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
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt3717532 | The Last: Naruto the Movie | Two years after the Fourth Ninja World War and Kakashi Hatake becomes the Sixth Hokage, the moon is falling towards onto Earth and will soon collide. The crisis is caused by Toneri Ōtsutsuki, a descendant of Hamura Ōtsutsuki of the Branch House, who is determined to fulfill his legacy and punish mankind for abusing chakra over a millennia. During the Rinne Festival, as Hinata Hyuga knits a red scarf that Naruto Uzumaki used to wear since childhood, Sakura offers to help her, but Hinata becomes doubtful while Naruto receive various gifts from everyone, including another scarf. Toneri infiltrates the Leaf Village but fails to kidnap Hinata due to Naruto's intervention, though Toneri successfully kidnaps Hanabi, Hinata's younger sister.
Naruto, Hinata, Sakura, Sai and Shikamaru Nara are assigned to rescue Hanabi, after Kakashi gives a special clock to Shikamaru that counts down to doomsday. Traveling in an abandoned village of the Ōtsutsuki Clan, Naruto recognizes the concept of romantic love from Hinata's memory while being caught in a genjutsu and from spending more time with her. Toneri transplants Hanabi's eyes in himself to awaken the Tenseigan that his ancestors sealed over the last millennium and proposes to Hinata. To have a chance at saving Hanabi, Hinata accepts his offer after rejecting Naruto's confession, causing Naruto to fall into depression. Back on Earth, the villagers defend themselves and intercept the moon's meteorites, evacuating the civilians from Toneri's genocidal assault, while Sasuke Uchiha returns to protect the village.
After recovering for three days, Naruto is reassured that Hinata truly loves him and the group approaches Toneri's castle. Earlier, the spirit of Hamura contacts Hinata as the "Byakugan Princess" explaining that Toneri has misinterpreted his decree. Toneri refuses to listen to Hamura, ruins the scarf and brainwashes Hinata. Invading Toneri's castle, Sakura and Sai secure Hanabi, while Shikamaru holds off Toneri's puppets. Naruto saves Hinata from the ceremony and destroys the Tenseigan altar. Toneri uses the remains to strengthen his power and slices the moon in half, as Naruto engages him in the Nine-Tails chakra mode. Naruto grasps a shred of the scarf and overpowers Toneri having the moon return to orbit. Taking back Hanabi's eyes, Toneri realizes the truth about Hamura's decree and decides to stay on the moon to atone his sins. After Naruto tells Hinata that the scarf he had earlier belonged to his late mother, the two confess their mutual love and return home.
During the end credits, Naruto and Hinata get married, while his friends attend the wedding. In a post-credits scene before the series' epilogue, the couple have two children, Boruto and Himawari. | violence | train | wikipedia | The film is not lacking for action, but it's not as evenly distributed as it could be--however, this film is about Naruto, so it is natural that the hero receive the majority of the focus.The characterization and plot were painstakingly revised and re-revised by the original creator, Masashi Kishimoto, and it shows--it shows so beautifully how our favorite characters have matured into adults, leaving an unbiased audience feeling a little wistful at the realization that these babies are no longer babies!Please, if you were ever fond of Naruto at any point in your life, do yourself a favor and watch this movie so you can see his long deserved and well-earned happy ending.
No Back on the movie, so there is nothing to like about movie and Naruto is now Officially over for me because not only i hated Sasuke and Sakura's worse couple at the end of manga but now the anime is also changed from Shonen to Shoujo.
I mean i don't like Sakura and karin and Hinata was OK but the main thing about anime was never Romance but now they gave a movie completely based on Romance and with no link to original story even the characters don't even seems that they are from Naruto.
Every thing got changed in the movie and now after fifteen long years we are told that Naruto never loved Sakura.
sasuke and sakura at least deserved some screen time, they're the main characters aside naruto, and the fans die to see team 7 moments again in combat since we haven't had those animated since narutos first season.
The Last: Naruto The Movie takes place two years after the Fourth Great Ninja War has ended, but now the ninja world faces a new threat.
Even though the film is about the 5 Great Ninja Nations coming together to exterminate the incoming threat, the film mainly gives an in depth conclusion on the relationship on the Naruto's love interest, Hinata Hyuga.
If you were ever fond of Naruto at some point in your life or if you want to see a great love story, do yourself a favor and watch this movie so you can see his long deserved, happy ending.
I'm a big fan of "Naruto" series and this movie really knows how to keep up the expectations.If i talk about the story than it was Awesome, you never always get to see an anime movie with such strong and potential story background.
Naruto has changed a lot in terms of fight-hing sense.Overall- I would definitely recommend you to watch this movie.
For example, the situation between Naruto and Hinata in this movie will explain the events that happen in the future of the main story.
Naruto is the one who experienced a lot in the movie, he understood the meaning of romantic love which made his grow the most obvious one among the other characters.
Everything from the technical aspects such as the exquisite animation and magnificent music to the intricate story and character developments are wonderfully implemented in this perfectly paced finale.The gradual change from the cycle of hatred to the understanding of love throughout the legend of Naruto makes this a very appropriate ending point for the series as it tackles the issues of self-preservation versus the selfless; a direct contrast to the war-torn era of despair and anxiety that preceded Shippuden.
Of course this is a different and much more abbreviated link than that of the intertwined fates of Ashura/Indra - Naruto/Sasuke as it's a much more personal exploration, but that's what makes it a perfect ending; it concludes the initially personal journey of the main character with a personal reconciliation, much like how the Manga resolved the retrieval of Sasuke.Wonderful ending to a wonderful, albeit flawed, series!.
this film is the best of the previous films, it is directed by Kishimoto in person :) what I like most is the romance between Naruto and Hinata, heart-pounding ..
even the fight scenes are amazing, the best film of all those released earlier, also for this reason that has gained much XD I read the Manga from the beginning of the characters falling in love and their characterization, and are happy that Hinata has been the star of this film, has had more space and was characterized better, even Naruto as a child abandoned by all to hero recognized by all and the only one that has always worried about him was just Hinata and it shows well in the film ♡.
I would like to change the title a tad more and instead call it Naruto and Hinata: At last, which is good as a romance is very seldom a one way street.
He is just another Sasuke, who is a highly delusional and immature kid.I guest the movie filled in the setting of the manga, including explaining the importance of Hyuuga bloodline and the love story between Naruto and Hinata - in the worst possible way...
The movie has a great story in which Naruto finally confesses his love with Hinata Hyuga, Byakugan Princess.
But now everyone acknowledges him , loves him and greets him as a celebrity whenever they meet him and now even all the girls want to be with him.In the first two minutes , the movie itself begins with the chronological recap of the world of Naruto, starting with the Sage of Six Paths and up to Naruto and Sasuke's final battle.
But still after watching the romance of Naruto and Hinata in the end makes me cheerful.There is one more funny thing about the movie, The Scarf!
Review: I enjoyed this movie because it finally brings Naruto and his love Hinata together.
A great movie and a nice way to end the Naruto series..
The major focus of this movie is the relationship between Naruto and Hinata, usually I'm not too fond on the romance aspect in the Naruto series but it was handled very well in this film.
The fight scenes are one of the many highlights of this film (even though the final fight looks like it was ripped out of Dragon Ball Z but that isn't really a bad thing) and the animation is actually consistent for once, yes, you heard me, it had consistent animation, and you know what?
Lastly, this film does get pretty slow half way through but it's nothing terrible so it'll eventually get better.Overall, The Last: Naruto the Movie is awesome.
With a ten-year Naruto fan like me, I watch this movie just to know everything after the 4rd war ninja world, especially how Naruto and Hinata become husband and wife.
He is always the idol who make me feel better every time I'm sad.But a fan of action movie like Naruto, it's action scene can't make me satisfied.
The last scene is him realizing Hinata loves him, and that totally excuses why he chose her, and not any of the other one thousand girls in the village who also did the exact same thing.And that is how the movie ends.
Maybe a story in the time skip detailing how Naruto and Hinata actually did end up together could have been done well, but this movie certainly isn't it.
but there was some great emotional capacity in the movie, but the villain was lack luster, I never really saw him as a great villain.overall Naruto coming to terms with his feelings (he was already in love with Hinata before the movie) for Hinata was great in some parts, but dragged out in most.I think the best part of the movie wasn't just the musical pieces, but the fact that they attempted to steer away from the Uchiha drama that dominated the manga overall a 6.5 for me, a good movie with faults which dragged out in some parts..
The movie made him look like a complete idiot who can't understand throughout the whole anime that Hinata loved him.
I know it had to be made like an interesting love story the whole action but i felt bad for both Naruto and Hinata there.And lastly i really expected more from the fight Naruto vs Toneri.
Fortunately, I managed to catch 'The Last: Naruto the Movie' during its limited release run at a local art house theater and I have to say it starts off splendidly with the characters several fans would already know since the show's humble beginnings.The film takes place about two years after the events of the Fourth Great Ninja War conflict, where Naruto and his former comrades have matured since.
While Naruto is now well-liked among his peers and (humorously) many female admirers over his heroic efforts, he has one more mission to take care of when his village is threatened and his love is captured.Ever since I can remember, I've followed the Anime throughout its first series and have barely caught up on its second series Shippuden, but after cluing myself in plot-wise, I know that the romance subplot between Naruto and Hinata was usually hinted upon frequently and became clear during the Fourth Great Ninja War arc.
The action sequences were pleasantly animated and complex at the same time, but what I found really disappointing was Kakashi and Sasuke not being featured that much in the film, let alone any true Team 7 moments, but I'm undeniably grateful they've given the whole subplot between Naruto and Hinata decent closure, especially when it's accompanied by various audience members loudly cheering and applauding to their romantic ending.To be fair, I wouldn't call myself an avid Naruto enthusiast, I'm more of a casual fan who likes to see loose ends being tied up and having various conflicts resolved.
I would still recommend it because, im not going to deny this movies is about Hinata and Naruto but its also about the Toneri clan stuff, and why it was a secret for a very long time and why they decided to show up now, personally i would still recommend you hardcore fans to watch it but i will not guarantee that this will be the best or the worst movie that you have watched in your entire life.2.
Its great, 8/10 but i won't spoil it cause you guys hate it so yeah but the character developments only revolves around Naruto and Hinata and all the other characters like kakashi, sakura, sasuke and stuffs like that just become minor if not supporting characters in this movie, and if you are OK with that watch the movie and if not then don't.Thats all I have got to say...
A masterpiece of a great story Manga, quality animation, music, and a good plotI do not know the people who hate the ending naruto, about NaruSaku, if you look at the entire series Naruto you will understand why he chose Hinata, though Naruto likes Sakura as a child, but when in Shippudhen, Sakura says she loves Naruto, but Naruto refused sakura, because he knows Sakura loves Sasuke, it can do you mean that he is no longer like SakuraThe Last Naruto the Movie is a romance movie that is extraordinary good, storyline, fight scenes, moments, the quality of its animation, and especially Hinata, the story of the film is adapted 2 Years after the Fourth Ninja War, tells the story of the end of the plan's Due Toneri .Naruto known to be very sensitive, and attention to his friend, but he was very insensitive about LOVE, he can not feel someone who always followed him, always loved him more than anyone else, while Naruto child, living alone nobody cares about it, then it's a sweet girl understand, she is HinataHyuuga Hinata feeling is very strong with Naruto, he is the first love and last love HinataHinata, he had sacrificed so much for Naruto, which ultimately makes Naruto fell in love with Hinata,Villain figure in the world of Naruto, not really as a villain, like Madara, Obito and Pain, the villain in the film was only made to build a story that how Hinata loves Naruto, Toneri very well as a Villain, running his role to be able to make Naruto became aware love Hinata.
The ending of the Naruto series finished the fights within the village system perfectly, the fact that they focused on the love life in the movie gave it a great touch and a new sense of character development.There was a brilliant mixture of battle and character development with a touch of reality to their human nature.
The movie ends with a flash forward to the new series set to take off this year with Naruto and Hinata's children to take the lead.
In the end, I was disappointed.I'll start with the positives - Animation and Music were superb and best in any Naruto film, the NaruHina scenes were cute, sad and generally well-developed, Sakura was the most matured character in the movie which makes her much more likable, Shikamaru and Sai were also very useful on the Naruto mission (with a few comedic scenes).
(PS: Lack of Characters is probably the biggest reason why I'm disappointed with this film) One Contradiction - Apparently Naruto only liked Sakura in the Past because of his competition with Sasuke.
IMO Naruto's feelings for Sakura was explained poorly.There are other contradictions in the film but there're quite minor.Overall, The Film has the Best Animation and superb music with a few good fights (also the final fight between Naruto and Toneri was great - very "DBZ" like).
For Naruto fans the movie is an amazing experience which is filled with great action sequences featuring Naruto in Kurama Mode fighting Toneri, Naruto defending Hinata from being kidnapped and many more.
The fans who like this movie are the Hinata fanboys/fangirls that are caught up with their childish love story fantasies.
(Though the plot with life on the moon is quiet weird, but hey, is the whole naruto story logical anyway ;) ) But I sort of feel the disappointment of how the remaining grown characters haven't been elaborated well in the movie, due to screen time.
Naruto The Last attached with Kishimoto Sensei too, my mind was just blown away, Road to Ninja was so good, i loved every little thing that movie had to offer the different realities, the dramas, and above all the new "storyline"it was something new, or at least in Naruto-verse, it's a new story and also happens to be canon that's the dream combo there, because for me personally, if a movie isn't really canon i could really care less about what happens there.anyway with high hopes i watched Naruto the last, expecting a new level of action scenes as a young adult Naruto bares his fangs.
the last time i saw Naruto acts like this was when Jiraiya's dead, and that was a great part of the arc, Naruto can be gloomy, he can be sad but with the right reason not for this forced love triangle crap, the movie tries so hard to sell on the love drama, but they failed miserably, with that out of the way, there's literally nothing else in heremy recommendation?
For some inexplicable reason, all the characters at the end of manga up with various people and have ridiculous children, although a majority of people have never had a contact with another.Spoiler: In the Movie Hinata is first Bond, Love, and a good Friend although the manga says otherwise.
I grew up with the character and that the ending was just romantically spectacular.Here is my 6 honest opinions on the movie:Good: (1) Closure on Naruto's final partner.
That itself could be the flaw of this animated feature as it may not satisfy all fans but fortunately, the plot is quite satisfying and it is unusually pleasant!Personally, I feel The Last: Naruto the Movie (2014) is a good one despite that one flaw because everything else is great.
The visuals and animations are beautiful and I quite like Naruto and Hinata's love story too.
This is my first Naruto movie by the way but I immediately became a fan afterwards along with taking a liking to several of its characters.
Plot--I feel the need to be really neutral in regards to the characters in the manga and what fans of the manga and anime really wanted to see in this movie.
SO judging the movie based on the comments and ratings will not be helpful.I personally liked the love story, the emotional build up, the character development of the Characters in a different way.
But other than that, this movie have a lot of emotional scene, good plot about how Naruto reconsider Hinata feeling.
Sasuke is the second main character, after Naruto, but this movie was not about him.
5) The only characters that had a role in this movie were Naruto, Hinata, Sakura, Sai and Shikamaru.
The main thing that brings this one down is that the love story between Naruto and Hinata, the core of the movie, is fundamentally flawed in the way that it was executed.The romance plot could have been a lot better if there had been some signs of a relationship naturally building between Naruto and Hinata in the TV show.
The Last: Naruto the Movie is a film that was released shortly after the acclaimed manga series ended.
Although it doesn't spoil the actual story of the anime/manga series, it starts off right after climax at the end of the Fourth Ninja War, so be wary if you're still in the middle of the series, I highly recommend watching this after the said events.The film is mainly about the romance between Naruto and Hinata, with plenty of actions faithful to the original story, the good thing is, it feels like a canon rather than a filler which is rare for side stories like this.
If you have been following the Naruto's story, you should know that Hinata's love was never answered and it almost seem one sided, how the series ended with Naruto getting married almost made no sense. |
tt0040765 | The Search | Trains bring homeless children (Displaced Persons or DPs), who are taken by Mrs. Murray (Aline MacMahon) and other United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) workers to a nearby transit camp, where they are fed and cared for. The next morning, the children are interviewed by UNRRA officials to try to identify them and reunite them if possible with their families.
A young boy named Karel (Ivan Jandl) responds "Ich weiß nicht" ("I don't know") to all questions. He grew up in a well-to-do Czech family. The Nazis had deported his sister and doctor father, while the boy and mother were sent to a concentration camp. They eventually became separated. After the war, Karel survived by scavenging for food with other homeless children.
The next day, the children are split up into groups and loaded into trucks and ambulances to be transferred to other camps. The children in Karel's group are at first terrified because the Nazis often used ambulances to gas victims, but are eventually coaxed into the vehicle. During the trip, the smell of exhaust fumes causes the children to panic. Karel's friend Raoul manages to open the back door, and the children scatter in all directions. Karel and Raoul try to swim across a river to escape from two UNRRA men. Raoul drowns, but Karel hides in the reeds.
Later, Karel encounters an American army engineer, Steve (Montgomery Clift), who takes care of him. He starts teaching the boy English. Because Karel cannot recall his name, Steve calls him Jim.
When Jim sees a boy with his mother, he starts to remember his own mother and the last time he saw her, near a fence in the concentration camp. He runs away one evening thinking the fence is nearby. Jim finds a fence at a factory, but cannot find his mother among the workers going home. Steve eventually finds Jim and tells him that his mother is dead (Steve has reason to believe she had been gassed) so he will stop searching for her. He also informs Jim that he is going to try to adopt him and take him to America to start a new life there.
As it turns out, Karel's mother, Mrs. Malik (Jarmila Novotná), is alive. In a parallel story, she has been searching for her son. By chance, she begins working for Mrs. Murray at the same UNRRA camp where her son had been processed. After a while though, she resigns to resume her nearly-hopeless search for Karel.
That same day, Steve takes the boy to the UNRRA camp before leaving for America. He hopes to send for the boy once the paperwork is completed. Mrs. Murray remembers the boy. Suspecting that Jim is Karel, she hurries to the train station to bring Mrs. Malik back, but the train has already left. Then, she sees Mrs. Malik on the train platform; she had changed her mind and decided to stay.
Mrs. Murray takes her back to the UNRRA camp and has her greet the newest group of children. Steve tells Jim to join the new arrivals. Mrs. Malik begins to organize the children and bids them to follow her. Jim walks past without recognizing her. Mrs. Malik almost makes the same mistake, but then turns and calls, "Karel!", and the boy and his mother are reunited. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1405365 | Celeste & Jesse Forever | Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) are best friends who start dating in high school and eventually marry young. Their relationship is shown in a photo montage; the montage ends with Celeste walking away from Jesse during a party.
Celeste and Jesse still get along well. Celeste is a successful trend analyzer and runs her own media company with her partner, Scott (Elijah Wood). Celeste's media company has just signed Riley Banks (Emma Roberts), a teen pop-star whom Celeste does not respect and had openly bashed during a previous television interview. Jesse is an unemployed artist in no hurry to find a job.
Celeste decides to separate but promises to stay friends and date other people. Jesse passively agrees, still in love with her and hoping for her to come back around. Celeste and Jesse's continuing closeness after their separation and in the process of divorcing becomes increasingly annoying to their mutual engaged best friends, Beth (Ari Graynor) and Tucker (Eric Christian Olsen). Beth tries to reason with the divorcing couple of the weirdness, but Celeste rationalizes that it is better for her and Jesse to maintain their friendship. Even their other mutual friend Skillz (Will McCormack) agrees that it is time for the two to move on with their lives.
Celeste is at first content with her current situation until they spend a night together. Realizing that a reconciliation is not possible, Jesse finally decides to move out while ignoring Celeste's apologies. One day Jesse announces that his new girlfriend Veronica is pregnant, which does not sit well with Celeste. She expresses her concern to Beth who questions her about having second thoughts with the divorce. To distract herself, Celeste takes up exercising and dates other people.
During her date with Max (Rich Sommer), Celeste runs into Jesse. The encounter becomes awkward for Celeste, but not for Max who finds Jesse to be a cool guy. Having gone through his own divorce, Max then confronts her that she's not ready to be dating again and to take her time. After a few more awkward dates with other men, Celeste meets Paul (Chris Messina) in yoga class and dresses him down for trying to hit on her but eventually warms up to him after meeting him again at a party. In the meantime, Jesse takes on more responsibility for Veronica and their child and matures along the way. Celeste realizes that her decision to divorce Jesse was impulsive and selfish, and wants to reunite with him. They then fight about her controlling nature and his slacker ways and go their separate ways on bad terms.
Celeste later gets a call from Riley asking her to come over. Celeste believes that Riley is angry over the logo she designed for her that unintentionally resembles a penis going into a butt. The logo sparks controversy with her tween fanbase. She arrives at Riley's house to find her in tears. Riley reveals that she has had a secret boyfriend, who she discovered has been cheating on her. They form an unexpected bond over their shared heartbreak and slowly become friends. At a nightclub with Riley, Celeste realizes the logo appeals to Riley's gay fan base, and they could use this to make her the next Lady Gaga. While walking with Riley, Celeste runs into Rupert (Rafi Gavron) a young, hot model she had rejected after an awkward date, and introduces him to Riley.
At Beth and Tucker's wedding, Celeste makes a toast. She tells the newlyweds to appreciate each other, to be patient, and to try harder, like she should have. This speech touches Jesse, and he thanks Celeste. They are able to reconcile and become friends again.
