similar to Alien, also), the weaponry at their disposal requires getting close to the monster.
Soon, the movie becomes a "man in rubber suit" affair with Stevens and company in pursuit of the seemingly indestructible monster that walks upright but has a protruding face and hands with claws that rip flesh in one strike.
The most tragic scene is what happens to Andreeff, who rushes to help her beloved Stevens (they are lovers in the movie), when she is captured and sexually molested by the creature on the rampage.
Terri Treas is also quite good as the doctor who must join forces with Stevens after the monster has wiped out most of the crew and figure out some way to kill the damned thing on the loose.
While it's an obvious rubber suit, I thought the designers done a good job on making the creature as ugly and ferocious as possible.
I admit that I enjoy Alien, Robocop, and Terminator rip-offs, and "The Terror Within" was better than I expected.
Sure, the sets and props, even the rubber suited monster, are meager, but given the budget Thierry Notz had to work with, I found "The Terror Within" rather surprisingly exciting and fun.
Okay, you've heard about "so-bad-it's-good" movies before, but this demented little thing plays in an entirely different league.
It's a cheesy and minimally plotted 80's earthbound "Alien" imitation and it's produced by Roger Corman, so that ought to give you an immediate idea about the overall quality of this production.
All we know is that some kind of "accident" wiped out 99% of the earth's population and that the few remaining survivors on the surface are continuously threatened by gargoyle-creatures.
Unaware of the fact that the gargoyles mate with regular females, they take a pregnant girl into their lair and numbly observe how she gives birth (in a sequence shamelessly copied from Ridley Scott's milestone) to a ravenous and fast-growing monster.
Admittedly, the plot description for "The Terror Within" doesn't sound half as bad as initially feared, but honestly the film is stuffed with plot-holes the size of the Grand Canyon, laughably inane dialogs, poor acting performances and tiny stupid oddities that are almost too amusing for words.
2)Actually, the monsters look a bit like an over-sized version of Duckman.
"The Terror Within" is an entertainingly cheesy creature feature.**SPOILERS**On a research mission, Hal, (George Kennedy) David, (Andrew Stevens) Sue, (Starr Andreeff) Andre, (John Lafayette) Linda, (Terri Treas) and Neil, (Tommy Hinkley) begin worrying that their mission should be concluded.
Determining the reason behind it's attacks, the team scours the base for the creature and launches a plan to get rid of it before it is able to kill off the entire crew one-by-one.The Good News: While not a great film, this one here is pretty decent.
The film does move at a pretty nice pace, keeping it between one encounter with the creature at a time and one significant discovery until it's done capitalizing on the previous one.
This really makes it seem like there's no real down-time at all, and by making the creatures' appearance in the film really early works wonders.
The basic premise of the film, several of it's key action and plot-point set-pieces are taken from one singular movie, the creatures' actions are the exact same as another film, and there's a whole series of scenes that come off as being featured in a thousand individual scenes themselves.
The cast,:Andrew Stevens as David, Starr Andreeff as Sue, Terri Treas as Linda, and a handful of others, go through their actions in earnest, Imagining themselves, I suppose, in a bigger budget production, where they are not terrorized by a guy in a rubber suit.
Lord they do try, The picture looks good, all production values on the mark, the writers have a tendency to repeat sequences, things are done in pairs, search the lower decks, " is the baby human?" let's split up" Don't leave the control room, The flaws are breath taking, The plot takes a "Ten Little Indian" turn by midpoint, I am sorry, so sue me, but the monster on the soundtrack reminded me of the great Supy Sales's, off stage pet, "Black Tooth" Blarh !
George Kennedy is a great well known actor with lots of films to his credit he worked along the greats like John Wayne, Henry Fonda, Burt Lancaster, Lee Marvin and Jimmy Stewart.
So it was sad to see him running around in a Post Apocalypse Movie with a laser gun that looked like it was made from PVC pipe from Lowes or Home Depot.
Of course with all the cast George Kennedy was the movie he must have done it because the director or producer was his brother in-law or something.
Still, it's about as good as a low budget Roger Corman knockoff could be; it's reasonably well produced (by Corman himself) and directed if mostly predictable and routine stuff.It takes place in a future world where most of humanity has been decimated by a chemical experiment that got out of control.
The resulting "gargoyle" that emerges when they try to abort it then proceeds to slaughter the hapless crew one schmuck at a time.To Cormans' credit, the sets look decent, and also giving the look of the movie some degree of quality is the work of cinematographer Rohn Schmidt, who's gone on to big things such as the feature film "The Mist" and the TV series 'The Walking Dead'.
However, the movie does so much cloning of "Alien" as to be somewhat groan inducing, right down to its creation of two comic relief characters (played by John Lafayette and Tommy Hinkley) clearly patterned after Parker and Brett from the '79 film.
It manages to create some suspense, and come up with a somewhat cathartic finale.A committed B movie cast plays this as well as they can, with Oscar winner George Kennedy lending some credibility to the proceedings.
Andrew Stevens (who went on to direct "The Terror Within II") is likable enough, as are lovely ladies Starr Andreeff and Terri Treas.
So good it's bad - buy it if you like those kinds of movies.
The film takes place on Earth in an underground facility called the "Mojave Lab." The crew's mission is to exit the lab and explore the Earth's surface searching for survivors in a future where 99 percent of the human population died off from a virus that they now now have a cure for.In the film's opening two crew members are attached by some vicious mutant creatures they call Gargoyles.
The instant the thing is seen lunging out of its host they resort to a cut away of our hero "David" played by Andrew Stevens looking on from a observation room and exclaims "Oh my God he's in the air vent." They clearly could not show any of that with the special effects set up they had, so they tell us.
A fair share of the action takes place inside the air vents, just like in the Ridley Scott film.
This was so clear to the crew that the costume designer on Terror dressed the "Neil" character played by Tommy Hinkley with a Hawaiian shirt almost identical to the one Harry Dean Stanton wore as "Brett" in Alien.The over all look and tone the film is going for is clearly inspired by it's high budget predecessor.
Even some of weapons the crew uses are the same.The unfortunate thing is the first 34 minutes of The Terror Within is uneventful and does not set up anything that you really need to know in order to understand the film.
They did not have much to work with, the character work was just not there in the script.HOW THEY FELL SHORT:The Gargoyle is an actor in a full body suit and a bulky head piece that only looked good in extreme close ups or in the shadows.
When Andre is attacked by the Gargoyle they assemble a fun series of shots but it ends up making him look like he's standing there for a total of eight seconds waiting to be killed.David realizes the sound of a dog whistle is the Gargoyles only weakness it debilitates him, so they make a tape of it to play back over the speakers so he can hunt it down.
The next seven minutes he is crippled, crawling around and doing everything except simply sounding the dog whistle he has hanging from his neck the whole time.In ClosingIt's goofs like this that lend to the overall charm of the film.
In an attempt to duplicate a space epic like Alien on a budget estimated to be the cost of a new sports car, the film makers of The Terror Within have produced a low rent romp that is SO BAD IT'S GOOD.
Roger Corman oftentimes would use a big budget film as a template for his B movie.
The cast is okay, a lot better than a film with a similar theme, "Xtro 2".
This one features George Kennedy who appears not to want to be in the film, but at least he does not slur his words like Vincent did!The story has the world's population mostly wiped out by some sort of plague.
They have like six main cast members, but as soon as the monster takes out one of them, the others are taken out within a span of ten minutes and we are done to the final two people and watching one get thrown around by the monster just like in the worse film, "Creepazoids".
George's death is rather funny though as he blasts the monster four times with his 'laser' then rushes the beast most likely to expel himself from the film sooner!
The sound acting by the sturdy cast helps a lot: Andrew Stevens as the rugged David, George Kennedy as no-nonsense lab head Hal, Starr Andreeff as the sweet, spunky Sue, Terri Treas as tough, feisty doctor Linds, John LaFayette as the easygoing Andre, and Tommy Hinkley as wisecracking goofball Neil.
I've seen much worse- but at least those movies had the guts to try something new (even though they tanked doing it).The Terror Within is a rip-off of Alien.
Even the camera angles and shot order are similar to Alien.I'd like to give this movie a 2 but there are other movies I'd give a two...and this isn't as bad as those. |
tt1724555 | Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days | === Setting and characters ===
Dog Days has players control James Seth Lynch for most of the game (the second player in co-op is Adam "Kane" Marcus). After the end of the first game the pair part ways. Lynch starts a new life in Shanghai with a girlfriend named Xiu, working for a crime organization led by English-born ex-pat Glazer. When Glazer tells Lynch about a plan to smuggle guns to Africa, Lynch calls Kane for aid in return for a split in the deal. The money would not only help them retire but also benefit Kane's estranged daughter Jenny (who survived the events in Dead Men).
=== Plot ===
Immediately after Kane arrives in Shanghai, Lynch forces his friend to help on an errand: threatening an informant named Li "Brady" Lung. The plan goes badly and a chase through gang territory ensues. After shooting a number of gang members, the pair corner Brady and his girlfriend in a wet market. A quick firefight ensues, and Kane accidentally shoots Brady's girlfriend. Brady calmly commits suicide.
The next day Kane and Lynch talk to Glazer about the smuggling operation, but their limousine is ambushed by Brady's gang. After a firefight on the highway and through the streets, they are told the leader of their attackers is a crime lord named Hsing. Kane, Lynch and Glazer's mercenaries raid Hsing's sweatshop headquarters and capture him. During interrogation, Hsing reveals the girl Kane shot was the daughter of an exceptionally high-ranking Politburo official called Shangsi, and that anyone friendly with the two men is effectively open season. Upon hearing this Glazer's men turn on Kane and Lynch, who are then forced to kill their former associates in order to hide the truth from Glazer. They then escape the police and Hsing's gang.
Lying low in a restaurant for a couple of hours, Lynch tries to call Xiu and tell her to meet him so they can flee Shanghai, but she doesn't pick up. Suddenly a Chinese SWAT team arrives. Kane and Lynch kill the policemen, then race to Xiu's apartment as she must also be a target. Discovering her apartment complex has been taken over by Hsing's men, the pair fight through the building, and find Xiu being held at gunpoint by Hsing. Kane suggests they kill Hsing immediately, but fearing for Xiu's safety Lynch knocks Kane unconscious and surrenders.
Kane, Lynch, and Xiu are brutally tortured by Hsing in a bathroom. Believed dead, Lynch is dumped in an alleyway. When he regains consciousness he kills Hsing and saves Kane, but is too late to save Xiu, who has been raped and killed. Both Kane and Lynch are naked and badly lacerated with box cutters, but they still escape into the city, fighting their way through another SWAT team in the process.
After finding clothes, the pair arrive at Glazer's arms-deal in a shipbuilding complex, naively hoping Glazer hasn't heard about their problems. Glazer does already know the truth about Shangsi's daughter's death and orders his men to kill them – but Kane and Lynch manage to annihilate the gang and corner Glazer, who begs for mercy and reveals that he has a plane that can be used to leave Shanghai. He is then killed by a military sniper, who they realize was sent by Shangsi who has used Glazer to entrap the pair. After fighting through many PLA soldiers and policemen, Kane and Lynch board a freight train leaving the area, thinking they're finally out of trouble. However the train is stopped and they are captured by the military.
While being transported by helicopter to meet Shangsi, Kane and Lynch hijack the vehicle, use the onboard weapons to gun down other helicopters, and force the pilot to land on Shangsi's skyscraper. They slaughter security and destroy much of the building before confronting Shangsi in his own office. Impressed by their skills, Shangsi offers them a pardon in exchange for serving as his employees. In revenge for Xiu's death, and fearing betrayal, Lynch kills Shangsi out of hand. Kane is distraught, realising they now have no chance of redemption or mercy in China.
Some time later, Kane and Lynch sneak into the Shanghai International Airport in order to fly Glazer's private jet out of the country. However, the authorities are alerted and after shooting their way through several areas of the airport they find the jet partially dismantled in a hangar. With no other choice, the two are forced to flee on to the runway, police hot on their heels, and hijack a commercial airliner heading for Balzar, Ecuador. | violence, revenge, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1334722 | Baccano! | Aboard the ship Advenna Avis in 1711, a group of alchemists summon a demon in the hopes of gaining eternal life. The demon gives them an elixir of immortality and the method of ending their existence, by "devouring" one another, and grants the summoner Maiza Avaro the formula of the elixir. Maiza and most of the alchemists decide that no one else must become immortal; only Szilard Quates opposes. That night, the alchemists begin to disappear, devoured by Szilard. Realizing the threat posed by staying together, they scatter across the globe.
In New York City during November 1930, Szilard succeeds in recreating the elixir, only to have it stolen by young thug Dallas Genoard. The elixir continually moves around the city because of Dallas, with the three mafiosi Gandor brothers, the two idiotic thieves Isaac Dian and Miria Harvent, and Maiza's protege Firo Prochainezo and their Camorra family, the Martillo, all passing it around. Szilard makes Dallas an incomplete immortal (meaning he still ages) to retrieve the elixir. However, all other parties accidentally consume the elixir, mistaking it for alcohol, at a party for Firo. Firo falls in love with Szilard's immortal homunculus Ennis, who betrays Szilard by telling Firo how to devour Szilard, which he does. The Gandor then cement Dallas to a barrel at the bottom of the Hudson River to punish him for killing Gandor members.
In late 1931, the Gandor fight the Runorata family for control of the same area after a new drug surfaces. In an attempt to resolve the situation, Luck Gandor asks his adoptive brother Claire Stanfield, a psychopathic assassin, to travel to New York. Claire agrees to and boards the transcontinental train the Flying Pussyfoot, on which he works as a conductor. The train is hijacked by the Russo and Lemure gangs, who are trying to kidnap a senator's family, and a battle ensues between the two gangs. Meanwhile, Jacuzzi Splot, Nice Holystone and their gang attempt to protect the passengers and fight the hijackers, while Claire assumes the identity of the Rail Tracer, a monster that eats train passengers, and slaughters much of the Russo and the Lemure, only to successfully propose to one of the Lemure, Chane Laforet, who is a daughter of immortals. A serial stowaway and newspaper field agent flees Claire and ends up helping in the rescue of the hostages. The last remaining members of the Lemure are eventually defeated by Jacuzzi's gang, while sadistic murderer Ladd Russo is incarcerated and loses his arm to Claire. At the same time, Ennis writes to Isaac and Miria, inviting them to Manhattan. The duo boards the same train and meets Jacuzzi, and unwittingly sway immortal Czeslaw Meyer from enacting malevolent acts by abandoning selling a series of homemade bombs meant for Runoratas to counter the Gandors.
The train arrives in New Year 1932 with the survivors going their separate ways: Jacuzzi and Nice escape custody and go into hiding after their base of operations in Chicago was taken over by the Russo family; information gatherer Rachel returns to the Daily Days mostly unscathed; Isaac and Miria introduce Czes to the Martillo family and is subsequently adopted by Firo and Ennis, who later marry, as the latter's brother; and Claire begins his mission to exterminate the enemies of his adoptive brothers, implying his intentions to find Chane and marry her after the job is done.
Later that year Dallas' sister Eve searches for Dallas, putting her at odds with Luck. These stories involved the Daily Days News Information company and the Runorattas' drug plot with Begg, a drug addicted immortal alchemist acquaintance of Maiza's encroaching Gandor turf through his miracle drugs, testing it on innocent bystanders including a young man named Roy Maddock. Eventually Eve is caught up in the turf war involving drugs with the Runoratta family and Gandors, the ramifications of the turf war affecting two lovers: Gandor speakeasy waitress Edith and her boyfriend, revealed to be Roy. The climax of the conflict results in Luck secretly telling Eve where Dallas is to spare her from bloodshed, and with Claire's help, the turf war ends with bittersweet results for Edith and Roy now associated with the Gandors until they finish the debt they compiled in the story albeit in happier terms.
Eventually, Dallas is pulled out of the river, but shortly after, he is abducted by the Larvae, a group working for Huey Laforet. Meanwhile, Jacuzzi's operations begin to encroach on Gandor and Martillo turf. Representatives (Ronnie Schiatto, Ennis and Tick Jefferson) from both groups converge on Eve's home, where his gang is staying along with Isaac and Miria. At the same time, the Larvae arrive to enlist Jacuzzi's help; they have kidnapped Dallas to prove that immortality is possible, and attempt to convince Jacuzzi into join them. Elsewhere in 1933 New York, Mist Wall, the largest branch office of the military equipment researcher and developer Nebula, is bombed as according to Huey's plans with the help of Lamia, another faction of homunculus made by him.
The next year in 1934 at Alcatraz Island, Ladd befriends Firo, who was framed for a public bombing, and Isaac, who was finally caught for his thefts, and they meet Chane's immortal father Huey, who was charged with treason and conspiracy years ago with affiliation to the Lemures among other terrorist acts. Meanwhile, Christopher Shouldered, Huey's homunculus, and Graham Specter, Ladd's loyal follower, cause an all out war in Chicago through various battles enacted by the Lamia and Russo family. Afterwards, Jacuzzi and his gang return to Chicago while Ladd attempts to kill Huey and fails thanks to the efforts of Isaac and Firo; however, the scuffle resulted in Huey's eye taken with the help of Lamia operative Sham, a homunculus who can take over one's consciousness by contact through his body in the form of water. The homunculus group Lamia (associated with Larvae, the group previously encountered by the cast) cause trouble for the Russo family while this happens. Several of the Lamia join their forces and others split for other purposes, particularly Christopher joining with the Russo family to protect their heir named Ricardo Russo along with Lamia member Sickle and Graham Spector. Isaac is eventually released from Alcatraz along with Firo. Placido Russo, Ricardo's grandfather and Ladd's uncle, is eventually turned immortal and consumed by Nebula scientist Renee for his failure in stopping the rampage of Chicago, resulting in Ricardo inheriting the crime family.
The remainder of the plot focuses of an even older faction of Immortals led by Huey's mentor and former lover, Renee Paramedes Branvillier detailed their relationship with the 1711 immortals from the 1700s till the later 1930s and how the corporation Nebula involves themselves against the other crime families by allying themselves with Senator Beriam, who has a grudge against the immortals and wishes to rid the world of them. One particular immortal named Melvi targets Firo in 1935 by endangering Ennis in order to extract the memories of Szilard Quaites by eating Firo, unaware that his bodyguard is Claire Stanfield, resulting in his defeat. Later, Renee continues to pursue Huey by attempting to reclaim Chane for a purpose which put her at odds with Claire who intends to marry their daughter. As of this writing, the conflict appears to remain unresolved.
In 2001, Maiza and a few immortals appear in a rural European town to apprehend a fellow alchemist and immortal Elmer C. Albatross, who had been masquerading as a demon and was imprisoned by the locals. They uncover an age old conspiracy detailing the origins of water homunculi from the 1930s (Sham and Leeza Laforet, sister of Chane) and also putting a stop the experiments on the people that had been ongoing in the town as they remained unaware of Szilard Quaite's demise for almost the remaining century, his descendant Bild Quaites later encounters the immortals and reveals the horrific secrets of the village. Phil and Felt Nebil, homunculi resulting from Szilard's experiments are subsequently freed from the village and allowed to wander the earth, ending up in New York after the ordeal.
In 2002, a cult named SAMPLE launches a heist to replicate the Flying Pussyfoot incident via a twin cruise ship named Exit and Entrance only to be thwarted by Claire Stanfield and Chane Laforet's descendants, Claudia and Charon Walken with Jaccuzi Splot and Nice Holystone's descendant, Bobby Splot along with his gang with unwitting aide from another faction called Mask Makers led by Huey's descendant Luchino B. Campanella. It is eventually revealed that Czes's tormentor Fermet is in fact the mastermind and overall villain of the series after Szilard Quates. | violence, comedy, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | Intelligent premises, with a little bit of the fantastic but not enough to feel inauthentic in the 30's prohibition underworld setting.At first it's difficult to follow because of the anachronistic order and sheer loads of characters, but as you get used to the pacing and familiar with the faces, the pieces begin to fit together.
The storytelling is genius, and the reveals are a lot more rewarding exposed in this way than if time were shown sequentially.English dub: I just finished watching this, and it's a fair localization that kept to the spirit of the original, and included more appropriate accents.
It's somewhat lacking in that Isaac and Miria, two of the more watchable characters, just aren't as funny, though the actors are decent they don't have the same chemistry as the original Japanese..
Three story lines are expertly weaved together with pacing that reveals everything at just the right time.
I showed this to my 40 year old parents (never seen anime) and they loved it.
Great series with plenty of fun and action set in '30s America.
When I started watching this series I didn't know much about it but as it could be watched legally on Funimation's YouTube channel I thought I'd give it a go; I'm glad I did as it is one of the best anime series that I've seen.
It is only sixteen episodes long but there isn't a moment wasted as it is jam packed with story and a large cast of memorable characters.
When the cast it is first introduced in the opening credits it seems that it will be impossible to remember who is who but as they are such great characters it isn't so difficult.
Over the course of the series we learn how they became immortal, how they get to know each other and most importantly what happened aboard the 'Flying Pussyfoot' a transcontinental express bound for New York on board which most of the cast meet and many people die in unpleasant circumstances.
Much of the series take place on the train but we also see frequent flash forwards of what happened before and what happens later, amazingly this does not lead to confusion.The series was a lot of fun but also included violent scenes which would make it unsuitable for younger viewers; the actions of 'Rail Tracer' might give them nightmares, they made me cringe and its a long time since I was a child.
The animation looks fantastic, the slight sepia tint giving it a period look and distinctive characters made it a joy to watch, it also had a great musical score to accompany it.These comments are made based on watching the series in Japanese with English subtitles although I did see one of the episodes in English and thought the dub was pretty good..
This show has so much going for it it truly will require more than one watch because it's just one of those stories where you uncover more as you revisit it making it long lasting.
The animation is great the background animation is probably the most impressive to me cause it both captures decades long gone but also it's not static it's actually lively.The story telling format is similar to films like "Pulp Fiction", "Watchman" and "Memento", which tell their stories in a non-linear format.
I always loved this format in storytelling because it adds a great amount of intrigue and depth to both story and characters and makes you constantly wanting more info about their lives.
There are lots of characters in this show it's confusing at first but if you stick with this show for a while you'll know who is who, how their connected and actually care about them.
My favorites are Isaac and Mira whom are both eccentric airheads but their hearts are always in the right place and they do take actions that do have fruitful results.The show is literally a puzzle another reason why it requires more than one watch.