On a karaoke date, Celeste informs Paul of her need to take some time to recover from the divorce, which he says he understands. We then see Celeste and Jesse finally signing their divorce papers and laughing at each other's inside jokes. Their lawyers look on, confused by their laughter. Celeste wishes Jesse well. She finally asks Jesse if he loves Veronica, to which he responds that he does. Celeste encourages him to keep fighting for it and they have one last kiss. Celeste begins to finally move on with her life and with Paul. | romantic, entertaining, plot twist | train | wikipedia | 'CELESTE & JESSE FOREVER': Four Stars (Out of Five) Rashida Jones and Andy Samberg play a divorcing couple who remain best friends and inseparable until one meets someone new.
The film is equal parts comedy and drama and actually allows both Jones and Samberg to show off their acting chops and do something a little more serious for a change.
It's a funny and insightful film and both Jones and Samberg shine in it.Jones plays Celeste, a trend analyzer who runs a media business with her friend Scott (Elijah Wood).
When Jesse tells Celeste he's having a baby with his beautiful new girlfriend Veronica (Rebecca Dayan) it throws her for a loop and causes her to reevaluate her life and her feelings for Jesse.The film is told more through Celeste's point of view and it's nice to see a romantic comedy that seems true to life and revolves around the woman having a mental breakdown rather than the guy.
Honestly I had never heard of it before finding it in the $5 bin, but I like Rashida Jones and Andy Samberg (the leads) and the premise seemed interesting, essentially a separated married couple who are still best friends and do everything together, it just didn't work out to be married.
In fact, all the supporting actors were perfect in this romantic drama comedy that required rapid fire quips, flippancy, and gut wrenching truths, culminating in a tearful confrontation between the two main characters that brought me to tears with its heartbreaking authenticity.Seems like Miss Jones is more than a pretty face, and Andy Samberg has range.
Rashida Jones is becoming one of my favorite actresses of today, and I think Celeste and Jesse Forever is her true breakthrough performance.
Rashida plays Celeste who is in the process of finalizing her divorce from her husband Jesse, who still lives with her and are oddly close friends still.
Jesse, played with corky poise by Andy Samberg, soon starts dating to move on which thrills Celeste until his past fling pops up in his life again and reveals that she is pregnant.
Both beat the dead horse of "complicated" relationships in film, but what's nice about "Celeste and Jesse" is that it never loses its comic edge in spite of melodrama.Rashida Jones and Andy Samberg star as the titular couple in the process of a divorce, but because they spent so long as best friends, they have no concept of needing to draw boundaries.It's a tough sell early on, that two people could go through a divorce yet essentially live together and spend time together in a somewhat intimate fashion.
Jones, who co-wrote the script with Will McCormack (who has a supporting role), chooses to make Celeste and Jesse opposites in terms of professional status (he's a slacker artist, she's a big-deal trend forecaster) in order to justify why, despite their fabulous on-screen chemistry, they're not meant to stay married.
It takes a bit of story wizardry, namely physical obstacles that force them apart, but somehow it makes sense, probably because Jones and Samberg are so likable.The story then plays out like the emotional roller coaster of a relationship between two people who feel one thing but do another.
Great romance movies get you charged up because you feel a certain way about both characters, and in this film we only really feel what Celeste feels.There's something special in "Celeste and Jesse," however, some rare ability to see the humor in the personally tragic, the potential for levity and irony in any situation.
You guys are lucky to be best friends.¨Celeste and Jesse Forever is an authentic romantic comedy directed by Lee Toland Krieger (winner of the Independent Spirit Award in 2010 for the screenplay of The Vicious Kind) and written by first timers Rashida Jones and Will McCormack.
The movie begins with a romantic montage between Jesse (Andy Sandberg) and Celeste (Rashida Jones), two best friends in love with each other with a nice indie soundtrack in the background.
Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) are best friends forever.
However, it could lose its audience before it gets to the romantic ending.What "Celeste & Jesse Forever" needs is likable characters.
She could have been likable but wasn't introduced until later on in the film and was way under-used."Celeste & Jesse Forever" was in desperate need for likable characters, and although they eventually gave a reason for animosity towards them, it was too little too late.
The directing was OK, but I found myself waiting for the movie to end.Plot/Characters: 5.5* - A separated couple that still has feelings for one another try to remain friends after some extraordinary circumstances complicate their dynamics.
From an outside observer's perspective, Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) are the perfect married couple.
They still have dinner with their friends together and Celeste, perhaps without realizing it, still wears a heart-shaped necklace which says "C&J 4ever".Celeste and Jesse Forever is a first time writing credit for Rashida Jones and Will McCormack who plays Skillz, the on/off again couple's marijuana supplier and sounding board.
When Celeste calls out a coffee shop line cutter, the guys says, "Are we really going this right now?" When yoga classmate a Paul (Chris Messina) tries to ask out Celeste, she naturally responds, "Are you really doing this right now?" Yes, this is trivial, but if dialogue like this distracts the audience during the film, it is unnecessary.Jesse wants to get back together with Celeste.
The trailer may have billed it as a romantic comedy of sorts, but in fact this film is quite depressing, especially for those who have their heart broken once before, and have taken much time to come to terms with it because of pride, ego, or just plain refusal to let go and move on.The title may seem like two lovers who cannot separate themselves from each other, and make every opportunity possible a declaration of their love, relationship and togetherness.
But once the opening credits are over, we begin to realize, like how the trailer began, that both Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) have separated from their marriage because they find themselves quarrelling a lot more often when under matrimonial vows.
Unlike my other favourite film of the year in Ruby Sparks, this one didn't have much of an uplift for a finale, because it wallowed too much, and cut a little too close to reality, unlike the other mentioned film that has a certain degree of fantasy thrown in.Executive produced and co-written by Rashida Jones, one may not be faulted for thinking that this was more of a Celeste centric story despite its title, because of the character's screen time and the dwelling on issues that Celeste faces throughout the course of the story.
Celeste and Jesse still remarkably stay friends, but the cracks do show up every now and then, and these fill in the blanks for the audience wondering how their firm friendship, with countless of inside jokes and private moments amongst the two, could have gone all the way south instead.And add to that the supporting cast of Elijah Wood as Celete's manager at work, and Emma Roberts as a skanky engineered pop star, really playing against type, just makes the narrative here seem fuller, again centered around Celeste's professional life as a trend analyst, very much opposite the laid back Jesse's freelance artist.
You might think a low budget indie film that revolves around a married couple's recent separation would be about as much fun as being bashed in the nuts with a bag of door knobs, but Celeste and Jesse Forever finds a way to escape any preconceived expectations to deliver an entertaining and original story.Director Lee Toland Krieger is no stranger to venturing off into the deep end where drama and comedy intertwine.
Lost in the influx of medium brow, quirky, sexually blunt, awkward pseudo indie films, the branching-away-from the factorty Urban Outfitters equivalent, post Judd Apatow, striving for a bit more moving in the way of the Duplass, comes Celeste and Jesse, an unfunny romantic comedy which aims for a slightly impressionistic flair.
In order for the film to work, the characters had to in some way be outsiders, underdogs, but it felt like watching boring people without souls trying too hard to be cute and share those "unique" moments, which were sadly few and far between.
She's a type-A career woman, a celebrity trend-spotter who compulsively controls all her impulses, while Samberg plays a slacker graphic artist who's fine with not working for long stretches and repeatedly watches videos of the weightlifting competition from the 2008 Beijing Olympics for inspiration.Directed with a surprisingly deft hand by Lee Toland Krieger ("The Vicious Kind"), the movie focuses on how these two characters, married but separated, remain an absurdly compatible couple whose failed attempt at marriage initially seems quite dumbfounding.
But I just think that it's an over-used hyperbolic phrase employed to describe every single new independent romantic comedy that way.The film seems to begin in earnest, in which the life-long friendship, romantic courtship, and eventual marriage between high school sweethearts Celeste (Rashida Jones, also the film's co-screenwriter, from which Lee Toland Krieger directed) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) is played out in a colorful visual morphology over the opening credits.
(Now I've never been married before, but I'm actually quite sure that there's no rule written down somewhere that says that EVERY divorce has to be bitter and nasty.)The story then shifts its focus to Celeste - a driven career-woman who owns her own business - a trend analyzer, and her many, disastrous attempts to date other people, even though she clearly still has many unresolved feelings for Jesse (who currently resides in their guest house), who is an unemployed artist and does not appear to be in any real hurry to find a job and support himself.
The question simply remains whether they can live up to their philosophy and move past their failed marriage while still remaining friends and seeing other people."Celeste & Jesse Forever" is a charming romantic comedy with some fresh, charming, and true-to-life performances from its two leads.
As a guy, Jones is strikingly beautiful (she's my dream girl at the moment) and extraordinarily talented, but it's quite possible that this is her breakout role here that will lead to bigger, better things."Celeste & Jesse Forever" is not the savior of the indie romantic comedy sub-genre.
Celeste & Jesse Forever (2012) *** (out of 4) Married couple Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) have been separated for six months but they continue to hang out as friends while waiting for the divorce papers.
Celeste (Jones) and Jesse (Samberg) play a separated couple, determined to stay in each other's lives.
They even say that they love each other.Much like the recently released "Lola Versus," "Celeste and Jesse Forever" takes a fairly standard romantic comedy concept and fine tunes it for more indie-minded audiences.
"Celeste and Jesse Forever" not only stars Rashida Jones but was also co-written by her, which proves surprisingly beneficial to the story.
I usually avoid romcoms like they are my creditors but I was pleasantly surprised with how funny and touching this one was.Thanks to a great story from Rashida Jones and Will McCormack, the film isn't just a collection of tired old gags we've seen a million times in the genre of romcoms and it didn't end with the sappy usual way.
Andy Samberg also shows that he may have a future in jumping from comedies to drama and, while he wasn't the best with the dramatic parts in this one, he did look like he was taking his first steps towards that path.The only real downside I had for the film is the fact that all the supporting characters don't really have enough of a presence in the story but, thanks to great performances from Samberg and a REALLY great performance from Jones, a lot of funny moments and a heartwarming story, the shortcomings on this one are barely noticeable and the film is perfectly entertaining..
Rashida Jones & Andy Samberg are Celeste & Jesse.
Throughout the film, Jesse is torn between his wish to move on with his life, and the obvious fact that Celeste is his lifelong love and friend.
The film is about Celeste Martin (Rashida Jones) and Jesse Abrams (Andy Samberg) who after being married at the start of film till the end are going through the hard time that is a divorce.
Of course Celeste struggles with Jesse moving on while she has to deal with her own work problems which include her gay best friend and a pop star she does not like.The film suffers from some of the clique moments that happen in a story like this but that is not even the worst thing about the film.
Some of those actors are Chris Messina, Elijah Wood and Will McCormack in their small roles.The film is not good and trying to make me care for characters in this situation I would usually feel happy for them.
I would not recommend watching no matter how much you like the actors or romantic comedies.MOVIE GRADE: D- (MVP: Rashida Jones).
"Celeste And Jesse Forever" is a film starring Andy Samberg and Rashida Jones (who also wrote the screenplay).
Just a glimpse here, a hint there, but basically we're left to guess about what's happening over there.Don't get me wrong, while watching it I was perfectly happy about the fact that Rashida has way more camera time than her title partner, but after a little reflection there's a bit missing, even for me.Apart from that, "Celeste & Jesse Forever" is a well penned, directed and acted movie with a rather un-Hollywood like ending, which is always nice to see..
Celeste and Jesse Forever (2012): Dir: Lee Toland Krieger / Cast: Rashida Jones, Andy Samberg, Ari Graynor, Eric Christian Olsen, Emma Roberts: Depressing romance with a theme that many folks may relate too.
The important scene regards our star couple, played by Andy Samberg and Rashida Jones out to dinner with a couple who are engaged and the conversation expands to this divorced couple still being close friends.
From the get go I got identified with this main couple; when me and my ex- girlfriend broke up, we became good friends and continued going out, just like Jesse and Celeste.
Rashida Jones and Andy Samberg are two excellent actors with a great chemistry, which makes this movie become more involving and realistic than most of the genre.
Jesse, on the other hand, has to start being serious and make it right this time with his new partner.The film's effective use of supporting characters help advance the lead and let us know who they really are, especially on Celeste's side.
Although, they still meet from time to time because of the divorce process and simply because they belong in the same circle of friends, the two has to endure the heartbreak of seeing each other move on from their past.Bold and unconventional, "Celeste and Jesse Forever" provides you a new look into the overused romantic comedy with a happy fairy tale ending.
When you think about it, the film may actually end up being bland if it landed in the wrong hands.Celeste and Jesse Forever is a bittersweet look into love, its ending and new beginnings.
Bias alert**This reviewer likes Rashida Jones, but does not like most romantic-comedies** Better late than ever I have just saw Celeste and Jesse Forever this week.
The best thing I think to come out of the movie is the extremely impressive performance by Rashida Jones.Jones plays Celeste, one half of the couple divorcing and still trying to maintain their nearly life long best friendship.
In fact they are close friends, and love each other, but don't want to stay married.Naturally it gets more complex than that, and initially we see that Jesse is thinking and hoping that Celeste will change her mind.
What is unique about this one is how the two main couples ended up getting divorced or close to it and yet they just act like best friends.
'Celeste and Jesse Forever' is a witty comedy about an ex-couple who are still best friends and seemingly have everything in common together, but are on the verge of getting divorced.
When we first meet Celeste and Jesse, played by the talented Rashida Jones (who was a co-writer of the screenplay) and Andy Samberg (of Saturday Night Live fame), it's evident that both these actors have tremendous chemistry together.
Rashida Jones, specifically, managed to get her friends on board for this film about two people who are supposed to be getting divorced, but still act like a happily married couple.
At the beginning of the film, when you're introduced to these characters, they seem like best friends or a loving couple.
By the end of the film, you actually hope Celeste and Jesse are not together forever.It's a decent script from Rashida Jones and Will McCormack, but it fails to be a truly compelling film.
Even if you restrict comparisons to the sub-genre of "Sweet & Sour RomComs," CELESTE & JESSE cannot touch (500) DAYS OF SUMM3R, primarily because there is little chemistry or plausibility at any point between the title characters, played by Rashida Jones (who also co-wrote this flick) and Andy Samberg.
Rashida Jones (also co-wrote) and Andy Samberg are the titular characters in what I would call a romantic comedy about post-divorce.
"Celeste and Jesse Forever" is the the story of two friends Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) who have known each other since high school, eventually they got married and now their relationship is on the rocks.
"Celeste and Jesse Forever" stars Rashida Jones and Andy Samberg as a young couple struggling to cope with the disintegration of a long term relationship. |
tt1815799 | Les bien-aimés | Sethe is a former slave living on the outskirts of Cincinnati shortly after the Civil War. An angry poltergeist terrorizes Sethe and her three children, causing her two sons to run away forever. Eight years later, Sethe (Oprah Winfrey) lives alone with her daughter, Denver (Kimberly Elise). Paul D. (Danny Glover), an old friend from Sweet Home, the plantation Sethe had escaped from years earlier, finds Sethe's home, where he drives off the angry spirit. Afterwards, Paul D. proposes that he should stay and Sethe responds favorably. Shortly after Paul D. moves in, a clean, mentally handicapped young woman (Thandie Newton) named Beloved stumbles into Sethe's yard and also stays with them.
Denver is initially happy to have Beloved around, but learns that she is Sethe's reincarnated daughter. Nonetheless, she chooses not to divulge Beloved's origins to Sethe. One night, Beloved, aware that Paul D. dislikes her, immobilizes him with a spell and proceeds to assault him sexually. Paul D. resolves to tell Sethe what happened, but instead tells what has happened to a co-worker, Stamp Paid (Albert Hall). Stamp Paid, who has known Sethe for many years, pulls a newspaper clipping featuring Sethe and tells her story to the illiterate Paul D.
Years ago, Sethe was raped by the nephews of Schoolteacher, the owner of Sweet Home. She complained to Mrs. Garner, Schoolteacher's sister-in-law, who confronted him. In retaliation, Schoolteacher and his nephews whip Sethe. Heavily pregnant with her fourth child, Sethe planned to escape. Her other children were sent off earlier to live with Baby Suggs, Sethe's mother-in-law, but Sethe stayed behind to look for her husband, Halle (Hill Harper) Sethe was assaulted while searching for him in the barn. The Schoolteacher's nephews held her down, raped her and forcibly took her breast milk.
When Halle failed to comply, Sethe ran off alone. She crossed paths with Amy Denver, a white girl who treated Sethe's injuries and delivered Sethe's child, whom Sethe named Denver after Amy. Sethe eventually reached Baby Suggs' home, but her initial happiness was short-lived when Schoolteacher came to claim Sethe and her children. In desperation, Sethe slits her older daughter's throat, and attempts to kill her other children. Stamp Paid manages to stop her and the disgusted Schoolteacher departs.
Paul D., horrified by the revelation and suddenly understanding the origin of the poltergeist, confronts Sethe. Sethe justifies her decision without apology, claiming that her children would be better off dead than enslaved. Paul D. departs shortly thereafter in protest. After Paul D.'s departure, Sethe realizes that Beloved is the reincarnation of her dead daughter. Feeling elated yet guilty, Sethe spoils Beloved with elaborate gifts while neglecting Denver. Beloved soon throws a destructive tantrum and her malevolent presence causes living conditions in the house to deteriorate. The women live in squalor and Sethe is unable to work. Denver becomes depressed yet, inspired by a memory of her grandmother's confidence in her, she eventually musters the courage to leave the house and seek employment.
After Denver attains employment, women from the local church visit Sethe's house at the request of her new co-worker to perform an exorcism. The women from the church comfort the family, and they are praying and singing loudly when Denver's new employer arrives to pick her up for work. Sethe sees him and, reminded of Schoolteacher's arrival, tries to attack him with an icepick, but is subdued by Denver and the women. During the commotion, Beloved disappears completely and Sethe, freed from Beloved's grip, becomes permanently bedridden.
Some months later, Paul D. encounters Denver at the marketplace. He notices she has transformed into a confident and mature young woman. When Paul D. later arrives at Sethe's house, he finds her suffering from a deep malaise. He assures Sethe that he and Denver will now take care of her. Sethe tells him that she doesn't see the point, as Beloved, her "best thing", is gone. Paul D. disagrees, telling Sethe that she herself is her own best thing. | tragedy, romantic | train | wikipedia | Fantastic, for those who love Honoré's movies.
Let's get the hard part out of the way: most Americans are going to hate this movie, so if you're an American, or if you're not an America but your taste runs toward Hollywood blockbusters, don't waste your time watching Beloved and our time reading about how much you hate it.
It's a very serious, complex, slow-moving (almost 2½ hours long, with no more than ten seconds of action), lyrical movie about messed up people who break into song at nearly every opportunity; and they're not typical American show tunes, or hip-hop, or rock in any form at all.
Even when some of the lyrics are in English, the songs sound French, and I'm sure to 80% of American ears they all sound the same.
Unless that prospect intrigues you, or you're already a Christophe Honoré fan, look elsewhere.
You won't like this movie.
You'll probably hate this movie.
You've been warned - you have no excuse now for watching it and then telling us all how much you hate it.Now for the easy part, because now I'm talking to people who either already love Christophe Honoré's movies or are open-minded and curious enough to give them a shot.
Beloved (thank God they've set that wonderful title free from Oprah's maudlin clutches) fits perfectly in line after his marvelous Chansons d'amour (Love Songs) and haunting La belle personne (The Beautiful Person).
Each movie in that trio is more complex than the last, and each one is better than almost any movie made by anybody else.
Love Songs, especially, has continued to send unexpected waves of joy rolling my way since I first watched it (I just realized) exactly three years ago today.Love Songs is special to me in part because the core relationship in it is between two men (I'm gay), and it's probably the sexiest, most beautifully realized gay relationship I've ever seen in a movie.
One of the leads in Beloved is gay, but none of the core relationships (there are several - as I said, it's more complex) in this movie is gay.
I thought that would be a turn-off, but it's not, and here's why: Chiara Mastroianni.I've seen Mastroianni before (she has a supporting role in Love Songs), and I've even seen her act with her mother (Catherine Deneuve) before, in André Téchiné's Ma saison préférée (My Favorite Season) nearly 20 years ago.
I've never seen her carry a whole movie before, as she does this one - and she's fantastic.She and the gay man connect, sort of - as much as any two people in this complicated movie connect.
Normally I'd really hate that, because I'm so sick of gay men in movies hooking up with women I could pull my hair out.
But she's so good in this movie - her Véra is such an appealing and interesting character - that I don't mind.
Getting to see how good SHE (Mastroianni) is is worth it.The rest of the cast is great too.
Deneuve gets earthier and more accessible every time I see her, which is good because I couldn't stand the Ice Princess she played for the first several decades of her long career.
Either she's opened up a lot in the last 15 years or so or directors are finally discovering how good she is playing other kinds of roles.Louis Garrel, Ludivine Sagnier (both also in Love Songs), Paul Schneider (an American actor I'd never seen before), and Czech director Milos Forman in an acting role for the first time that I've seen - all are very good.But the star of any Christophe Honoré movie, for me, is Christophe Honoré himself.
He takes conventional movie elements - comedy, drama, romance, character study, music, song and others - and weaves them together in fresh and unconventional ways that yet never seem forced or precocious.
I wouldn't try to explain anything he does because I wouldn't know how to.
All I know to do with his movies is relax, let go, and let him take me for a ride.
I was surprised to see that most people across the internet hate this movie.
I don't (and I am a recent Film grad, to qualify that).
In fact, this is one of the most perfect movies I've ever seen, and one of my top 3 favorite French films.
I was incredibly surprised by how long it was.
A musical-y epic?
But towards the second half I could actually sense how devoted Honore must've been to this movie, and why he didn't want to compromise it by condensing it.
I watched this on my laptop logistics-wise, so I didn't have the same experience as someone stuck in a chair in a too-cold theater.
The cast?
Perhaps could've been improved upon, but it's the familiar Honore cast and as such carries with it solid chemistry that was essential to the story.
It channeled the Umbrellas of Cherbourg, with its lovely palette of colors.
Yes, it has songs, and *yes* it took creative license.
My imagination is vivid, so I didn't have to tax it too much to buy the story.
I think the <25 demographic would prefer it more than the 30+.I feel that people had problems with it because they were expecting a da Vinci, but this is highly Impressionist in spirit..
Splendid Cast, But The Musical is Just Satisfactory!.
Very rarely are movies made about unrequited (one-sided) love and love lost, let alone musicals.
It's good and somewhat interesting; though it tests your patience a lot.
With the terrific star-cast it has, I expected a lot more.
It falls short of a definite and good plot, and it lacks heart.Catherine Deneuve is not even utilized properly.
Ludivine Sagnier is charming; it's amazing how much she has grown up since Ozon's 'Swimming Pool'.
And it was delightful to see Paul Schneider in this French musical.
The remaining cast just does their job, which is not much.Even though it's a musical, the songs are quite average.
The only song I actually loved is 'Ici Londres (Heaven Knows)', sung by Chiara Mastroianni and Paul Schneider..
A beautiful Honoré.
This film is remarkable.Beautifully shot, full of inventions, the film is extremely refreshing as most of Honoré's work.
The tone is pop and lighthearted, while addressing unconventional subjects, such as elder's sexuality.The casting is impeccable as always with Honoré.
If the duo Deneuve-Sagnier and the depiction of a female character of that generation had a taste of dejà-vu (Ozon?
Todd Haynes?), Honoré managed to make it feel like unexplored territory.
But that's with Vera's character that Honoré is at its best.
Mastroianni is AMAZING!!
You've never seen a woman in her late 30's depicted that way in a movie.The downturn of the film are the singing parts.
It really doesn't work and it's even painful to watch.
Other than Jacques Demy's films, one can think of Resnais's "On connait la chanson", Ozon's "8 femmes" or Ducastel & Martineau's "Jeanne et le garçon formidable" as examples of the successful mix of serious subject matters and musical.
But with Honoré, it doesn't work (with the exception of the elegant telephone scene with Duris and Preiss in "Dans Paris").
It's tempting to just recommend to skip the singing parts as the film is otherwise quite long.Other than that, the film is a must see..
my second Honore musical.
Way way way too long.
The nearly three hour run-time is longer than all the parking meters in the area of the theater, so i even risked a parking ticket to see the end of this flick!
Lots of actors from a previous Honore musical: "Love Songs" (which ran a respectable 100 minutes).
Sagnier gets the movie off the ground and then Deneuve sinks it.
There might be a decent musical in there somewhere.
Ludivine Sagnier is one of the many attractive gems of European Leading Ladies of the cinema.
She and Isabelle Huppert are my favorite French Actresses nowadays.
It's always tricky to cross generational lines and use different actors for the same character in different stages in life.
Even the most forgiving viewer might find himself at odds reconciling the tall handsome young "Jaromil" with his older version, regardless of how well and charming the part was played.
If you liked "Love Songs" then you will feel at home with the Alex Beaupain score..
The Problem With this Film.
The problem with this film is Christophe Honoré.
A 2 and ½ hour film about self-indulgent people explaining why they are unhappy at being self-indulgent.
It could have been done one hour shorter.
The half musical score is a feeble attempt to be the the Umbrellas of Cherbourg.
Trying to be French new wave cool instead of being good.
I'm convinced Christophe would have tried to make a musical out of Cloud Atlas.
I love the cast but after 2 and ½ hours I was wishing they would take an overdose and end my suffering and theirs.
Catherine Deneuve, always beautiful and her daughter in film and real life, Chiara Mastroianni, convincing as a seductress, but they were the only high points in the film for me.
I rate this film a good sleep aide...
A difficult choice: Watch this film or stick pins in your eyes?.
If the cinema had fixed up the seats to the electric mains and had run through 20,000 volts every 5 minutes I might just have enjoyed this film.
As it was, me, my wife and the 12 other unfortunates who had not read IMDb reviews before purchasing tickets suffered the worst 2 and one quarter hours of French cinema ever printed to pass through the gate of a projector.OK - it started fine and looked as if it was going to be a nice piece of retro-Parisien farce but then...they began to sing.
And at various stages through this loooooooooong film some character or other would start wandering through the streets of Paris, Reims, London, Montreal, wherever, and start with the stupid words ("Big Ben has melted and I can't tell the time") and turgid tunes.All the characters were unpleasant to various degrees and totally and utterly unbelievable.
Good news, two of them did, bad news, the others lived to keep on wandering the streets turgidly wittering on....
This review can't possibly contain plot spoilers as there was no plot.Acting was average at best.
Singing was just awful.
I didn't even know it was a musical (term used loosely here) until someone started 'singing'.The storyline was largely incoherent and when it was coherent it was criminally bad.
We, along with virtually everyone else, left the cinema before it finished so I don't know how it ended but I can guarantee that it was terrible unless the final scene was Ashton Kutcher revealing that we had all been Punk'd.
All in all it was very disappointing, if slightly unintentionally hilarious, and a poor representation of the French film industry.
The Idea was good, but the world isn't ready yet.
The idea of this film is alright: We always try to love someone who does not respond our love.
On this way we add one affair to the other without caring for the people we hurt.
I personally think you could make a good film out of all the star actors and this basic idea, but this is not a good film.
You can see here bad acting, strange characters and an overloaded story.
Especially the characters do not make any sense.
This wanted to be an Almodovar-film or Philip Kaufman's The Unbearable Lightness of Being, but it was none of it.
Too long and morose.
I rather enjoyed the first 45 minutes of "Beloved." Ludivine Sagnier, one of my favorite actresses, plays a 1960s French woman who is confused by love.
I was still with the story as the years passed and Sagnier matures into Catherine Deneuve, in a nifty bit of casting.
However as the story shifts to that of daughter Vera, it all becomes a bit too morose for me.
Vera for some reason becomes obsessed with a man who cannot love her back.
It simply appears the young woman is eager to destroy her life.There are very strong echoes here of the Truffaut film "The Story of Adele H." Truffaut, however, was well aware he was filming the story of a woman's descent into madness and hell.
In "Beloved," director Christophe Honoré takes a similar story but shoots it in a very different light.
He seems to think there is something so very romantic about desperately loving someone who cannot possibly love you back.Honoré throws in everything but the kitchen sink here, covering topics from Aids to 9/11.
But, at around 2 hours and 20 minutes, it's all too much for such a morose topic.
I probably should have turned it off after those first 45 minutes..
nostalgia for the Babyboom-generation.
The well-made "Les bien-aimes" (= French for "the well loved-ones") shows a pretty extended plot.
Stretching from the 19-Sixties up to 2007, it focuses on the lifetime so far of the baby-boom-generation.
It contains all ingredients for recognizing a Babyboomer's life.
Acted out by a number of France's best actors and actresses, Catherine Deneuve prominently among them.In spite of its serious tuning, this film nowhere and never puts any weight on your mind.
Which is characteristic for the French cinema.
Another French characteristic: it leaves you with a good aftertaste..
I made the mistake of thinking the Sundance channel was showing the excruciating Oprah Winfrey "Beloved" one night and missed this movie as a result.
All I can say is: I simply love Christophe Honore movies (: Is it that he has a gay sensibility?
Is it that I love Alex Beaupain's songs?
"Love Songs" is one of my all-time favorite films as well, and for many of the same reasons.The actors in this movie are all simply superb.
If I single out Milos Forman it's only because I was so surprised by his acting choices.
But the trio of female stars are all wonderful, fresh and amazing.
Louis Garrel and the polish actor who plays the younger Jaromil are terrific too.
Paul Schneider is an actor I hope to see again in other things.I found the film exciting, not boring; the camera-work, the editing, the pacing, the music, the colors, even the length of the movie (2 hrs., 19 minutes) exhilarating!
This is the kind of film that you have to surrender and allow yourself to be "inside" the movie during it's running time, without reservation.This is a movie for people who love french cinema, as I do - it's my favorite country, without exception, for movies these days..
A Song Is Stillborn.
It takes a lot to get me to pay good money to see one of Cristope Honore's wet dreams and it'll take even more after this bad joke.
The selling point such as it was took the shape of a chance to see Catherine Deneuve playing opposite her real-life daughter Chiara Mastroianni, as they did a couple of years ago in A Christmas Tale.
I really should have known better, after all Honore did little for Isabel Huppert's career when he featured her in Ma Mere albeit Huppert has a penchant, unlike Deneuve, for appearing in sleaze and is such a great actress she is able to live it down.
For Deneuve it must have felt like a sentimental journey of sorts given that her breakthrough role came in The Umbrellas Of Cherbourg where one hundred per cent of the dialogue was sung.
Here it's something like seventy per cent and in forty eight years the lyrics here are just as banal as Demy provided for Umbrellas but the big difference is 1) Demy had the benefit of Michele Legrand's melodic gifts and was himself a gifted director whilst Honore is lumbered with a tone-deaf composer and couldn't direct a sex-starved sailor to a hooker in Hamburg.
A very flat, two dimensional movie (boring).
I was very surprised at how dull and lifeless this movie is.
The French movies that I have seen in the past are usually very well produced with excellent acting.
When I fall asleep in the first 20 minutes of a movie,there is usually something wrong with it(the movie).
It is as if the director was trying to tell a grand story about the human condition, but didn't know how to do it.
Dull,lifeless and boring.
This movie is not representative of the excellent French movie industry as a whole.
I especially did not like the singing.
There was no buildup to the singing, it was delivered in a very unemotional flat way.
I walked out of the movie after 35 minutes in because of the lack of dynamics involved, the actors and actresses in the movie were simply afraid to act..
I wish I could be more specific, but it's obvious that Facebook--even with its 50 new gender\orientation labels announced this week--STILL lags far behind the French cinema in imagining variations of desire and longing.
Between BELOVED and last year's sex epic BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOR, every possible sexual proclivity and\or perversion is covered at least once.
BELOVED more aptly could be titled RED SHOES, as "hot" spike heels of that color star at the beginning and ending of this lengthy spelunking expedition through the cavernous Tunnel of Love, turning "young" Madeleine into a whore, and apparently leading her daughter Vera to dance (figuratively, at least) amid the falling ashes of 9-11 victims.
I think it was Gertrude Stein who said, "those who can, do; those who can't, sing sad songs in French." Though lovers of plaintive Parisian ballads will award BELOVED with ratings of 8, it's only fair to point out that one-third of this flick involves people wandering actual French city streets at night, wailing out sad ditties about horribly bad sex to anyone within earshot, as a stage spotlight inexplicably follows them along! |
tt0062030 | Nato per uccidere | Helen Brent (Claire Trevor) has just received a Reno divorce in Nevada. That night, she discovers one of her neighbors, Laury Palmer, and Palmer's gentleman caller both murdered in Palmer's home. The killer is Palmer's other boyfriend, Sam Wilde (Lawrence Tierney), an insanely jealous man who won't abide anyone "cutting in" on him.
Helen says nothing to the police; she's leaving town and doesn't want to be impeded. She runs into Sam and is instantly attracted to his self-confidence and brutality, but she is engaged to marry a wealthy boyfriend, Fred (Phillip Terry). Sam wants to call on her in San Francisco. He arrives there and meets Georgia Staples (Audrey Long), Helen's foster sister, also rich. Sam soon shifts his attentions to her, marrying the sister for her money after a whirlwind romance. Neither Helen's engagement nor Sam's marriage is an impediment to their beginning an affair.
Meanwhile, back in Reno, the owner of the boarding house where Helen lived has hired a mercenary, verse-quoting detective, Albert Arnett (Walter Slezak), to find out who killed Laury. The detective follows Sam's friend, Marty (Elisha Cook Jr.), to San Francisco, where he soon begins to make blackmailing overtures to Helen. Marty finds out who hired the detective and attempts to kill her, but Sam thinks he's trying to cut in on his action and kills Marty.
Fred is troubled by the resulting police investigation, as well as by Helen's increasingly heartless demeanor. He calls off their engagement. Sam and Helen face off in a fatal confrontation as their schemes begin unraveling, with Sam fatally shooting Helen before he is slain by police. | western | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0017843 | Easy Virtue | Larita (Jessica Biel), a glamorous American widow and successful racecar driver, meets young John Whittaker (Ben Barnes) in Monaco. They marry, and he takes his bride home to meet his family at their dauntingly large rural mansion, where seven generations of Whittakers have been gentleman farmers. There she meets her icy cold mother-in-law, Veronica (Kristin Scott Thomas) and disheveled, sad-eyed father-in-law, Major Jim Whittaker (Colin Firth).
Veronica, already predisposed to dislike her new daughter-in-law ("John's floozy") is further disappointed to find that she is a brash American who, like the Major, speaks fluent French. Larita also meets John's former girlfriend and neighbour Sarah Hurst (Charlotte Riley), who is gracious about the marriage. Larita remains calm in the face of her new mother-in-law's disdain, even being so bold as to reveal having been previously married.
Time passes, and to Larita's disappointment, John is not eager to leave the estate (portrayed by Flintham Hall, Nottinghamshire) so that they can find a home of their own. Larita is bored and miserable in the countryside and hates blood sports like hunting, and indeed any of the entertainment country English people seem to enjoy. She reads Lady Chatterley's Lover, by D.H. Lawrence, which shocks her husband's female relatives, and she doesn't want to play tennis. She also dislikes Veronica's stuffy decor, her constant entertaining of her friends and the overcooked food. Worse still, she suffers from hay fever. She tries to get along with her mother-in-law, but Veronica refuses to accept her and naturally resents her attempts to bring some American traditions into the situation.
Larita makes some inadvertent gaffes, accidentally killing the family chihuahua and giving some joking advice to the younger daughter, Hilda (Kimberley Nixon), that unfortunately results in embarrassment to, and enmity from, the daughters. Sarah comes to the Whittakers' parties, and to play tennis, accompanied by her brother Philip (Christian Brassington), on whom Hilda has a crush. Philip, however, is infatuated with Larita, which further angers Hilda. To Veronica's horror, she and her hunting party discover John and Larita making love in an outbuilding. Larita finds herself increasingly isolated and demoralized by her mother-in-law's derision, verbal attacks and dirty tricks. Larita's only sympathetic friends are the Major and the servants, whom she treats better than Veronica does. Larita retreats to the Major's workshop to help him work on his motorcycle. Still troubled from having lost all his men in the war, Jim Whittaker has lost interest in his home, and any love between him and his wife has long since gone.
The Whittaker estate has fallen on hard times. John, once in the shadow of his dragon-lady mother, loses his independence and seems immature to her as he is drawn into family life. In addition, John's affection for Larita seems to be waning, as he complains about his wife to Sarah, who finds his overture inappropriate.
Finally, Hilda obtains a newspaper cutting revealing scandalous secrets about Larita's first marriage to a much older man who was dying of cancer: she had helped him die using poison. John withdraws from Larita, while the Major scolds his daughters for their cruelty. At Veronica's next big party, John refuses to dance with Larita, so the Major dances a tango with her. She determines to leave the marriage, and on her way out of the mansion, she apologizes to Sarah for having interrupted her relationship with John. She hopes that Sarah will take John back. Veronica and her daughters confront Larita one last time, and an argument ensues in which Veronica and Larita trade barbs, and Larita advises the daughters to leave and see the world while they still can. Larita finally leaves after casually destroying a priceless bust, but the Major goes with her. Furber (Kris Marshall), the family butler, wishes them well. | flashback | train | wikipedia | This silent Alfred Hitchcock drama gets decent mileage out of a rather simple story.
Isabel Jeans stars as a young woman who, because of a messy divorce in her past, is unfairly considered a woman of "Easy Virtue", and she must struggle constantly against the ways that her past affects how she is perceived by others.
One of the best is Hitchcock's treatment of Jeans responding to a marriage proposal - it's quite innovative, and a nice way to avoid the often banal treatments of romantic scenes.This is nothing like the movies for which Hitchcock is usually remembered, and it's really not even among his best silent work.
Coward and Hitchcock seem to ask us the connection between slandered reputation and "easy virtue." In "Blackmail" the jester (the painting) seemed to scoff at the so-called justice meted out by the law keepers in final sequence.Visually the most poignant shot (repeated twice) in the film is the shot of the judge's wig from above his head as he looks up.
"Easy Virtue" is an early and impressive Hitchcock in which the master displays a range of innovative filmic devices (such as the way we learn about a marriage proposal by watching the eavesdropping hotel switchboard operator rather than by seeing the man or woman talking on the phone).
The story is based on a play by Noel Coward and (contrary to the other posted IMDB comment on the film) I believe the movie is excellent.
Of course, the jury can't see beyond its Victorian preconceptions (if she's alone with him all day, of course they've slept together) and it finds her guilty.Now a disgraced woman of "easy virtue," Larita takes to the Riviera where she ensnares a rich young suitor (after he hits her in the eye with a tennis ball).
Unfortunately, she doesn't tell him about her checkered past and naturally Larita's family hates her on sight.This story takes on a range of highly relevant divorce issues.
Very few early films (silent or sound) ever dealt so candidly with the harsh realities of divorce; "Easy Virtue" compares favorably to the outstanding "One More River" (1934) in its straightforward and quite moving treatment of the issues..
Attractive Isabel Jeans (as Larita) is in divorce court, after a scandalous incident results in the death of a painter for whom she was sitting.
"Easy Virtue" may be considered rather ordinary, albeit a Noel Coward play directed to film by Alfred Hitchcock.
Farebrother has a pleasantly sharp tongue, asking, "John, who is this woman you have pitchforked into the family?" She shoots to kill.****** Easy Virtue (3/5/28) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Isabel Jeans, Robin Irvine, Violet Farebrother, Ian Hunter.
In Alfred Hitchcock's Easy Virtue, a woman has some explaining to do when the family of her second husband finds out there was a first husband.
Easy Virtue is one of Hitchcock's interesting but not great films, that is neither among his best or worst.
When it comes to his silent films, Easy Virtue is perhaps one of his weaker ones, with his best being The Lodger and his weakest being Champagne.
The sets and costumes are lovely to watch, while Violet Farebrother plays her role with tremendous gusto and Isabel Jeans brings a lot of charm to hers.
And some have made a good point about the benefits of having dialogue instead here, I have great appreciation for silent films but Easy Virtue was the sort of film being a comedy-social drama where dialogue would have helped it come alive.
A very little seen Hitchcock, and a decent British silent film, from a Noel Coward play.
It must have looked good when it was new.The courtroom sequence has some typical Hitchcock touches - views through the judge's monocle.
But I am spoiled and have seen much more moving films on this subject matter that frankly it was an arduous labor to sit through Easy Virtue till the end.
This sophisticated melodrama from a Noel Coward play is clearly unsuited to Hitchcock's particular talents: the initial court-room sequence is the best, allowing the director to experiment with camera technique (especially his creative use of the dissolve to jump from the present into the past and back again); the rest is a succession of clichéd situations, making it a rather tedious whole.
With this, I've only 3 more extant Hitchcock Silents left to watch - THE PLEASURE GARDEN (1925), DOWNHILL (1927) and CHAMPAGNE (1928); his second film, THE MOUNTAIN EAGLE (1926), is believed lost..
The silent Hitchcocks which have been restored/well mastered onto DVD are hugely more enjoyable so I sincerely hope someone gives Easy Virtue a restored DVD release soon.
That is mainly due to it being a silent film of a Noel Coward play.
One of Alfred Hitchcock's best films and an underrated classic of the silent era!.
Easy Virtue is one of Alfred Hitchcock's best films.
But when John's family starts to find out a few things about Larita's past her relationship with her new husband starts to become strained.
This makes me wish that the film had a little bit better closure and had gone on for just a little bit longer.All of the actors in the movie do a great job with Isabel Jeans playing Larita with true excellence.
Robin Irvine manages to do a nearly perfect job as John so basically all of the actors are great including minor ones.Each and every one of the sets in this film are great and the only noteworthy special effects shot, a man firing a gun, is done very well for the time.
The plot is based off of a 1925 play and it ends up working very well here in the movie, the film is a pretty good length although it could have used a little bit more footage at the end, the acting is stupendous, the music is great and fits the movie well, and finally the special effects are great.
Now I could probably watch "Nosferatu" or "The Phantom of the Opera" with no music, but those are good movies with great story/plot/action.
Easy Virtue (1928) ** (out of 4) Isabel Jeans plays Larita Filton, a woman who is abused by her drunken husband who thinks she is having an affair with a painter.
This is a pretty tame and rather lame silent from Hitchcock and it's only real asset is those wanting to seek out the director's early work.
The most interesting scenes are the early ones in the court where Hitchcock brings some nice style to the film when we get the various flashbacks, which then cut back to the court.
I think Easy Virtue would have worked better if we wouldn't have known Larita's background until John's family discovered it.
High point throughout the film was Isabel Jeans's portrayal of Larita Filton, a woman judged by her past.How to rate this movie by numbers?
The camera sees through a judge's monocle to bring the court case into focus, a dangling monocle dissolves into a clock pendulum to indicate passage of time, a marriage proposal and acceptance experienced only through the facial expressions of an eaves-dropping hotel telephone operator.It is a sordid and pointless tale of a woman framed to be divorced from an alcoholic, abusive husband, whose shame follows her into a marriage (from which she has held back the truth), only to have to face it yet again.Like ANNA Christie this plot is abusive and misogynistic, blaming and holding women to account to actions forced on them by men.