It's also beautiful mix of genres,there is alchemy, action, romance, gangster crime, noir, martial arts, slasher horror, comedy, fantasy, it's an exhausting mix but it all blends in perfectly like throwing in different fruits to make a tasty fruit punch.As an old saying goes, "Everything happens for a reason." Rating: 4 stars.
Best Anime I have seen (and I have seen a lot..
1. First Thing first - "best editing in any anime series ever." Perfect pace..
You have to watch the entire series to get a complete understanding and after completing you will relish it even more and might get a complete new understanding to the story.
"Great Character Depth." Every character is special, different and grabs your attention (there are a lot of characters..
The series tells two loosely connected stories: One about a group of alchemists fighting over bottled immortality; one about the rivalling Maffia families of 1930's Manhattan, both in distorted chronology.
Likewise, the characters are likable but not at all developed, which is - how convenient - less of a bother when the viewer is trying to keep up with their place in the story.
They were having this special thing where you could watch the first episode online for free!
This series is rather confusing so far, but I'm hoping it'll make more sense once I watch more of it.
The series is set in the 1930s in the U.S., which is pretty different for those used to watching anime where the setting is almost always Japan.
The music is great(the theme is pretty much intrumental 1930s music.), the animation is great(much like the style from Blood Plus),the voice acting is very spot-on, and the story is great.
This is a great show,but should be noted it is rated M for mature, so maybe not such a great idea to let your little 5 year old watch it..they might be a little traumatized from the blood in some scenes.
Its a Great watch for such a short series having only 16 episodes.
Has its share of suspense,action and laughter The first two episodes were a task to watch as you didn't know whats happening with the overload of characters,the many time jumps and the confusing story.By the time the third episode ended, i was hooked.
This animation is unique in having no central character.
Each have there own story to tell and all of them are intriguing.Each episode leaves you with wanting to know what will happen next.The music is also great.
it has many, many characters that, although initially seem to overload you with information, will each form a connection with you by the time the 16 episodes are up.
this anime spares nothing when it comes to showing bloody fights and the like.
"baccano!" takes a while to grow but if you stick it out till the end you will be very glad you did, for anyone who watches the entire series will be left with a longing for more anime like this one.
the only reason it does not achieve that title is do to "Durarara!", another great anime by the same production company, Brain Base, which i highly recommend seeing.
A multi-strand tale of mobsters and alchemy, 'Baccano' is the 16 episode story of a colourful cast of characters on the other side of the law (including hit men, gangsters, socialites, robbers and well, an alchemist or two) whose lives change over the course of three years (1931-1933) as they deal with the likes of a turf war, gangland murders, an elaborate train heist and the convergence of 'immortals' seeking the means to produce an elixir of eternal life.
A fun and distinct period romp, 'Baccano' is told in a manner akin to 'Rashomon': jumping between different characters and times and seeing their effects on the story, and given our diverse cast, this equals a lot of possibilities.
The train is the main anchoring point, and where most of the story takes place, but we cut back to prior years to help inform characters, as well as the bigger narrative of the show, which deals with immortals, alchemy and their ongoing battle.
In fact, this would make a great beginner's anime, given how restrained it actually is and not using a lot of the 'eccentricities' that the form has become notorious for.
If the West produced mature dramatic animated series, this is how I imagine it would look.Animation is solid, sleek and dynamic without being hyperactive, the voice work is good despite some accents, and the 30s setting allows for some really neat recreations of the contradiction that was 30s America: really gorgeous skyscrapers and trains versus very dingy warehouses, dark speakeasys and slummy neighbourhoods.
The large group of characters are also by and large rather likable and fun, even if they are slightly stock mafia archetypes, with special note going to the aforementioned Issac and Miria.
They are such wonderfully charismatic and energetic goofballs yet not so much so they clash with the darker elements.As far as complaints, I really can't offer much, except that having a big cast does mean some of them, as well as certain plot threads, are not fully tied up by the end, yet their introductions make them feel more important than they actually turn out to be.
Plus, the returning immortals angle is not explored as much as you would think, with really only one episode being the focus and then a quick cap off at the end.
If you're like me, and you prefer anime shows with a bit more of a mainstream, perhaps even "Westernized" flavor, this is a great choice.
The only irritating cutesiness comes from the slapstick duo of Isaac and Miria, a pair of dopey criminals; everything else is brilliantly scripted and slickly animated.The ridiculously complex plot spans several time periods and involves an enormous cast of characters, all seamlessly intersecting in fascinating ways.
The editing is some of the best I've seen in an anime, with the subplots bouncing off of each other through different time periods - 1930s Prohibition-era New York, to the 1700s, to the present day.
No Japanese aesthetics here, outside of the obvious fact that it's a Japanese cartoon; characters and settings are all clearly influenced by European and American culture.The action sequences are brutal and fluid, with plenty of great fights throughout.
As Anime News Network similarly pointed out, the English dub here is preferable just because of how well the voice cast pulls off all the different accents the characters have.
One of the best English dubs you're likely to ever hear, I'd say.There is a supernatural element to the show, but it's wonderfully subtle: some characters are immortals, growing back appendages and digits in wonderfully animated sequences that show every drop of blood coagulating and returning to the flesh from whence they came - almost like a slow-motion vacuum.
The ways in which characters can become immortal function as one of the great wrinkles of the show, and there's even a unique way for immortals to kill each other known as "devouring"; saying anymore would be spoiling the fun.
Needless to say, the desire to be immortal (or the desire to die) propels lots of the different factions in the show to clash with one another (often unintentionally).As a feat of multi-pronged, centuries-spanning, character-heavy writing, this is undeniably an anime epic for the ages.
The only flaw is the ending, which feels a bit abrupt - like there should be more (I know the light novel series upon which the show is based did continue after the events of the show).
One of my favorite anime shows ever, one that I often think about, and one that I rewatch at least once a year.
There are shows with a lot of suspense, blood and gore with no humour whatsoever, being completely serious, and have to be very long to get the story complete.
This show has its share of suspense, blood and gore, but what it also has, is an amazing story concisely told in 16 episodes.
In the beginning, I was questioning as to where this story was going, but as the story progressed, I felt like I was been taken as a spectator on a journey with these interesting characters.
All I can say is that the writer has been on point with the way this story has been told, and it has been executed perfectly by the animators.
I found the story and the characters dull and not at all engaging.
It has nothing to do with the complexity of the plot, the number of characters or the twisted way of telling the story.
Despite having the best English dub voice actors, it's setting era and its likeable characters, it just didn't click with me as being the best anime to watch.
I mean I have watched just 3 episodes but I just didn't get into the mood of wanting to watch it more...Sorry to fans of the anime but its just not one of my best anime lists......
The variety of characters and the time jumps seemed like a good idea for storytelling at the beginning but after a point it got a little annoying.
The conversation at the beginning and the end of series is definitely an interesting way to communicate the authors intentions and address the fourth wall.They didn't focus even a little bit on the loneliness side of immortality which could have been explored.
Set primarily during the events of a train hijacking gone hilariously wrong, this is where most of the large ensemble cast come together in one place for the first time.
The show makes repeated use of the somewhat non-traditional story-telling structure to build tension between characters and the viewers, breeding an inherent distrust of certain people due to your foreknowledge of future events.
This makes for a very interesting experience, while never diminishing the many mysteries the show brings to the table.The fantasy elements of immortality or demons are never overpowering, the former makes simply for an effective macguffin which masterfully drives along the plot while the characters develop on the centuries long ride of their never-ending lives.
Neither being of central importance to the story or the characters.
This is by far as close to a perfectly structured narrative as I've ever seen.The characters are the real meat here though, they're lively and realistic but never boring or generic.
A large number of anime with a cast this size tend to let a lot of characters fall into plot-cracks only to resurface when a deus ex machina needs a plot twist for a pilot, while over-developing the 3 male leads and their girlfriends.
All of them have distinct personalities and you'll have a hard time pinning them to simple anime clichés or tropes..
Now, I am a die-hard fan of the popular anime, such as Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood, Fairy Tail, Attack on Titan, One Piece, etc.
However, this is by far my favorite anime of all time.
It accomplishes in such a short time what other shows often need hundreds of episodes to complete.
You would think with such a short time, that you would have under developed characters and a flat storyline, right?
The story is told out of order, but this just makes it even more interesting as the more you watch, the more pieces fall into place in the carefully interwoven plot.
The musical score is amazing, the dub is fantastically casted, matching (and maybe even surpassing) the skill of the sub, it's full of everything you could ever want.
If you don't watch the series from beginning to end i can almost guarantee you wont really like it, but if you watch it all the way through it basically explains everything, just all out of order.
With all that being said its a decent show, the characters are all crazy in a good way and make you like them.
Honestly i could take it or leave it, but having stuck with it to the end i did like it more then if i stopped half way.Overall 3.5-4/5 I wasn't a big fan of the way they portrayed the show, in my opinion it could have been done a lot smoother but that being said it was done the way it was for a reason.
Confused about the story, what's actually going on and about why the hell the story's time line is all jumbled up(there IS no reason).
Annoyed at the character's stupidity that has no charm to it, at it's inability to tell a coherent story and plot and at the voice acting.
Biggest reasons for this anime not working at all is this:There is no reason to care about these characters or about what happens to them because the vast majority of them are all immortal.
The immortal characters are LITERALLY indestructible.
Which is just a lazy way of trying to remedy the lack of tension coming from the plot point of immortality that YOU (the writer) CREATED!
I didn't care about any of the characters or the events of the story.
The one thing I like though was one character who was mute, and I enjoyed watching how she interacted with other people.
The fact that this has the balls to talk down to me and have an ending discussion on what makes good stories is insulting.
A unique storytelling set in different times but comes together as one story.
This was one the best series I have seen, not just in anime but altogether.
The animation is great,go watch it.
The story is told in intervals of different time periods.
Just watch till the last episode.
A unique and great watch!.
Interesting story told in out-of-order sequences with a mix of different characters.
The anime lost intensity towards the end.TOP 5 EPISODES1.
Episode 14 - Graham Specter's Love and PeaceVERDICTA good anime that could have been better.7/10 - Good |
tt0058123 | Les félins | The episode opens with a single father, Jerry, repeatedly pouring himself a mug of coffee and then dumping it in the sink. The clock shows just before 8:30 am. He then speaks to his daughter, Samantha, who leaves the house for school. Overall, the father and daughter's interactions are listless and unemotional, and almost robotic – apparently both are unable to experience "joy". Seemingly seconds after Samantha leaves, she returns, while Jerry discovers his coffee maker missing from the counter and questions Samantha why she is home, to which she responds, "It's 4:30 in the afternoon, and I live here." Jerry realizes he has lost time or must have blacked out while she was gone and does not know what's wrong. At Princeton-Plainsboro, Cuddy assigns his case to House.
Foreman figures out from pupil examination that the man is a somnambulist, and Taub and Thirteen are assigned to follow the patient during his sleepwalking episodes. They trail him by car while he drives ahead of them, and discover he is buying cocaine while asleep. The team approach the dealer that sold the cocaine to Jerry and ask to buy it themselves, hoping to find the answer to his condition. After running tests, they discover it was cut with lactose. House deduces that the man is lactose-intolerant and treats him, but Jerry's condition continues to deteriorate, as Taub notices he literally begins sweating blood during an examination and his kidneys fail. House persuades Samantha to donate a kidney to her father. Her monotone expression and glum one-word answers prompt him to realize that she is a sleepwalker too, and is suffering from the same condition as her father.
Meanwhile, Cuddy meets with Becca, the mother of the baby she is hoping to adopt. Cuddy is curious to know why Becca chose her to adopt her baby, and she is told that her father and grandfather were abusive men, and that she did not want her baby going through that as well, and also the fact that Cuddy's credentials impressed her. But things begin to go wrong, as Cuddy notices Becca has an odd rash on her arm, and she hospitalizes her in order to treat her. She and Cameron perform an ultrasound and see that the baby's lungs are underdeveloped. Cameron orders a treatment of steroids for Becca, but it causes Becca to have a sub-uterine bleed. Cuddy is extremely concerned for the baby's health, which draws House's attention. He insults Cuddy's parenting skills and questions her motives for wanting to be a mother. He also berates her for agreeing with him to deliver the baby now, as that would be a serious risk to the baby's lungs, and he tells her "You can give the mom more blood; cannot give the fetus more lungs!" Cuddy consults Becca, who does not want to sacrifice anymore. She asks Cuddy to deliver the baby. She and the surgical team successfully deliver baby Joy via cesarean section, and Joy begins to cry on her own, which means, to the relief of everyone, that her lungs were developed enough for her to breathe on her own.
After a conversation with Wilson, House consults his patients, and Jerry reveals that he is of Middle-Eastern descent, and changed his Muslim name after the first Iraq invasion to avoid confrontation from others. House figures out that he and Samantha have familial Mediterranean fever, a genetic condition which caused all their symptoms: anhedonia, vasculitis, lactose intolerance, hematidrosis, and kidney failure. (Medical commentators complain that this presentation does not match the real-life disease.) After the father and daughter are treated, they are shown smiling, playing and laughing together happily, in stark contrast to their earlier emotionlessness. Even as he awakes he notices beauty and color contrast to the grey of e.g. the empty room before.
While visiting Becca in her room, Cuddy is told by Becca that she had an epiphany while Joy was being born, and saw the sheer bliss on Cuddy's face when she held Joy, calling it "the most beautiful thing I've ever seen". Becca regretfully says she will not put the baby up for adoption. Cuddy is shocked and tries to reason with her but is unsuccessful. Seeing the finality of Becca's decision, Cuddy leaves, heartbroken. Later that night, House visits a devastated Cuddy at her newly furnished house (in preparation for the baby) and when Cuddy tells him she is finished with trying to have a child, whether through pregnancy or adoption, House says that it's "too bad" because she "would have made a great mother". Cuddy is shocked at first, then becomes angry and demands why House always negates every situation because he was the one who had said that she would "suck" as a mother ("Finding Judas"), yet now he is suddenly saying she would be a great mother. House looks at her regretfully and quietly responds that he does not know why. Cuddy's expression changes and then, in that tense moment, House and Cuddy passionately kiss, and the episode ends with a cliffhanger as House quietly says "good night" and walks out the door with Cuddy staring after him, saying a confused "good night". | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0455965 | Jade Empire | === Setting ===
Jade Empire takes place in a fictional kingdom inspired by ancient China. The game developers had a constructed language, Tho Fan, created for the game by Canadian linguist Wolf Wikeley. The language has been designed to sound ancient and distinctly Asian. Tho Fan does without the verb "to be"; instead, articles are used to mark tense. In the game, the Tho Fan phrases do not actually match up to their on-screen translations—most of them are actually a set of a few dozen pre-rendered phrases. In fact, the game will often use exactly the same audio track to say successive sentences, as also occurs in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.
=== Story ===
Chapter 1: Two Rivers
The game begins with the player cast as a martial arts student under the tutelage of Master Li, head of the Two Rivers martial arts school, based in the Golden Delta.
The player's training is interrupted as the town of Two Rivers comes under attack from an aggressor in a strange ship, who summons ghosts to attack the student. The attacker is defeated by Master Li, who comes to the student's rescue and reveals that the attacker was a member of the Lotus Assassins, a mysterious force serving the Emperor of the Jade Empire. Gao the Lesser, a rival of the student, issues a challenge for a duel and loses. He is expelled from the school after he attempts to use explicitly forbidden magic on the student. Master Li explains that the student is the last of the order of Spirit Monks. He, a brother of the Emperor and leader of the Empire's army, had ordered an attack on Dirge, where the Spirit Monks' temple existed, in order to end the Long Drought. He claims to have opposed the act and to have saved the student and the Dragon's Amulet.
He sends the student to a cave beneath the school, where the student finds part of a Spirit Monk amulet and has a vision of the Water Dragon—the entity whose death at the hands of the Emperor ended the decade-long Long Drought, but left spirits roaming the land. Dawn Star, one of the students at the school and a friend of the player, is kidnapped by Gao The Lesser. The student rescues her but returns to find the village in flames and Master Li kidnapped. The student, Dawn Star, and Sagacious Zu, a man whom they met in the swamps around the village, head off in a borrowed flying machine towards the Imperial City, where Master Li has been taken.
Chapter 2: Tien's Landing
The party crash-lands their machine in Tien's Landing and sets out to find a new flier and a wind map that will show them the way to the Imperial City. The new flyer, called the Marvelous Dragonfly, is taken from the base of Gao the Greater, the father of the dead student of the first chapter. Gao the Greater is working with Grand Inquisitor Jia's elite subordinate, Inquisitor Lim, and is distressed to hear of his son's death. The player tracks down and kills him, and recruits Sky, a rogue, and Kang The Mad, Gao's personal engineer.
The party goes to a recently drained area near Tien's Landing, which flooded when the dam was first constructed. The Lotus Assassins opened the dam in order to search the ruins of old Tien's Landing. The student fights Chai Ka, a demon bound in the body of a little girl, and learns that Chai Ka was sent to protect the student and that the Lotus Assassins already have the amulet. The player can then close the dam or destroy the controls, keeping it open forever.
The student then heads to the Great Southern Forest, which is owned by Lord Yun. The player then has the option of helping the Forest Shadow defeat a demon known as the Mother, or helping the Mother's cannibalistic demons destroy the Forest Shadow. In either event, the player can convince Lord Yun that the forest is recovering and get his wind map. Inquisitor Lim will ambush the player at this point; the player kills him and recovers a piece of the amulet.
Chapter 3: Imperial City
The party lands in the Imperial City and meets Silk Fox, who is revealed to be Princess Lian the Heavenly Lily, daughter of the Emperor. She is unconvinced that her father is behind the sickness and plagues of the land, and believes that Death's Hand, the black armor-clad head of the Lotus Assassins, is responsible. After joining either the Executioners or the Inquisitors, the student's party infiltrates the Lotus Assassins' training ground to recover the last part of the Spirit Monk amulet. Sagacious Zu reveals that he was one of the Lotus Assassins who killed Master Li's family. During their quest, the party helps Master Gang assassinate his superior, Master Shin, making the deed look like an accident, and puts a corrupted Spirit Shard into a Jade Golem, causing it to malfunction. The golems go out of control, damaging the underground complex. The party battles two Jade Golems and a handful of Lotus Assassins, killing Master Gang in the process. They also find Grand Inquisitor Jia, who reveals that the Emperor knew about what Death's Hand and the Lotus Assassins were doing and had, in fact, ordered them to do it. The player kills her, but Death's Hand arrives. Sagacious Zu sacrifices himself to save the student, burying Death's Hand in rubble.
Chapter 4: Imperial Palace
The party fights their way to the Emperor's throne room where Silk Fox learns of what her father has done. He is aware that the Water Dragon's death is stopping the dead from reaching the underworld but is mad with power. The Emperor knocks down everyone in the throne room with a blast of magic and summons guards to attack the student, who defeats them. The student battles the Emperor, who is able to alternate fighting styles and damage immunities. The student kills the Emperor, but Master Li gets up, takes the Jade Heart for himself, and kills the student.
Chapter 5: Spirit Monk Temple
The student wakes up in the underworld as a spirit. The Water Dragon reveals that Sun Li had planned this all along; he wished for the Water Dragon's power and needed to obtain the amulet and defeat Emperor Sun Hai. The student meets up with the spirit of Abbot Song, who reveals what truly happened at Dirge. He explains that Sun Li wore the armor of Death's Hand and killed the abbot when he tried to stop Sun Li and his brothers. The brothers arranged for Dirge's fountains to be tainted with human blood, weakening the Water Dragon, and Emperor Sun Hai killed Sun Kin (later Death's Hand) when he and Sun Li attempted to oppose him. Abbot Song then reveals that one of his order attempted to escape with the student, but Sun Li, who had escaped from Sun Hai, killed the student's guardian and assumed his identity. The player and Abbot Song make their way through Dirge and learn that an evil being has taken control after the fall of the temple. The student reaches the place where the Water Dragon was slain, and defeats aspects of the student's darker emotions. The student then returns to life, and the rest of the party, who learns about this through Dawn Star, flies to Dirge to reunite with their friend.
Chapter 6: Defending the Temple
While the student was dead, Sun Li realized that action would have to be taken in case the student managed to return to the realm of the living, and he retrieved Death's Hand from the rubble of the Lotus Assassin headquarters. He then sends the Imperial Army against Dirge. Sky pretends to betray the group, and lures Death's Hand out so that the student can defeat him in single combat. However, this is not enough to defeat him; Death's Hand rises again, but the student uses the force of his will to expel Sun Li's influence. The player may then release Death's Hand, use him as a slave, or convince him to seek redemption.
Chapter 7: Back to the Palace
The party flies back to the palace to confront Master Li, now the Emperor. As they make their way through the palace they discover that Emperor Sun Hai had stopped the drought by cutting open the Water Dragon's corpse and letting the water that flowed from it feed the Empire. The student chooses either to destroy the Water Dragon's body, thus freeing her spirit and allowing the dead to find the underworld, or to defile the water, weakening the Dragon, and then claim her power after defeating the new Emperor.
The student reaches Emperor Sun Li, who first sends Constructs of Bull and Elephant demons, the most powerful in the game, after the player. Sun Li then encases the student in stone and attempts to defeat the player with the force of his own doubt. However, if the student's companions survived, they will reduce the number of enemies that must be fought in each of the two stages. Sagacious Zu appears and helps free the student from his mind.
Emperor Sun Li offers to help his student live in legend forever, if the student dies without fighting. If the player makes this decision, the student is remembered as a hero for knowing his or her place as Sun Li looks on and laughs. If the player does not, Sun Li attacks, and the student defeats him.
==== Endings ====
If the student follows the Open Hand and chooses to free the Water Dragon's spirit, then the end sequence shows the people of the Jade Empire cheering the student and their party. If the student follows the Closed Fist and chooses to enslave the Water Dragon, the end sequence shows the Lotus Assassins kneeling at the feet of the student. After this end sequence, there are short text summaries detailing the fate of any characters who survived the adventure. These vary depending on whether the student chose to enslave or free the Water Dragon, and also on what romance options the student pursued.
Dawn Star: If the student chooses the path of the Open Hand, then she either settles down with the student, settles down on her own, or rules the empire with the student. If the student talked her into a Closed Fist philosophy or abandoned her, then she wanders the Jade Empire alone.
Silk Fox: If the student does not romance Silk Fox, she will become Empress of the Jade Empire. If the student is male and romances Silk Fox, he and Silk Fox will rule the empire fairly, or with an iron fist. If the student is female and romances Silk Fox, Silk Fox will either rule the empire fairly with her 'companion,' or will rule with an iron fist, and both the student and Silk Fox will don the Silk Fox costume to silence dissenters.