One wonders why Coward wrote it or that Hitch filmed it.A bloody bore, despite Isabel Jeans controlled performance, and worth the attention only of die-hard Hitch fans..
The premise of the story is that a woman, the gorgeous Larita, is caught in a scandal when she is divorced from her husband (he was a drunk louse, and the 'Easy Virtue' name comes from the sort of scandal at the time: she went into another man's arms, an artist who cared for her, and then he got into a big fight that ended with a gun going off).In other words, she was found guilty and found a "Correspondent" or whatever that means, so she decides to high tail it to the Mediterranean/South of France and happens to meet a nice young man, John, who just falls head over heels for her...
You can see where this might go.At first I thought this might be somewhat of an unintentional trial run for Hitchcock for Rebecca, also about the terrors that come to a woman when she is brought home by her new beau to the family and the mother doesn't take a liking to her in the slightest.
So in 1928 it was not at all normal and, on the contrary, if one became a scandalous figure for it (for, GASP, possibly favoring another man over a drunken brute!), it could be seen as something unfavorable.But on the other hand, to the stories credit, the way the story ends up rolling out not all sides see this past of Larita's omething that's even they're business, when it does surface (at first her face is a 'you remind me of someone' thing, but it can't be placed until it's seen in a newspaper, somehow the medium change makes it clear which is a clever touch by the way).
I liked the moments where John's father takes Larita aside and says 'do right by my boy, I don't care about what you did before.' It's a mature moment, just as when she tells them all when the big revelation comes out, 'it's my business, I have to live with it, not you' to that extent.So there's some drama to unpack here, but I think for the most part Hitchcock finds a way to navigate this story with entertaining direction and moments that really make you keep attention.
He can't help that some of its contrived to the point that one might see in a modern romantic comedy or drama - i.e. if the main couple just sat down and had a damn conversation it'd be the end of it, and the "I love you without knowing you" seems a little weak, albeit it does end up being part of the commentary on how flawed John is when he is in one place like the South of France vs with his family - but there's many moments for terrific acting Isabel Jeans as Larita and the mother played by Violet Farebrother.I think one can pick apart this movie and see the holes in it, or how the ending is a bit rushed, and at the end of it all its still a credit to how sharp Hitchcock's craft was by 1928, near the tail-end of his work in silent productions, that he could make the camera dynamic (watch for those shots in the courtroom early on that make things seem bent out of shape, the way those views-through-the-monocle for the judge gives an entrapping quality, at least it did for me), and probably puts in some comedy where I can't see it being in the play.
Yet at least it's a story that, for the time, attempts to wag a finger at people who think Divorce = Bad, and Hitchcock tries to overcome the lack of what would usually be necessary in adapting a Noel Coward play, like *dialog*, and can still make some interesting cinema out of it..
Films like "Easy Virtue" really helped with shedding light on the subject in the social consciousness/awareness and divorces became socially acceptable.I'm not big on most "romance" films but there are a few of them I really enjoy and this Hitchcock film is one of them.
I found this one pleasant to watch since it deals with a subject that was still considered to be taboo during the time era this film was made in.A good film if you like romance films, the history of films in general or simply love Alfred Hitchcock.7/10.
In Sir Alfred Hitchcock's silent screen adaptation of Sir Noel Coward's play, "Easy Virtue." Isabel Jeans plays a woman with easy virtue which is explained in the beginning of the film.
Most of the cards were at the end and by then I didn't care what was being said.Apparently some woman got divorced because she got her portrait painted by some artist who disappeared after shooting her husband....or something.
One of Hitchcock's English silent films, based on a Noel Coward play, this demonstrates the difficulty of making a full-length complex-plotted film without dialogue.
Larita escapes from scandal in the south of France, where she is courted by a young man who says he doesn't need to know about her past.
'The Lodger (1927)' was Hitchcock's first sign of future promise, a truly effective silent thriller, and many of the film-making techniques he experimented with would later form an integral part of his many masterpieces.
Either way, 'Easy Virtue' his eighth film is a rare opportunity to see Hitchcock attempt a melodrama, and the results are interestingly mixed.
The story was based on a Noel Coward play, a medium upon which the director would rely heavily for many of his later films.'Easy Virtue' starred British actress Isabel Jeans, who had previously appeared in Hitchcock's 'Downhill (1927)' and would later return in 'Suspicion (1941).'The story concerns a young lady named Larita Filton (Isabel Jeans), who had experienced a difficult and much-publicised divorce when her infidelity with an artist led to her husband being wounded and the artist's suicide.
Frustrated by the constant pursual of photographers, Larita takes a peaceful holiday to France, where she meets a kind and gentle man named John Whittaker (Robin Irvine), whom she soon marries, much to the surprise of the man's family.
Jeans is something of a two-sided character; we understand her plight for happiness, and yet she's got such a sense of arrogance about her that we're much more sympathetic towards her conflicted husband.At just 60 minutes in length, 'Easy Virtue' outstays its welcome by a good quarter of an hour.
The court trial in the film's opening was quite brilliant, with Hitchcock displaying the technical imagination that would ultimately make him great.
If this film had not been directed by Alfred Hitchcock, no one would remember it or even want to remember it!
Don't expect typical Hitchcock touches in this early silent of his called Easy Virture since this isn't even a suspense film but more of a melodrama about a divorced woman who can't escape her past, a past in which her then-husband discovered her painter's infatuation with her, which he mistakes for an affair, and gets shot by him but survives though the painter later commits suicide (which I wouldn't have known about if I hadn't read the synopsis on the DVD case back).
Silent drama from Alfred Hitchcock based on a Noel Coward play.
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock, this average silent drama was based on a Noel Coward's play.
What follows next is predictable - Larita meets another young man, John Whittaker (Robin Irvine), on holiday, the two fall in love and marry impetuously, shocking his proper family who eventually learns of her secret past.
John's proposal and Larita's answer occurs over the telephone, heard by the receptionist (Benita Hume, uncredited) whose expressions tell the audience all they need to know.Ian Hunter (the third and last time he would work with the director) plays Mr. Filton's divorce attorney who, despite the fact that he's a longtime family friend of the Whittakers, is not the source of the disclosure.
"Easy Virtue" was Hitchcock's try at Noel Coward (the play had already had a New York run (1925) of 147 performances with Jane Cowl as the scandal plagued Larita).
Everson points out that the direction of the two films were poles apart with Hitchcock making his film in a far more interesting and exciting way than the other one with it's much more juicier subject matter.The first part of the film was opened out from the play and from the first scene Hitchcock is trying out innovative camera shots - the judge's eye glass becomes the camera lens and singles out the plaintiff's counsel (a youthful Ian Hunter - a Hitchcock regular by the early 1930s) as he tries to blacken the name of Larita (beautiful Isabel Jeans) who, as the decanter is grasped, thinks back to the scene of the scandal.
Interesting For Hitch Fans...And That's It. The sad plight of a twice-wronged woman - first by her husband, then society - gets the silent treatment from Alfred Hitchcock in this early melodrama.
Many of the themes of later Hitch classics come up, and in sometimes arresting ways, but the overall impact is a thud.Larita Filton (Isabel Jeans) finds herself ruined when her brutal husband catches her with a lovestruck artist.
Trouble ensues when he introduces her to them as his new wife, her secret unknown but festering all the same.Hitchcock's silent films are fascinating to watch even when they aren't all that good.
For one thing, he had quite a stock company going by this time: Jeans, Irvine, Violet Farebrother (who plays Whittaker's disapproving mother), and Ian Hunter (who plays the attorney who handles the case against Mrs. Filton) all appear in "Downhill," a film Hitchcock directed the year before.Also, Hitch silents often reveal the unique nature of his approach to cinema in embryonic form.
Jeans likewise personifies every sexy-but-troubled blonde Hitchcock would find such reward in making suffer.What the film doesn't have is an engaging story.
Finally, this is one time the silent medium really under-serves the story, as many scenes play out in long talky pantomimes with minimal dialogue cards.You really get the feeling Hitchcock wanted to explore his growing bag of tricks at the expense of intelligent exposition.
Film buffs can probably spot techniques that Hitch carried on using into the sound era - he was always a visual director.And the story is good, as others have pointed out. |
tt0112571 | Boys on the Side | Three unique women embark on a cross-country road trip: Jane (Whoopi Goldberg), a lesbian lounge singer in search of a new life after breaking up with her girlfriend and getting fired; Holly (Drew Barrymore), a pregnant girl who just wants to escape her brutal boyfriend; and Robin (Mary-Louise Parker), an uptight real estate agent who has her own secrets (namely being infected with HIV).
Robin puts an ad in the newspaper that she is looking for a traveling companion to accompany her on a cross country trip to California. Jane answers the ad and agrees to join Robin after her car gets towed during their meeting. Jane and Robin leave New York City and travel through Pittsburgh to take Jane's friend Holly to lunch. They stumble across a knock out-fight between Holly and her abusive boyfriend, Nick, over some missing drugs.
They leave him there bound to a chair with tape after Holly hits him in the head with a bat to stop him from attacking Jane. Later, he frees himself from the chair, stumbles across the floor, falls and hits his head on the bat and dies. The three unlikely travelers then form a special friendship on their journey which sees them through ultimately tragic times.
After discovering that Nick is dead and that Holly is pregnant, the three women decide to continue across country and end up in Tucson, Arizona when Robin has to be hospitalized. They decide to stay in Tucson, hoping to start a new life. However, Jane has a secret crush on Robin, Holly falls in love with and eventually confesses to a local police officer named Abe Lincoln (Matthew McConaughey), and Robin finds the courage to face her impending death.
Shortly after Jane and Robin have a falling out over Jane telling a friendly bartender (James Remar) who was interested in Robin that she has HIV, Holly is arrested by Abe. She is taken back to Pittsburgh to face the consequences of her actions. The return to Pittsburgh involves Robin and Jane making peace with each other on the courthouse's "Bridge of Sighs" while the Pittsburgh Police process Holly.
A few months pass, in Tucson, Holly is free and with Abe and her daughter, which is celebration to all family and friends. Robin is now farther along with AIDS and is not expected to live much longer. The party asks Robin to sing the Roy Orbison song "You Got It" as she performed that song in a Star Search contest; though weak, she manages to sing with Jane backing her singing. In the final scene, Robin has died from AIDS as her wheelchair is now empty, Holly and Abe plan to stay in Arizona and become a family, while Jane hits the road to finally seek a life of her own. | comedy, murder, paranormal, violence, tragedy, romantic | train | wikipedia | 'Boys on the side' is a very touching movie that looks essentially at what it means to be a woman, trapped inside a man's world.
It also looks into what it means to be sick, which I have been no stranger too, either....Three women sharing a car going west, team up in this winning celebration of camaraderie, caring and friendship which quickly becomes a family, in 'Boys on the Side'.
The three main girls in 'Boys on the side' include the 'lesbo' Jane (Whoppi Goldberg), Robin (well acted by the talented Mary-Louise Parker), who is being helped to drive across America by Jane, and the fun loving and partly liberated Holly (Drew Barrymore).
It is Holly's great personality and character that turn these best friends into a very close-nit family.
I am interested in seeing McConaughey's latest film, titled 'How to lose a guy in 10 days'.The director of BOTS was Hebert Ross (from the brilliant 80's movie, Steel Magnolias).
I love how he brought out the movie's main themes of sex and sexuality (gay and straight), the empowerment of women, friendship, sickness, humour and what it means to be a family.But the movie's story was also a highlight from where I viewed it.
Lines like when Holly asks Robin at the dinner table, `We're you?' in reference to her and Jane having a sexual relationship, the next few lines are great.
The title of the film was well thought up, considering the line that Robin's mother says to her daughter, `You can't fight nature, God knows you women keep trying, treating your men like side dishes, stick a fork in when needed, just like men used to treat us.' That line is basically what the film is all about.Another great part to this film was its soundtrack.
I am sure that the powers behind this movie wanted such a performer, considering one of the main characters in the film was also gay.I watched this film, just a few weeks after seeing a movie that I am sure inspired the writer of the script, that being 'Thelma and Louise'.
Parts of 'Boys on the side' has a similar feel to 'Thelma and Louise' - that of women on a road trip, trying to break free of men's hold on them.
While a lot of the film is original, it has a very touching ending, to what can only be described as a very emotional movie.
I also feel that director Herbert Ross, allows us to experience what each character is going through in life and does not shrug away from any issues that other movies might simply try and avoid.
With a cleverly incorporated soundtrack, 'Boys on the side', is a movie that we can all learn from, to try and improve not only our friendships that we have, but how we live our lives in a world that can be cruel, harsh and unfair.CMRS gives 'Boys on the side': 4 (Very Good Film).
Absorbing, funny and incredibly aware comedy-drama about three ladies on a road trip: Whoopi Goldberg as a lesbian lounge singer, Drew Barrymore as a pregnant, unmarried waif, and Mary-Louise Parker as an uptight woman trying to loosen up (and suffering from HIV).
Barrymore is at her best here, Goldberg is outstanding, and Parker--while not a varied actress--does solid work.
Drew Barrymore really makes this movie what it is as the dizzy (blonde of course) Holly, with her fresh and upbeat view on life.
Moreover, this film shows that Barrymore can not only play the slutty, seductive parts (e.g The Amy Fisher Story, Poison Ivy) but a role which mixes both.
It's definitely a chick flick (although the guys may drool over a blonde Barrymore.) However the actor who plays Abe Lincoln is an eye catcher.This is not one of Whoopi Goldberg's best roles and I didn't think her part as the lesbian was believeable, yet she did display both strength and humor to keep you interested.
Mary Louise Parker was excellent and her performance was on line with her part.Definitely a movie for a Barrymore fan and if you need a heart warming movie to keep you interested at night.
I found Mary-Louise Parker's character so like myself that it was hilarious!
Drew Barrymore, lovely as ever in her role, provided the much-needed sparkle to the movie.
Then remake me a chick or a dyke to get the kind of real, unbridled love -- romantic and platonic -- that these women have for each other and their hetero spouses/friends.Mary-Louise Parker's character is so sad, yet so rich.
I especially love Mary Jane Parker in this film even though all the actors are great.The film has so many great lines in it too and who would have known Whoopi Goldberg has a decent singing voice.
Great movie about three women (Whoppi Goldberg, Mary-Louise Parker, Drew Barrymore) and their various adventures as they travel cross-country.
All three are fantastic and the film manages (more or less) to juggle many plot elements (AIDS, lesbianism, pregnancy, drugs, violence, murder etc etc) and deal with them all effectively.Parker is probably the first woman ever to play a straight woman with AIDS in a major Hollywood film--quite a feat.
The film is long but never dull and it all ends to a very moving final sequence--I cry every time I see it!Two minor quibbles--it takes Barrymore over a year to have her baby and there are obvious cuts in the second half of the movie (I assume this was to keep the film down to two hours).
Count the chick-flick conventions: The revenge on the abusive boyfriend; the three so-different young women bonding; the mother-daughter conflicts; the road trip; the scene where somebody sings "Happy Birthday" to somebody amid much general rejoicing; the adorable baby; the tear-wringing incurable-disease character; etc.
The three leads are good, a young Matthew McConnaughey isn't yet annoying, and there are nice turns from Estelle Parsons and Anita Gillette, a Broadway baby decades earlier who matured into a proficient character actress.
You can't say there aren't good roles written for women after having seen Boys On The Side.
Three plumb parts are written here for Mary Louise Parker, Whoopi Goldberg, and Drew Barrymore and another good one for Anita Gillette as Parker's mother.Parker is in need of someone to share road expenses on a move west and Goldberg answers an advertisement in New York.
The last time I saw a film with a plot premise like this was Kalifornia where David Duchovny takes on a psychotic Brad Pitt as a traveling companion with their respective women.
In a much lighter vein Charlie Ruggles and Mary Boland got Burns&Allen and a large great dane in Six Of A Kind.Boys On The Side falls between these other films in its humor ratio.
The trenchant observations the women have about life and love are the best part of the film.
All three have secrets we all learn, one of them is dying.Best two scenes in the film are Goldberg on the stand giving as good as she gets with prosecutor Dennis Boutsikaris and Parker and Gillette having a good mother and daughter hair letting down.Matthew McConaughey got some early attention here as a deputy sheriff who falls for Barrymore.
A rare and lovely movie focusing on female friendship, Boys On the Side explores 3 women, the way they sabotage themselves and how they love each other anyway.
Mary-Louise Parker is Robin, an uptight real estate agent dying of AIDS.
Whoopie Goldberg is Jane, a black lesbian singer who also wants to go to California in hopes of getting more work.
And in Tucson they stay, with Jane getting work at a local bar, Robin getting involved with the bartender that works there, and Holly- who is pregnant, maybe by Nick or maybe not- falls in love with a cop named, of all things, Abe Lincoln.
Thus forms the glue which holds together Goldberg, Parker, and Barrymore and the conglomeration of characters which coalesce around them in this sentimental tale with humor, charm, and poignancy and its share of sappy, weepy, and corny moments.
first of all let me say that this movie in no means should be compared to Thelma and Louise...they are two totally different movies, both good but very different.....boys on the side has great acting, a great soundtrack, an interesting story line and even though it may not be a "guys" movie i think that anyone can enjoy this movie.....whoopie Goldberg is as superb as ever and even though i wasn't a fan of Mary Louise parker before i saw this movie i definitely am now.....even though the drew Barrymore character is a bit over the top she plays it so well we can forgive her!
"Boys On The Side" is the movie that has it all and one of my absolute favorite movies!When reading the plot this movie might seem ordinary and non-interesting like another "Thelma and Louise" wannabe: Three girls in a car on the run from a police charge.
Beyond the - at first sight - simple plot hides unexpectedly deep and complex characters brought to life in stunning acting performances by Whoopi Goldberg, Mary-Louise Parker, Drew Barrymore and cameo Anita Gillette.
Actually (as intended) it is these strong female characters and the emotional interactions between them that hold this movie together.
The few male characters in the movie are (as the title indicates) kept on a side track, though they are of great importance to the development of the three women.However, what I like the most about "Boys On The Side" is its delicate mixture of humor and drama taking you on an emotional journey with equal room for laughs and tears.
With charm, warmth and wits this movie gives you a story about love, friendship, solidarity, and discovering the true values in life, as it also treats delicate issues like homosexuality and AIDS in a non-offensive way that most people will be able to relay to.Another successful addition to this fantastic movie is the soundtrack, which is a carefully selected collection of songs performed by strong female artists, i.e. Sheryl Crow, The Cranberries, Annie Lennox, Pretenders and more."Boys On The Side" may not be the perfect movie for a romantic evening with your boyfriend, but as a "girls' movie" on a night out with your friends it is highly recommendable.
Boys on the Side is a powerful but sometimes amusing melodrama about the lives of three woman with different backgrounds coming together to celebrate the lives of women on their earnest road trip.
This film may also be a little more on the feminist side, but I didn't mind that much since women are equal to men and should have their stories told as well.Herbert Ross's film is about a wisecracking club singer, an uptight saleswoman, and a young, free spirit all joining crossroads so they can travel cross-county from New York to California.The acting is very good.
Drew Barrymore is also very good and she seems to be my kind of girl.Overall, this is very powerful film about womenhood and some of the problems they face.
From Whoopi Goldberg, Mary Louise Parker, Drew Barrymore - that's just for starters - a solid cast.
Our three heroines go out into the wild blue yonder just like Thelma and Louise, even leaving a body behind, but things take a sentimental turn and at times descends into mush.
Whoopi Goldberg, Mary-Louise Parker and Drew Barrymore may initially sound like the casting idea if one wanted to make a film with some really strong miscasting.
It all has to do with the sometimes comedic and sometimes dramatic adventures of a lesbian singer (Goldberg) who's currently unemployed, her real estate agent new lover (Parker) and a drug addled friend (Barrymore) who leads them all on the run after she fatally assaults her abusive boyfriend.
It follows 3 lady's Whoopi Goldberg,Drew Barrymore and Marry-louise Parker who set out for a better new life.
Whoopi Goldberg plays an amazing part in this film she warms your heart by making you laugh and then making you cry.
This movie truly explores the powerful bond between women,and leaves you with the knowledge that the female friendships of the world are stronger than any love affair ever could be.
fantastic, sentimental movie about the death, men, woman and true friendship.
I am a huge Roos fan (loved "The Opposite of Sex"), so I was totally surprised to find that he wrote "Boys On The Side." I wish he had directed it, too, because although Herbert Ross is a master of "women's films," I think Roos' slightly less sentimental hand would have made a better movie.
Still, I liked it before I knew who wrote it; usually I can't stand either Barrymore or Goldberg, but both were very effective here, and Parker just proves again why she deserves a much higher profile in Hollywood.
All in all, a great little film that is completely inclusive of various minorities (shows how easily it can be done) AND which features two of my favorite actors, James Remar and Matthew McConnaughey, in two very sympathetic performances.
I like what you might call "sappy" films sometimes, they just fill me up, heavy dramas are necessary at times.
Whoopi Goldberg, Mary Louise Parker, and Drew Barrymore all turn in fine performances here, Goldberg and Parker especially.
She joins the unbelieveably amazing Mary-Louise Parker and the effervescent Drew Barrymore!
A serious film about relationships, with excellent performances by the three principals: Whoopi Goldberg, Mary-Louise Parker, and Dru Barrymore..