Sky: Sky will use the Guild for good purposes, or serve as the student's consort or as the new Death's Hand. If the student romances Sky, they leave the imperial city and live on the outskirts of Tien's Landing, unless the student is male, in which case they continue on their adventures through the Jade Empire, not content to settle down in one place.
Black Whirlwind: Black Whirlwind initially takes a contract hunting demons for the Celestial Bureaucracy, but the red tape annoys him and he ultimately leaves. After leaving the Empire for some time—he is likely responsible for a sudden influx of outlanders with missing limbs—he returns, vowing to never leave the Jade Empire again. He gets bored a week later and heads north.
Henpecked Hou: After a series of mishaps, Hou starts a delivery business which he immediately uses as a method of escaping his overbearing wife.
Chai Ka: Chai Ka will either return to the heavens, freeing Wild Flower and giving her the gift of life, or remain trapped in Wild Flower's body causing her to wander the empire as a raving lunatic.
Ya Zhen: Ya Zhen will either serve the student until the student passes away, at which point Ya Zhen moves to bigger plans, or else will serve the student forever and loyally.
Death's Hand: Death's Hand will either become more evil, mutating so badly that his armor cannot hold his demonic form, or he will spend the rest of his days wandering the empire as a crusader for good in order to make up for his past misdeeds.
Kang the Mad: Kang will continue to invent machines until an explosion appears to take his life, although strange machines will continue to appear on the student's doorstep every year on the anniversary of their victory. As Lord Lao, Kang's lack of danger affects his imagination in building machines, so as a radical solution Kang starts arming the mobs that chase after him. If the player chose the Closed Fist ending, Kang works for the emperor (the player), worrying his use will eventually be worn out and he will be disposed of. Eventually, he crafts a portal to another dimension and disappears in a huge explosion, taking an entire lake with him.
Yet another ending is available if the Student agrees to the terms of surrender presented by Sun Li in the final confrontation. The ending sequence features a statue of the student being praised years later by a class of children with a skin condition similar to that of the Lotus Assassins. One child asks what life was like before the protagonist's honored sacrifice and is quickly shushed by his teacher as a Jade Golem readies an axe to quell such questioning. The sequence ends with Sun Li laughing evilly; the decision to surrender has ultimately led to misery and corruption in the Jade Empire. | good versus evil, violence, action, flashback | train | wikipedia | Every gamer and I mean everybody should play this game, especially RPG and action/adventure fans.It has a brilliant, wonderfully crafted story, great voice acting, fantastic characters (and development), great dialogue, shocking plot twists and surprises, cool and easy to learn battle system, gameplay that is so well done, great graphics, locations, visuals, enemies/monsters, I could go on forever.
The overall story without the sidequests isn't too long (around 20 hours or so) but with the sidequests, you can easily play for much much longer, and the sidequests are just as fun and worthwhile.
They add to the story as well.Once you begin the game, you won't want to stop playing.
However, you will read the opinion of a pretty satisfied gamer.First off--I love anything Chinese, be it food, films, or pseudo-Chinese video games.
This is pseudo-Chinese in that it takes famous Hong Kong cinematic elements such as kung-fu and interesting character names yet for some reason shies away from actual Chinese culture.
I get a kick out of people calling themselves things like "Sun Li the Glorious Strategist" and being serious about it.Pros (and there are several, in my opinion): The game is beautifully designed--the environments are often stunning and the character models look great.
You can follow "The Way of the Open Palm" (which is what I'm doing, former Girl-Scout that I am) or you can be wicked and follow "The Way of the Closed Fist." Both are pretty self-explanatory and in the game it's almost painfully easy to distinguish which response goes with which path.
And it gets better--bad guys react to different voice tones than good guys, which is expected.The combat is touted as the central aspect of the game, since kung-fu has revealed itself to Americans has an art form.
(Many people refer to "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" when talking about this game--it isn't that dull.) There are oodles of different styles to choose and they each fall under different headings--magic, martial arts, support, or weapons-based.
You have to change styles and see what sends 'em reeling.There is some great voice acting in this game as well.
(Kim Mai Guest makes her appearance in it--she's in TONS of video games.) I think all of it is pretty good, as it usually fits the character, I didn't notice any repetition, and the dialogue is well-written.
(And the characters words come very close to matching their lips.) I have noticed several laugh-out loud moments, usually when my character chose the wrong conversation style (I tried intuition and it didn't work).The last pro--the Dragonfly minigame.
Taking on all the side quests adds a huge amount of dialogue, especially if you keep saying the wrong things.
I guess it's because four hundred times more recording would have been required to come up with all the answers your character can make.
(Actually, your character will yet out style changes during fights, but that's the only time you'll hear them.) The second-to-last con, and it's enough to annoy anybody, are the frequent load times.
Your character can sprint through the whole game until you run into one of those load times.
It has a fantasy sound to it and the developers could have saved some time--it was created ages ago.) All in all, a game easily recommended to almost anybody..
It's a fun game, with a great fighting system, fun characters, and an interesting plot.Who DOESN'T like the "comic relief sadist", and Sky, the smart aleck thief.
Plus, characters often have interesting "twists" which adds to the fun.All in all, I'm hard-pressed to find flaws...You can switch styles, which prevents boredom, and even get a GUN!
Other people will talk about other things, so there is no point covering exposed ground, so I will talk about my favourite part of Jade Empire, the voice acting.
then kick yourself for not knowing that same actors voice was Simon Templeman when you first played Jade Empire!
Besides the expertly delivered voice acting, the rest of the game is top notch.
Trust me this is an amazing game and if you don't like RPG's then Jade Empire is the perfect one to convert you..
its a completely different genre and can't really be compared (if you did though, multiplayer in a game will ultimately win out, especially if its as good as halo 2's is...).
The problem with keeping it out is that it has a very similar feel to KOTOR except the combat is real-time.
but the game is an RPG and i guess its more storytelling that difficult...) and the same techniques work on every enemy no matter what style you use.
I remembered completing KOTOR when I was 8 years old and I recently discovered my love for science fiction with the Mass Effect games.
I haven't played any of the Dragon Age games though...
However in terms of their games on their own this is actually one of the weaker BioWare entries but trust me when I say compared to their usual standards this means nothing in terms of quality.You are the last of the Spirit monks.
You are trained at a class of martial artists by someone who claims to have rescued you from the empire massacring the Spirit monks when you were an infant which means that now people who have died won't go to the Spirit world and the Emperor is responsible.
So you fly around the empire, recruit people and help restore everything from chaos.Okay, the characters are the worst in a BioWare game (which again translates to not bad but it could have been great).
If you pick this game up looking for something on par with Juhani redeeming herself from going to the Dark side in KOTOR, Wrex trying to bring his species reputation up a bit from violent savages, Mission's home-world being destroyed right before our eyes or Thane doing a good last act before dying then there is almost nothing here that is even close.
The most interesting character by far is Wild Flower - she has no identity as a creature native to the spirit world ties itself to her throughout life and even helps her to stop from dying.
Each is interesting if I told you it on it's own but almost every single character has some kind of past with these guys that just gets old - when you get down to it, it's revenge, redemption all that stuff and while there is some character development outside of that - I barely remember these characters and being that I can name every character from all their other games without thinking - that is saying something.The combat though is excellent.
Basically controlling the D-Pad to select what fighting style you want and different buttons in combat do a Max Payne-ish bullet-time and a button to heal you.
There really is strategy involved in doing the combat in terms of mixing and matching styles and weapons to ensure you win fights.
If being in an RPG where you can talk to a Python isn't a selling point - I don't know what is.I also enjoyed the mini-game touch.
If you decide to attack as opposed to avoid the Empire you are treated with an Atari or NES style mini game where ships fly in from the left right and top of the screen while you shoot them down.
Oh and the betrayal about a third away from the end, it was nowhere near a surprise considering the character's nickname.Basically while it has the formula for being a great BioWare game it is no wonder why this never really made it anywhere.
The combat really is more of the selling point to this game and while some of the characters may get interesting what usually happens to them is you exhaust their dialogue options too quickly and barely have to talk to them for the rest of the game..
One might make a case that any game in which you can verbally spar with a John Cleese- voiced obnoxious twit is automatically worth playing.
Still, the quest ends with an absurdly overpowered weapon as a reward - and that's Jade Empire in a nutshell: flashes of brilliance mixed with unbalanced combat.Neither one of BioWare's finest RPGs (the Baldur's Gate saga, Mass Effect 1&2, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR) nor of their weakest efforts (Dragon Age II, NWN OC), Jade Empire is elevated by its fresh, original setting, inspired by a mythological version of ancient China of a "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" wuxia flavor.
I like Tolkien as much as the next guy, but for once it's nice to have fox spirits and ninjas instead of elves and orcs.There is much emphasis on combat (real-time, action-oriented), which unfortunately isn't that great.
A few initial styles are pretty much deadly already, and some later powers - cue the infamous Jade Golem stance, the closest thing to a "I win" button I've ever seen in a RPG - so hideously overpowered that the game might as well have skipped to the end credits the moment you obtain them.
It's like adding to the rock-paper-scissors hand game a fourth shape (let's call it the Death Star) which trumps all others: you have no reason to use anything else, if not as a self-imposed challenge.Still, characters, dialogues and plot are compelling enough, and there are a few effective twists and choices, with a morality system focused, more than on a good/evil dichotomy, on a predecessor of the paragon/renegade system seen in Mass Effect..
The only game I like more than this is Halo.
The voice acting is beautifully done and all the voices match what the character should sound like.The only downside to this game is that it is a bit easy and the martial styles are very simple.
These are the only real problems with the game.The story is very well written and original.
The story was so good I have played through this game three times, and I am just starting to get all the additional storyline, i.e. romancing characters like Dawn Star and Silk Fox.I can keep talking about this game forever, but you need to play this game to find everything out.
Buy this game if you like RPG's or action games.Basically a few things in this game keep it from being perfect.
Jade Empire is the type of game you can start playing on a Sunday morning and continue to play till it gets over, no matter the time it takes to complete.
It took me 40 hours to complete the game (that's how big it is).Anyways the games starts with a character selection (as do all the RPGs).
The Emperor killed the Water Dragon and used its spirit to become powerful and end the drought that affected the Empire 20 years ago.
Your objective is to rescue your Master, help the spirit of Water Dragon and end the destruction caused by the ghosts.Since it is an RPG, you can choose to be the good or the bad guy.
Be good and honorable and you get Open Palm points; be a jerk and you get Closed fist points.The story is good and the cast of supporting characters are interesting as well as annoying, but not boring (Kang, Zu, Black Whirlwind are my favorite supporting characters).
However the story after Act 5 becomes too cliché, melodramatic and the twist in the tale (your master is the bad guy and most of your supporting characters are related to each other in some way) felt unnecessary.
You can choose from various martial arts styles, weapons and magic styles and even transform into an animal demon or ghost.
Your followers have various skills (you can only choose one follower at a time) and you can command them to fight alongside you or enter support mode, where they won't fight but your attributes will be recharged over time or you will deal more damage with various styles.The game boasts of a real time fighting system, but that is simply not the case.
During the fights, your character doesn't do what you want him/her to do or does it seconds later, after your previous moves have been completed.
The fighting is pretty good though and you will love it.
If I really had to nitpick, there are no cheat codes for the game and that this is not a complete open world game - There are only two areas to explore - a small town and a big city (which is actually pretty small).
Compared to KOTOR, this is a disappointment...I highly recommend installing the Jade Empire in Style mod when playing a new game.
In addition to adding various new styles and armor sets, it also fixes the fighting and the style points system and makes game play more fun.
So to summarize the game:The Good- Soundtrack, graphics, fighting game play (especially after the Jade Empire in Style mod), characters and side missions.The Bad- The cut-scenes (badly rendered and you cannot skip them).
The Boss fights (the Emperor, your Master and Death's Hand are easily defeated, whereas the Lotus assassins and animal demons and spirits are much tougher.
Good short game with great ambiance but weak points.
Summary Jade Empire is a beautiful looking game with a proper plot with twists supported by good sounds and visuals.
Replayability is low, despite the option to choose from several starting characters and the option to play a new level of difficulty.
No new content is opened up and you are forced to the same combat options regardless of the character chosen.
I was especially impressed by the way the music changes with the setting while keeping the music in Asiatic style.
These side quests are varied in content.The supporting cast of characters is varied and interesting.
Many of them have interesting tales to tell and you can even have a romantic affair.The good thing is that Jade Empire sets down a very good stage for the player to act upon.
After leaving the imperial city the story is just a single path of combat to the end, before Tien's Landing it has the feel of an introduction.That the game is actually longer than it has content is partly because there is much repeated.
This is especially true for battles against the powerful monsters like Death's Hand or the final battle in the arena in the imperial city.
Indeed it looks like the more difficult a battle is the longer the cut scene is.A second thing is the combat.
On the face of it the combat offers enough different options, amongst it something called styles.
Since you need to spent skill points to develop styles to more effectiveness you find out you only have enough to develop the styles you got early in the game.
Besides it is a guess each and every time how effective a new style is and you can't reuse skill points already spent.
In fact the basic style you start out with affect the most monsters.
In addition the effectiveness of styles are reduced because the more advanced ones cost magic points(called chi) while the basic one's are free to use.
Especially powerful styles are an enormous drain on your chi and can only be used for short while.
I created a character which mainly used weapon styles.
The reason was that you need to buff both chi and focus when using such a character.
So when using weapons you need to buff two stats while if you use basic and magic styles you can concentrate on one stat.
In addition you can actually choose a style that regenerates chi, but there is no style that does the same for focus.
And finally weapons styles don't affect ghosts and, because of the plot, there are a lot of ghosts in this game.In other words, while there is potentially a lot to choose from in reality your options are limited to a small set of well developed styles and some you choose for fun or spent points by accident.There is one other weak feature, that is the unlock-able Jade Master difficulty.
When you have gone through the game you can replay it in Jade Master difficulty with the stats and styles you ended the first game with.
What not happens: you don't hit harder and all the magic and support style's you and your enemies do the same damage as in the basic game.
Since there isn't a way to improve the skills beyond the basic set you find that the battle's just take longer to complete.
Nevertheless besides these weak point it is an entertaining game that, when due time has passed can be replayed..
I don't know if I'll need to use any but it doesn't hurt to be safe than sorry) If you like playing action and/or RPG games you'll really like "Jade Empire".
But before I start rambling, let me break it down: Pros: Easily learned button controls(I don't know about you, but having games where I have to press A + B + R trigger + Left thumbstick up...just gets annoying and in heated battle, it's hard to remember).
The sound matches the game and setting quite well.
Another plus is that the sound never overpowers the game or gets so bad one is distracted.
The story itself is quite long and I find myself being just as interested in the dialog and movie scenes as I do in the quests and fights.Cons: In a game so great there isn't many.
Also, if you're like me, character customization is a HUGE factor in any RPG.
Oh, and you can choose which of like 6 characters you want(and you can rename them).
And I've never been able to totally immerse(sp) myself in a game like I can when it's truly, a unique and personalized character.So that's it.
That way you'll be certain this is the game for you(and i doubt there will be many of you who don't buy it hehe). |
tt0105859 | Sun lung moon hak chan | This is a period film set during the Ming Dynasty in the desert region of China.
Tsao Siu-yan is a power-crazed eunuch who rules his sector of China as if he were the Emperor and not a mere official. He is the leader of the Emperor's ruthless security agency known as the Eastern Depot (東廠 Dong Chang). He has built up an elite army of skilled archers and horsemen who receive intensive training and powerful weapons.
When elements of his administration plot against him and his despotic rule, Tsao comes down ruthlessly. One such plotter is defence minister Yang Yu-xuan, who is executed along with his family. Tsao does spare two of the younger children and instead sentences them to exile in order to lure Yang's subordinate general Chow Wai-on into a trap.
Escorted by a couple of rather poorly East Factory soldiers, the children are sent out into the desert. Rebels, led by Chow's lover, swordswoman Yau Mo-yan, arrive to free them, but are attacked by East Factory troops. Tsao later calls off the attack when he realises that Chow is not among the fighters, and instead orders his troops to pursue them to find where they will be meeting with Chow. The rebels and the children then proceed to the Dragon Gate Pass through which they will cross the border.
They reach the Dragon Gate Inn, which is a meeting place run by brigands. The innkeeper, the lively Jade, runs a sideline in which she seduces and murders her guests. Jade also keeps whatever money the customer has, then drops them down a chute to the kitchen and have them served as the meat in buns. The cutting up is done by her cook Dao, an expert at stripping meat to the bones.
Mo-yan and her followers arrive at the inn. She is disguised as a man, but Jade is not fooled, claiming that only a woman would pass her without so much as a glance. That night she confronts Mo-yan and the pair engage in a lively acrobatic fight with both women trying to remain clothed, while stripping the other.
Rebel leader Chow arrives and is re-united with Mo-yan. They plan to cross the border with the children but the bad weather delays their departure. Furthermore, Jade takes a liking to Chow and resolves to get him for herself, also has in mind the reward offered for his capture. Things are made even more complicated when East Factory officials led by Cha arrive at the inn posing as merchants.
The scene is set for a vicious battle of bodies and wits between both sides, with Jade trying to keep the peace and getting every advantage, monetary or otherwise, that she can get out of it. Meanwhile, the bulk of the East Factory forces, led by eunuch Tsao himself, are on their way to the inn.
Chow believes that, like most den of thieves, the inn has a secret passage through which his comrades can escape. Jade agrees to show them the passage if Chow will sleep with her. He agrees if they marry first. Jade, a practical girl, is rather surprised at having to marry for a one-night stand but proceeds anyway, with Cha acting as host for the wedding. The heart-broken Mo-yan drowns her sorrows in drink.
The growing tension inside the inn breaks out into open battle when Cha and his men realise that the rebels want to use the secret passage to escape. The fight that follows results in the deaths of all the Dong Chang at the inn and most of the rebels and brigand hosts. Mo-yan herself is seriously injured.
Tsao and his army arrives and lays siege to the inn. Inside there is only a handful of survivors: Jade, Chow, Mo-yan, Dao the cook, and the children. They escape through the passage, but a loose ribbon gives them away and Tsao himself sets off in pursuit.
A vicious one-on-three battle amidst a desert storm as Tsao fights Jade, Chow and Mo-yan. Weakened by her wounds, Mo-yan perishes in quicksand. Just as Tsao is about to finish off Jade and Chow, Dao suddenly appears and takes him on with his carving knife. He carves away at Tsao, leaving the warlord with a skeletal arm and leg. Chow then moves in for the kill and Tsao is finished.
Chow and the children make their way to the border. Realising how much Chow meant to her, Jade and Dao decide to follow Chow after burning down the infamous inn. | violence | train | wikipedia | Tsui Hark produces this historical affair, a costume drama detailing the plight of resistance fighter Zhou Huaian (Leung) and partner Qiu Moyan (Lin), relentlessly headhunted by evil eunuch Cao Shao-qiu (Yen), a powerful so-and-so and hottest contender for supreme control of the Imperial court.
Zhou is his latest obstacle that deserves elimination and so he lures his orphan children into a trap, which summarily backfires and the resistance take up refuge at the isolated Dragon Gate Inn, situated in the middle of the desert.
Cheung plays the delightful innkeeper in a light hearted and flirtatious manner, and truly shines in the role, however there are few comedic touches: the movie is dark and sinister due to its restrictions to the Inn, yet the action is lavish and radical, culminating in that legendary Gobi desert finale that'll just blow your socks clean off..
Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and Hero are okay, but absolutely not comparable with this real Hong Kong martial arts classic.
New Dragon Inn is absolutely on the list the next time I go to Hong Kong (I only want the original Cantonese version).
There are a lot of people who won't understand the feeling a good martial arts movie can give you, but that doesn't matter.
Everybody loves "Crouching Tiger", but this movie made more than 10 years ago is a much better martial arts movie.
Instead of trying to be everything like "Crouching Tiger" did, it was just designed and implemented as a martial arts movie, and nothing else.
It is interesting that those who have a problem with the imagination of Chinese martial arts movies do not have any issue with that of "Matrix".
Having said that, I understand that those who have never read Chinese martial arts novels may have trouble with some of the scenes, especially if you are trying to find medical evidence to verify the possibility of some moves.
This is definitely the DVD to own...(being completely disappointed and disgusted with "Ashes of Time" by Kar-wai Wong), "Dragon Inn" a film credited to Hark Tsui has restored my faith in action/martial arts fantasy films.
The action in Dragon Inn does not disappoint and doesn't lose any integrity with the audience from the beginning to the finale.
As the days pass, bad weather keep the groups in the inn while Cao and the Black Riders close in.I borrowed this film from a friend with no prior knowledge of it, so I checked out the reviews on imdb to get a taste for what it would be like.
The story is laced with humour which mostly works and has some nice touches (the teasing striptease-come-fight between Jin and Qiu was fun) but I did have a nasty taste due to some of the strong language and crudity which seemed out of place.What didn't work as well for me were the selfsame scenes that other reviewers have been raving about the fights.
The final fight (which again some users have called one of the greatest fights ever filmed!) is OK but not as acrobatic or inspiring as I'd have liked also it's gore spoils the actual action to the point where it is laughable rather than exciting.
His role consisted mostly of two cameos one at the start where he sit passively and the other at the end in an overly-gory fight scene which was so lost in a sand storm that his skills were not fully displayed.
Maggie Cheung probably shaded it as she had the most interesting character but Lin was also very good.Overall I enjoyed the film and am not suggesting that it is a bad film only a bit too gory for my tastes.
Even as Hong Kong wuxia movies go, this one is wild, replete with a Hotel California in the middle of the northern Chinese desert, a marauding crew of arrow wielding horsemen, the evil eunuch from Butterfly and Sword, a lovable midget barbarian, the beautiful Maggie Cheung, and the gender bending immortal Brigitte Lin.
Donnie Yen sweeps into the end of the movie looking like Priscilla Queen of the Desert.
The film's only disappointment is the wooden love interest Tony Leung (KF, not the much better CW) - why would Maggie fall for such a stiff?
Dragon Inn is simply a fun film, and comparing it to the pretentious and boring Crouching Tiger, as other reviewers do, does it a disservice..
One of the most beautiful of Hong Kong's 'New wave' sword-fight films, "Dragon Inn" has virtually nothing wrong to be said for it.