But dominating the movie is Mary-Louise Parker, who plays a lonely woman and is the one who's illness causes the trip to stop in Tucson.
Real estate agent Robin (Mary-Louise Parker) puts an ad in the papers looking to drive to San Diego with somebody.
They stop at Pittsburgh to see Jane's flirtatious friend Holly (Drew Barrymore).
Bar owner Alex falls for Robin.The first half is a road trip like 'Thelma & Louise'.
The movie is both funny and sad, like real life.
I've always thought Mary Louise Parker is a great actress, though sometimes I have tired of her "victim" roles - before her "Weeds" days (love Weeds)!
Good comedy/drama movie that promotes close bond between women.Well produced with good performances although the story was blatantly prejudiced towards men.Barrymore looks very delicious and Goldberg gives us her best since THE COLOR PURPLE.Not for men who do not like seeing women's points of view.......
BOYS ON THE SIDE **** Herbert Ross's last work, 'Boys On The Side' tells a unique, special story of the bonds between three women as they take a cross-country drive, end up in Nevado, and struggle through hardships, progressively developing in their character.
I wanted to like this film bit I really didn't.
Maybe it's because the above mentioned film is my all time favorite and this seemed a little bit of a rip off-women.
Even the previews made it look so much like Thelma.Or maybe I was spoiled by Thelma and Louise, to me no other female road trip movie even comes close.
Although I will say this was a tear jerker with interesting characters and good acting(the much better then average cast in my opinion is what saves this movie), on a whole I found it to INTENTIONALLY sappy and unoriginal.
It has not aged well, influenced by popular 80s films like Thelma and Louise, Fried Green Tomatoes or Steel Magnolias -- female pal movies that were much better than this one.In fact, Mary-Louise Parker is pretty much reprising the same exact role from Fried Green Tomatoes only in contemporary dress.
It's all about "bonding" between these 3 very different women who honestly have nothing in common, and one is dying and another has a deeply creepy crush on her.There is a time-line here set by Drew's character's pregnancy -- she is visibly pregnant as soon as they are in Tucson and has her baby near the end, so the whole film must be happened in under 7 months and more likely 3-4 months.
Add to this the fact that all the fellas are either schmucks or complete losers, and not only is it obvious the girls want to go it alone for a good reason, but it's also clear that this is an ordinary, forgettable film.Whoopi Goldberg has been infinitely better than this, and though both she and Mary Louise Parker (in a role similar to that in "Fried Green Tomatoes") are competent, we know they're both well below par here.
Mary-Louise Parker's character was perfectly drawn and acted.
I'm sorry, but I did not like "Thelma and Louise." This movie had more depth to it even though it is sort of sappy at times; but still, it was good.
Mary-Louise Parker stole the film with her frail health, yet she holds nothing back verbally.
During the trial in this movie when Mary's character was a witness for "Holly" played by Drew Barrymore, she was trying to say that women have a special bond that takes place just like men do, yet not as many women are hardly ever quick to judge men when they get together or maybe even assume they are "gay." We all just take it at fact value which is that it's "Boys' night out." Women are still being misunderstood when they remain friends like the three women were in this movie.
This film by The Sunshine Boys director Herbert Ross is quite a good drama with very small elements of comedy.
Basically lesbian Jane (Whoopi Goldberg) is a night club singer, out of work.
AIDS suffering Robin (Mary-Louise Parker) is a quirky real estate agent looking for a ride-share to accompany her to California, this is answered by at first unsure Jane.
In Pittsburgh they pick up a third, one-night stand and man loving Holly (Drew Barrymore), escaping a violent and drug-dealing partner. |
tt0092507 | Abhimanyu | Maasilamani (Raghuvaran), a dreaded don, spreads terror around him: triggering riots, smuggling illicit liquor and drugs. The police are exasperated by Maasilamani and send Abhimanyu (R Parthiepan) to cope with Maasilamani. Abhimanyu is an incorruptible and strict Assistant Commissioner of Police who has been suspended seven times for challenging his superiors.
Abhimanyu first reforms the corrupt constables and befriends with the police officer Deraviyam (Chandrasekhar). In the meantime, Manju (Ravali) fall in love with Abhimanyu. Then, Abhimanyu intercepts Maasilamani's illicit drugs shipments. At this point, Abhimanyu becomes Maasilamani's worst enemy in a very short time. Maasilamani cannot kills him directly for fear of having the police behind him. So he triggers a riot in a college to kill smoothly Abhimanyu but Abhimanyu stops the riot just in time. Maasilamani's right-hand Somu turns approver, Maasilamani henchmen manage to kill him and Deraviyam at the court. In anger, Abhimanyu wants to punish Maasilamani but he sees a familiar face in Maasilamani's house.
Abhimanyu is in fact an orphan. In the past, Abhimanyu's father (Anandaraj) was a heartless corrupt police inspector and Abhimanyu's mother Kausalya killed him. So Abhimanyu's sister was sent in an orphanage and the pregnant Kausalya in jail. Abhimanyu was born in jail. The person that Abhimanyu saw in Maasilamani's house is actually Ranjitha: his long-lost elder sister and Maasilamani's wife.
What transpires later forms the crux of the story. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0022352 | The Sea Ghost | Navy Lieutenant Greg Winters (Alan Hale) is found guilty by a court-martial for pausing briefly to prepare to rescue survivors of the Alatania, a torpedoed ship, rather than attacking immediately the submarine responsible. As a result, he is sidelined for the rest of World War I.
In 1925 New Orleans, lawyer Henry Sykes (Clarence Wilson) hires now civilian Captain Winters for a salvage job on behalf of Evelyn Inchcape (Laura La Plante). Sykes insists on using his own deep sea diver to retrieve something from none other than the Alatania. After a box is brought up, Winters confronts the diver, who turns out to be Karl Ludwig, the commander of the submarine for whom Winters has been searching. He puts Ludwig in the brig, though he soon escapes.
Then Winters goes to see Sykes and Inchcape. Inchcape's wealthy uncle and cousin lost their lives aboard the Alatania. Winters reports he has recovered two wills, one leaving a million dollar estate to Inchcape, the other to the cousin, whom Sykes implies is still alive. Now, after seven years, the uncle can be declared legally dead. Winters is willing to split the money with either party. Despite his professed indifference to Inchcape's beauty and her loathing of men in general, when they are alone, he gives her the first option. She despises him, but he tears the will in her favor in two and gives her half. Later, he sees Sykes at his office and, while pretending to bargain, learns that the cousin is actually dead; Sykes intended to produce an imposter.
Sykes bribes Winters' first mate and some men to betray him. When Winters goes to settle accounts with Ludwig, he is ambushed and knocked out (though Ludwig has no part in it). Sykes kidnaps Inchcape and sets sail on Winters' ship. In a cabin, Sykes attempts to force himself on Inchcape, but she is rescued by Ludwig. They have a talk. Meanwhile, Winters, accompanied by his friend, ineffectual upper class lawyer Percy Atwater (Claud Allister), boards the ship and subdues the crew.
Then he gets his long-awaited bout with Ludwig. Just as Winters is about to choke the life out of his hated foe, Inchcape shows him a letter in which Ludwig's sweetheart informs him that she will be sailing on the Alatania. Ludwig received it after the sinking. Winters acknowledges that Ludwig has suffered enough and lets him go.
Afterward, Winters forces Sykes to marry him and Inchcape, before having the lawyer tossed overboard. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0362696 | Haasil | The background of the movie is student politics in the University of Allahabad and the dirty turn it takes. When Anirudh (Jimmy Shergill) meets Niharika (Hrishitaa Bhatt) at university, they quickly become romantically involved. Unfortunately, their relationship can't escape the political battles between two rival gangs of students headed by Gaurishankar Pandey (Ashutosh Rana) and Ranvijay Singh(Irrfan Khan). When Anirudh meets Ranvijay (Irfan Khan), who has eliminated Gaurishankar Pandey, the former believes that he is merely helping his fellow student.
Anirudh gets involved in violent politics and shoots Niharika's cousin accidentally. Ranvijay Singh helps him escape to Mumbai with the help of his aide (Rajpal Yadav). Anirudh later learns the truth of Ranvijay Singh whose ultimate aim is to marry Niharika.
Badrishankar Pandey (Murad Ali), the brother of slain Gaurishankar Pandey, helps Anirudh kill Ranvijay in order to avenge the loss of his brother. A fierce gun battle takes place at the Kumbh Mela between the gangs of Ranvijay and Badrishankar Pandey before Anirudh kills Ranvijay. The Chief Minister, Kabanlal Pandey (Sudhir Pandey) helps them escape the crime scene and gets Aniruddha discharged from all the cases as he was also blackmailed by Ranvijay. | violence, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0411118 | Anthony Zimmer | Anthony Zimmer is a genius career criminal wanted by police around the world. He has used ingenious methods to launder money legally, using dummy corporations that file lawsuits against firms outside France. Zimmer is also being pursued by the "White Collar Barons"—a powerful Russian mafia with whom he once did business. Zimmer is an elusive character, however, with no known description of his appearance following his recent plastic surgery. One standout detective named Akerman is getting close to catching the criminal mastermind; he knows that Zimmer will risk everything to reunite with the lover he left behind, Chiara Manzoni, who has not seen him since his plastic surgery.
Anticipating a reunion with Zimmer, Chiara arrives at a restaurant, where she receives a message from her boyfriend, telling her to "pick up" a stranger whose general appearance matches his own in order to mislead his pursuers. Chiara boards a TGV high-speed train and chooses François Taillandier, a bland 38-year-old translator who reads detective novels and whose wife left him over six months ago. Fascinated by this beautiful mysterious woman, François has difficulty concentrating on his yogurt and reading. When they arrive at Cannes, Chiara invites François to stay over with her at the Carlton Hotel. She also gives him a watch that bears Zimmer's name on the back.
The next morning, François wakes up alone and finds himself the target of two hitmen. He frantically escapes and seeks shelter at a nearby police station. There, he befriends Lt. Camel Driss, who provides him with clothes and a room at a nearby hospital. They discover that Chiara checked out of the Carlton Hotel that day. Driss believes François' story after seeing a bullet hole in the hotel room, which is now occupied by members of the White Collar Barons and their leader, Nassaiev. Later that night, Driss is murdered.
When he sees Nassaiev and his goons outside his room, François escapes and unexpectedly reunites with Chiara, who takes him to a secret hideout in Nice. There, she explains that she set him up because he matches Zimmer's build, and she tells him to stay in the hideout for a few days. The next day, however, François leaves the hideout and stalks her outside the Hotel Negresco, hoping to get more answers from her. Soon François is nabbed by the police and interrogated by Akerman, who reveals to him that Chiara is in fact an undercover DGDDI agent. That night, Akerman secretly meets up with Chiara to discuss the rendezvous Zimmer proposed in a classified ad. Akerman tells her that while she will be at the rendezvous point, he will keep an eye on François.
With François in custody, Akerman and his men park their surveillance truck and post their snipers within the vicinity of the rendezvous point: Zimmer's old mansion. Chiara enters the mansion and confronts the White Collar Barons and Nassaiev, who threatens to kill her if Zimmer does not arrive within five minutes. François leaves the truck and rushes into the mansion to save her, but is immediately placed on the ground at gunpoint by Nassaiev's men. After Nassaiev rejects her claims that François is not Zimmer, Chiara gives the signal and the snipers shoot down the Russian mobsters.
As the police remove the Russian bodies from the scene, François reveals to Chiara that he is, in fact, Anthony Zimmer. She tells him to flee, but Zimmer refuses, even though he knows Chiara is an agent. He opens a secret safe and takes out a notebook filled with his banking information, and leaves it by the front door for Akerman—his way of giving up his life of crime for the woman he loves. Knowing what he's given up for her, Chiara decides not to reveal his true identity to the police, and the two drive away together. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | Things Are not How They Seem to Be. In Paris, the international police force and the Russian mafia are chasing Anthony Zimmer, an intelligent man responsible for laundry of dirty money in France.
The only means to reach Zimmer is through his beloved mistress Chiara (Sophie Marceau), who is under surveillance of the police and the mobsters.
While traveling by train to the country nearby Nice, the common man François Taillandier (Yvan Attal), who has the same body shape of Zimmer, is select by Chiara as if he were Zimmer and used as a bait to lure those that are pursuing her.
When Taillandier is chased by the professional Russian killers, he runs the French police when the real situation begins to be disclosed to him."Anthony Zimmer" is a great thriller, with a situation that recalls Hitchcock's classic "North By Northwest", i.e., a man mistaken for another and pursued by criminals.
The attractive story has many twists, a nice cast with the gorgeous Sophie Marceau and the efficient Yvan Attal in the lead roles.
Scenes you have seen a thousand times, this movie makes you see them with new eyes: a guy killing time watching TV, a car chase in an underground parking lot, or someone having coffee and reading the paper in the morning sun.
The final plot twist may not be up to common standards of plausibility, but it doesn't subtract from 90 minutes spent in silent wonder at what the French can do with a little sunshine and lot of mascara..
The most important things in a movie like this are to have a plot that twists and turns but remains at least semi-plausible, to have a reasonably attractive hero, a super-sexy femme fatale and appropriately menacing villains, and above all to keep up the pace no matter what.
Throw in the bonus of lots of the high life -- the mountain-top super-house, the suite at the Carlton in Nice and all the rest -- and the extra bonus of a happy ending (I don't think that's a spoiler) and you make a very enjoyable evening out.Don't bother trying to work out later how all the bits fitted together.
I don't think this film made a big splash at the box office or earned much critical acclaim, which is a shame.In my view, its fascinating scenery, the many twists and turns, a fabulous Sophie Marceau, and not least a clever ending, make this pure entertainment to watch and would have deserved better.The film does remind me of Hitchcock at his best.Not all the pieces may fit together all the time, but I don't find this to be an issue with this movie.
This is an engaging and quite clever thriller, produced, directed and acted as only the French do: stylish, cool, suave and with a twist.
Zimmer, however, has recently acquired a new face via plastic surgery; so nobody knows what he looks like now.He has a weakness, however: the femme fatale who, in this case, is Chiara (Sophie Marceau), who keeps in touch with Zimmer via classified messages in the Herald-Tribune.
Because Zimmer wants an available sap to act as stand-in when the mafia make their hit...Enter poor Francois Taillandier (Yvan Attal), minding his own business on the train when the gorgeous Chiara sets down opposite and, very adroitly, gets Francois to join her in her travels to the Cote d'Azur and a luxurious holiday
he thinks.
Francois figures he's maybe in heaven for the first day, a wonderful dinner, followed by the potential for real romance.And then, the sky falls in...In short order, Francois is running for his life (almost like Dustin Hoffman in Marathon Man [1976] and for similar reasons) as the mafia try twice to kill him, Chiara reveals that she set him up, the mafia keep on trying to make a hit on him, the police try to help him, and Zimmer's still pulling the strings it seems.
Things are closing in on Francois, and it seems like only a matter of time before he takes a hit.Not everything is as it seems, however...To say more would spoil this film for you.
The cinematography is exquisite on the French coastline, the sound track is good, the acting is...oh, who cares...I was too busy looking at Sophie Marceau anyway.
Anthony Zimmer has disappeared with his ill-gotten riches, to change his looks and his voice with plastic surgery to escape the French customs police and a Russian mafia gang.
One nuance of note: the customs police chief becomes fully aware at the end of what the viewer finds out.A great film in all ways - superb acting, pacing, plot, scenery, and background music - all integrated in a very involving film.
The Tourist is not all that bad, perhaps even above average, but Anthony Zimmer is much better..
I found this movie a bit slow paced in many places, sometimes unnecessary so.However that being said, I have noticed that the major part of the plot has already been given away in the first 20 minutes of the film.
As usual, she portrays a woman who is coldly sexy, turning to a hot object of desire in several scenes.The plot of the movie is relatively simple, and its length is a bit too short.
As so many have said before me Sophie Marceau is very,very good in Anthony Zimmer but , for me, Yvan Attal was the standout.
I have liked his somewhat deadpan style since "Les Patriots" (still one of my favorite thrillers) and here, as the 'ordinary' guy supposedly caught up in things beyond his knowledge he plays a much more realistic Cary Grant type than you would usually see in a Hitchcock movie.
That's part of the fun of films like Anthony Zimmer.
Anthony Zimmer (2005)Ah, this has its moments, but it sure is overly clever and at times overly derivative.
The interactions and scenario of an elite crook and some undercover and suspicious types on the boundaries of the big hunt for him are taken straight from a lot of previous movies--even from "North by Northwest," of all things, which you'll catch in the train conversation and in the general nature of the leading woman in both cases.
It's all well enough done to keep you watching if this is your kind of movie, and I didn't mind traipsing along even as it seemed to bowl into a lot of old tricks.What was worse, overall, was the dependence on a huge trick, one that you might or might not anticipate, and which comes along at the very end like a splotch of ketchup on your plate.
Yeah, yeah, we were warned the escapee was a master of disguise and had had a lot of plastic surgery, but still, it's just not enough, not enough.Everything is set in the south of France, Nice to be exact, and is pretty and fun (like a lot of other movies set there).
The movie itself is French, of course, and in one nice scene a man starts to ask a question in English, and another man (one of the chief cops, we suppose) says, "I don't speak in English," or something to that effect.
(A lot of French films in particular use a bit of English--or a lot--to do more than just sound international.)But I find an interesting nuance mostly because the movie is otherwise a very straightforward affair.
Director Jerome Salle wanted this film to remind us Hitchcock's or Polanski's movies with the next door guy type getting caught into a web of mistaken identity.
He actually tries more with a story which may have had a better chance if it decided whether it wants to play on the thriller or on the romantic movie line.
We are left with a well acted film with Sophie Marceau and Yvan Attal leading a good team of actors, but also with a feeling of in-satisfaction because despite the good ideas the film ends by looking too short and too superficial to give us time to be thrilled or to be moved..
If you like films such as North by Northwest and The Thomas Crown Affair, you are bound to be intrigued by Anthony Zimmer.Sophie Marceau plays her part as femme fatale with a perfect mix of Eva Marie Saint's Artemisian aloofness and Rene Russo's no-nonsense sensuality, and it is a pleasure to watch her interaction with Yvan Attal throughout the film.
Too bad so few Anglo-Saxon writers/directors respect those basic rules.Bottom line: If you rent Anthony Zimmer, you won't need a back-up film.
Like in every other mystery identity movie, once you know you the bad guy really is, you tend to rewind the whole film in your memory and see if the whole thing is coherent.
And, everything being said and done, it's always a treat to watch Sophie Marceau act, though she somehow manages mostly to get involved in projects that don't match her talent..
A guy-next-door type translator (NOT "interpreter", mind you) (Yvan Attal) recently "ditched" (I took this from the sub-title in the version I saw) is on a train going to a seaside resort to enjoy a quiet vacation by himself when an enchanting woman (Sophie Marceau) sits opposite him and asks him to help her with the stuck zippers on her cardigan.
Anthony Zimmer involves a crime mystery and a romance.The silly plot (and the even sillier plot twist) is there merely to provide a platform for Marceau and Attal to act, and does not worth talking about.
Marceau can play the role of the beautiful enigmatic women without even trying and Attal delivers the persona of an all-too- familiar absolutely ordinary guy caught in a whirlwind of unsought excitement to perfection.
I'm not saying that it's a bad flick: the actors are a pleasure to watch, particularly the absolutely stunning Sophie Marceau (and this is coming from a straight girl).
I don't find the plot "silly" twisted, and not only providing a platform for the two actors to act.In fact, this movie goes far beyond the easy crap usually sold.
This movie deals with one aspect of what life is for some people in the world: an uneasy understandable manipulation of individuals by other individuals.I'm sorry for the guy who did put the previous comment but I just feel that he should read more books, or maybe go back to school and learn to think "out of the box" before he puts unadequate comments that are to viewers, to the director and to the actors a real insult.Stratege thinker Sun Zi said 2500 years ago : an country without spy is like a blind army.
Salle teases us in several ways; showing a female hand - her back is to us - selecting and lighting a cigarette in close up, then more feet as she walks the length of a platform before finally boarding a train and walking past several empty seats to select a place opposite Yvan Attal - whom we might be forgiven for assuming is the eponymous Zimmer - and even then her eyes are hidden behind dark glasses.
I watched this film (which came as add-on to German magazine ComputerBild) last night, in high anticipation for Sophie Marceau.
In the end, I felt a bit disappointed - slightly giddy by the twisty plot, and I had waited for Marceau's strong acting (as seen in Marquise) in vain.Then I read the comments here, and was thinking what I would write in a comment, and became unsure.
You could call such things red herrings, but they certainly worked very well for me.I'll certainly watch "Anthony Zimmer" again - with all its quotes of Hitchcock (the mansion on the hill, and many more) it can stand up well on its own, and be enjoyed even though one knows how it ends, like a true classic.
I decided to watch the movie entirely for Sophie Marceau but Yvan Attal was surprisingly good.
The scene which forms the crux of the movie ought to have been done with more finesse that is Anthony Zimmer being revealed.
Sophie Marceau looks as beautiful as ever in the movie.
Watch this movie for good story telling and a very believable setting..
Both revolve around a geeky main character, out of their depth in a dangerous world, rescued and in love with a cool good looking action capable femme fatal (Sophie Marceu/Lucy Liu)..who has the answers....and is also in love with them.In the end, despite both of them being geeky *very* everyman characters, their geek personas are in fact a disguise, they are actually the so far unseen central anti hero character (Anthony Zimmer/Sebastian Brooks) of the movie, a very secretive and highly capable independent agent, who's face has never been seem (except by the female central character).In both films, two bad guy organisations (Russian Mafi and French Police/Sunway Corp Digicorp) are chasing after him, however don't know what he looks like.In the end, the bad guy organisations are outsmarted, and the Zimmer/Brooks character escapes with the girl...the only people to witness his face are killed.