It takes us to another world and introduces us to interesting people, and then, when the end comes, it simply says 'adieu' and the film closes and we are home again - but far better informed on the nature of the world, and of the human heart, than we would be other wise.True cinema magic, and certainly one of the best of its kind - perhaps one of the best of any kind..
Although not as good as the original, this one has more action to appeal for younger audience and the additional character of the inn lady played by Maggie Cheung is great fun.
And there was the immortal Brigitte Lin. Unfortunately, the plot and script(reportedly) suffered due to an eye injury caused on Brigitte's eye during shooting and the producers need to rush the film's completion for the festival time's screening.Not as successful in the box-office as Swordsman 2, not as good as the highly acclaimed and artistic Ashes of Time, and not a cult success like White Hair Bride, this movie is still fun to watch.
I am a great fan of HK martial arts movies especially with the historical background.
Your story might work but it is a action cinema where real martial arts has disappeared and it is a total failure.For me it doesn't deliver what other users are suggesting.
DRAGON INN exibits the same great production values of every Tsui Hark film.
It's a good movie all around, with some truly enjoyable performances by a stellar cast.What both makes and breaks it is the shaky balance between the bulk of the film and its climax.
This is an absolutely phenomenal martial arts movie.
Donnie Yen as the big bad eunuch is unbelievably solid - watching the film it is difficult not to laugh at times because everybody is so ridiculously hard, but that's why we watch kung fu, right?
Unlike Crouching Tiger this film focuses slightly more on ground work and less on the fly-by-wire kung fu that we see so much of in recent Hong Kong cinema, which is essentially a good thing because the martial arts are more realistic - however, the feats performed by the characters in this film are far from believable.
Kung Fu movies are not ALL about the fighting, though, and this film delivers the goods in all other departments as well.
It is superbly directed (not just in the fight scenes), and actually has a compelling plot (very rare in kung fu) and superb performances from the actors, especially Maggie Cheung, of 'Police Story' fame.
On one hand, I love the martial art fighting scenes, they are very well choreographed, and I have seen a lot of Hong Kong martial art movies circa 1990.
However, having the meat cleaver in the final moment feels more an inapt insertion than a fight enhancer.I still prefer the Swordsman series over Dragon Inn..
The revival of the martial arts genre in the 1990s saw many movies spring out, some good, some entertaining, and some quite boring.
There seemed to be a certain appealing factor missing, despite it's A-list cast of Brigitte Lin, Donny Yen, Maggie Cheung and Tony Leung, and loads of martial arts sequences.
While it's not directed by Tsui Hark, who only produced it, there certainly are plenty of hints that he probably got his fingers all over this one.As the story goes, set in the Ming Dynasty, the eunuchs are growing in power, and one of them, Tsao Siu Yan (Donnie Yen) takes control over the Eastern Chamber, and founded his own militia, the Black Arrow Troops.
It set out Tsao as the one with the biggest, erm, attitude, ordering the murder of political rivals such as military secretary Yang, and in true Chinese fashion, giving the order to wipe out his entire lineage.In comes our heroes Chow Wai-on (Tony Leung) and Yau Mo-yan (Brigitte Lin) who save the children and try to smuggle them to safety at the frontier.
However, the long journey sees them stopping at the titular Dragon Inn in the middle of a desert, run by sultry innkeeper Jade (Maggie Cheung) who forms a rivalry with Yau for Chow's affections.
At times, they exhibit a battle of wits, something like scene in Swordsman where each group tried to get a leg up on the other.In the movie, I thought Maggie Cheung had a field day with her character, and steals the thunder from Brigitte Lin. Her Jade flip flops from side to side, depending on who's giving her current advantage, and with her shifting loyalties, you just didn't know who's side she's on, when you realize that she's actually acting on her own interests in preserving the way of her life - conning lecherous folks, killing them for money and then removing the evidence by serving their bodies as meat buns.
Tony Leung's Chow is somewhat similar to Chow Yun- Fat's Li Mu Bai, except that here his martial arts skills aren't that really great, and has to rely on cunning and charm to save his troupe.The two weakest characters here belong to Donnie Yen, whom we don't really see much of except for the finale fight, but the most disappointing one was Brigitte's role as Yau, which is somewhat an uninteresting character in being there just to act as a proxy, and love interest, contrary to the notion that she might be a very skilled swordswoman, given her top billing on the poster / DVD sleeve.
I guess after seeing her as Invincible Asia in Swordsman II, anything less would seem like a disaster.Nonetheless, for martial arts genre fans who love it for the swordsplay and kungfu, then you can count on the action choreography of Chng Siu-Tung and Yuen Tak to deliver the goods.
While it's usually more of the same type of choreography (creative clanging of swords), there's a single scene at the climatic battle that on one hand drew laughter (of the serves you right kind), and on the other, just make you marvel at the audacity of it all, as you almost definitely won't see it coming, nor develop in such a manner, and when it does, just puts a smile on your face.Having not seen the original version by King Hu, I am interested now to see how his vision contrasted with the more standard fare that we're used to from Hong Kong, especially from Tsui Hark.
Soft arts affect you internally and subtly in ways you are not immediately aware of.New Dragon Gate Inn has finally shown me that there are soft and hard martial arts movies.
It's a visual treat with stunning set pieces, but I didn't realise the effect it was having on me until it was over.It's difficult now to discuss any historic/fantasy MA film without referring to CTHD, because good or bad, it's become the standard.
Great stars deliver disappointing Wuxia movie..
Here they plan their next move, aware that Cao and his followers are hot on their trail...Having seen some clips of this film on TV and been impressed with the sheer craziness of what I had witnessed, I laid down my hard earned cash for what I hoped would be a prime slice of mad Wuxia action; with Donnie Yen, Maggie Cheung and Brigitte Lin all starring in this Tsui Hark produced epic, I figured this was going to be something special.
But an hour in and I was starting to wonder if I had got the wrong film.Fight fans will be sorely disappointed since the martial arts scenes are so poorly edited that they become confusing and once the characters reach the inn there is next to no action for quite a while; in the meantime we get to watch some rubbish about visitors to the inn being turned into pork buns (a la The Untold Story) and Maggie Cheung unsuccessfully tries it on with Tony Leung.The crazy action eventually kicks in when Cao's army arrive at the inn.
If the whole affair had been as deliriously barmy as the final 20 minutes then Dragon Gate Inn would have been a classic rather than just another average kung-fu movie..
I am a big fan of Swordplay, and Hong Kong movies.
There are moments that are nice, but for the most part the silliness of the story just left the a bad taste in my mouth for the whole film.The final fight scene is good for a few laughs, and I suppose that was the best part as I had to rewind and watch again.
These reviews are also misleading in the way they make such a big deal about the average fight scene at the end which is apparently spectacular, firstly it is nothing special or new to this type of film and also becomes so rediculous I felt sick that I had paid for it.
So Bad. I can't believe anyone could actually like this rubbish.Picture and sound quality make it look like a 1930's b-movie and that goes for the acting as well.The story such as it is could have been written be a scriptwriter from the teletubbies and going by the dialogue it was.The fight scenes move so quick you don't know whats going on half the time and the sound effects of the swords sound like someone pulling a zip up and down and as for the final 10 minutes were it turns into a comedy horror,well the least said the better.A truly awful movie..
Nice martial arts movie.
I was slightly disappointed that Donnie Yen wasn't in this movie much, apart from start and the rather bizarre fight scene towards the end of the movie.Overall, New Dragon Gate Inn is a great movie, but there are better martial arts movies out there.8/10.
Last of few good Fantasy Martial Movies.
"Dragon Inn", or "New Dragon Gate Inn", was last of the few good fantasy martial movies in which wire works are minimal.
Swordman II, a better known movie in which Brigitte Lin was in, had such wire works in inappropriate places.
Dragon Inn showed off martial skills of Brigitten Lin and Tony Leung in ways that you can't believe.
I like that kind of wire works.I enjoy climatic battles and Dragon Inn delivered it with excellence.
Maggie Cheung as the inn keeper is great, one of her best film performances surely.
Brigitte Lin and Tony Leung are good too as the children's main protectors who in contrast to Cheung play it quiet and steadfast.
Mix these together with a gallery of interesting supporting characters and you have a fascinating film.As well as the action there are other great scenes.
The scene between Lin and Cheung that starts off with one having no clothes on and the other fully dressed develops in a humorous but charming way.
I hadn't watched this in years but this was always one of the more memorable HK movies for me, if only that it featured the two luminous actresses Brigitte Lin and Maggie Cheung in swordfighting roles.
It starts off great, with the four leads fighting in a desert storm - glorious cinematography - but ends with the stupidest cop-out that is hardly befitting of what could've been an epic period movie.
I'm not really a big fan of the new wave of period kung fu films that filled Hong Kong cinemas throughout the 1990s.
NEW DRAGON GATE INN belongs to the latter category.
The action scenes are wire work heavy, something I'm not particularly fond of, and watching people simply spinning or flying through the air is not something that I call martial arts; it's not about skill, but show.
Lin is good, old-school quality and Yen is typically fantastic in what amounts to little more than an extended cameo, but for the most part NEW DRAGON GATE INN is a frenzied and dull mess..
It's a fairly typical HK swords fight movie -- not too bad, not too good.
The plot is, the bad guy (Donnie Yen character) wants to eliminate one of his adversary and used two children as bait to lure out his adversary so he can be eliminated.The romance between the Brigitte Lin character and the Tony Leung character could be more convincing if they use actress and actor of the same age.There is one surprise hilarious moment near the end during the final battle.
However, I think they should add more funny scenes like that.At the end, there is a big plot hole: the whole army disappeared, only the main bad guy went and fight the good guys..
Having seen the original masterpiece that this is a remake of (King Hu's Dragon Inn, possibly Hong Kong's biggest hit of 1967) I was bound to be disappointed.
It doesn't match the original's cinematography or epic feel, but if you are interested in early 90s wuxia pian, this is worth a look.It has an all star cast: Brigitte Lin (been a fan since Swordsman 2), Maggie Cheung, Tony Leung and Donnie Yen - some of THE biggest names in 90s era Hong Kong.
Maggie Cheung plays the disreputable innkeeper who appears to be playing both sides for maximum profit, but, to add complications, she falls in love with Tony Leung's character.Some other reviewers have described this film as being more "serious" than most kung fu flicks from the early 90s, but there is still a few silly and bizarre elements, especially concerning the lusty innkeeper and her Mongolian butcher boy (hint: there is not a lot of livestock in the desert). |
tt0120108 | The Proposition | Set in the Australian outback in the 1880s, the movie follows a series of events following the horrific rape and murder of the Hopkins family, likely committed by the infamous Burns brothers gang.
The film opens in a remote wood building with a violent gunfight between the police and Charlie Burns' (Guy Pearce) gang, which ends with the deaths of all of the gang members except for Charlie and his younger brother Mikey. Captain Stanley (Ray Winstone) makes a proposition to Charlie: he and the feeble-minded Mikey can go free of the crimes they have committed if Charlie kills his older brother, Arthur (Danny Huston). Arthur is a mercurial psychopath who is so vicious the Aboriginal tribes refer to him as "The Dog Man" and both the police and the Aborigines refuse to go near his camp. Captain Stanley states his intention to civilize the harsh Australian wilderness by bringing Arthur to justice and using Mikey as leverage. Charlie has nine days to find and kill Arthur, or else Mikey will be hanged from the gallows on Christmas Day.
Captain Stanley's motivations for taming Australia are revealed: he has been forced to move there with his delicate wife, Martha Stanley (Emily Watson), and apparently wants to make it a safer place for them to live. The Stanleys were friends of the Hopkins family, leading Martha to have nightmares about her dead friends. Word spreads of Stanley's deal with Charlie, primarily from Stanley's corrupt subordinate, Sergeant Lawrence (Robert Morgan), causing disgust among the townspeople.
Shortly thereafter, Eden Fletcher (David Wenham), for whom Captain Stanley works, orders that Mikey be given one hundred lashes as punishment for the rape and murder of the Hopkins family. Stanley is aghast at this, not only because he believes Mikey is likely innocent and the flogging may kill him or harm him irreparably, but also because it will break his deal with Charlie and bring the Burns gang's revenge upon him and his wife. Stanley sends Sergeant Lawrence away with tracker Jacko (David Gulpillil) and other men to "investigate" the reported slaying of Dan O'Riley by a group of Aborigines.
Meanwhile, Charlie rides in search of Arthur, drinking and apparently reflecting. Along the way, he encounters an inebriated old man named Jellon Lamb (John Hurt). In the course of conversation, Charlie realizes that Lamb is a bounty hunter in pursuit of the Burns brothers and knocks him out. Later on, after sleeping on a rock bed, Charlie awakes and is speared in the chest by a group of Aboriginal men standing over him. Seconds later a gunshot is heard and the head of the man who threw the spear explodes. Charlie then passes out.
Charlie wakes up in the camp of his brother Arthur, located in caves among desolate mountains. Arthur's gang consists of Samuel Stoat (Tom Budge), who shot the Aboriginal man who had speared Charlie; a woman named Queenie (Leah Purcell) who tends to Charlie's wound; and a muscular Aboriginal man called Two-Bob (Tom E. Lewis). As he recovers from his wounds, Charlie has several opportunities to kill his brother, but does not.
Captain Stanley attempts to defend Mikey by gunpoint from the bloodthirsty townspeople, but is overruled once Martha arrives, insisting on revenge for her dead friends. Mikey is brutally flogged and horrifically wounded. The formerly excited townspeople slowly become disgusted and Martha faints at the ghastly display. Captain Stanley grabs the whip and throws it at Fletcher, staining him with blood. Fletcher fires Stanley.
Near Arthur's camp, Sergeant Lawrence and his men have found and butchered a group of Aborigines. Arthur and Two-Bob find Lawrence's group while they sleep and kill Jacko and Sergeant Lawrence. Before Arthur stomps Lawrence to death, Lawrence tells Arthur that Charlie has been sent to kill him. Jellon Lamb enters Arthur's camp and ties up Samuel and Charlie, both of whom are sleeping. Lamb is shot from behind by the returning Two-Bob. Arthur then begins torturing the still-living Lamb with a knife. Charlie points his revolver at Arthur, but instead shoots Jellon in the head, putting him out of his misery.
Charlie decides he wants to break out Mikey and informs Arthur. Arthur, Samuel and Charlie ride into town dressed in the clothes taken from the officers Arthur and Two-Bob had killed, while Two-Bob poses as an Aborigine they have captured. Once at the jail, the men free Mikey, and Charlie and Two-Bob ride off with him. Arthur and Samuel remain to torture and slaughter the two officers inside the jail. The badly injured Mikey, who has never recovered from the flogging, dies in Charlie's arms. As they bury Mikey, Two-Bob tells Charlie that all of this is Charlie's fault: "You should never have left us."
Captain Stanley and Martha let their guard down to have a peaceful Christmas dinner. Immediately following their conclusion of grace, Arthur and Samuel shoot open the door and invade their home. Arthur pulls Captain Stanley into the other room and brutally beats him, while Samuel taunts his wife. Samuel drags Martha inside, and Arthur shoots Captain Stanley through the shoulder. As Samuel assaults Martha, Charlie walks in and informs Arthur of Mikey's death; Arthur ignores the news and encourages Charlie to listen to Samuel's beautiful singing. Charlie walks up to Samuel and shoots him point blank in the head, then shoots Arthur twice, saying afterward, "No more." Arthur staggers out of the house. Charlie tells Captain Stanley "I want to be with my brother." He leaves the house and follows a trail of blood to find Arthur seated on the ground nearby and sits down next to him. Arthur states that Charlie has finally stopped him and asks what he will do now, to no answer, and dies as his brother watches the blood red sunset of the outback. | romantic, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | But it kept me watching, fascinated, for two hours (including commercials), and at the end I felt like I wanted to spend more time with it.
It has romance, elegant atmosphere, a surprising plot, intriguing themes, and good actors...so, while the pacing and direction sometimes seem a touch stilted, I'd definitely watch it again.I'm a bit baffled that everyone who finds fault with this film picks on the story.
For me, the story was the strong point: it had some truly surprising twists and grew from the complexities and relationships of a range of fully drawn characters--a luxury most films, with their flat cardboard characters, don't offer.
In the world of the film, where even a seemingly perfect husband could with no warning transform into a tyrant, even a woman who thought she had it all could be trapped by a paucity of choices.That makes it sound like a preachy feminist movie, which it isn't.
I do not think a lot of the comments from other reviewers really see the value of the movie, or look at it from all of the character's points or motives.
William Hurt as Barret is totally selfless in his quest for a family and Madeline Stowe as his wife is also very convincing.
The big surprise comes from Blythe Danner, although I really cannot figure out exactly what her role was--is she secretly in love with Hurt?
Though there may have been some inconsistencies to real life, I enjoyed the movie and so did my friends and acquaintances...I was taken by the snowball effect...though some scenes could have been done differently...I accept it for exactly what it is...movie drama, not real life...some scenes were predictable and some I never saw coming...I was impressed with the job interview...the job...and then the transition from BOY to MANHHOOD and then the snowball effect that changes the lives of all persons involved including the priest...for me personally...the movie was well done...I am sure it could have been better but so could every movie once it has been seen and critiqued...GOOD JOB!.
I still want to see the western, but this was not a bad misdirection.Whoever cast A History of Violence had to see this film as William Hurt plays the same character in both films - marvelously, I might add.
He wants to give his wife (Madeleine Stowe in a great performance) a child and Viagra was not yet invented, so he hires someone (Neil Patrick Harris) to do the job.
OK, so we have a moral question here, but we ignore that for the movies sake.Into his parish comes a new priest (Kenneth Branagh) and he jumps the Rabbit-Proof Fence, uses The Magic Flute, and we have an Alien Love Triangle.
And, no children were hurt in the making of this film.There are some fine performances and an interesting story.
I think it is better seen at home where you can go back and watch portions over again, because in some scenes you must hear every word and pay attention to body language and expression quite closely or the plot can easily lose you.
Bad acting or directing would have made this movie impossible to understand, because the writing is extremely subtle.
I love this movie, and am very sad not to be able to watch it since my VHS player broke.
I like to watch it once or twice a year, and enjoy sharing it with friends who have not seen it.
I will continue to look for it on DVD every several months, and I will be looking to fix or replace my VHS player just so I can watch this and one other movie that I also love and can't get on DVD..
With such a fine cast, and a great story, the producers and the directors should have taken time to be more accurate and correct about details.
Love it or hate it, and the opinions seem to be pretty evenly divided, this is a compelling film because of the performances of three fine actors--Kenneth Branagh, Madeline Stowe, and William Hurt.
The story is incredibly far-fetched but, a la Six Feet Under, because it deals with emotions and fantasies we've all felt, it works in some sort of quirky way.Madeline Stowe is absolutely radiant--confused, vulnerable, strong, passionate.
Watch it for the actors, and weep for the film..
Great actors, good story - what went wrong?
I never know where the character starts and the typical William Hurt begins (he did a great job though, I was almost convinced).
The movie deals with death and I couldn't help grieving because this could have been such a great film.
(their love scene could have been sooo much better).Like I said, I kept wondering "What went wrong?" : The actors were exemplary (probably to overcompensate for the movie's weaknesses).
I don't know much about the art of movie-making (movie-watching, maybe) but I think even a seasoned film professional will watch this movie with tears after seeing such a great cast and good concept go to waste.
(With Brannagh, Stowe and everyone in it, except Hurt and Danner)- yeah right!The other option is for it to remain as a prime example of when great acting meets a good movie idea, but the sparks just don't fly.Watch it for the actors, and weep for the film..
How can you hate a movie that has Kenneth Branagh, as a Catholic priest, who has given in to the weakness of the flesh, saying, "I began to know God thru Elenore...it was she who taught me about faith." Or Kenneth Branagh saying to William Hurt, "You know you needen't feel guilty about this, THE SUN SHINES HERE TOO."(italics, mine) All kidding aside, the cast could have sleepwalked thru this somewhat cliched drama of a wealthy, staid older millionaire, resorting to having a jerk impegnate his beautiful young wife to keep the family line going, having the jerk end up dead, and the beautiful wife meets a charming local priest,,,and then...you know ..and so forth.
But what saves the movie, are the acting "chops" of this steller cast: Branagh, William Hurt, the beauteous Madeline Stowe, and Blythe Danner.
William Hurt definitely has acting greatness in him.
Blythe Danner works steadily on Broadway and surely deserves an award for a lifetime of top level acting, on the stage, and in the movie house.
All in all I enjoyed this film and recommend it to fans of the above great performers.
If you like movies based on Dad's boss making him take in the boss's chimp for the weekend, just when the hated insufferable in-laws are coming for a barbeque, and the kids decide to dress up the chimp as Ben Laden, and the fox terrier next door tries to mate with the chimp and start a REAL family, even if the local DA says chimp /terrier unions are heretical to the basic man/women setup, and...
You know there must be a problem when a recent film appears on TV with a cast that includes William Hurt, Kenneth Branagh, Madeleine Stowe, Robert Loggia and Blythe Danner and you've never heard of it.
One of the previous comments summed this film up far better than I could but I would still like someone to tell me who the hell is Blythe Danner supposed to be?
I'm certainly not going to watch it again just to find out..However, by far the saddest thing about this movie is watching talent like Blythe Danner, Madeleine Stowe and William Hurt being wasted in rubbish like this (I didn't miss out Mr Branagh by accident , incidentally).
Stowe is beautiful to watch but she was mis-cast in this one.
Watch it, enjoy it, then turn off the TV and make love to whomever is with you..
I'd still rather watch Kenneth Branaugh in a mediocre film, than not see his work at all.The Proposition has numerous weak spots- primarily the storyline.
Talented high-powered actors, plus high production values, minusa dreadful slow-moving story, equals a major waste of time andmoney.
Someone once said that it is impossible to extract a good film out of a bad script.
The script is really very weak, beginning with the absurd situation of Kenneth Branagh telling the story to Robert Loggia when it was Loggia who witnessed the initial facts, Branagh not being present.
Most of all, the whole cast led by William Hurt and Kenneth Branagh imbue their characters with such a high degree of dignity and seriousness that makes us think of one of those good Bette Davis vehicles..
After having an extra-marital affair with an attractive Roman Catholic priest we are expected to believe that all of a sudden Eleanor falls in love with her wimpy husband again?
Only good thing about the film was the music, but even that got on your nerves at times.
A movie I'll watch at least once a year..
I feel like a freak because I just watched this film and thought it was wonderful.
I'm asking this because I thought the movie "Michael" directed by Nora Ephron was also wonderful and the people around me thought it was full of clichés, the same comment at least one critic made of "The Proposition".
The acting was superb, the story thoroughly human,i.e., convoluted, winding, illogical, full of distress remorse and anger, but mostly about the beautiful, ugly or neutral ways we humans love.
This is one of those rare movies I'll watch at least once a year, clichés or not..
is it his discomfort acting in somebody else's film, or his uneasiness of the director being "Shakespeare's Sister"?Well, "The Proposition" has indeed many weak spots, being a period flick, but primarily it doesn't have a goal.
Though I believe that especially Arthur (the unmistakable William Hurt) was a well-developed character, even he doesn't fit in the storms stirring dark waters of his family.
Oddly enough, I really fell for William Hurt and Madeleine Stowe in this film.
Wanting so much for his wife to have a child, but sterile himself, Hurt's character Arthur Barret arranges for a young Ivy League student (played by Neil Patrick Harris) to sleep with his wife as long as it takes to impregnate her.
William Hurt is an excellent actor and the storyline of the loves, entwined among the various characters was very moving.
All the cinematic fringe areas of this film are terrific, set design, costuming, hair, wigs and Kenneth Branagh, but what this film lacks is a stimulating plot, an appealing story line and enough electrifying dialogue to keep us awake.Confusion about who is the main character versus who is the film's antagonist forces us to close our eyes to ponder but since the dialogue direly needs a few more rewrite drafts before our ears unclog it's all just too much work.The acting is erratic at best.
Up against the Shakespearian Kenneth Branagh William Hurt manages to stay afloat but Madeline Stowe sounds like she's screeching her lines most of the time.Considering the dialogue she's saddled with you can't blame her for being histrionic.Faced with the decision of going out or staying in the choice is obvious.It's a lot easier to stay home and do a crossword puzzle..
I found this movie to be very powerful, with strong performances from most of the cast.
I think besides Jesus Christ himself and God almighty the rest of us realize this is a groundbreaking film that is meant to enjoy, Kenneth Branagh, Madeleine Stowe and William Hurt all deserve credit for excellent performances.
1st watched 01/10/1999 - 7 out of 10(Dir-Lesli Linka Glatter): Uneven at times in it's format, but otherwise very well acted and filmed story of surrogate pregnancy involving a Catholic priest.
The acting by Branagh lifts this film above mediocrity..
I felt the casting was good and Madeline Stowe's character in particular was easy to relate to.
As for William Hurt, such a somber and sympathetic character could be compared to the likes of Heathcliffe...so full of longing and unfulfilled dreams.
The script of Rick Ramage has so many turns and twists that the story looks like a mixture of real life and a religious novel.
The actor Kenneth Branagh (father Michael McKinnon) gives a more value to the movie.
I think that one must be a catholic to really understand the complexities of the movie involving the problem of couples not having children and the significance of marriage and above all the importance of purity for priests..
This movie was no Shakespeare, but I was drawn into each character, wanting to know what was going to happen to them each second of the movie.
If you don't like Kenneth Branagh, this movie and "Hamlet" might just change your mind..
I think the acting was superb and the characters and the story were incredible.
I loved watching the story unwind.
Their love produce twins that are seen at the end of the film going with their great uncle to the altar as he is going to receive communion from the real father of the boys.One wonders what is Kenneth Branagh doing in this thing?
This is a film that will be cherished by lovers of soap opera and hated by others that might stumble into this movie thinking it's better, based on the names of the people involved in it.
Although this film contains few surprises the performances by the principle cast members are all very strong.
William Hurt gives a fine performance as a staid and reserved husband to Madeline Stowe who in turn gives a wonderfully involved performance as a woman struggling both with her own intellect and identity as well as her faith as a Roman Catholic.Kenneth Branagh is also compelling in the role of a Roman Catholic priest.
Fine supporting performances from Blythe Danner and Neil Patrick Harris round out the cast.The film itself is a quiet movie in which the story is allowed to unwind at a leisurely pace.
The characters drive the movie, which is rare.Although the movie lacks the subtle beauty of a Merchant/Ivory production, it does remind me of their films in some ways, though at times I got the feeling that the film makers where trying a little to hard for that sort of feeling without quite knowing how to achieve it.
Some of the film, particularly the outside sequences felt too much as if they were shot with a TV screen in mind.The weakness of the film, I think, is that I couldn't quite believe the story that develops between Branagh and Stowe.
Without giving too much away, their relationship somehow never quite rang true.Still, over all, a film worth seeing; especially for fans of William Hurt..
The script is pretty weak, and that's probably why the movie went straight to video, but the actors are much better than the parts, making the movie worth watching.
Kenneth Branaugh is always good, and William Hurt expresses just the right amount of emotion for his strained character.
The third group feels that although it has a great cast and is well acted, it has a deeply flawed story.
The story is told in flashback by Kenneth Branagh's character Father Michael McKinnon.
He wants to concentrate on helping the poor, but also wants to avoid the Barrets, the richest and most influential family in the parish.Eleanor Barret, played by Madeleine Stowe, and her husband, the powerful Arthur Barret, played by William Hurt, are unable to have children due to Arthur's infertility.
Eleanor falls pregnant, but young Roger finds that he enjoyed the work so much that he would like to continue working for free – he begins to make a pest of himself, and threatens to expose the deal, all of which leads to unexpected developments.While this unfolds, Father McKinnon, no longer able to avoid the Barret's dinner invitations, announces that he is in fact Arthur Barret's nephew.
The sight of Father McKinnon in full clerical garb pashing Aunt Eleanor is far removed from Hollywood's classic depictions of priests in films such as "Going My Way" and "The Miracle of the Bells".
Some of the script is good, and some of it not so good.....Major spoilers ahead:The film does gloss over very quickly the healing and "falling in love again" that occurs between Hurt and Stowe as husband and wife.
It's as though Stowe and Branagh have a period of close friendship, then a very brief and passionate affair, and then in the next scene we are supposed to believe they got over each other almost immediately?
There is no transition from THEIR mutual love to the renewed love and passion that Stowe feels for her husband, played by Hurt.
And he's happy to just be a priest and watch her raise his kid as Hurt's child?
Hurt was very good I thought.Definitely a soap opera and the plot strains one's belief in places, but enjoyable overall.
I'm still waiting for Kenneth Branagh to give a really bad performance.
The father will raise them as his in the full recollection of the woman he loved and in the total ignorance, at least proffered ignorance of who is the father.And we are back at the beginning of the film when the lawyer who is dealing with the will of the husband has to come to the priest and ask for his benediction and the full explanation.
The husband did know the truth and the priest can remember all these Sundays when he gave communion to the father and the two twins who were in fact his own twin sons.Melodramatic and maybe effective to show what love can be in a man who cannot perform his procreative role.
Kenneth Branaugh is a wonderful actor as are all the other characters.
Oh yes, William Hurt and Blythe Danner.
[Possible SPOILER]I picked this film out of a used-vhs bin basically because it had Kenneth Branagh in it.
The characters are interesting, the sets are visually appealing, and the casting is phenomenal--William Hurt, Blythe Danner, Madeleine Stowe, Robert Loggia, etc. |
tt0159090 | Vanity Fair | This film adaptation's storyline begins around 1920 and concludes in 1933. In its opening scene a limousine is traveling down a road outside London. In the car are two passengers, Amelia Sedley (Barbara Kent) and her friend Becky Sharp (Myrna Loy), young ladies who agewise are in their twenties. Amelia is from a rich, well-connected family, while Becky is from very modest means and has no family at all. Given Becky's circumstances, Amelia has invited her to her home for the Christmas holidays.
At the Sedley estate Amelia's family welcomes their guest, but the mother is soon wary of her. Those suspicions are warranted, for Becky aims to use her beauty and guile to gain wealth and privilege by climbing England's social ladder. Her first target for achieving those goals is Joseph, Amelia's much-older brother (Billy Bevan). After Becky tries unsuccessfully to trap him into marriage, Mrs. Sedley sees her cuddling in the home's drawing room with her daughter's fiancé, George Osborne. Disgusted, the mother calls "Miss Sharp" into the adjoining room, where she advises Becky to leave immediately so she can begin the job she had accepted before the holidays, that of governess for the family of Sir Pitt Crawley. Becky heeds the thinly veiled advice and departs.
Upon her arrival at the residence of Lord Crawley, Becky quickly stirs the passions of both the elderly Sir Pitt and his son Rawdon (Conway Tearle). The new governess entices them with her suggestive comments and by allowing each man into her bedroom at night while she glides about in her satin pajamas. Soon she and Rawdon begin a secretive affair, but Sir Pitt finally catches them together in Becky's bedroom. There they inform him they had married the previous day. That news enrages the old man, who orders his son and his "shameless little hussy" out of his house.
Relocating to a townhouse in London's Mayfair district, Becky and Rawdon feel the financial strains of being cut off from Lord Crawley and his wealth. The couple at first brings in money by betting and cheating their friends playing bridge. That income, however, is insufficient for their mounting bills, so Becky schemes to find other ways to get money. She does so through blackmail and by obtaining gifts from a string of lovers, including George Osborne, now the husband of her friend Amelia. Eventually, even Rawdon cannot tolerate his wife's wanton, criminal behavior. On the evening he is released from police custody for writing bad checks, Rawdon finds Becky at their home with another lover. He declares their marriage is over and gives her only ten minutes to vacate the premises. As she leaves, he informs Becky that his father had just died, and he is now the new Lord Crawley. He then warns her that if she ever dares to refer to herself as "Lady Crawley," he will track her down and kill her.
Several years pass and Becky lives in a far less affluent, largely French-speaking area of London. There she prowls the area's bars and casinos, getting money from the assorted men she meets. One evening in a casino, she sees Amelia's brother Joseph, who updates her about his sister's situation. While Becky already knows that Amelia's husband George had died five years earlier in a horse-riding accident, she learns from Joseph that Amelia still refuses to remarry. Subsequently she also learns that her friend's devotion to George's memory and her mistaken belief in his fidelity have led Amelia to refuse repeated marriage proposals from Dobbin, a gentleman who has adored her for years. Sometime later, Becky invites Amelia to her apartment and confesses her affair with George. She then calls Amelia a fool for revering a dead "cad" and urges her to wed Dobbin, who is waiting outside in a car. When Amelia rejoins him after Becky's disclosures, she rests her head on Dobbin's shoulder, implying that his next proposal will be accepted.
The film sequence that follows shows the passage of more years and the ongoing disintegration of Becky's life, which has become a daily struggle marked by petty crimes, prostitution, and meager funds. In the final scene Becky enters her shabby one-room apartment. Lying on the bed is Joseph, stirring from his latest binge. She addresses him as "my love" and informs him that his sister had just given her another check. He is infuriated and tells her never to accept money again from Amelia. Becky turns, sits at a dresser, and stares into its mirror. In the reflection she watches her face transform from the reality of its present haggard appearance to its former beauty. She then notices that Joseph has quietly departed. She also notices on a small bedside bureau that he has torn up his sister's check, and in the dust that coats the bureau's surface he has written Finis ("The End"). The film concludes with Becky lowering her face into her hands and weeping. | romantic, satire | train | wikipedia | This is a marvellous retelling of William Thackeray's 19th century novel, successful in almost every possible way.
But what makes this so good, particularly for those familiar with the novel, are two things: its total commitment to the spirit of 'Vanity Fair', and joyously perfect casting and acting.As readers of VF will know, the narrator plays a very important part in the book.
His sly comments on the 'puppets' (as he often refers to the characters) that perform in his 'play' are frequently funny, exciting and always engaging.
For the story is literally a Fair: characters come and go as the narrator sees fit while we the audience look on with amusement.
We start with both Becky Sharp (the main character but not the traditional heroine as Thackeray's contemporary audience would have expected) and Amelia Sedley, and we follow their fortunes and interaction with other characters over some twenty or thirty years.
And though he is notable by his absence in the book's most powerful scenes, he will return shortly to talk about something else that another character is getting up to.
This is where this adaptation nails the spirit of VF so precisely; it never forgets that these characters are puppets in a play, performing for our entertainment.
And the sly comments of the narrator are subtly retained in bizarre camera shots: the fat pig snuffling outside Queen's Crawley, or the beggar playing 'Rule Britannia' with his little bells as the soldiers march off to fight the Battle of Waterloo.But this would have been for nought if the casting had not been spot on.
Natasha Little IS Becky Sharp.
Beautiful, alluring, charming, witty, cunning, deceptive and manipulative, she is every man's dream on the outside (I fell in love with her, and I can see all she is getting up to!).
Frances Grey is also perfect as Amelia; not as beautiful as Becky, but still pleasant, sweet and kind-hearted, and forever doting on George Osborne.
Tom Ward as Osborne was not what I was expecting, yet he got it right: a dashing English officer, strikingly handsome, and not totally devoid of morals, but very easily succumbs to his vanity and pride.
Philip Glenister as the only genuinely heroic character in the book (though still not without faults), Dobbin, again is not how I pictured the character, but again nails it perfectly: slightly clumsy, socially awkward, but clear thinking, level-headed and always ready to do the right thing.
The rest of the cast play their respective grotesques with equal perfection and relish - to single out each and every one is impossible, though all deserve it.As a lover of this book, I congratulate all on a job well done.
I cannot comment on how someone who has not read VF will like this series, but I can understand that they may be a little bewildered by it all: the occasional dizzy camerawork and loud brass band music.
So long as you understand that we are the audience of a colourful, vibrant fair populated by a rich assortment of people, all with faults, all with redeeming features (however materialistic they might be), then I think you should derive great pleasure from it, because more than anything, this is great fun..
The story of Becky Sharp, a girl who is never any better than she needs to be, and her friend Amelia who is much too good for her own good.Natasha Little is simply perfect as Becky.
Little is the kind of woman that women find hard to like: delicately beautiful, exceptionally talented making her perfect to play Becky.
It is the subtle nuances in her moments that give her performance great depth and complexity needed for accessibility for a selfish character who is the smartest person in any room she is in.
All she has to do is stand still and look stupid." Little's Beky is not as likable or vulnerable as Reese Witherspoon who played Becky in a major motion picture film version made right around the same time but with a miniseries we have time to understand her more.
Besides, not many actresses are as likable as Witherspoon.As the story begins, this production does not look lavish, but the casting is so wonderful, the script so strong, the costumes simple but just right, that we are given the ability to focus on getting to know the people we will be following through 6 episodes.It is this initial simplicity that is the brilliance of the production design by Malcolm Thornton.
As we progress through the story, wealth becomes more complex, overstuffed and overdecorated, echoing the complexity of the lives of Becky and Rawdon.
Rawdon played by the handsome and overwhelmingly talented Nathaniel Parker (INSPECTOR LINLEY, BLEAK HOUSE).Breathtaking Andrew Davies, possibly the most brilliant adapter of the classics of all time, gifts us with a screenplay of grace and subtlety, weaving the ease of modern speech perfectly into the period action in a way that feels classic, but is totally accessible.It all bounces along to the ohm-pa-pa of a brass band.
While it passes as a military band, it also has a the raw, slightly under-rehearsed sound of a New Orleans jazz band, and sometimes a 1940s dance hall
meanwhile Becky's musical choices are straight from the pub
to the delight of the men around her.
The band is really the only downfall of the production, in the moments of great serious importance, the band hits us over the head with a blaringly repetitive theme that gets very annoying after 6 episodes.
One of the nice subtle touches is that even Becky's singing, which at first seems flawless and delightful, begins to sound a bit flat in the episodes where we see dark results of her behavior on those around her.The music for Amelia and William is completely different.
Plaintive melodies played as quietly as loyalty and love that things only of the good of the beloved.
Wonderful movie, and very faithful to the book!.
I saw this version of "Vanity Fair" when A&E premiered it in 1998, and I was totally captivated.
I had not, at that time, read the book, so I was happily tugged along by every twist and turn of this delightful tale.
The acting is outstanding on all accounts, the writing is solid, and Thackeray's story is timeless.Now I am finally getting 'round to reading the book, and I am amazed by how faithful this mini-series is to the original work.
Though I usually am frustrated by the liberties that are taken with great literature, and I believe that one should always "read the book" before taking in someone else's interpretation of it, this is a case where having "seen the movie" makes it even more fun to read the book.Becky Sharp, Emmy Sedley, and especially Captain Dobbins (Philip Glenister really shines) are vividly portrayed -- as are all of the characters.
In either order, read the book and watch the movie.
Generally I think that the great Victorian door-stoppers are better suited to the mini series format than that of feature films because even with a running time pushed to three hours there just isn't the room for the typical panorama of characters, supporting characters, plots and subplots.
I admit at first I was a bit disappointed by the choice of Natasha Little to play Rebecca because I thought the actress was too tall and elegant to play a character who was described as petite and vivacious.
But no matter; Little's cool headedness, verbal wit, and carefully disguised ruthlessness were all pure Becky (unlike Mira Nair, the screenwriters of this production realized that to soften this character's harder edges wouldn't modernize her; rather, it would flatten her).
Frances Grey does fine in in the thankless role of Amelia Sedley.
Although this was somewhat out of keeping with the novel, I did like the scene of Amelia still in bed after her wedding night, her hair spread out on the pillow, blissfully talking to her new husband.
It makes her seem a bit more than stupidly devoted child-woman she is for most of the novel and makes those later scenes in which Becky and George (just weeks after George's marriage) brazenly flirt in front of Amelia all the more painful.
The other characters are well cast too, with the terrifying Lord Steyne being the most memorable of all--in his final scene, without having to say a word he looks as if he really will have Becky murdered without a second thought if she ever approaches him again.All in all, highly recommended..
The best production of Vanity Fair for all time?.
Thackeray prefaced his book with a short piece apparently explaining that the characters were just "puppets" who lived, ate and made love in a (fictional?) world that was neither moral nor immoral.
However the book is generally seen as a savage satire and even today the appearance of Knight of the Realm, Sir Pitt Crawley, is rather shocking in that the reader just as much as the characters in the book, mistake him for a footman or even watchman such are his appearance and manners - breaking a convention that other Victorian writers such as Dickens and Trollope strictly observed.
In the opening chapter the exceedingly disrespectful young Becky Sharp is again a character set against the Victorian archetype.
Neither virtuous nor fallen woman (generally the literary alternatives at the time), Becky Sharp fights her way through life using her sharpness of perception and her bodily attractions - sometimes winning, sometimes losing badly.Thackeray portrays a world where people can and do behave badly and act grossly.
The real Becky Sharp, on the make and none too scrupulous, existed then, she exists today, as do all the other characters but it requires the removal of the rose-tinted spectacles to see them - and perhaps some courage to write about them too.This production plays the story entirely straight - an excellent cast portraying their characters realistically and without exaggeration, living according to their respective values and the hand Life deals them.
It is left to the titles - the visuals and the music - to sound a ripe raspberry at their antics - and to remind us that this is not a puppet show but a sharp satire on how some people lived in England 200 years ago.A pretty fine cast, not all though got an opportunity to shine, but memorable were Jeremy Swift as a perspiring great dumpling Jos Sedley; an unsmiling, uncharming and unsightly Lord Steyne, removing the noble from the nobility; Philip Glennister as the ever reliable Dobbin; Nathaniel Parker as the dashing officer/adventurer snared by adventuress, Becky Sharp.
The problem however I had with Natasha Little was that she was no seductress, there was no sweetness (however false) that surely would have been an essential weapon in her fight to get what she wanted?
Perhaps the book does not make clear the nature of her appeal to men, only her will, her lack of scruples and the mixed success she had.
Perhaps for all his sharp observation, Thackeray did not have intimate knowledge of such aggressively ambitious women?
Vanity Fair 1998 BBC version.
I had never read the book (I will now!) but have grown to have a lot of trust in any adaptation that BBC does.
Especially impressive was the ability of Natasha Little (Becky Sharp) to express Becky's manipulativeness through her subtle facial expressions and subtle use of her eyes and her voice.
Not hard to believe that so many of the characters were completely sucked in by Becky's wiles.
There has been a ridiculous number of movies about psychopathic killers - Silence of the Lambs, Se7en, Copycat, The Cell, etc, etc - and yet for a realistic depiction of a psychopath, this mini-series leaves them all far behind.
If you want to see what the average psychopath is like (or perhaps I should say above average, because there is nothing average about Becky Sharp), this is far more true to life than all the others.
The reality is that for every Hannibal Lecter in the world, there are a thousand Becky Sharps, and together they do far more damage than all the serial killers.
I can only think that Thackeray must have known someone like her, because you can't get this close to reality by sheer imagination, and I don't know of any literary examples he could have copied from.Of course, the novel, and the series, are about far more than one character - they are in fact about Vanity Fair, the world that Thackerary knew and didn't particularly love, the society which was so warped and hypocritical (rather like ours today, in fact) that it allowed characters like Becky Sharp to prosper.This is not nearly as pleasant as the usual BBC mini-series, but it is compulsively watchable; the depiction is almost flawless and Natasha Little does a brilliant job portraying the woman we love to hate.
The rest of the cast is also excellent, including Nathaniel Parker as Rawdon, the principal victim of his wife's intrigues, Philip Glenister as the lovable but awfully clumsy Dobbin and David Bradley as the appalling baronet Sir Pitt Crawley..
I had never read the novel (though I recall the name William Makepeace Thackeray from school), so I have no idea how accurate to the book this version is.
I love this mini-series so much.
The somewhat dark humour and the love/hate for Becky is delicious.
I love Natasha Little - first experiencing her acting abilities and beauty on 'This Life'.
Strangely, the wonderfully grotesque nature of most of the characters reminds me of films like 'Strictly Ballroom' and 'Muriel's Wedding'.
Odd I know, though they are also somewhat dark humoured films.
A six hour miniseries by the BBC and A&E, "Vanity Fair" (1998) has sufficient time to present the classic tale of the socially adroit, cunning, and beguiling Becky Sharp's rise from lowly governess to lofty aristocrat with depth, detail, and attention to the many characters and side stories swirling around her.
Natasha Little makes a superb centerpiece though her fellow actors are equally well cast and competent in their roles.
The downside to the series is a somewhat uneven screenplay which spends time while women sing parlor songs only to rush through some of the moments in which we would most like to linger.
"Vanity Fair" (1998) should be time well spent for anyone into Victorian period fare, especially comedy/dramas, the works of W.M. Thackeray, or fans of the players.
I haven't seen the new version (it's not out in the theaters yet here), but the fuss led me to re-watch the DVD of the mini-series.