Both movies even finish off with the respective couples traveling off into the sunset together.Anthony Zimmer is stylish in a typical French way, but Cypher itself is quite stylish and the original and the cleverer of the two.
The Angelina Jolie-Johnny Depp starrer was an entertaining film...one of the things which prevented it from being great though, was that it could never make up its mind as to whether it was a suspense thriller, an action thriller or a comedy.
But I'm pleased to say that the French original 'Anthony Zimmer' has no such identity crisis.The plot of 'Zimmer' is very simple and in retrospect I can't but help feel that 'The Tourist' sometimes needlessly embellished (and in the process, complicated) the story.
Some things the viewer needs to put together himself while watching the film.
Case in point, Chiara's (Sophie Marceau) motivation in befriending Francoise Tallandier (Yven Attal) as part of her scheme to fool Anthony Zimmer's pursuers is something which one has to assume based on the action on-screen and other subtle hints-its only explicitly spelled out more than halfway through the film (whereas in 'The Tourist', its made glaringly clear to us pretty much from the start).A major superficial difference between the two versions is to do with the style and grandeur of the remake, which is contrasted by the relative simplicity of the original.
The lack of emphasis on set designs and scenic beauty reinforces the film's prime focus on the character's and their story and also serves to give the film a much more 'serious' feel as opposed to the flamboyance of the remake.Special mention must be made of the lead actor Yven Attal.
Sophie Marceau's 'Chiara' is likewise a VERY different character from Angelina Jolie's 'Elise Ward'...unlike the glamorous and enigmatically playful Elise, Chiara is a much harsher individual, though she does reveal a softer side as the story progresses.On the whole, I feel 'Anthony Zimmer' is a much more serious, and tighter film, than the remake, though I will always remain a fan of the comically thrilling Depp-Jolie starrer as well!.
Anthony Zimmer is an average suspension movie, but if you have seen Cypher (http://imdb.com/title/tt0284978), you know how the movie is going to unwind from the first five minutes on.
The story is very similar (not to say, in some parts identical), although in Cypher, the main character actually "deleted" his memory, so the entire "Who's the guy?" game actually makes sense.As has been mentioned elsewhere, even when alone, Zimmer doesn't act like himself, and it doesn't really make sense why, unless to lead on the viewer.
The characters remain flat and two-dimensional (even the main character...), and the final twist just doesn't come off right (especially since most viewers will have the identity shuffle figured out by now).If you haven't seen Cypher, maybe this movie works for you.
It gets an average rating for the nice camera work and Sophie Marceau, but I'm sad to say it would probably have scored higher if the producers had directly copied Cypher..
"Anthony Zimmer" is a conventional romantic thriller and con movie which finds a gang of Russian criminals and law enforcement agents frantically attempting to apprehend master criminal Anthony Zimmer.The film was directed by Jerome Salle, whose style is unimaginative and at times dull.
The only thing Salle's film has over Donnersmarck's is the presence of the always stunning Sophia Marceau.
I had forgotten I wanted to see this film, and while I thought The Tourist has it's good points, that class is awesome, I only wish I knew it was really a remake of Anthony Zimmer.
Sophie is a different story, but they sure know how to photograph her.I like the rawness of AZ.
Beautifully filmed (great aerial shots) and well acted especially by Yvan Attal who was just superb in the role of a nerdy mystery reading accountant type.
Also the story is not perfect her role is not completely logical but this is a minor thing...There are twists and the final one makes the movie work.
In US films the bad guys mostly don't get away with it--you have to go to more cynical European creations to get the ending you want.
Motivitations are at the core of such movies, and since some things we take for granted can lead us down the wrong path, and like a chess player having read several moves ahead, one must backtrack and start over.Ms. Marceau surprised me - I knew her to be very pretty, but in this movie she adds a new twist.
Mr. Attal is also very good - I'm not sure how easy/difficult it is to portray this - but I was hooked from the get-go.### It's one of those movies that makes you feel very intensely, even if you can question the motives (i.e. you know that if a "femme-fatale" hits on a plain looking guy, she wants something). |
tt0172089 | Aatank Hi Aatank | Shiv Charan Sharma, a farmer, moves to the city to make a life with his son Rohan, daughter Radha Seth and his wife. He meets Munna, an orphan. Shiv and Munna work hard in the underbelly of the city outside the law and go on to lead a syndicate of gangsters. Years pass by and Shiv Charan Sharma is shown to have become an untouchable ganglord. Aslam Pathan and Billa Singh Thakur, rival crime bosses, try to kill Shiv in hopes of overtaking his territory and get rid of the opposition he was proving to be in their plans to increase drug traffic within the city.
Munna meanwhile falls in love with Razia, who is the daughter of Aslam Pathan. She elopes with Munna and gets married. Aslam Pathan attempts to get back at the father of the groom, by sending Gogia Advani to Shiv Charan Sharma with a drug proposition as he thinks that Shiv's acceptance of Gogia's offer would create dissent amongst the crime cirlces. Shiv Charan Sharma refuses, but Munna seems interested.
Shiv Charan Sharma gets shot by goons hired by Pathan and Thakur. They think that Munna will follow up on the drug deal if the father is out of the picture. The father survives though. At this point Rohan enters the picture with girlfriend Neha.He has kept away from the family business till this point. Rohan then avenges his father's shooting by taking out Gogia Advani with Munna's help. Following the shooting, Rohan is on the run where he meets Ganga whom he falls for too. Four years later, Rohan becomes the crime boss. In the end, Sharad Joshi takes a killing contact from Aslam Pathan and Billa Singh Thakur to kill Shiv Charan Sharma and Munna. It is to be seen how Rohan protects his brother and his father. | romantic | train | wikipedia | A unique movie in the 90s. The movie released in 1995, when there was a period for romantic movies released, such as Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge, Barsaat and others. This one was unique in the sense that it is a gangster type movie. The movie is about a farmer who moved to the city of Bombay with his family where he met a boy called Munna who had no-one and both started to become a gangster. Years later son (Rohan) follows suit as he takes over from his father and avenges for both Munna's and his father's murder. Rajnikanth, perhaps this was the last time he did a Hindi movie, ditched his style of "throwing a fag to his mouth" and rather performed a great role as Munna. The amazing performance was by Aamir Khan, who was not really old to play such a role, executed very well as a gangland boss. This movie would have been suitable for this decade, where movies such as Company by Ajay Devgan was made. However, it was not a bad movie, although perhaps Aamir Khan was not the suitable actor to play such a role at that time.. Bollywood's take on the Corleone family. Okay, the film failed at the box office but which Godfather remake has been successful? A great story like The Godfather hasn't found its takers in Bollywood but none of the remakes are bad (except for the semi-remake Dharmatma). After Zulm Ki Hukumat was released, it could have been that the director of AHA wanted to make his own version. Zulm Ki Hukumat being the best remake of Godfather ever, didn't find may takers at the box office.AHA was stuck for years and people had already forgot about the film when it released. The film is not a complete clone of The Godfather, but yes, the first half is very similar adding Bollywood flavour to it. It wont be wrong to call it a 'desi adaption' where several subplots were added for the sake of masala. The direction is little tacky, which needed a little tiding up to do. The songs don't make much of an impact at all.Aamir Khan does pretty well for himself as he didn't play an anti hero role before until it came to Earth and Fanaa. But the evil Aamir in the second half puts a smile on your face, his performance was wonderful. His wig and moustage do look silly. Rajnikant does okay. Juhi Chawla doesn't get much scope. Ishrat Ali is natural. And okay guest appearance by Om Puri and Kabir Bedi, who have just under 10 minutes of screen time but just add a little action Overall, an okay adaption of Godfather. Considering the time it was made in and the several problems that occurred during its making.3 out 5. an attempt to remake godfather-I. Now during the late 80's and 90's Indian cinema was famous for copying scripts from Hollywood movies and add a few Indian cinema mas-ala touch to it . This movie is no different , I just saw this movie on T.V. today and it was pathetic ,it is attempt for a Indian version of the great movie "The godfather" where Amir khan plays "Michael Corleone" but they are not even close, I can't believe even the shooting scene in hotel is also copied.....and off course there is emotion,action,drama,romance and more.... like the typical Indian movie. these are the movies that give Bollywood a bad name.. One of Aamir's flop films. This film is one of Aamir's lesser known films, it had Aamir play a gangster, with a different look however that time flopped and got Aamir criticism. The film is similar to GODFATHER but has it's own bollywood spin The film starts with Ishrat Ali entering Mumbai from a village to earn money with his wife and kid and later becomes A Don alongwith Rajnikant Slowly Aamir too enters the underworld. The film was delayed for 3 years and Aamir himself admits that it was a mess, with some scenes re shot to avoid the stale look and some deleted. The emotional angle is not too strong here, though several scenes of Aamir Khan are well handled, like the manner in which he seeks revenge but the film could be much better Direction by Dilip Shankar is okay Music is okayAamir Khan is good in his role however his look got him criticism and also he was too young for the role, Aamir Khan is missing in parts of first half too Rajnikant is good in his own style, Pooja Bedi hardly has scope and her scenes were cut, Juhi Chawla has a short role and is okay Ishrat Ali is good, Goga Kapoor, Raza Murad are all good, Om Puri has a brief role and is wasted |
tt0445965 | Feed | Australian cop Phillip (Patrick Thompson) works as a Cybercrime investigator for Interpol. Phillip finds himself shaken after investigating a case in Hamburg, Germany, in which a man consents to have his penis cut off and eaten by his lover. Phillip's own relationship is troubled due to his frequent travel and difficulties with romantic intimacy, and he finds himself unable to respond positively to his beautiful girlfriend's sexual overtures. The two have rough sex that gets out of hand, and she leaves him after writing "pig" on his chest with lipstick.
Meanwhile, Phillip has been working with his partner, Nigel (Matthew Le Nevez), to investigate a fetish website that features morbidly obese women being held captive and fed fattening food. The website's intricate encryption suggests that the webmaster is concealing a deeper perversion, and, despite the objections of his superiors, Phillip travels to Toledo, Ohio, to investigate the webmaster and determine the whereabouts of "Lucy," a former site favorite. In Ohio, the site's sadistic webmaster, Michael Carter (Alex O'Loughlin), holds Deidre (Gabby Millgate) captive in a ramshackle cottage in the woods. After questioning a local priest, Michael's adoptive sister, and his thin, attractive wife, Phillip manages to track Michael to the cottage, where the latter is preparing to feed Deidre a thick slurry of eggs and weight gain powder. Phillip learns that Michael developed a sexual fascination with obese women due to his troubled relationship with his overweight, immobile mother, who died when he was a child. He also uncovers the twist in Michael's fetish website: not only are paying site members able to watch him feed and fornicate with obese women, but they can place bets on when each woman will die, using posted statistics on their body proportions, blood pressure, and other medical indicators.
In the cottage, Phillip finds Lucy's decaying remains and then confronts Michael; Michael reveals that he killed his mother and fed Lucy until she died. The slurry-like preparation he was attempting to feed Deidre through a tube contains some of the fat he had carved from Lucy's body. After a struggle, Phillip shoots Deidre, who maintains her love for Michael even as Philip tells her about his deceptions, and two shots can be heard off screen.
The final scene reveals Phillip living in suburban bliss with Michael's overweight adoptive sister. He takes some sandwiches she has packed for him and drives to the cottage in the woods, where he eats them with gusto, pausing to tantalize a wheelchair-bound Michael with one. Michael, starving and emaciated, begs Phillip to "Feed me." | suspenseful, plot twist, flashback | train | wikipedia | The premise of this film is excellent - it's the first movie I've been aware of that tackles the bizarre subject of feeders.Sadly, the strong cast is let down by sloppy direction.
At the end of the day, it's okay but instantly forgettable.The film scrapes a "7" as the subject matter is interesting and the acting is very good....it's just a shame that butter-fingered director Brett Leonard manages to drop the ball.
The gruesome "Feed" is not recommended to audiences of blockbusters or commercial movies; but for viewers that aim for a disturbing film that breaks taboos, they will certainly enjoy this movie.
I just got to see this movie at the Fantasy Film Festival in Nuremberg and I was pretty astonished how many people actually wanted to see it.
"Feed" tells the grotesque and fascinating story of psychopath,who feeds his victims to death.He keeps seriously obese women in his dead mom's house where he feeds them junk food and calorie-rich slop to their hearts desire.Australian cop tries to stop this disturbed fetishist..."Feed" by Brett Leonard is an undeniably unique addition to the psycho genre.Alex O'Loughlin is excellent as the resident lunatic Michael Carter.The film is quite gross,but having seen tons of extreme stuff I wasn't shocked or disturbed.Still the subject matter is morbidly fascinating and there is enough nudity,vomit and deviant behaviour to keep exploitation fans happy.Give this tense and slightly repulsive thriller a look.The nods to German cannibal case of Arnim Meiwes are especially notable.8 out of 10..
The basic plot: cyber investigators from Austalia stumble on a fetist website about women who literally get feed to death of their own volition.This movie will have a limited target audience.
either more of the cannibal issue from the start of the movie or take that scene out completely or tie it into the force feeding later on.I did stop eating though when I was watching it.
Feed has added yet another great twisted Aussie movie to my favourites list.An interestingly twisted story about a cyber-cop, a sociopath and his fetish with huge women.
But that's pretty much where the originality ends.What follows is a psychological horror with no scares, a few sick scenes involving food, pretty good acting, questionable decision making and some pretty good directing.I didn't care much for anyone in the film....probably the most was "Deidre" just because of the position she was in, but that's not saying much.
Without authority, Phillip flies to America to track Michael and stop this disturbing act.At a time when Australia is rebuilding its film industry; with great films Look Both Way, Wolf Creek, Little Fish and The Proposition, it was only a matter of time for a movie like Feed would make its way out of the woodwork.
With our society so concerned of being thin, Feed spins that notion on its head, where bigger people are more beautiful; while taking it to the n'th degree with Dedrae weighing over six hundred pounds.Like many films of this caliber, the hallmarks of a small budget are easily seen, yet isn't that the 'charm' of these films; rough camera work, corny dialog, overblown acting and a plot that doesn't completely make sense.
This film tells the story of a serial killer with a fetish for obese women who force feeds them and takes bets online as to when they will die.What I thought interesting about this film was that even though this guy was obviously insane and he's sole goal was to kill these woman he had such a love and tenderness for them.
There are no name actors who can't act, bad dialogue, bad settings, bad lighting (the opening scene is filmed entirely in blue) and a bad, horrible plot.If it were done right, the movie could have been so much better.
Also, I don't think anyone would want to sit down for an hour and a half and watch a movie which opens with someone feeding a naked obese woman whilst getting off on it.:sicky: I'm going to give this a 0/10, even though the minimum I can give it here is 1....
That was in fact part of the plot; so how the previous poster failed to notice that I'm not too sure.All in all I enjoyed the film; I liked the (at times jerky) camera-work and lighting - as the previous comment mentioned, a lot of filters were used (like the blue one) but I think this added to the film's atmosphere.A few things were a bit unbelievable, and the ending was rather odd (shan't spoil it for you)...but all in all, a fairly good movie..
Alex O'Loughlin plays Michael Carter, a Feeder who films feeding women online and tracks their vital stats for placing bets as to when they will die.
I watched it primarily because it had been worked on by the guy who did the lawnmower man and i was a really big fan of that movie.so anyway i had a look online to see a little about it and got a vague idea what was going on.
for instance sakes the suit is just so well crafted, absolutely seamless as far as i can see, moved really well and the detail on it was impeccable yet shows how limiting to a persons life experience it can be to maintain such a large body weight.anyway I'm kinda rambling here but i guess that when it boils down to it i really suggest that anybody who has a high threshold for the bizarre and shocking should really take a look at this film, my biggest fear however is that it might inspire people who have a hidden interest in this fetish to actually seek out partners to participate in it with which i feel is not a safe practice.the gore towards the end of the film is a little campy in as much as that it really looks pretty crappy when compared to some other low budget films with a similar quirk but none the less this does not necessarily detract from the film on the whole.so watch if you are so inclined but i implore everybody that does watch it to not try and pursue their own experience of this fetish as it is far to dangerous, and also far to unfair to the mental and physical health and wellbeing of all involved..
I found this movie good in concept but the story line is badly planned and the acting poor, the film "dances" around from one scene and subject to another not really linking one thing to another.
I don't think so...The movie starts promisingly, and the plot seems sort of well established, but the whole international theme soon becomes confusing, irrelevant and unbelievable.The American scenes look as though they've been filmed in oz despite the addition of left hand drive cars with yank plates on!Overall, a disappointing attempt at a movie that could have been so much better than it is...
The over use of filters, the totally inconsistent characters, dreadful acting, a third act that takes up 2/3rds of the films running time, plot holes, shocking (shocking as in shockingly fuc**ng awful) plot developments that come out of nowhere and make no sense and overused pseudo-intellectual monologues from the killer almost 5 of them in the dragged out 3rd act.The worst thing about the film is the grotty, horribleness that pervades though it and I don't mean that in a good way.
A preliminary warning here - this film may not be for everyone.If you are a bit squeamish about various aspects of human physiology in the extreme, you might want to reconsider before viewing this item.Having said that, however, I will give credit where it's due.This is certainly one of the more original screen plays I have ever seen, and I've seen my share of quirky, fringe occupants of the horror / suspense / weird sci-fi genre'.The closest comparison that comes to mind, though it's plot and situations are quite different, is another quirky example of this sort of genre', "Hunger".Both of these films are quite terrifying and grotesque in their own way, but Feed embarks into new unexplored territory.As I said, for originality, this piece can rightfully claim to be unique, to say the least.The acting has its highs and lows, some well done, other parts a bit more .
really different sort of bizarre quasi horror film with a twist, you'll definitely be entertained, though I suggest you do not want to be eating, anything, at all, while watching this .
FEED is one of those films thats starts great, interesting, seems to have a great plot, shows sick things that we don't expect to see in a film, then it kinda just fizzles out at the end.Even though this is not one of the greatest films i have seen, it defiantly kept me watching.
If you enjoy films like Seven you will enjoy FEED however you will be slightly disappointed, as Seven gives the viewers that last final twist at the end, FEED just does not deliver.The police man who goes to American is NOT sent their, he goes to America off his own back, prior to what another comment mentions, the police man does leave Austrailia but only because he is adamant that the website he has found will lead him to something much worse.I would say FEED is certainly worth watching, but just don't expect a gritty plot, that you can work out, because there just isn't one, unfortunately..
(His son Patrick plays the co-lead, along with Alex O'Loughlin, who, as a blond, looks an awfully lot like Owen Wilson, without the noticeable nose.) The movie begins as though it might hold together, but slowly comes apart until, toward the end, director Brett Leonard ("Lawnmower Man," "Virtuosity") leaves logic adrift entirely and has his hero (and us) lamely rolling around in body parts and fluids.
The questions supposedly raised here about our consumer culture and over-eating are red herrings, plot-wise, and neither pertinent nor intelligent enough to qualify as "intellect." Yes, unhealthily fat women (and the men who go for them) exist in life and online, but this film--which equals "Hostel" and "Wolf Creek" in sheer ugliness while possessing about one-tenth the movie-making smarts of both put together--has no reason to be..
The idea, besides, that what we see on screen does really happen, maybe behind the walls of your neighbor, only adds to the horror.I won't spoil anything because this movie must be enjoyed from start to finish, there is everything here: psychopathy, deep web, cannibalism, and a constant, impending sick feeling which will unnerve you for the whole duration and after the end.
Thompson stars as Phillip Jackson, a cybercrimes investigator who gets wind of people like Michael Carter (O'Loughlin), who take women and then feed them and feed them until they're bedridden and completely dependent on their captors.
What could easily have been a lame "shock" movie revolving around the feeder fetish becomes a compelling thriller.The film opens with an Australian police officer on an internet detail exposing an Armin Meiewes type case of cannibalism-shown in borderline nauseating detail.
As Michael strives to get his latest lard-assed lady, Deidre (Gabby Millgate) to pile on the pounds and pop her clogs, psychologically damaged cyber-crime cop Phillip Jackson (Patrick Thompson) attempts to stop the loony using whatever means necessary.If, like me, you've a craving for weird and perverse cinema, then you'll no doubt be licking your lips at the thought of Feed, which from the plot summary, sounds like a satisfying smörgåsbord of sadistic delights.
It's a shame, because with a little more thought and care during preparation, this could easily have become Leonard's signature dish.Those who do decide to tuck in will have to make do with savouring the film's tastier morsels: the solid central performances from O'Loughlin, Thompson, and especially Millgate, who has to act from under a ton of realistically fleshy make-up; the gratuitous nudity from Jackson's gorgeous nympho girlfriend; the genuinely nauseating scenes of force-feeding (which are made even worse when it is revealed what is being served up!); and a few choice chunks of meaty gore.All this delectable deviancy definitely makes the film worth watching, but I doubt you'll go back for seconds.6.5 out of 10, very generously rounded up to 7 for IMDb..
The aspect of the story where an Australian cop goes to America on his own and manages to solve the whole case without almost any form of assistance, is perhaps a bit implausible, but it does provide a good set-up for the ending of the movie.
I thought the acting was pretty strong and it moved at a rapid pace with an bizarre and unsettling story about a sick and disturbed man feeding women to death and storing their fat and a cop who discovers his psychotic antics and wants to bring him down before the next woman becomes another victim.