I agree with the comments that this is not the top-of-the-drawer BBC miniseries, although there are some very dramatic scenes, particularly as the venue of the film shifts to Brussels in the lead-up to Waterloo.
Natasha Little is indeed bewitching as Becky Sharp, a slippery character if ever there was one, and it will be interesting to see how Reese Witherspoon will cope with this role.
Perhaps since Ms. Little is much less well-known than Ms. Witherspoon, she has more scope for creating a unique image of the ambitious Becky Sharp.
My favourite novel, but not my favourite mini-series.
I have usually enjoyed tremendously British mini-series based on classic novels, but...I read that wonderful novel some 15 years ago when I was still teenager and I fell in love with it instantly.
'That's life' he shows us, and let the readers do their own convictions.But then I saw this tv-series, and if I hadn't read the book first, maybe I wouldn't have bothered to do so after it either.
You can't spoil a novel that good completely, but still that tv-series left much to hope for.
Like in other mini-series, Tom Jones, made at the same time, there should have been a commentator in it (novelist's alter ego).
One of Vanity Fair's strong points are those wonderful comments which Thackeray made throughout the book.
Without them half the fun is missing.I should also complain about annoyingly boisterous music, lack of colour and the casting, which wasn't that impressive in my opinion.
Well, of course I had great expectations, but if you haven't read the original novel, or think it's something unique, this adaption might not be that bad.
Excellent music, fantastic performance by Natasha Little and her 'Linley'.
a splendid mini series.
I much prefer this version to the film, which naturally has its limitation of time to be considered.
The cast I believe to be perfect, so much is said without words and the story plays along beautifully.
It's been some years since I read the book, it's always on my list but gets pushed back because I have read it before, but perhaps this year?
Becky is a delicious minx and Amelia is gullible and sweet.
I loved Josh Sedley, adored Dobbin and Rawdon.
I enjoyed Vanity Fair.
However, it probably won't be on my top ten list of mini-series to watch.
I love Andrew Davies work, but the character of Becky Sharp was dialogued rather sparsely.
How many times can Ms. Sharp "look sultry and seductive" instead of speaking?
The stand-outs in the cast are the man who played William Dobbins (Phillip Glenister) and Joss Sedley (Jeremy Swift)..
William Makepeace Thackray has written an unbelievable piece of literature and this film does justice to the great story of human imperfections.
Story doesn't finish until the last scene is over.
There are certain flaws like actors don't age even after 10-12 years but the story is so good that you see them as grown up men and women psychologically.
Story was really supported by very good actors.
Natasha Little was a delight to watch as a lady with grey shades.
I haven't read the novel or knew anything about it.
I had to chose between Mira Nair's 'Vanity Fair' and this one.
The film is really good but novel has to be a masterpiece. |
tt0097965 | New York Stories | === Life Lessons ===
In a story loosely based on Fyodor Dostoevsky's short novel The Gambler, Nick Nolte plays Lionel Dobie, an acclaimed abstract artist who finds himself unable to paint during the days before the scheduled beginning of a major gallery exhibition of his new work. Rosanna Arquette is Paulette, his apprentice/assistant and former lover. Lionel is still infatuated with her, but Paulette wants only his tutelage, which makes things difficult since they live in the same studio-loft. Paulette dates other people, including a performance artist (Steve Buscemi) and a painter (Jesse Borrego).
These deliberate provocations on Paulette's part make Lionel insanely jealous — and fuel his creativity. Lionel and Paulette, it becomes clear, have been using each other: Lionel using her sexually, Paulette using him as a means of entry to the higher spheres of the New York social and art scene. Paulette wants to give up and go home to her parents but Lionel persuades her to stay because New York is where a painter needs to be.
Lionel pours his anxiety and repressed passion into his work. Paintings around the studio show visual metaphors from relations past: stormy skies, burning bridges, and tormented clowns. Lionel realizes that he needs the emotional turmoil of his destructive relationships in order to fuel his art. In the last scene, at the art exhibit, Lionel meets another attractive young woman, a struggling painter. He persuades her to become his assistant, and potentially his lover, beginning the cycle anew.
=== Life Without Zoë ===
Zoë (Heather McComb) is a schoolgirl who lives in a luxury hotel. She helps return to an Arab princess a valuable piece of jewelry that the princess had given to Zoë's father (Giancarlo Giannini) and had been subsequently stolen and recovered. Zoë tries to reconcile her divorced mother, a photographer (Talia Shire), and father, a flute soloist.
=== Oedipus Wrecks ===
New York lawyer Sheldon Mills (Woody Allen) has problems with his overly critical mother Sadie Millstein (Mae Questel). Sheldon complains constantly to his therapist about her, wishing aloud that she would just disappear. Sheldon takes his shiksa fiancée, Lisa (Mia Farrow), to meet his mother, who immediately embarrasses him. The three, as well as Lisa's children from a previous marriage, go to a magic show. His mother is invited on stage to be a part of the magician's act. She is put inside a box that has swords stuck through it and she disappears, just as she is supposed to, but then she never reappears.
Although he is furious at first, this development turns out to be great for Sheldon because, with her out of his life, he can finally relax. But soon, to his horror, his mother reappears in the sky over New York City. She begins to annoy Sheldon and Lisa (with the whole city now watching) by constantly talking to strangers about his most embarrassing moments. This puts a strain on his relationship with Lisa, who leaves him. Sheldon is persuaded by his psychiatrist to see a psychic, Treva (Julie Kavner), to try to get his mother back to reality. Treva's experiments fail, but Sheldon falls for her, possibly finding her to be very similar to his mother (see Oedipus complex). When he introduces Treva to his mother, she finally approves and comes back to Earth.
=== Trailer ===
The trailer contains three shots from the "Zoe" segment not in the actual film: (1) Zoe ordering room service, (2) A boy slams a pie in a girl's face at a party, and (3) A different angle of Zoe's parents kissing right before Zoe yells "cut". The trailer can be found on the 2012 Blu-ray edition. | paranormal, satire, storytelling | train | wikipedia | The anthology that include three short films that take place in New York City was made by three great American directors, Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, and Francis Ford Coppola."Life Lessons" directed by Martin Scorsese, literally took my breath away - it made me want to rewatch all Scorsese's films (with the one exception, GONY, though).
Devilishly clever portrait of an Artist as Not a Young Man. 9.5/10 I loved Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks" and I think it is very funny and touching.
Three 40 minutes short films by three of the greatest American directors; Scorsese, Coppola and Allen.
Even if I personally is not a fan of Nick Nolte, the movie has depth and it's just as good as you would expect from a director like Scorsese.
I'll step out of the loop here about "New York Stories," three tales of New York from 1989, directed by three formidable directors: Martin Scorcese, Francis Ford Coppola and Woody Allen.
I happen to think all three films had something to offer, and the fact that the Zoe sequence is about a child does not for me make it the weakest segment.I found the Scorcese segment starring Nick Nolte and Roseanna Arquette the most thought-provoking, the Zoe segment the most charming, and the Allen segment the wackiest.
It is a film that has a lot of depth, but it is quite worth it for fans of the actors and those who could get interested in Richard Price's story.Coppola, director of THE GODFATHER and APOCALYPSE NOW makes Life Without Zoe here, a film that is 180 degrees out of whack from those two movies in that it tells the story of a little rich girl whose best friend is a doorman and revolves around a rich boy's birthday party.
In a way, it almost could appeal to kids, but it's the wrong place to put in between a story of artists by Scorsese and a comedy of mother and son troubles by Allen.Which brings me to the last short film, Oedipus Wrecks, where Woody plays a character whose mother suddenly out of the blue disappears.
So, New York Stories is worth checking out for Life Lessons and Oedipus Wrecks, and there could be an audience somewhere for Life Without Zoe, although the biggest flaw of the movie comes that neither one can connect at all outside of the fact that they all take place in New York and are made by New York directors- in short- fascinating and imperfect in some ways.
Martin Scorsese's "Life Lessons" shows artist Lionel Dobie (Nick Nolte) trying to assess his relationships with people, Francis Ford Coppola's "Life without Zoe" shows a very mature girl, and Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks" is about Sheldon Mills (played by Allen himself), a man who quite literally cannot get away from his mother.I have to say that Scorsese did a very good job looking at troubled relationships, and Allen shows how hard it is to have certain kinds of people as parents (of course he often shows that).
Perhaps it would be fine if it were its own film, but Coppola had to know that he was being teamed with Scorsese, his fellow creator of quintessential Mafia cinema, and Woody Allen, the prolific source of mature and sophisticated comedies about sex and relationships.
This is the case in New York Stories, because Woody Allen's segment, Oedipus Wrecks, the final third of the movie, is hilarious.
And by the by, it's a very pleasant surprise to see a younger Larry David, pre-Seinfeld and pre-Curb Your Enthusiasm, in a bit role in Oedipus Wrecks.Whatever was going through Coppola's mind, it's because of him that New York Stories can be described as a film in the shape of a circular saw.
My best advice to anyone renting it is to sit back and thoroughly enjoy the first segment by Martin Scorsese ("Life Lessons")-although you may be sick of "A Whiter Shade of Pale" by the end of it, or you may have a new reason to love it.
Then, watch Woody Allen's very funny "Oedipus Wrecks." This short film, like Albert Brooks' "Mother" will have you going, "My God, it's Mom!" A satisfying rent.
"Life Lessons"Nick Nolte plays a Leroy Neimann-style artist living in a New York City Loft and he picks up Arquette promising her "life lessons" Basically, he uses her and spits her out, but there's more to it than just that.
This is as reminiscent of the best of Allen's "funny films" as it is of his beautifully constructed New Yorker short stories.
Three stories, Scorcesse/Woody Allen/& Francis Ford Copola...Martin Scorcesse's dealt with cosmopolitan talent by way of artistic integrity, a piece of delicate Lalique is less fragile than the characters in this episode...Nick Nolte needs to come to grips with it..the simple fact is that HE'S HORNY!!
Woody Allen's segment dealt with the occult, wishes were reality and reality was taking a sebaticle...The Jewish Mother is so loving, she is relentless in driving her son crazy!!...Believe me, this problem is a nice one to have...The best line in this segment being..."What do need to marry a blonde with four kids for, You're not an Astronaut"..What wins out in the end is the theme song to this segment..."I want a girl just like the girl who married dear old dad" AND THE WINNER IS: MARTIN SCORCESSE!!!Scocesse's segment dealt with the demented concept that everything in life takes a back seat to an obsession...(For some people anyway) a sexual obsession,,,that is usually the favorite...The intensity of emmotions that Nolte and Arquette displayed are truly Life Lessons indeed...SO THE NOD GOES TO THE OBSESSION!!.
I'd seen NEW YORK STORIES (NYS) before on cable, and I'd enjoyed the trilogy of short films by Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, and Woody Allen.
As for the other entries, Scorsese's LIFE LESSONS, with a screenplay by Richard Price, is well-crafted and well-acted, though the temperamental, manipulative artist and assistant/muse/lover played, respectively, by Nick Nolte and Rosanna Arquette were so immature and strident they got on my nerves after a while.
I have viewed the "Life Lessons" segment of New York Stories probably 80 times.
So I will comment on them individually.The first short, 'Life Lessons', is directed by Martin Scorsese and is about Lionel Dobie, an artist (Nick Nolte) whos girlfriend Paulette (Rosanna Arquette) dumps him as a lover, yet stays in his atelier to live.
"New York Stories " it's a collection of three shorts made by Martin Scorsese ,Francis Ford Coppola ,and Woody Allen .
The first ,By Martin Scorsese"Life lessons " it's my favorite .The short story it's very well developed and the direction was quite good .
The special tenderness of love for a father's daughter, and when young, this special inexplicable bond, mutually returned, is beyond 25 words or less--but Coppola has sensed this, no doubt especially helping to create this reciprocal magic by employing Sofia in the filmic role of the daughter--at this age and stage of Zoe's tender life, although her early cinematic ability is undoubted and has since been proved, I would judge being employed firstly as being the real daughter and distant secondly, as an actress.And in my view, he and she have both sensed this, and made a good filmic depiction of it.
There is great depth of love mingled with total child's whimsy-quite a tough mix to encompass in a film short.Although I hinted this paediatric Ulysses (a day in the life of...little girl X), as a child thinks, doesn't have beginnings, middles or ends, the adoration of young Zoe, mingled with all her other dreams, is crafted into an aesthetically stunning (?how real?) climax of her father's achievement as a musician when he is lead flautist at an orchestral performance in the open air at the foot of the Acropolis, commencing at dusk---just one of these stunning, life lasting images that Coppola has this ability to produce.
When Martin Scorsese (Raging Bull, GoodFellas), Francis Ford Coppola (The Godfather) and Woody Allen (Annie Hall, Hannah And Her Sisters) join forces and make three separate short films all based around the same simple idea of living in New York, you know that original and interesting concepts will be seen.Scorsese's "Life Lessons", the first of the three films, is probably also the best.
Scorsese and Allen put together excellent pieces and showed their talents to the world, unfortunately Coppola couldn't do the same.What if New York Stories 2 was made today?
In these three short stories set in New York, Allen boils a funny but flavourless chicken, Coppola conducts a disastrous flute solo, and Scorsese paints a masterpiece..
Good idea but uneven execution.The concept: three of the greatest movie directors the world has known, Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola, are each given a 35-40 minute segment to make a mini-movie set in New York.
The result is New York Stories.The movie starts with Scorsese's segment, titled "Life Lessons".
However, the feeling is not mutual...Coppola's segment, "Life without Zoe", involves a young girl, Zoe (played by Heather McComb) and her privileged-yet-parentless life.Woody Allen's segment, "Oedipus Wrecks", completes the movie.
Nostalgia takes over."Life Lessons" (Martin Scorsese segment): Marty, the only who haven't wrote his own piece, made a small masterpiece with his short film, the longest of the segments.
"New York Stories" are three films from three directors, and not the least of them: Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and Woody Allen.
Scorsese and Allen's segments are no masterpieces, but "Life Without Zoe" is the worst film ever made by Coppola.
While Scorsese and Allen at least intended to tell us stories, you know, with characters, conflicts, with seemingly plots for Cinematic Gods' sake, "Life Without Zoe" is a lifeless, dull and shockingly thin film, relating in a fairy-tale format the adventures of a rich little girl, with her friends, and one obscure Arab Prince who speaks Oxford' English and still struggle to understand some basic words.
It looks flashy like "The Color of Money" but the film borrows more from "After Hours" (starring Rosanna Arquette too), through the depiction of the artistic New York, a world made of venal interest and sincere passion, where talentless people use sex to fulfills their ambitions, and true artists translate the lack of it into their work.
I wish he could see Marty and Woody's films and look at "Zoe" and think "What have I done?" How can a man so capable of greatness like "The Godfather" let himself slipping that way?
I even wonder if he didn't remove the last names in the opening credits out of shame.I've got to hand it to Scorsese to outshine two great directors and make a truly original piece of art, I wish Allen could make a worthy ending to a very promising comedy.
Eager to see it, an interesting collaborative project between three key directors of the New Hollywood movement, I even rushed home from a prior engagement.Three shorts banded together with the unifying setting of New York, New York Stories consists of: Life Lessons, Scorsese's tale of the relationship between an artist and his apprentice; Life Without Zoë, Coppola's take on the life of a child of wealthy parents, left to live alone in a luxurious hotel; Oedipus Wrecks, Allen's exploration of mother-son relationships.A distinct danger with films of this sort is in the directorial differences which can vastly disrupt the overall film's flow.
Not masterful, but quite, quite funny, and with a nice dash of comment on the issue at hand.The kind of idea that's interesting to see played out, New York Stories is neither as bad as its worst nor as good as its best.
New York Stories (1989) consists of three shorts with the central theme being New York City.It's directors are Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and Woody Allen.From that trio you could expect something better, but the result is very mediocre.The first story is Scorsese's Life Lessons, loosely based on Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Gambler.It tells about the relationship between a painter called Lionel Dobie and Paulette, his apprentice and former lover.The second story is Life Without Zoë by Coppola.It's about a rich schoolgirl.Allen's story is Oedipus Wrecks.It tells about a Jewish New York lawyer, who has problems with his mother.She doesn't like her son's fiancé Lisa, and the mother starts hovering above the city and telling embarrassing stories of her son.The actor list looks great.Nick Nolte is Lionel.Rosanna Arquette plays Paulette.Steve Buscemi is Gregory Stark.Illeana Douglas is Paulette's Friend.Deborah Harry is Girl at Blind Alley.Heather McComb is Zoë.Giancarlo Giannini is her father and Talia Shire the mother.Holly Marie Combs is Costume Party Guest.Adrien Brody appears in his first film role as Mel.Woody Allen is Sheldon.Mia Farrow is Lisa.Mae Questel plays the mother.Julie Kavner portrays Treva.Larry David is Theater Manager.Kirsten Dunst is Lisa's Daughter.Mike Starr is Hardhat.From the three I liked Scorsese's the best.Nick Nolte's performance was intense.I also liked Allen's work.The magic show scene was funny, after which the mother disappeared.Coppola's was the weakest of the three.This is worth seeing, even though I expected something better..
Woody Allen's post 2000 movies, like Small Time Crooks, are full-length versions of his short in New York Stories, which really isn't a bad thing.
Fellini uses a gimmick for his short comedy and Allen uses exactly the same one.Of the handful of short film collections I have seen, New York Stories (especially the Scorsese & Allen segments) is the only one that draws me back for more..
You get three of the world's most talented filmmakers together to make a film about the city that inspired the majority of their films and you would expect a little more than what New York Stories has to offer.
Francis Ford Coppola's Life without Zoe is more fun than the previous film, but still has little impact.
Woody Allen's inspired piece about a man haunted (literally) by his hounding mother is funny and seems to have more to say about New York than the previous films.
Three top directors (Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, Woody Allen) helm three separate stories about denizens of the Big Apple.
Scorsese, still in "After Hours" mode, works quite well with handsome, raffish Nick Nolte, playing an obsessive painter; Coppola, working from a dim script co-written with daughter Sofia, has nothing up his sleeve with a tale about a poor little rich girl; Allen wrote and co-stars with Mia Farrow in the best segment, a funny fantasy about a Jewish man at the mercy of his domineering mama.
Big-timers Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola, and Woody Allen direct self-contained segments that never interact.
But this was so bad, so boring and uninteresting that I hardly could watch it even with fast forwarding.Overally, because the Scorsese's piece is so great, and the Coppola's piece also in it's own way, this episode movie was very good, and very interesting.
The first is Martin Scorsese's "Life Lessons", written by Richard Price, and starring Nick Nolte and Rosanna Arquette.
In general, I don't like Sofia Coppola's work, but if you do, you might appreciate this directionless piece.Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks" concludes New York Stories.
The final story "Oedipus Wrecks" is directed by Woody Allen.
Scorsese's short movie with Nick Nolte and Rosanna Arquette, was the best of the three but I still expected better from him.
In all, I was disappointed with these short movies which centred around New York, but out of all of the directors, Scorsese is the winner.
Budget: $15million Worldwide Gross: $11millionI recommend this movie to people who are into there dramas about 3 different stories based in New York and directed by Coppola, Scorsese and Woody Allen.
New York Stories (1989) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Three legendary directors come together for this anthology film but sadly the end results really don't live up to the hype.
Even though all three films open with credits that tell you who directed them, anyone familiar with their work would be able to tell even without the credits.Martin Scorsese's "Life Lessons" features an artist (Nick Nolte) struggling to find his painting in time for his big release party but while trying to finish up he's also struggling to find a connection with his assistant (Rosanna Arquette) who he has been having a sexual affair with.
Farrow isn't much better as she just sleepwalks through her part.NEW YORK STORIES, in the end, is a pretty disappointing affair with only Scorsese's film really coming to life and being something worthy.
Francis Ford Coppola's 'Life Without Zoë' is a fizzy, uptown urban fairy tale told from the point of view of a precocious, sophisticated 12-year old heiress, and Woody Allen's amusing, typically neurotic 'Oedipus Wrecks' is reminiscent of one of his New Yorker essays, perhaps better suited to the printed page.
If I could rate this film on Woody Allen's contribution alone, it would receive a 10, however, since I have to include Scorsese's and Coppola's as well, a 5.
And mind you, all five of those points are for Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks." Scorsese and Coppola both seem like they did not take this project seriously at all.
Woody Allen directs the last story in a trilogy, the other two being unsatisfactory pieces by Martin Scorsese and Francis Coppola.
{It was also really interesting tosee the large canvas that is the centre-piece of the film take shapefrom nothing to a real work of admirable art by the story's end.} 8/ 10 on this one.The second segment, "Life Without Zoe", by Francis Ford Coppolais, to put it frankly, horrible!
Not only is this the best piece of thethree shorts that make up NEW YORK STORIES, but one of thevery best of Woody Allen's films, period.
I'd rate it *1/2 out of 4.Woody Allen's "Oedipus Wrecks" (great title, by the way) is possibly his purest comedy - and his funniest film - in a over a decade.
This was obviously a story close to the Coppola's heart, yet they were unable to make it interesting."Oedipus Wrecks" is pure Woody Allen. |
tt0027421 | Captain January | Captain January (Baby Peggy) is a young girl who lives in a lighthouse in Maine with her guardian, Jeremiah "Daddy" Judkins (Hobart Bosworth). Judkins, who is the lighthouse keeper, rescued January from a shipwreck when she was an infant. The only clue to the baby's identity was a locket with a photograph of a woman around her neck, so Judkins adopted her as his own daughter.
January helps Judkins with his tasks around the lighthouse. As Judkins' heart begins to fail and his health worsens, these tasks become increasingly more complicated and important. In one instance, January must ascend to the top of the lighthouse by herself to light the lamps. The local townsfolk become skeptical of Judkins' ability to care for the girl, and try to have her taken away.
January is saved from the orphanage by a chance meeting with Isabelle Morton (Irene Rich), an affluent young woman who comes to visit the lighthouse. She believes that January looks familiar; when she sees the photograph in the locket, she identifies January as her late sister's child.
Isabelle wishes to adopt January and reunite her with her blood relatives. Faced with his poor health and the scrutiny of the townspeople, Judkins agrees. However, the girl is miserable in her new surroundings, runs away, and finds her way back to the lighthouse. Judkins and the Morton family finally devise a means to make everyone happy: January returns to the Mortons, and Judkins is employed on the family's yacht, ensuring that he will always be able to visit his former daughter. | romantic, melodrama | train | wikipedia | Typical Temple Movie - Which Means Feel-Good Fun. Here's another "cute" Shirley Temple movie with interesting characters and a decent share of good song-and-dance numbers.
The story is similar to a few other Temple films in which a nasty person takes Shirley away from the good people but the good guys prevail in the end.
It was a tried-and-true formula in the Temple movies.Here, the "villain" is truant officer (Sara Haden) who wants to take Shirley away from good guy "Captain January" (Guy Kibbe).
Haden is effective in her role because you just want to slap that woman!Shirley and Buddy Ebsen team up for a very entertaining song-and-dance routine to "The Codfish Ball," the best song in the movie.The film gets a bit uncomfortable when Shirley gets taken away but ends in the normal tearfully-happy Shirley, as always, back with her loved ones and the people who really care about her.
Those include the "widow" played by Jane Darwell and the school teacher, acted by June Lang.All in all, it's the normal Temple movie that provides good feelings, something we viewers always need..
I love this film -- one of the sweetest Shirley Temple's movies(all right, I'm always saying that).
Shirley plays Star, an orphan found by Captain January(played by Guy Kibbee), who is the guardian of a Light House.
Shirley is sweet as always, singing and dancing, especially in "At the Codfish ball" and "The Right Somebody to love".
Anyway, a very enjoyable movie with the great child-star Shirley Temple, with a great cast of co-stars and a great humor!It's very fun to watch!Lovely!.
Another Shirley Temple Family Film Classic.
A vindictive truant officer attempts to wrest little Star from CAPTAIN JANUARY, the old lighthouse keeper who saved her from a watery grave.Shirley Temple captivates her audience once again in this, one of her most popular films.
Singing & dancing, laughing or crying, she once again exhibits all the talents which for years made her top of the Hollywood box office heap.It's difficult to imagine anyone other than cuddly Guy Kibbee in the title role.
Pretty June Lang plays the sweet village schoolteacher.Amiable hoofer Buddy Ebsen joins Shirley in a wonderful song & dance number, The Cod Fish Ball.' Tall & pliable, with plenty of goofy facial expressions, Buddy's performance gives a little idea as to how much he might have contributed to THE WIZARD OF OZ three years later over at Metro, had not health reasons forced him to withdrawal.Shirley also sings Early Bird' and, in a delightful nursery fantasy, The Right Somebody To Love.'.
The Captain's Kid. CAPTAIN January (Fox, 1936), directed by David Butler, is prime Shirley Temple in a formula story about an orphan named Star who is being raised by Captain January (Guy Kibbee), a crusty old lighthouse keeper of Cape Tempest, Maine, after being rescued from a shipwreck that has drowned both her parents four years ago.
All goes well until Agatha Morgan (Sara Haden), a new tyrant officer from Salem, who feels that the child isn't being reared properly, makes arrangements to take the child away from him and have her placed in an institution.Based on the story by Laura E.
Richards, CAPTAIN January is an updated reworking to an earlier 1924 Principal Pictures 1924 silent version starring Baby Peggy, Hobart Bosworth and Irene Rich.
As much as this new adaptation has the makings of a straight drama, due to Temple's musical talents, and the support of a young hoofer named Buddy Ebsen (on loan from MGM), song numbers were inserted to give it some added sparkle.
With the score by Lew Pollack, Sidney Mitchell and Jack Yellen, songs include: "Early Bird" (sung by Shirley Temple); "The Codfish Bowl" (sung and danced by Temple with Buddy Ebsen); a portion from "Lucia di Lammermoor" (an opera by Gaetana Donizetti, performed by Temple, Guy Kibbee and Slim Summerville) "The Right Somebody to Love" (sung by Temple/ and unseen chorus during dream sequence); "The Right Somebody to Love" (reprise by Temple) and "The Codfish Bowl" (sung by Temple, Kibbee and Summerville).
With the exception of a dream sequence, where singing is possible, all the other song numbers are inserted the story, with the music played by an off-screen orchestra right on cue.
Temple awakens, stretches her arms into the air and looking straight into the camera starts singing the opening lyrics of "Good Morning" which begins her opening number of "Early Bird." She dances her way to the bathroom where she changes into her sailor clothes, and occasionally continues to look her way towards the camera as she brushes her teeth.
A little fake, but not as imaginative as her next number, "The Codfish Bowl," displaying the dancing talents of both Temple and Buddy Ebsen.
Slocum(; and James Farley(The Deputy Sheriff).While 20th Century-Fox might have used some of its own resident lovable old coots as Claude Gillingwater Sr., playing Captain January, for example, the studio used Guy Kibbee from Warner Brothers, who, in the final product, proved to be the logical choice.
Kibbee also makes a memorable over-sized baby with a bib sitting in the high chair in an amusing dream sequence with Temple acting as his nursemaid.Aside from some melodramatic scenes, including Temple crying for "Cap" as she is being being taken away by the officers after losing his position as lighthouse keeper, CAPTAIN January is equipped with amusements, the best being the exchanges between Guy Kibbee and the underrated Slim Summerville as Captain Nazro, January's best friend, along with the middle-aged Eliza Croft (Jane Darwell), a rich widow woman after the affections of January.
Buddy Ebsen, years before immortalized on television as Jed Clampett in THE BEVERLY HILLBILLIES (1962-1971), supports as the loafer with a talent for dancing who finds companionship with the local school teacher named Mary (June Lang).
Temple, who rarely gets a chance to share screen time with another child actor of equal age status, does so this time with Cyril Morgan (Jerry Tucker), a precocious but obnoxious little boy with whom she finds she has to compete in an entrance exam to enter the third grade.
As much as the boy keeps telling Star that she knows nothing, this equally precocious little girl eventually displays how much she does know and more.CAPTAIN January, at 76 minutes, was one of the handful of feature films displayed in 1989 on Playhouse Video, a division of CBS/Fox Video, as part of the Shirley Temple collection.
When the Disney Cable Channel presented Shirley Temple movies in the early 1990s, all of which were colorized, the closing cast credits were included while prints for American Movie Classics (1996-2001) and later, the Fox Movie Channel, in the original black and white format, eliminated the closing credits with an insertion of a THE END title card taken from another movie.
While the Shirley Temple collection from Playhouse Video has been out of print, CAPTAIN January can also found colorized in both the VHS and DVD format.Regardless of format CAPTAIN January, is recommended viewing for adults and youngsters alike, especially those who endure themselves with old-fashioned screen entertainment equipped with comedy, songs and a touch sentiment combined.
This is the kind of film to make anyone a SHIRLEY TEMPLE fan.
Here the little miss is once again an orphan but this time a kind-hearted lighthouse keeper (Guy Kibbe) is raising her as his own.
Troubles come when the local schoolmarm decides Shirley needs a better education and upbringing.Shirley not only sings a couple of bright tunes, but has a big dance scene on the wharf with Buddy Ebsen--complete with intricate taps and all kinds of whirls as they dance to "At the Codfish Ball".
This and her opening number "Early Bird" are among the film's most charming routines.Shirley gets emotional during the final tug of war where she is being torn away from the Cap, a crying scene that reveals just how deeply felt some of her performances were.Highly recommended..
I had an unusual opportunity to see both the original 1924 version of "Captain January" (Starring Baby Peggy) and the 1936 version (Starring Shirley Temple).
She was raised by a nice old lighthouse keeper (Guy Kibbee) and years later, a nasty old biddy wants to take the child away and put it in an orphanage because she feels the man is a bad influence on the kid.
Either way, it all ends well--and everyone, naturally, is very happy.This is a good family film....but not a great one.
A Pretty Decent One. Actually, Captain January is one of my favorite Temple flix because of the music.
Guest star Buddy Ebsen puts on an entertaining show in the beginning of the movie with little Shirley Temple.
After more than 30 years, I once again enjoyed Shirley Temple's Captain January.
This was the first Shirley Temple movie I remember watching as a kid during the early '80s when I-along with my siblings and parents-visited some family friends in Gulfport, Mississippi.
That title character was warmly played by Guy Kibbee and most of the best scenes are between him and Ms. Temple.
Also loved Buddy Ebsen-especially when he's dancing with Shirley-and Slim Summerville.
There were also plenty of laughs like the scenes of Shirley and Jerry Tucker-who had quite a year in 1936 as he was not only a member of Our Gang performing with the likes of Spanky, Alfalfa, and Darla, but also appearing with Bing Crosby in Anything Goes and Clark Gable in San Francisco-who plays an arrogant nephew of the truant officer who's not very nice to Captain January.
It is a good story and quite typical of the Shirley Temple movies of the time, but what stands out to me is the songs and innocence of the period..
Captain January is Shirley Temple at her best.
I can't imagine that it is any better than this one.The title role is played by Guy Kibbee who is a lighthouse keeper on the New England coast.
The only disturbance to Kibbee's tranquility is the marriage minded Jane Darwell.That all ends when a new truant officer comes to town played by Sara Haden best known for being the maiden aunt who lived with the Hardy family.
Of course it all works out in the end for our little moppet and for her guardian Captain January.Highlight of the film is Shirley dancing with Buddy Ebsen in the Codfish Ball number.
Slim Summerville has an important role her also as Kibbee's best friend and occasional voice of reality.Captain January holds up well today for the kid in all of us..
Captain January (1936)*** (out of 4) Remake of the 1924 film has Shirley Temple taking over the role originally played by Baby Peggy.
In the film she plays the feisty six-year-old Star who has been raised by Captain January (Guy Kibbee) ever since he found her after a shipwreck killed her parents.
CAPTAIN January is a step up from the original silent version thanks in large part to the terrific cast.
The performances are really what makes this one worth watching with Temple and Kibbee doing a wonderful job together.
Slim Summerville adds terrific support as the best friend and we get a young Buddy Ebsen in a small role and Jane Darwell is also great in her part.
CAPTAIN January, as I said, isn't original and it contains no big twists but it's sweet enough and features such a cast that it's pretty much irresistible..
I'm generally not big on Shirley Temple kid films, although she is a great performer.
This is one of her best films as a child.She is an orphan (isn't she always?) found at sea by an old lighthouse keeper.
Among the lighthouse keeper's buddies are film legends Slim Summerville (sole survivor of "All Quiet on the Western Front") and Buddy Ebsen (surely everyone knows the original Tin Man and Jed Clampett).The film is probably best classified as comedy/drama/music.
Seen these many years later, Temple's vehicles barely get by on story (aided always by musical sequences to bolster the content), and her timing (always too-perfect) and exaggerated reactions might leave most modern viewers rolling their eyes.
Seems Shirl was pulled from a shipwreck by a government-appointed lighthouse keeper, but when a truant officer from the State Board finds out the tyke isn't in school, she threatens to take the kid away.
It doesn't really matter if the prune-faced officer has a point that Temple isn't being raised properly (the woman is turned into the proverbial villainess almost immediately); one can see right away that Temple can hold her own, taking care of herself and her elderly guardian in the bargain (as well as the local widow who has her hooks in for the Captain).
Temple isn't the only one overly-rehearsed; Guy Kibbee's January is cued for wide-eyed reactions so often you wonder if maybe if he didn't film them all in one day.
Little Star (Shirley Temple) lives in a lighthouse with the keeper, Captain January (Guy Kibbee).
Also on hand to help are Cap's argumentative friend, Nazro (Slim Summerville) and sailor Paul (Budde Ebsen).
Cap borrows money from a friend to buy Star a lovely dress and the little girl does so well on the entrance exam, she is put in first grade immediately!
The cast is terrific, with Kibbee, Summerville, Ebsen and the rest supporting the most darling child star ever.
Just watch Temple and the young Ebsen dance to the wonderful At the Codfish Ball.
Be it January, February, March or any other month, get Captain January and know you will be watching one of Shirley's best films ever..
Crusty lighthouse keeper Guy Kibbee (as Captain January) gently rouses a sleeping Shirley Temple (as Star) from her slumber.
Little Miss Temple is estimated to be old enough for the third grade, but since she washed up from the Maine coast, Mr. Kibbee can't be sure of the girl's exact age.
Temple enjoys song and dance time with rubbery-legged fisherman Buddy Ebsen (as Paul Roberts).
He would like to marry schoolteacher June Lang (as Mary Marshall), but the halibut aren't swimming...The fact that Temple lives with Kibbee and doesn't attend school irks newly appointed "truant officer" Sara Haden (as Agatha Morgan).
A "hula dance" by Temple was cut from the film, lest the star appear sexually suggestive; considering Temple is briefly seen donning her "grass skirt" while talking to Mr. Ebsen, excising the number can be understood.
With a fine soundtrack highlighted by "The Right Somebody to Love" (covered by The Mamas & The Papas as the lead song for their 1968 album) and "At the Codfish Ball", plus a perfect co-starring characterization by Kibbee, "Captain January" is quintessential Temple.
She made better movies, but became a more calculating performer...This film is would serve as an excellent first (and possibly last) look at Shirley Temple, especially for young children.********* Captain January (4/17/36) David Butler ~ Shirley Temple, Guy Kibbee, Slim Summerville, Buddy Ebsen.
With the way that mean Truant officer wants to take little Shirley away from the people she has loved and known all her life it starts to look sad for her.
Then when one of the men finds out she has an Aunt and Uncle still alive and they come and claim her before that mean truant officer can take her away things start looking good.
When her Aunt and Uncle call out for the Captain of the boat right there is her old friend Captain January and she is so happy to see him again.
Right there is one of the only movies that the ending is so happy that every time I see it or think about it my eyes bust into tears of joy for that little girl..
Captain January(Guy Kibbee) has been living at his Cape Tempest, Maine,lighthouse with Shirley for 4 years, since her parents died in a boat accident nearby.
Jane played a subsidiary role in 5 of Shirley's films..
Guy Kibbee(January) was borrowed from Warner, while Buddy Ebsen was borrowed from MGM.The central problem of a prospective jobless and Shirleyless January appears to have a solution in the end.
Then, Shirley starts off with "The Codfish Bowl", with Ebsen later joining in, dancing around the wharf area with Shirley.
Then, after Shirley dawns a fancy dress, she and Captains January and Nazro informally sing an opera from "Lucia di Lammermore".
Great Temple film with a wonderful cast.
Let's see...Shirley Temple's best film?
In fact, whenever I see Guy Kibbee in an old movie, I think also of this film.
And, this is the only film I think of when Buddy Ebsen comes to mind.
And then there's that spritely tune "At The Codfish Ball", and the memorable dancing with Ebsen.Temple really was quite remarkable for her age, and while it is easy to criticize the sentimentality of the 1930s, why not just sit back and enjoy the flick.
Guy Kibbee is delightfully gruff as Captain January, the lighthouse keeper who adopted Starr (Temple).
Slim Summerville is just right as the slightly goofy but lovable Captain Nazro, January's friend (and their mock arguments are a hoot).
And the wonderful Jane Darwell is on hand as a widow smitten with Captain January.It's been about 50 years since I saw this flick, and I still remembered the ending.
Hence three brief reviews: (1) Captain January offers a slight story, expertly fashioned and tailored as a vehicle for Shirley Temple, who will most certainly delight her many fans.
A solid support cast includes Slim Summerville, June Lang, Sara Haden and a more subdued than usual Buddy Ebsen.
(2) Better than I remembered – for the first quarter hour anyway, with Shirley singing and dancing and Buddy Ebsen putting over the lively "At the Codfish Ball".
(3) You might be able to stomach Shirley Temple getting all her sums right and even knowing the year that Columbus discovered America, but when it comes to a super helping of flat-footed fogies like Guy Kibbee and Slim Summerville who are determined to paint portraits of quaint rustic simplicity and simple virtue, I pause. |
tt0319495 | Detour | Piano player Al Roberts (Tom Neal) is drinking coffee at a roadside diner in Reno, hitchhiking east from California, when a fellow patron plays a song on the jukebox that reminds him of his former life in New York City. At the time, Al was bitter about squandering his talent working in a cheap nightclub. After his girlfriend Sue Harvey (Claudia Drake), the nightclub vocalist, leaves to seek fame in Hollywood, he decides to go to California and marry her. With little money, he is forced to hitchhike his way across the country.
In Arizona, bookie Charles Haskell, Jr. (Edmund MacDonald) gives Al a ride in his convertible and tells him that he's in luck: he's driving all the way from Florida to Los Angeles to place a bet on a horse. During the drive, he has Al pass him pills several times. That night, Al is driving while Haskell sleeps. When a rainstorm forces Al to pull over to put up the top, he is unable to rouse Haskell. Al opens the passenger-side door and Haskell falls out, striking his head on a rock. Al then realizes the bookie is dead. Fearful that the police will believe he killed Haskell, Al drags the body off the road, takes the dead man's money, clothes, and identification, and drives away.
After spending the night in a California motel, Al decides to drive to an urban area and ditch the car. At a gas station, he picks up another hitchhiker, Vera (Ann Savage). After some time, she suddenly asks him what he did with the real owner of the car. It turns out she had been picked up by Haskell in Louisiana; she scratched him and got out in Arizona after he tried to become too friendly. Al claims to be Haskell, but she calls his bluff and blackmails him by threatening to turn him in. She tells him that they should sell the car rather than abandon it.
In Hollywood, they rent an apartment, posing as Mr. and Mrs. Haskell to provide an address when they sell the car. However, Vera learns from a newspaper that Haskell's wealthy father is near death and looking for his son, who ran away as a youth after accidentally injuring his friend. Vera demands that Al impersonate Haskell as soon as the father dies, but Al balks at this notion, pointing out that he knows next to nothing about either man.
Back at the apartment, Vera gets drunk and they begin arguing. She threatens to call the police, running into the bedroom with the telephone and locking the door. She falls into a stupor on the bed with the telephone cord tangled around her neck. Al pulls on the cord in an effort to break it. When he finally breaks down the door, he sees that he has accidentally strangled her. He gives up ever seeing his girlfriend Sue again and returns to hitchhiking instead, imagining his probable future arrest by the police. | violence | train | wikipedia | My favorite bit was the scene where King Freak (T.C. Davidson) is carrying Tara (Ashley Elizabeth) like a sack of potatoes away from the Freak residence seemingly intent on getting her alone and doing God only knows what to her, only to be interrupted when Queen Freak (Micky Levy) calls to him from the second floor window like a good little freak wife and happy homemaker to tell him dinner, (Jill Jacobs, held captive and chained upside down) is ready.
While returning to Los Angeles in a trailer through the desert, the driver Neil (Brent Taylor) convinces his friends Tara (Ashley Elizabeth), Harmony (Danna Brady), Loopz (Aaron Buer), Michelle (Jessica Osfar), Lee (Ryan De Rouen) and Cashie (Kelsey Wedeen) to take a detour to an isolated mine where it could have a plantation of peyote.
Sooner the teenagers find that they are under siege of a group of sadistic deformed cannibals and they have to fight to survive."Detour" is a teen rip-off of "The Hills Have Eyes", using the same storyline but with many silly dialogs and situations.
I like horror movies, and "Detour" is not among the worse that I have seen, having beautiful and sexy actresses and a good conclusion with the scary little girl in the best scene of the movie.
Unfortunately the annoying character Loopz spoils what could be worthwhile in this movie, plagiarizing the way of speaking of Eminen and having imbecile lines and attitudes.
If you have not seen this movie yet, better off watching "The Hills Have Eyes" instead.
Normally I am forgiving of most low-budget "young folks in danger" types of low-grade horror films because they sometimes rise above expectations, the shot-on-video HIGHWAY TO HELL being a good example.
That in itself is a missed opportunity (but not a big one) because we all know where horror films go when there's a gang of gregarious kids around.
There's no build of suspense, the frights are few, the cannibals look like friends and family of the film-makers with very little make-up or reason to be the way they are.
With a decent effort on makeup and a bit of style and maturity this could have been pretty good, but save your time and watch HILLS HAVE EYES instead.
This update of the classical Craven's movie The Hills have eyes emerges from the mass of the direct to video slasher road movies of the last few years for a very good use of colors in its cinematography.
This is the only redeeming feature for a movie with a young cast that could be used with more reasons in a Playboy soft core movie (and one of the actress has indeed been in a Palyboy video), it is totally boring as a real horror movie, with ridiculous special effects (with running blood that is really colored water), almost no new ideas in the use of the killers or in the killings their-selves and an hysterical cast.
In independent-straight-to-video side, there's Detour, a little slasher that reminiscent of Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Hill Have Eyes.
But this flick transcends the stigma of "low-budget-straight-to-video-horror-rip-off" for the simple reason that it is incredibly entertaining!
Ok, the acting was mediocre at best, but the story (obviously an homage to TCM and The Hills Have Eyes) redeems any shortcomings in the acting department, and the gore is nicely done.
The rest of the movie was bad acting, ghetto talking, stupid effects, and lame jokes.
So as not to "spoil" anything, the plot is as follows: A group of young people get stranded in the middle of nowhere and trouble ensues.This movie has a plethora of similarities to the recent remake of "The Hills Have Eyes".
The only redeeming quality this movie has is a bevy of good looking 19 year-old girls.
It was like watching a Bally's Fitness commercial.So much for the good.Other than providing nothing new in the way of story or effects, the movie manages to annoy more than entertain, unless you want to watch it MST3K-style and mock it aloud in your living room with your friends over a case of beer (because that's about how much beer you'll need to numb the pain).It's really hard to tell one gorgeous chick from the next, but there were some memorable male characters.
"Words" such as "yo", "aww-ite" and "dog" interspersed with the usual expletives went from satirical to just plain offensive.I don't know the budget of either this film or "The Hills Have Eyes" (2006), but either could have been made for $3M or less.
It would be amusing to watch them back to back so you can see the amazing similarities -- both have motor homes, both use unfamiliar faces, both have cunning and creepy foes, and both take place in the middle of nowhere.This film was made several years before "Hills" and I never saw the original, so I cannot compare.
And "Detour" just doesn't work.I gave it a 5/10 for the good-looking women..
It's a simple-plotted fun movie about a group of friends driving in a camper van, who are going on a detour for drugs, who fall prey to a family of weird psycho cannibals.
The acting was average, nothing special of course (being a low-budget B-movie), and some of the dialogue was beyond cheesy, but overall it was a fun late-night slasher-stalker movie to just turn the lights down and sit down to, and relax with.
This is the type of movie that gives direct-to-video horror a bad name.
When the film was over, it left me wondering, "Where the hell was this person the last few years?" "Detour" is a bad, bad movie.
The plot was recycled from countless other films, especially "The Hills Have Eyes".
To be fair, there was an very impressive amount of well-done gore effects, at times a little tension, and nicely shot desert locations.
These are nice saving graces, but they certainly don't carry the movie.Once in a while, you'll rent a direct-to-video film that you've never heard of that turns out to be a real gem.