The basic plot of a man force feeding women to death is the basic key of desire to want to watch this movie.
The basic plot of a man force feeding women to death is the basic key of desire to want to watch this movie.
Other than that, the sexual content goes beyond what I find acceptable, basically you are subjected to porn when it really isn't necessary to the plot.Some of the other scenes within the movie are very disturbing but I won't divulge any further.I think if this had been done differently it could have been so much better, the idea behind the film is a unique one and could have been a really good film.This however is a disturbing, very strange and unsettling film made on a low budget.
The theme of consumption and overpopulation is well-represented by the film's images and dialogue, the acting was good, though the story had some big flaws, especially with characterization -- the "rogue" Australian cop is operating so far beyond the law that he's hard to be take seriously, and later plot-scenes resulting from the rogue cop's illegal activities ought to be taut, but rather, come off as too long and almost laughable (for some of the dialogue): I'm guessing this is what prompted one reviewer to make a snide, unwarranted comment about liberals.
From this point on, the movie tries very hard to present some interesting juxtapositions, forcing us to watch him have rough sex with his girlfriend, inter-spliced with images of some deranged psycho force feeding grotesquely overweight women, as though trying to suggest that we're all predisposed to some fetishes, and maybe we're not so different from the sickos after all.
If you like raunchy sex scenes, fat chicks, watching liposuction operations and enjoy watching things that make normal people puke..you will love this movie.
I had a feeling the director wanted to make a Se7en type of film but where Se7en delivered the goods nicely and appropriately Feed failed miserably in all accounts.The director tried to use the controversy around the issue of a pretty unusual fetish to make an intelligent account of the sickening acts of a man obsessed with fat women.
To start, my rating of this movie is a pretty good microcosm of this review - completely average.Like most viewers, I heard about this film because of the quite extreme reviews, either from friends, websites or anywhere else you get reviews from.
FEED is a relatively original film that I think has been passed-over undeservedly because of it's unorthodox subject matter.The film revolves around an Australian police officer who comes across a fetish website that shows obese women being stuffed with food to the point of total incapacitation.
I watched this movie after reading a number of reviews and watching the enticing advert for the DVD on TV and i'm not disappointed.There where some fantastic performances especially by the feeder he was absolutely amazing and had a pretty flawless American accent considering he was Australian, i would without a doubt watch another movie with him in based on his performance in this movie.Some of the acting was a bit soap opera however this didn't spoil the tension there was a fantastic sub plot about the cop and his abusive relationship with his girlfriend which lead in nicely to the unexpected ending and demonstrated his state of mind and how he could do what he does (i wont give away the twist though) The Camera angles and directorial style although not truly original where very good, the diolouge was fantastic, the atmosphere would shift from sinister to subdued which always kept me guessing, in short i don't have a lot bad to say about this movie.What i will say is that if your a horror fan or like your shocking / gory / sick movies don't be fooled by some of the other comments there's nothing in here thats really shocking but it is a fantastic physcological thriller and 100% recommended..
Jackson thinks Carter is feeding women to death & making money out of it through his website, Jackson has to go it alone in order to stop Carter...This Australian production was directed by Brett Leonard this is not so much a horror film as a psychological drama that revolves around rather unpleasant events, although Feed has been getting lots of positive reviews I have to say while it's well put together I didn't really like it that much.
Based on the supposed underground culture & fetish of people being forced fed until they die Feed tries hard to be more than just a simple exploitation film, the only person who kills anyone on screen is the supposed hero the cop & Deidre the obese woman is seen as being consensual with what is happening to her & there are several speeches by Carter about how he is letting Deidre be free what she wants to be & that he loves her for what she is without having to conform to societies perception of beauty. |
tt0064002 | Alice's Restaurant | In 1965, Arlo Guthrie (as himself) has attempted to avoid the draft by attending college in Montana. His long hair and unorthodox approach to study gets him in trouble with local police as well as residents. He quits school, following which he hitchhikes back East. He first visits his father Woody Guthrie (Joseph Boley) in the hospital.
Arlo ultimately returns to his friends Ray (James Broderick) and Alice Brock (Pat Quinn) at their home, a deconsecrated church in Great Barrington, Massachusetts where they welcome friends and like-minded bohemian types to "crash". Among these are Arlo's school friend Roger (Geoff Outlaw) and artist Shelley (Michael McClanathan), an ex-heroin addict who is in a motorcycle racing club. Alice is starting up a restaurant in nearby Stockbridge. Frustrated with Ray's lackadaisical attitude, she has an affair with Shelley, and ultimately leaves for New York to visit Arlo and Roger. Ray comes to take her home, saying he has invited a "few" friends for Thanksgiving.
The central point of the film is the story told in the song: After Thanksgiving dinner, Arlo and his friends decide to do Alice and Ray a favor by taking several months worth of garbage from their house to the town dump. After loading up a red VW microbus with the garbage, and "shovels, and rakes and other implements of destruction", they head for the dump. Finding the dump closed for the holiday, they drive around and discover a pile of garbage that someone else had placed at the bottom of a short cliff. At that point, as mentioned in the song, "...we decided that one big pile is better than two little piles, and rather than bring that one up we decided to throw ours down."
The next morning they receive a phone call from "Officer Obie" (Police Chief William Obanhein as himself), who asks them about the garbage. After admitting to littering, they agree to pick up the garbage and to meet him at the police station. Loading up the red VW microbus, they head to the police station where they are immediately arrested.
As the song puts it, they are then driven to the scene of the crime where the police are engaged in a hugely elaborate investigation. At the trial, Officer Obie is anxiously awaiting the chance to show the judge the 27 photos of the crime but the judge (James Hannon as himself) happens to be blind, using a seeing eye dog, and simply levies a $50 fine, orders them to pick up the garbage and then sets them free. The garbage is eventually taken to New York and placed on a barge. Meanwhile, Arlo has fallen in love with a beautiful Asian girl, Mari-chan (Tina Chen).
Later in the movie, Arlo is called up for the draft, in a surreal depiction of the bureaucracy at the New York City military induction center on Whitehall Street. He attempts twice to make himself unfit for induction, first by getting drunk the night before and performing the physical exams while hung over, then by acting like a homicidal maniac in front of the psychiatrist, but fails both times (the latter incident actually gets him praise). Because of Guthrie's criminal record for littering, he is first sent to the Group W bench (where convicts wait), then outright rejected as unfit for military service, not because of the littering incident, but because the government is suspicious of "his kind" and instead opted to submit his personal records to Washington, DC.
Upon returning to the church, Arlo finds Ray and members of the motorcycle club showing home movies of a recent race. Shelley enters, obviously high, and Ray beats him until he reveals his stash of heroin, concealed in some art he has been working on. Shelley roars off into the night on his motorcycle to his death; the next day, Woody dies. Ray and Alice have a hippie-style wedding in the church, and a drunken Ray proposes to sell the church and start a country commune instead, revealing that he blames himself for Shelley's death. The film ends with Alice standing alone in her bedraggled wedding gown on the church steps. | melodrama, satire, home movie | train | wikipedia | I had all but forgotten about the film of "Alice's Restaurant", which was inspired by (as opposed to based on) Arlo Guthrie's classic and comic song of the same name.
Viewing it again on DVD made for a curious experience.Midway through the film, director Arthur Penn (fresh off of "Bonnie and Clyde", I believe) literally shoots the events on which the song is based, and they are if anything even more amusing on screen than on record.
However, anyone expecting the film itself to reflect this tone overall is in for a surprise.By the time Arlo (playing himself) has his litter-inspired run-in with the draft board (which is, again, hilarious) we have come to know him as one of a commune-like group of people in Stockbridge which is more or less centered around Alice and Ray.
Alice seeks to add some stability to her life by opening a restaurant, which she does successfully with the help of friend Arlo's jingle.
She and Arlo are the only members of their group who look beyond the aimless lifestyle of the members of their commune, who are content to meander through life riding motorcycles and getting stoned.
We see Alice affected by the drug-inspired struggle and death of addict Shelley and Arlo affected by the long illness and eventual death of his father, Woody Guthrie.
But if Arlo has his music to move on to, Alice is fairly glued to her life with the stoned-out Ray, their friends and her restaurant.
It is with great sadness indeed that she watches Arlo ride off to resume his life on the road.The point made about the trappings of the Hippie lifestyle being so unfulfilling are well ahead of their time when juxtaposed with other movies of the era and are actually quite haunting.
This shift in tone is never quite reconciled by director Penn, rendering the film more of a curiosity than a success.In addition to the now-fabled Thanksgiving sequence, highlights include James Broderick's lively performance as Ray, Pat Quinn's understated one as Alice and Guthrie's ever present charm and humor.
(That's folk music producer Harold Leventhal as Woody's manager.) The film itself is ultimately as ramshackle as the group whose story it tells, but if the era means anything to you you will find it worth watching..
This was an "establishment" movie designed to cash in the popularity of the then-popular folk song by Arlo Guthrie.
As most students of 1960s filmmaking are aware, "Alice's Restaurant" was director Arthur Penn's unsuccessful follow-up to "Bonnie and Clyde." It was based on -- or rather inspired by -- a good idea: Arlo Guthrie's famous autobiographical song, which told the humorous and ironic tale of two run-ins with the "establishment," as we used to say, during a Thanksgiving in Stockbridge, Mass., and a subsequent draft board examination in New York City.Thirty-three long years later, seeing this cultural artifact from the late '60s is less like watching a story unfold than stepping into a time machine.
Way back when -- before a six-figure salary became the college student's holy grail, when saving the world was more important than earning a law degree -- young people were actually passionate -- about freedom, about peace, about the long- term prospects for humanity.
If that passion has not completely vanished, it has certainly been redirected -- and not, in my view, toward a positive or productive end.Whether Penn's film works or not as a cinematic adaptation of Guthrie's song, whether it successfully mixes deadpan humor (hippies vs.
The movie succeeds in capturing a remarkable moment in time, a short period when the future may have been uncertain, but there was still a brilliant ray of sunshine at the end of the tunnel -- and a youthful force propelling us toward it.The hippie movement may have been naive, but it was a movement nonetheless, and a positive form of rebellion.
As seen in the film, young people often used the word "peace" instead of "goodbye" -- not just as a pleasant sentiment at the end of a conversation, but as a serious reminder of what was important -- that nothing was more vital than global, harmonious accord, to "live as one." That spirit may have died with John Lennon; it may have left this Earth with Jerry Garcia.
Those who write complaining that the movie isn't like the song are missing the point.
The movie merely includes the song - and some events in Arlo Guthrie's life in the 1960s.
Get over the fixation about the song and you might begin to see what the movie is about.Alice's Restaurant is about life and loss, and the traps we allow ourselves to get caught up in.
Note the significant change in tone in the last section: The marriage ceremony and party at the end brilliantly convey the idea of the characters trying to "be free" and have a good time, but that if there is aimlessness in your life, there will be a sadness there and you won't know were it is comming from.
I've always liked Arlo Guthrie's music and the soundtrack is excellent, featuring the title track which tells this true story.
It's quite a fun movie, laced with moments of very serious elements like Woody, Arlo's dad, in the hospital.
With its scenes of cars and motorcycles gunning down the road, its voice overs from a youthful Arlo Guthrie, its attempts at humor, and its generally nonchalant tone, "Alice's Restaurant" may strike some viewers as nothing more than the hippie version of "The Dukes Of Hazard".
To young viewers, who lack historical reference points, the film may seem like some quaint period piece, that has almost no relevance, in an era of capitalistic exploitation and lost idealism..
That place could be the embodiment of the whole 1960s.Anyway, "Alice's Restaurant" is nowadays a look back at when the country's youth were fighting for a better future (people who lived through the '60s would probably object to how I said that).
And in the Bush era, we really long for that.By the way, I saw Arlo Guthrie in concert when he came to Portland in 1998, and then again in 2004.
Based on his folk song, Arlo Guthrie plays himself.
He's called up for the draft but his littering conviction keeps him out of the war.Arlo Guthrie and his song come from a time and place.
However, as time wore on, the commune ideal began to crumble like many other communist societies do- hippies begin to realize they are leeches on society, and in their valiant efforts to 'stick it to the man,' they incidentally remain reliant on the establishment to live.
Also, on a much more subtle level, in the last shot of the film we see Alice longingly staring at the camera after Arlo has just left the commune.
As Ray romantically expresses his ideas of somehow opening another commune, Alice begins to realize the ultimate flaw of the counterculture, and despairingly awaits what will be come a terrible, fruitless marriage.
Even though Alice has a Restaurant, and a way to make money, ultimately the very hippies they surround themselves with in the commune will suck it dry and move on.
The story that is told in the song Alice's Restaurant takes but a few minutes to tell in the movie.
If you want to see what the world looked liked in 1968 through the eyes of a young, mild-mannered folk singer, this is your movie..
The movie is based on the song and the events as well.Folk music carried on by the first family of American Folk Music - Woody and Arlo Guthrie - American Icons and Heros - in their own way.If you are not into the 60's or folk music - don't bother..
From there, the film seems to wander more than Arlo does.Alice's Restaurant mainly attempts to capture the essence of the 60's.
The actual dramatization of the events that are detailed in the now traditional Thanksgiving album (only because, I guess, Arlo is having Thanksgiving dinner at Alice's) is about as faithful as imaginable, but I'd say the scenes earlier on, when Arlo has just come into town and isn't able to really stay at any pad for too long due to his long hair and his inability to conform to playing music right in classes.
These are subtle jabs at the outcast of the times- not simply as a 'hippie', as Arlo Guthrie is a little too folksy to be a typical hippie, albeit not too far removed for Woodstock- and as a mostly one-sided take on the issue of the 'hippies', it doesn't demonize one side, while not making bones about showing the upright citizens as those who are close-minded.Filled with some great tunes, and an attitude to film-making by Arthur Penn that reflects its creator in a somewhat lighter, though no less socially conscious mind-set than Bonnie & Clyde (except less disguised), Alice's Restaurant is imperfect entertainment and a glimpse of the period that will appeal to anyone at all interested or remember all-too-well the socio-political troubles.
(At the same time, the sacramental wine of the former is replaced by a ceremonial joint that gets passed around.) Of course, without anything like formal rules, a downside is revealed once Alice ends up doing all the restaurant work, which the others happily shirk.The ending remains something of a puzzle.
Alice's Restaurant (3 out of 10)"Well, you had to be there..." You just can't defend a movie that way.
I took another look at this on DVD recently after seeing Arlo at the Falcon Ridge Folk Festival near Stockbridge.When I saw it years ago I thought it was a pretty down-headed take on the 60's counterculture, sort of like "Wild In The Streets," only with better music.
In the end, AR is of its time, one long past, and in hindsight perhaps best left on the shelf, for as the one thing the film does show is that "the hippie dream" was born in false freedom, filth, suspect mysticism and beliefs, and ended--like the movie--in confusion, sadness, heartbreak, and an eventual acceptance of society norms..
Additionally, as an American History teacher, I did appreciate how this was all like a time capsule--with both the good and bad of the era all rolled into one package.The movie purports to be based on real-life situations that occurred to Arlo Guthrie when he was 18.
While there was a lot of idealism, free love and self-expression, the film also had a very dark side that particularly came out at the end--and was a great way to show that the idealism of the 60s was starting to die a slow death.
Also how this minor incident resulted in Guthrie's being rejected from the draft was kind of cute (though I wonder just how true that was--if it was, then that's nuts!).Other than the funny and poignant parts at the end about the dark side of the 60s, there wasn't a whole lot I liked about the film.
More scenes like this would have helped considerably.Of course, the arrest-for-littering story recited in the song is played out, but it's amidst a convoluted array of hippie do-as-you-please nonsense.
If Alice's Restaurant were to be made today it would most likely be filmed in a much grainier, true-to-life fashion, cinema verite wed to the modern taste for close-ups and hand-held camera.
Alice's Restaurant stands now as nothing more than a curio, failing completely to capture or convey any sense of how life was like for the draft-dodging members of America's counter-culture.
Alice's Restaurant simply points the camera at a group of people who possess ill-defined motivation and an almost complete lack of direction: change the hairstyles and the clothes and what takes place on screen could be taking place anywhere at any time in the past fifty years.Arlo Guthrie is no actor, but he's actually quite good in this because you do feel that, while he's obviously acting, he's also trying to be himself and so you get some insight into the man.
Maybe it's his age or the cowboy-ish clothes, which make him look something like a good ol' boy, but he never really seems to fit in and fails to convince as the kind of man to whom Alice would be married.For all its counter-culture credentials the film, and its characters, ultimately resort to the most conventional of social traditions.
This is the movie not out of the novel or a short story, but out of a song, popular "Alice's Restaurant Massacree" by Arlo Guthrie, and it plays well on screen too.
Arlo Guthrie's hilariously mordant 20 minute story song gets adopted into an affably whimsical, episodic, occasionally funny and ultimately quite downbeat and sobering free-form feature by director Arthur Penn that astutely captures the key issues and concerns of the 60's hippie counterculture: dodging the draft, smoking grass, getting hassled by the pigs, being persecuted by grossly intolerant, narrow-minded, repressive straight conformist squares, trekking all over the country to find your true self, and defying everyday social conventions so you can do your own thing, man.
The film's precise, clear-eyed portrait of the painfully gradual disintegration of flower power idealism and the cynicism and disillusionment that followed in its wake nowadays seems all too grimly true and prescient, with the volatile relationship between vulgar, boorish, obnoxious swinger James Broderick and his frustrated, irritated wife Pat Quinn (they play Ray and Alice Brock, the owners of the titular restaurant) brilliantly reflecting the turbulence and capriciousness of the period.
And this film is still living on the hippie dream, on the flower kids and their illusion that life is nothing but music and fun.
Arlo Guthrie's girl friend looks very Vietnamese, a symbol of the war going on that no one wants to see.
I can almost reproduce the "Alice's Restaurant Massacree" from memory, but I never saw this film back in the day or since.
This continued relevance is part of why I rated it as high as I did!)Jarred by all this, I looked up the film afterwards on Wikipedia and discovered that Arlo had nothing to do with the script, which was basically Arthur Penn's work.
There are a lot of notable editorial decisions, such as:So far as we can tell, the movie Arlo has few political beliefs, and wants to get out of the draft by any possible means just because he doesn't want to go.The movie starts off with Arlo fighting the draft by trying to make the Black clerk's day miserable with his snarky answers.The whole movie is framed within the months of Woody Guthrie's dying of Huntington's chorea (displaced in time, btw).To bring down the tone further, Shelly, a heroin-addicted friend of Arlo's, is invented and treated as pitiable and doomed.Ray Brock is portrayed as sexist, verbally abusive toward Alice, and verbally and physically abusive toward Shelley.
Alice is portrayed as basically reacting ineffectually to the chaos around her.)Although the title song was sung by the real-life Arlo as a rallying cry for anti-war and anti-draft mass action, none of this comes into the film at all.As an illustration of how this comes together, let's look at the key scene where Arlo and company, having found that the town dump is closed on Thanksgiving and they can't dump their microbusful of garbage there, find a bridge over a garbage-strewn streambed and throw all their garbage down there.
A moment in the life of a folk singer, Arlo(Arlo Guthrie)who spends time trying to make it in the music biz by doing the bar scene while also frequenting at a hippie commune/restaurant derived from a former Catholic church.
We see the humor, tragedy, and response towards living the hippie lifestyle.Alice(Pat Quinn, who is simply delightful)runs the kitchen at the commune often tired of her man, Ray's(James Broderick)constant decisions to bring more and more off the street for her to cook for.
The tragic element of the film is Shelly(Michael McClanathan), a young man trying endlessly to kick a nasty drug habit and loved almost as a son by Ray & Alice.
Alice's Restaurant is one of those film's with a reputation.
A film not necessarily classic in the way people speak of it, but one that's definitely of its time.
Alice's Restaurant benefits greatly from Arlo Guthrie's charismatic performance.
He decides to visit old friends Alice (of the title) and Ray who run a hippie commune.
On another note, apparently, you would want to look into this, but the Trinity Church that Ray and Alice live in is still around and is like a shrine type thing now.
Of course the film "Alice's restaurant" is mainly meant to be an homage to Arlo Guthrie, who plays the leading part.
Arthur Penn's Alice's Restaurant is a product of its time.
Alice's Restaurant is a time capsule of the attitudes of young people during the late '60s as experienced by folk singer Arlo Guthrie and his friends like the married couple Ray and Alice Brock, played here by James Broderick (Mathew Broderick's father) and Pat Quinn.
Very much of its time, Arthur Penn's film tries to mix the humorous with the dramatic with uneven results.
Some of the most touching scenes are those of Arlo with his father, folk singer Woody Guthrie (played here by Joseph Boley) and those of Ray and Alice after the drug death of a friend.
Ray and Alice's remarriage at the end and the followup makes this one of the most bittersweet movies I've ever seen....
He does this by posing the intelligent and serious young man Arlo Guthrie and Pat Quine playing Alice against Alice's workshy husband Ray, played a tad heavily by James Broderick, and an aimless community of people skirting life at the former church made restaurant.Director Penn contrasts bright and colourful New England landscape and towns with revolting and ugly icons and rituals of late sixties counterculture. |
tt4324274 | Batman vs. Robin | During an investigation of missing children, Damian Wayne, AKA Robin, Batman's son with Talia al Ghul, has taken the Batmobile out to an abandoned toy factory without Batman's consent. He finds the perpetrator, Anton Schott, who has mutated some of the victims into dolls. Batman arrives, and in the resulting battle, Robin chases Schott while Batman knocks out the dolls with gas and frees the remaining children. Upon defeating Schott, Robin chooses to spare him, but an owl-masked assassin named Talon suddenly kills Schott and frames Robin for the murder. Batman is eventually convinced of Robin's innocence after finding an owl feather at the crime scene.