The sound effects manage to be bizarre and misplaced, while the script is lacking in tension and purpose coming across as stilted instead, the pace is leaden, the direction is flat and the story- if we forget for a minute that it is highly derivative of The Hills Have Eyes and pales massively in comparison- has nothing suspenseful or surprising in it with many of the scenes rather stupid rather than terrifying.
The characters, aside from the obvious stereotypes, are both cardboard and annoying, Loopz being the absolute worst, and the eager but bland overall standard of the acting does little to help matters.
Applicants must be familiar with the plot of The Hills Have Eyes, but not the good parts.
I think that most of the reviews given for this film are spot on, given that (by the creator's own admission) it is basically a rip-off of the "Hills Have Eyes" franchise.
This movie starts out like your usual, lame b-grade horror, you may be tempted to turn it off.
This (like "Wrong Turn") is a return to the better days of horror.
Yeah OK maybe it was a remake of the Hills have eyes and TCM but who cares because there are a lot of movies out there that make a close copy or what ever so why do you guys criticize this movie when you don't the others?
So i suggest that any one who reads this and has not seen the movie to check it out b/c i think that it is the best and that is why i give it a 10!!!!
So a lot of you guys say that it sucks well i guess if it sucks then you blow because when i read the comments i think that it is really childish of you people to write bad things so OK maybe you have your comments but leave it at that don't go "WOW could a movie suck more" or " A five year old could write a movie better than this." I sorry people but i think that it is really immature to do that but hey that is just my comment.
Perhaps one of the best looking independent features I've seen in quite some time, "Detour" updates a favored classic in an entertaining and relentless fashion.
Unsuspecting teenagers, cannibals, beautiful actresses, a good comic relief character, an inescapable setting, sexual innuendo, a solid script and excellent special effects.
A teeny-bopper version of 'The Hills Have Eyes.' Not a whole lot to say about it, the killing scenes are good, but not great.
If you happen across this, and like slasher films, then you could add this to your collection, just for the sake of being a horror buff.
This movie has pretty much the same plot line as wrong turn (minus that fact it takes place in the desert and the characters are in search of a pot field).
The best part of the entire movie is probably seeing the main cannibal, who looks like Mr. Clean's brother who was locked in an unventilated room while mixing cleaning products.
I can honestly say that after being introduce to this character I wish every second after that to see his untimely demise.There were some good effects and the actual camera shots weren't that bad considering their budget.
Yes, Hills Have Eyes, Texas Chainsaw, and a slew of others shine through, but thats a good thing, right?
Bad acting, not a single shred of originality (although how often does that happen in horror movies these days?) One of the actors looks like a broke-down Leonardo DiCaprio.
The RV happens to break down in the desert(yet ****HERE COME THE SPOILERS****it is conveniently able to start at the end of the movie ***THATS THE END OF THE SPOILERS***there's a bats*** insane gas station owner, and disfigured cannibals.
None of the characters were interesting at all, and throughout the movie, I wanted to punch the annoying white-rapper-wannabe tool in the mouth.
Granted there are a lot of horror movies that pay homage to the classics, but there's no word for this other than awful..
I actually was laughing out loud at the first 20 minutes of this thing called "Detour"Everything is pretty much explained about the movie by the other reviewers...My only addition would be is to turn on the closed captions if You have it...the dialogue is so good up to the point where the inevitable happens and it becomes the teenage splatter flick it intended to beLike over-the top gore?Like watching first rate actors in their debuts?
An extremely verbose group semi obnoxious ravers are either going to or coming from a rave in the desert, they're warned by a shotgun toting apparent mental patient working at a small gas station, just like in "The Hills Have Eyes", to stay on the main road.
They decide to take an old dirt road and then when they accidentally drive their RV off the road and get stuck, just like "The Hills Have Eyes" and "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre", and are set upon by a group of stoned cannibals living in an old abandoned mining town in the hills.Derivative of everything from the aforementioned flicks to "Die Hard" to "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" to "Route 666" to "Gore Met Zombie Chef from Hell", but somehow it's still fun, to a point.
I think the first half of this is better than the second half, it starts off looking like an over-directed splatter movie, but then after the first ten minutes it switches gears and turns out to be a mildly amusing throwback to 1970s slasher movies; but by the final 30 minutes, it has worn quite thin.
The acting isn't that bad considering this is basically just home movies, but that little rapping hammerhead character, Loopz, almost ruins what little fun there is here.
The director's commentary on the DVD is also mostly a chore to listen to - they sound like high school students, and they keep interrupting each other every two sentences - but it is kind of funny when they mention "Don't go onto IMDb and give this movie a bad review!".
*SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT*"Detour" is a B-movie version of "Wrong Turn".
A bunch of teens decide to take a DETOUR off the desert highway to look for some drugs.
"Detour" has all the right C-words for a decent B-movie.One last thing, watch out for the one guy in the camper who tries to talk like a gangsta rapper.
Of course, their RV breaks down in the boonies and all sorts of hilarity - and by hilarity, I mean horror movie slashing - ensues.The dialog is weak...the acting is weaker...and the special effects are weakest, or weakester...whatever.Anyway, there are a few good death scenes.
But here's a suggestion to would-be producers of low-budget horror flicks: I know you're trying to create distinct characters, with attitude or personalities that stand out for the viewer.
Make the characters seem like real people, who would really be friends, and the movie might actually generate a few more chills because the viewer might start to care what happens to these people.Best unintentional moment of comedy?
Very few horror movies that I consider really bad.
This fortunately is one that I liked.This movie is pure Horror candy.
You got cannibals, Rave, Hot chicks, Blood and Even a white wanna be rapper, who although seems very annoying at first, but grows on you as the movie continues.The story is basic slasher flick , Kids go to dessert for an all-night party and wind up being hunted down and eaten by a family of drug crazed peyote fiends.
if you have not seen the movie stop reading at once ,cause here goes-The ones you think would live die and the ones you really want dead, well let's just say they keep annoying till the end.
I will say one thing , the majority of the cast does actually look like teenagers this time around.
There are a lot scenes that don't make sense and are not consistent, but they seem to be there intentionally to make it more b-Movie fun.
In the end you get a great stand off between the girls and the freaks really reminding me of movies like "Mother's Day".Compared to Hills Have Eyes and Wrong Turn, the movie lacks the scare factor, but it does contain one scene that's really chilly.
The girls changed outfits like 30 times.7.) Nice of the Cannibals to make a warning sign.
If I would be scared, with a broken bus in the middle of a strange desert, looking for a signal for my mobile, believing there are people near, the LAST thing I would do is having sex with a really annoying girl..
The movie was filmed under the title Hell's Highway and changed it to Detour after the success of Wrong Turn.
I only hope that the young folks DETOUR is aimed at re-discover Wes Craven's 1977 THE HILLS HAVE EYES.
A pretty good and enjoyable low-budget indie horror item.
You know the sort of thing, taking the mick out of each other, the silly bits of unnecessary character development to pad the run time out that in the end mean nothing & are irrelevant to the overall story, the stupid decision making like splitting up, going off on your own across miles of hostile desert & the fact that no-one tries to or even suggests that they try & free the van from sand it's stuck in & what about that little girl?
On a positive note the second half of Detour is much better than the first, but this still doesn't make up for it being crap.Director Taylor does what he can with nothing but a desert to shoot in, which turns out not to be much.
The girls in Detour are nice however, a few babes never go amiss do they?I was disappointed by Detour, it's like an extremely boring poor mans The Hills Have Eyes (1977), the stranded motor home, the cannibals, the isolated desert setting, the gas station owner who knows more than he's letting on & warns them about the desert etc.
*Review contains spoilers*Hell's Highway is a low budget thriller typical of the genre, but for some reason I wanted to cut it some slack.Sure, it has the usual stereotyped characters, predictable plot, mediocre acting, poor sound and gratuitous sex scene typical to this genre.
Despite allegedly being cannibal drug addicts who live in the desert, many of the killers appear relatively well dressed and clean cut - which makes them even less convincing.Ultimately, overlooking the films flaws the overall effort was mildly entertaining and even the annoying Loop character grew on me by the end.
A good low-budget horror, for sure..
Although it takes obvious cues and influences from other movies, mainly Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Hills Have Eyes (but at least the originals, in it's defense) Detour adds enough of its own take on affairs to feel new and interesting.
However, these scenes are horror dynamite, and well worth sitting through the movie for.
You have Loopz, the white-boy wannabe gangsta, who's so OTT that you can't help but dig it, some truly ludicrous lines and a general sense of fun that a lot of bigger horror movies miss out on.
Between the at times great direction and this surreal comic bent, you have a quality midnite movie (or 1.15 AM for that matter...shakes head).It'll never be hailed as a classic, but Detour is an entertaining and well thought out horror that's worth 90 minutes of your time.
The other characters are a mish mash: two best friend party girls, a goth, the rich kid, the couple.
So why did I like this movie?
So why did I like this movie?
So why did I like this movie?
So why did I like this movie? |
tt0284482 | Shenmue II | In 1987, teenage martial artist Ryo Hazuki arrives from Japan in Wan Chai, Hong Kong on the trail of his father's killer, Lan Di, of the criminal Chi You Men organization. He searches for Master Lishao Tao, the only link to the whereabouts of Yuanda Zhu, a martial arts expert who sent Ryo's father a letter warning him of Lan Di's intentions. When Ryo finds Tao, whose real name is Xiuying Hong, she refuses to help, considering his quest for vengeance reckless. The two part ways, but Xiuying continues to monitor Ryo's progress.
Ryo encounters Wuying Ren, the wily leader of a street gang. Ren decides to help Ryo after deciding there may be money to be made in Ryo's mysterious phoenix mirror; Lan Di took the second mirror, the dragon mirror, when he killed Ryo's father. Wong, a street boy who admires Ren, and Joy, a free-spirited motorcyclist, assist Ryo in his journey.
Ren informs Ryo that Zhu is hiding from the Chi You Men in Kowloon Walled City, a densely populated, crime-ridden enclave of Hong Kong. They locate Zhu there but are ambushed by the criminal Yellow Head organization and Zhu is kidnapped. Ryo and his allies infiltrate the Yellow Head headquarters, but Wong and Joy are captured. Ryo rescues Joy by defeating a powerful martial artist. On the rooftop of the Yellow Head building, Ryo rescues Wong and Zhu from the Yellow Head leader, Dou Niu, as Lan Di departs by helicopter.
At Ren's hideout, Zhu reveals that Lan Di killed Ryo's father because he believes Iwao killed his own father. He also reveals that the mirrors will lead to the resurrection of the Qing Dynasty, the last imperial dynasty of China. Zhu advises Ryo to continue his search in Bailu Village in Guilin, where he says Lan Di is also heading.
In the mountains of Guilin, Ryo rescues a young woman named Shenhua Ling, who has dived into a raging river to rescue a deer. Shenhua's family is connected to the legacy of the mirrors, and she seems to have magical abilities. They walk through the mountains to her village. At Shenuha's family home, a tree named Shenmue (Chinese for "sedge tree") is in bloom; she explains that her name means "flower of the Shenmue tree". The pair go to a stone quarry on the village outskirts to meet Shenhua's father, but find he is missing. They discover a cryptic note and sword; Ryo combines the sword with the phoenix mirror, triggering a device that reveals a large mural of the dragon and phoenix mirrors. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | The opening is fantastic, with beautiful real-time graphic scenes, but is not revolutionary.
Even with some mistakes and graphic failures, the graphic is excellent with a high grade of details.
Women, main characters, motos and children are well designed, with good texture.
Can not be said about the men characters.
It is as good as the first, maybe better.
If SEGA releases it in English, we, owners of Dreamcast, will be happy to continuing play the Saga to achieve it's end!.
I want to thank 'whathasntbeentaken'.
for those kind words: "I personally preferred the English voice for Dou Niu over the Japanese one.
Dean Harrington's performance gave the Yellowhead leader a much more menacing quality, he genuinely sounded like someone who could and would crack your skull in two if he felt like it,"...
I have to tell you that it was a tough job!
That voice was one of the hardest I've ever done!
You comments are inspiring!
Thanks much!!!
As game go, I thought Shen Mue 2 was going to have greater success.
I guess I was wrong about that.
It doesn't get the kudos it should.
I have to say the actors and staff put a lot of hard work into the game.
It was done over a 6 months period and the gig was intermittent, so, many of us had to review the voice trailers to remember just how we did the voice.
That might be one of the problems with regard to imbalances or differences in the quality of the voices.
I might add that it was a big effort by the game maker and was also a big budget.
They took a chance with Shen Mue 2.
I hope they made their money back.
In this business that is one of the most difficult things to do!
all the best Dean Harringon.
A Great Game.
"I think that shenmue II or shenmue I for that matter are the two biggest underrated games of ALL TIME.
Now I think that Yu Suzuki went all out to make a story that would capture the viewer/players soul and take them on an adventure, and that it did.
I think that "shenmue & shenmue II are the best video games of all time".
I love the way the game is so free for you to do what ever you wan't.
If you wan't to go talk to some of the many NPC in the game go for it, its that free.
It took over 7 years with over 20 million$ For the game to be made then 2 years later Shenmue II came out.
Both Underrated games.
I love Shenmue and its story its so free..
One of the best games I've ever played.
I thought the first Shen mue was a good game.
It was a flawed game in many ways, but it was original, and once the story started moving I really wanted to find out what was going to happen next.
But the second game is were the story really begins to shine, and is a much better game in almost any way.Shen mue II starts out right after the first one, with Ryo arriving in Honh Kong.
Here he starts his search for Lan Di, the man who killed his father.
Sadly he is quickly robbed and must start earning money (so much for all the money I imported from my Shen mue save game...).
Sadly this means that the story starts pretty slowly.
But in a few hours you will be on track and have met several interesting characters, and when you finally reach disc 2 the game really starts.
And from here it only gets more and more interesting.One of the more interesting things about the story is that Ryo is an idiot.
He doesn't care for anything else than revenge, and treats the characters that tries to help him pretty badly.
This is also one of the flaws with the story, as why people continue to help him is a bit beyond me.
Thankfully he grows a bit throughout the story, especially after he meets Ren, who is much more interested in helping himself than in helping Ryo. They form an interesting alliance, and it helps that Ren is damn cool.The thing I liked best about Shenmue though is that it feels like you're playing a high budget kung fu movie.
If you like cinematic games this is the game for you.
But, unlike cut scene heavy games like Xenosaga, they actually made many of the cut scenes interactive in this game.
In a lot of scenes you will have to press different buttons to make Ryo do the right things.
It's very simple in theory, but it works very well, and makes the cut scenes that much more involving.
It feels like you're playing a movie, not just watching one, and there's a good mix between these cut scenes and you doing all the action yourself; You'll do plenty of fighting by yourself as well.
They also treat the subject matter with great respect.
You'll meet up with a lot of different kung fu masters in the game, and you can learn new tricks for use in combat from them.
You'll hear a lot of kung fu philosophy about the moves, and how you perform the new moves usually is linked to this.
Overall I got the feeling that the creators love and respect martial arts, and it translates well into the game.I played the PAL Dreamcast version of the game, which has Japanese voice acting with subtitles.
I would recommend this version over the XBox version, because the Japanese voice acting works well with the very eastern feel of the game.
This is Hong Kong in the 80s, and the game works hard to make sure it feels that way.
It's true that it is a bit strange hearing everyone in Hong Kong talk in Japanese, but it still works way better than hearing them talk badly dubbed English.
It also helped that Japanese voices were excellent, of course.This is not to say the game is not without it flaws.
But the magic of the game is that I truly didn't care.
I was so caught up in the story and feel of the game that I couldn't care less everything wasn't perfect.
If you like games with a good story and eastern kung fu movies, I can't see you not liking this game.
It's sad that the first hours aren't that great, but if you stick with the game it's worth it.
I only hope that Sega will one day make a third game, because it's a real shame if a series that started this good will end up unresolved..
the best.
this game is truly the best game i have ever played.
its just like a movie with countless added extras.
the storyline is great and you just cant tear yourself away from playing.
the graphics are breathtaking .
the game is funny , touching and emotional well done sega i really hope they are planning to bring the film out 10/10 the best!!!!1 raven -v-.
Not bad, but it is both stronger and weaker than the first..
Shenmue II is not a bad game at all.
The cut scenes and in game actions flow well (though sometimes the in game things feel a tad blocky) and the music, probably because it was mostly borrowed from the original, is great as always.
It is both better and worse than the first game, too.
This time there is far more character development and interactions feel more realistic (the money isn't just for show this time).
Unfortunately, it is much more linear, sometimes forcing you into a certain task or not allowing you to leave an area because you didn't talk to enough people.
The voice actors both increased and decreased in quality too, and anyone who dismisses it as universally bad is obviously biased.
The best of the lot is probably Wuying Ren's actor, who sounds great in both versions.
I personally preferred the English voice for Dou Niu over the Japanese one.
Dean Harrington's performance gave the Yellowhead leader a much more menacing quality, he genuinely sounded like someone who could and would crack your skull in two if he felt like it, while the Japanese one was not so much, and almost sounded constipated when he calls out to Lan Di (who has just taken off on a helicopter to watch the fight between him and Ryo from a safe distance).
As bad as people say he is, Corey Marshall (voice of Ryo Hazuki) is acceptable at worst and sometimes downright good (for example, when watching the Greg More scene, I couldn't help but feel Corey did better than his Japanese counterpart.
In the English version, you really feel how annoyed he is at Ren, who had just forced him into a fight with the pro wrestler, and his desire to end things when he growls "I'll show no mercy").
The actors for Baihu and Shenhua are probably the weakest, but they are still alright.
The game also feels more like, as a previous reviewer said, an Eastern martial arts movie.
The scenes when you fight Baihu in a steel cage (and where he claims "he'll remember that name" when Ryo says his name after winning) and the rooftop fight felt nothing short of Epic.
Definitely worth purchase.8/10 |
tt0069996 | Don't Play Us Cheap | Trinity and Brother Dave are a pair of devil-bats looking for a party to break up. They come across a party in Harlem. Although Trinity is eager, Dave warns him not to touch it. "When black folks throw a party, they don't play!" Trinity joins the party, already in progress, thrown by Miss Maybell in honor of her niece Earnestine's birthday.
Trinity first tries to break the records ("you can't have a party without music"), but finds that they are unbreakable. He drinks an entire bottle of liquor, thinking he has depleted their supply of alcohol, but finds out that all of the guests have brought their own bottles, and when he tries to eat all of the sandwiches, another plate is brought in.
Trinity finds himself unwilling to continue being mean after he insults Earnestine, making her cry. Trinity apologizes to her, and tells her that he has fallen for her. Three more guests show up, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, and their college-educated son Harold. Earnestine ignores Trinity for Harold. Trinity becomes jealous.
Brother Dave arrives in human form, eager to break up the party, but Trinity is unwilling to. Mr. Johnson tells Harold not to get involved with Earnestine, because her family is too "common," and he can't risk the big future he has ahead of him. Earnestine approaches both Harold and Trinity to dance, but they are pulled back by Mr. Johnson and Dave.
Dave persuades Trinity to try to break up the party before midnight, when they will both be turned into the thing that they pretend to be: human beings. As time runs short, Dave and Trinity find themselves at the dinner table with the rest of the guests. Dave insults Mrs. Johnson, prompting her to leave with her husband and son. The rest of the guests tell Dave that they're glad that they left.
After the dinner, Trinity stands up and announces that he and Earnestine are getting engaged, an announcement which infuriates Dave. Dave makes one last attempt to break up the party by trying to make a move on Miss Maybell. When Dave finds that she is all too willing, he turns himself into a cockroach and tries to sneak out the door before being smashed by Miss Maybell. | cult, blaxploitation, romantic | train | wikipedia | The best of the Bizzare.
Wow what an odd film.
This is one of those films that only a mother could love.
And then 30 years later a whole new audience sees it.
What may have looked too strange then can now be seen with new eyes.
This movie is thick.
The colors and aesthetic,the textures and flow are so different from other movies that if you watch it like you would another movie you might miss it.
Watch this movie without any of your existing experience filters and let it present itself to you and then you might see the genius of it.
Great Film.
If you enjoy avant-garde films and/or cult and/or low budget black (afro-american)comedy, then you are probably already a fan of Melvin Van Peebles.
I love telling people about this film because it's so simple yet profound and a whole lot of fun!
It feels like this film was originally a stage play cause it all takes place in one flat.
The music is bluesy, gospel and folk and yes chile it's low budget, but that's the point.
It's great to see black actors like Mabel King and Esther Rolle doing work that you can tell they actually enjoyed doing for a change!!!!
Not only did Melvin Van Peebles write the script, but he also composed all of the music.
With the exception of Esther Rolle the cast has great, soulful voices, but even the monotoned throaty voice of Rolle adds great character to the film.
It's the rawness and honesty of this movie that makes it so great...Besides I'm sure Miss Rolle knows she can't sing!.
Amazing.
This film was a great commentary on the contrast of human values, especially the characters and their personal aspirations.
It reminds us not to take everything about our lives so seriously and that all too often, some of the best things can come in the smallest of packages.It was nice to see Florida and Evilene act out different roles other than their showcased parts.
The best part of the film was the crazy music.
You can tell that the cast members had a really fun time.
It's no Broadway legend, but it's cheesiness and its simplicity are sure to catch your eye.
I caught it on BET Starz and I never forgot it.
It makes me wish that people still had such house parties!
Enjoy!.
Melvin Van Peebles' Don't Play Us Cheap may play its beats like a sledgehammer but don't let that deter you.
After months of this being listed as "long wait" on Netflix, I finally got the disc of this movie from them just today.
It was the fact this was Melvin Van Peebles' follow-up to his hit Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song that got me wanting to watch this as well as the fact it was originally a stage musical he wrote.
What a thrill to see future TV stars like Esther "Good Times" Rolle and Mabel "What's Happening?!" King here though my favorite of the singing cast was Joshie Armstead when she warbled "You Cut Up the Clothes in the Closet of My Dreams".
All those songs and some of the loud dialogue can be exhausting but this was never boring, let me tell you!
I was also thrilled to find out the musical director was Harold Wheeler who I know as the conductor of the band and singers on "Dancing with the Stars", at least he was until last season.
So on that note, I recommend Don't Play Us Cheap..
A Great Movie For The Early 1970s.
This was a cool musical movie!
It was nice to see Esther Rolle and Teresa Merrit in another role besides the roles that made them very popular.
This movie was so funny and crazy.
It was definitely a great movie to be made in 1973! |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.