The next night, Bruce has dinner at Wayne Manor with fellow wealthy socialite Samantha Vanaver, who meets Damian. Later, he tries to connect with Damian, but he voices his frustration towards Bruce for never trusting him. Bruce goes out, leaving Damian with Nightwing to look after him (and calling off his date with Starfire in the process) and starts to investigate the owl feather, which leads him to the Gotham Museum of Natural History's Hall of Owls. He is reminded of a childhood story about the Court of Owls, a secret society of wealthy men who ruled Gotham from the shadows and killed any who opposed them by sending agents called talons. On the night his parents were murdered, Bruce had seen an owl clutching a bat flying away from the crime scene. He became convinced that the Court of Owls was to blame, but after finding no evidence of their existence, Bruce dismissed the legend.
While continuing to investigate, Batman is attacked by three undead, owl-masked assailants. After killing one, Batman witnesses the other two suddenly liquefying into black ooze. Meanwhile, Damian, having escaped Nightwing and fled the mansion, is approached by Talon, who encourages Robin's choice of punishing criminals and offers Robin a chance to join him. Unsure of the decision, Robin returns home, where Bruce discovers him and warns him that he will be sent away to a school in Switzerland unless he learns to discipline himself.
While driving to a date with Samantha, Bruce is kidnapped by white owl-masked people and he is brought before the Court of Owls, who offer Bruce a chance to join them. After Bruce leaves, given time to consider the offer, Talon reveals himself to be working for the Court of Owls, who are secretly raising an army of inhuman, undead talons to destroy Gotham City and allow the Court to rebuild it in their own image. However, their current talons are imperfect and dissolve after a period of time. It's also revealed that Talon's in a romantic relationship with Samantha, who's secretly the Grandmaster of the Court of Owls. While the Court is planning for Talon to become one of their undead soldiers, with Robin serving as Talon's replacement, Samantha's secretly planning to save Talon from this procedure and have him become a member of the Court, so he can rule Gotham by her side.
Damian, having contacted Talon, starts accompanying him to take out criminals, though he hesitates to kill them, which frustrates Talon. Sensing how Robin looks up to Batman as a father, Talon explains that after he gave his abusive thief father up to the police, who shot him, Talon was recruited by the Court of Owls. Batman shows up, having tracked Robin's activity, but is blocked by Robin from capturing Talon. Batman tries to convince Robin that Talon and the Court of Owls are using him, but Robin is unconvinced, believing Batman is trying to hold him back from his potential. A confrontation breaks out between them, with Robin nearly getting the chance to kill Batman before leaving.
Batman sneaks into the Court of Owls's headquarters through the sewers, but is exposed to psychotropic gas by the Court, causing Batman to hallucinate. He is rescued by Nightwing and Alfred Pennyworth. Meanwhile, Talon introduces Robin to the Court and the Grandmaster. When Damian reveals himself to her, Samantha deduces that Batman is Bruce. When ordered to kill Damian, Talon instead turns against and overthrows the Court and kills every single member, including Samantha. Now in control of the Court's army of talons, Talon leaves Damian behind, offering him another chance to join him once he has killed Batman.
Talon and his soldiers attack Wayne Manor, breaking into the Batcave as Batman, Nightwing, and Alfred fight them off. Batman and Talon battle each other. Talon gains the upper hand until Robin, who escaped from the Court's headquarters, intervenes and fights in Batman's place. He eventually defeats Talon and holds a sai to his throat. However, Talon commits suicide by forcing Robin's sai through his own neck, leaving Robin stunned and confused.
Batman tries to welcome Robin back home, but Robin refuses, claiming he needs to sort out who he is. He leaves for a monastery in the Himalayas that Batman suggested to him. | cult | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0114171 | The Power Within | Stan Dryer, an unsuccessful-at-life green-belt in karate teenager, is given an ancient ring by an old karate master whom Stan tried to save from impending doom.
Stan soon discovers the magical power of the ring when he defeats not one, but five drunk, low-life idiots who want to steal his red convertible. He even discovers that the ring gives him the power to answer any question you may have about the rise and fall of Communism in Russia.
Soon Stan starts taking advantage of his power. One day, at lunch, Stan and his friend notice the top jock at school asking his girlfriend why they broke up. Stan and his friend overhear the conversation and Stan's friend says something along the lines of, "...it'd be nice if someone would shove his jock strap in his face..." Stan counters this by saying, "I think I can do better than that."
Stan then gets up and asks the top jock's girlfriend out. The top jock becomes furious and tries to punch Stan, but Stan grabs his fist in defence. A fight breaks out, and Stan ends up defeating 12 jocks in the process. Soon Stan meets up with an evil man named Vonn, and also meets a monkey that is actually a reincarnated version of the old man. Stan discovers his powers were in him the whole time and defeats Vonn, gets the girl and is happy. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | A story about finding the Power within yourself..
This film shows what you can do with little money and lots of imagination.
The story is simple and well told.
The action is not high tech or computer animation driven.
It is exciting never-the- less.
The martial arts choreography is very strong without being too campy or gimmicky.
TJ Roberts is the real McCoy in his martial arts.
I think the title says it all.
It's a fun adventure into discovering your true potential..
The Karate Kid meets The Lord of the Rings.
Attractive sixteen-year-old Ted Jan "T.J." Roberts (as Stanley "Stan" Dryer) is urged to hook up with older pretty woman Tracy Melchior (as Sandy Applegate) after the senior prom, by chubby pal Keith Coogan (as Eric).
Although Ms. Melchior seems ripe and willing, Mr. Roberts is too shy to get up the nerve.
Meanwhile, martial arts badass William Zabka (as Raymond Vonn) is looking to acquire, by any violent means, an ancient Chinese ring to match the one he wears - the wearer of both rings is promised incalculable power.Roberts' mother, actress Karen Valentine (as Clyda) worries that her son might be a wimp, but worries more when he is given the other ring of power, which is formerly worn by his mystical guardian angel, Gerald Okamura (as Yung).
Wearing the ring, Roberts becomes a martial arts master, and gets his girl.
But, he must also battle Mr. Zabka, who wants both rings of power.
Nice to see "Griffith Observatory", Roberts as a smaller guy with a killer kick, and Ms. Valentine aka "Pigtail Peggy" - or was it "Alice Johnson"?
***** The Power Within (10/24/95) Art Camacho ~ Ted Jan Roberts, William Zabka , Karen Valentine, Keith Coogan.
"Heaven is different for everyone.
For me, it is fishing".
This here's the first film adolescent karate star Ted Jan Roberts starred in after beginning his MASKED RIDER TV show, and his first feature following the same year's superior A DANGEROUS PLACE.
THE POWER WITHIN isn't a bad movie but it's far from great - more of a middle-of-the-road thing, mixing magic and martial arts on a B-movie's budget with unsteady results.
There's an interesting cast here and some decent fight scenes, but for all this one's potential, it still sort of comes up short.The story: When one of two ancient, magic rings comes into the possession of a timid high schooler (Roberts), he acquires not only impressive new abilities but also an adversary in a dangerous thief seeking the ring (William Zabka).The screenplay by PM Entertainment regular Joe Hart is a bit problematic.
I don't think it's very effective in getting its point across.
The lesson it imparts is that you ought to fulfill your potential, something which Ted's character eventually learns he can do even without magic jewelry, but the setups used to illustrate this are unrealistic and unfair.
Prior to acquiring the ring, Ted gets chastised by everyone from his martial arts instructor (Michael DePasquale) to his little brother (the kid from EVENING SHADE) for getting beaten up by no less than five bullies, and after he gets the ring, a teacher challenges him with ridiculously complex history questions as though purposely trying to make him fail.
Later he's arrested for beating up a load of goons in self-defense.
Lighten up, folks!
Gerald Okamura, the wise old man Ted receives his ring from, plays a pretty strange character who introduces the inexplicable magical feats seen in the movie (e.g. teleporting, projecting visions, shooting explosive lightning), but I don't mind him since he delivers what might be the best fight scene of the movie, using smooth kung fu to take on a group of thugs.
This is one of the few fights unmarred by unnecessary editing, which hurts the remaining six brawls to varying degrees.
They're still watchable, especially the one wherein Ted gets back at the aforementioned bullies, but disappointingly, the worst fight is also the most important one: the final showdown between Ted and William Zabka.
Zabka's fun to watch throughout the movie, with his crazy sunglasses and English accent, and by all means it should be intriguing to see him antagonize another karate kid, but it's all for naught when their only battle is a short, one-sided little thing that takes place in front of an unconvincing backdrop.
I've definitely seen better.Not unlike Roberts' previous MAGIC KID, a good portion of the film takes place in and acts as a pseudo-advertisement for the Universal Studios theme park, which is fun in a campy and corny way.
Karen Valentine is interesting as Ted's on screen mother, and there's a lot of enjoyable weirdness throughout the film, like the unexplained presence of a chimpanzee in Gerald Okamura's house and Ted's inexplicable ninja dream.
However, it's not crazy enough to be great on that leg alone, and as a fantasy/martial arts flick it doesn't deliver entirely either.
If this sounds like your kind of thing, go for it, but I've seen better from the boy action hero..
"The Power Within".
Art Camacho's 1995 martial arts fantasy flick "The Power Within" is good at what it wants to be - a martial arts fantasy flick with a good message about believing in yourself and your own abilities, and fulfilling your own potential.Stan Dryer (Ted Jan Roberts) is an average teenager who's having trouble making the grade in school, gets beaten up by the bullies on the school's football team (despite the fact that Stan is taking lessons in Karate and is not very good at it), and is being urged by his best friend Eric Graves (Keith Coogan) to ask pretty popular girl Sandy Applegate (Tracy Melchoir) out to prom - but he's too scared to do so.
In other words, he lacks any sense of self-confidence.To top it off, one day, Stan manages to save the elderly martial arts master, Master Yung (Gerald Okamura), from thugs.
Master Yung dies not long after the struggle, but not before having passed the mysterious and mystical Ring of Power onto Stan, who now finds himself in possession of incredible strength and martial arts skills.
It turns out that the Ring of Power is actually the SECOND of two Rings of Power, the other belonging to Raymond Vonn (William Zabka, of "The Karate Kid"), an art thief and master criminal, who now wants both rings for himself."The Power Within" is very much a "B" movie for teenagers with some after-school special trappings, though it's not one without a good message about believing in yourself and your abilities.
The acting is a mixed bag; Ted Jan Roberts, a kiddie actor known for his martial arts skills in Tae Kwon Do, is easily identifiable as the Everyman that the audience can latch onto, even if his performance is a little bit hammy at times.
William Zabka is by far the film's strongest performer, even if he comes off as nothing more than just a standard movie bad guy (which is not too far removed from the violent teenage black belt he played in "The Karate Kid").6/10P.S.: International Kickboxing legend Don "The Dragon" Wilson makes an inspiring walk-on cameo as himself....
As a Martial Arts Movie....
As a Martial Arts Movie The Power Within is not a badly put together display of moves.
It gives you a sense of self awareness you didn't know you had.It teaches you not to think of yourself a failure all the time but to put in what you've got.
To be able to show others I CAN DO IT..
Is Ted Jan Roberts "The man of your dreams"?.
In this entertaining PM effort, Ted Jan Roberts, or, "TJ" as we like to call him, plays Stan Dryer, a shy 16-year-old kid who wants nothing more than to go to the prom with Sandy, but is too meek to ask.
When an old man, Master Yung (Okamura), gives him half of a powerful ring that gives him confidence and excellent martial arts ability, his life changes for the better.
The only problem is, the other half of the ring belongs to the dastardly Raymond Vonn (Zabka).
Vonn desperately wants the other half of the ring so he can control the world.
Will Stan defeat Vonn and make it to the prom?
Find out today!
TJ has formidable martial arts ability.
He does impressive kicks and can knock out many baddies at once.
Before Stan gets the Power Within, he is failing all his classes in school.
After he gets it, he begins to ace his classes and is quite knowledgeable about the cold war, easily discussing "Gorby" with style and aplomb.
At the prom, in the vein of Corey Feldman, with whom he co-starred in A Dangerous Place (1995), Stan strikes a Michael Jackson-like pose.
Maybe The Power Within isn't ALL good.Zabka as Vonn puts in a fun, over-the-top performance.
He adds a lot of life and energy.
He wears a blue kimono numerous times and chops cinderblocks with his hands.
He has some memorable quotes, such as "If you keep pestering me, I'll send for your soul!", "Obey me or die!", and the strangely homoerotic "Remember me, Stan?
The man of your dreams!" (Stan has weird dreams that feature Vonn, usually laughing maniacally).
Also, one of Vonn's henchmen resembles Gene Simmons sans makeup.
That is pretty intimidating.Stan's brother Deke is the obnoxious little brat who likes to play his Game Boy and yell "Yeah!" He also admonishes his brother that he's "missing Magic Kid!" For those who don't know, Magic Kid (1993) and Magic Kid II (1994) both feature Ted Jan Roberts.
How meta.There is an inexplicable cameo by Don "The Dragon" Wilson.
He is introduced, as himself, to a martial arts class.
He gives Stan some life lessons.
It's always nice to see the fan favorite, even if there is basically no reason to.
He must have been on break from filming the PM vehicle CyberTracker (1994).In all, "The Power Within" is a fun action/martial arts romp meant for teens.
For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com |
tt0081662 | Tsigoineruwaizen | Vacationing in a small seaside village, Aochi, a professor of German, runs into Nakasago, a former colleague turned nomad. Nakasago is being pursued by an angry mob for allegedly seducing and killing a fisherman's wife. Police intervene and Aochi vouches for his friend, preventing his arrest. The two catch up over dinner where they are entertained by and become smitten with the mourning geisha Koine. Six months later, Aochi visits his friend and is shocked to find that he has settled down and is having a child with Sono, a woman who bears a remarkable resemblance to Koine. Nakasago plays him a recording of Zigeunerweisen and they discuss inaudible mumbling on the record. Nakasago suddenly takes to the road again with Koine, leaving Sono to birth their child alone. Both men enter affairs with the other's wife. Sono later dies of the flu and is replaced by Koine as a surrogate mother. Nakasago takes to the road yet again. Aochi learns of Nakasago's death in a landslide. Koine visits Aochi and requests the return of the Zigeunerweisen record but he is sure he never borrowed it. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | Astonishing series of outrageous images.
So you are here because you like such outrageous films as Branded to Kill and Nikutai no Mon. Overwhelmed by those films, you couldn't help but search for more about this truly unique filmmaker and found that he has continued to make films in the last two decades too.
That is what led you here, right?This film is a thoroughly independent "art" film made with fairly low budget.
The story is about two university professors who meet a woman...
OK, it is impossible to summarize the story of a Seijun film and actually say ANYTHING about the film, as you all know.
As usual, the film gets forwarded through a series of images rather than driven by the plot engine.
One of his finest works at it.
Possibly the best.Sadly enough, this film hasn't been seen by many outside Japan, presumably because its "Japanese-ness" would prevent them from fully appreciating its mastery (they say it should require some knowledge on the atmosphere of Japan of the period in which the film is set - in the early 20th century - to enjoy its mood).But I doubt it.
This is an astonishingly beautiful and nightmarish film that could be appreciated by anyone who loves cinema, although I must admit that it is not for everyone, not even for a Seijun fan who loves his yakuza flicks merely for their over-the-top absurdity and "campiness." Be warned.There is no yakuza or prostitute in this film.
Only chilling, nightmarish images.This is a film for those who really want to find out that those B flicks are not the only things that Seijun Suzuki can offer.
I sincerely hope that someone has enough guts to introduce this film to the world to make it available in English (French, German, Spanish and whatever) on video.
Suzuki Returns.
A surreal period film following a university professor (Toshiya Fujita) and his eerie nomad friend (Yoshio Harada) as they go through loose romantic triangles and face death in peculiar ways.Director Seijun Suzuki was terminated from his contract with Nikkatsu Studios in 1968 for making "movies that make no sense and no money" (specifically "Branded to Kill") and was subsequently blacklisted.
In the following years he conversed frequently with his crew at his home and continued developing ideas for new projects.
Suzuki's blacklisting ended with the release of his critically and commercially unsuccessful 1977 film "A Tale of Sorrow and Sadness".
But it was "Zigeunerweisen" that brought him lasting acclaim.You might wonder, why does a Japanese film have a German title?
Well, "Zigeunerweisen" (also known as "Gypsy Airs") is a musical composition for violin and orchestra written in 1878 by Pablo de Sarasate, based on themes of the Roma people.
This composition provided the title and much of the soundtrack for Seijun Suzuki's film.
Indeed, the concept of wandering is intrinsic to the plot.But this is less about plot and more about dreamlike imagery.
There are many strange visuals.
Not outright bizarre, but some things bordering on performance art.
One scene, for example, has two men buried in the sand beating each other with rods.
Why is this necessary?
It isn't, but is all a part of what makes the film memorable."Zigeunerweisen" was a surprise success in Japan, both commercially and critically; it took home the Japanese Academy Awards for best picture, director, and supporting actress, and the prestigious Kinema Jumpo awards for best director, film, screenplay, actress, and supporting actress.
Suzuki was not just back, he was finally recognized as a real treasure.
This success naturally lead to future films, and this became the first part of Suzuki's Taishō Roman Trilogy, followed by "Kagero-za" (1981) and "Yumeji" (1991).
Not sequels or a trilogy in a strict sense, they are each surrealistic psychological dramas and ghost stories linked by style, themes and the Taishō period (1912-1926) setting.In North America, Kino International released a DVD edition of the film in 2006.
It features a 25-minute interview with Suzuki discussing the making of the Taishō Roman Trilogy, a biography and filmography of the same, the theatrical trailer and a gallery of promotional material and photographs.
The Arrow Video Blu-ray brings these features along for the ride.
On top of that, they offer a high-definition presentation and a new introduction to the film by critic Tony Rayns..
Seijun Suzuki's art film didn't quite satisfy me.
Suzuki is generally known for his outrageous, eye-popping imagery.
I think his films actually contain a lot of depth and are great besides that imagery, but I know it's the visuals that bring him his fame.
This film, independently produced after a long hiatus from film-making, is a different kind of Suzuki.
A VERY different Suzuki.
Zigeunerweisen, named after a musical composition that plays a couple of times during the film and a record of which plays an important part of the plot, is a rather slowly paced art film, a very long one at that, with an almost European feeling.
There are a few striking images in its two and a half hours (most notably a woman licking a man's eyeball), but it isn't the phantasmagoria of Suzuki's earlier films, or his later films.
The dialogue is often weird and poetic.
My favorite line was "You caress me as if sucking my very bones." The film takes place during the Taisho period, which occurred after the Meiji Restoration during the 20s and 30s.
It is a period marked by further Westernization and a loss of traditional values (I might be wrong, but I think Oshima's In the Realm of the Senses is set during the same period).
The story involves two friends, a professor and a vagabond, and their relationships with their wives, as well as a geisha they once met on a vacation.
There isn't too much story, per se.
The vagabond marries a woman who looks identical to the geisha, but doesn't stay faithful, or even at home.
The film is mostly told from the point of view of the professor (played by Toshiya Fujita, the director of Lady Snowblood).
Like I said, the film is very deliberately paced.
It was hard to stay interested at times.
But the movie moves toward a mysterious and haunting finale.
I don't think I get it, but I found the whole film intriguing, at least.
Not my favorite Suzuki by a long shot, but maybe I'll understand it better on a subsequent viewing (which probably won't happen for a long while)..
Look, stop me if you've heard this one, but there were these two fellas.....
I'm on a different track from this movie and so may not have understood it right, since what I understood it to mean didn't agree with the summary in the program.
What I got was a metaphysical buddy movie about a sane man who looks somewhat like Edgar Allan Poe and a crazy man who seems to be channeling Toshiro Mifune in "Rashomon." The crazy man treats a succession of women more or less badly, more or less with their complicity, and the sane man more or less permits it, and gets bitten for it in the end.
Even death doesn't help him shake off his opposite number.
I interpreted this as a Jekyll/Hyde story about the two sides of human nature mysteriously but inescapably linked.
Male nature, that is; the women in the film are seen in terms of their relation to men.
In the focus on perversity and obsessiveness, the plot reminded me of Poe or Rampo (and the movies from Poe and Rampo), but until the last half hour the atmosphere is not much like a horror movie; more as if Bunuel had written a Kabuki play and Satyajit Ray had started to film it but dropped out and been replaced by Roger Corman; except that the films of all three, to me, are more interesting to watch than this, which I found rather long and monotonous.
Much of it seems like a play, most of it is in dialogue, and the more visual parts tend to turn arty and a little silly.
The last half hour, in which the plot turns ghost-storyish, I found more entertaining but off the point; an easy out.
For me the best thing about the film was the performance of the leading actor, which seemed very good to me and which I would have liked to see applied to a different script.
But again, I'm not attuned to its sensibility.
Perhaps my life is already so obsessive that I'm jaded; a few more obsessions more or less...ahhh, big deal..
Brilliantly Absurdist Japanese Ghost Story.
Suzuki's first independent production (co-produced with the Art Theatre Guild) is a mesmerizing combination of the absurdly irrational, painterly beautiful, and fiendishly historic.
Setting the film during the Taisho period (a relatively small Japanese period which can effectively be compared to the Weimar or "roaring twenties" in the US), it's anarchic and sexuallly attuned characters reflect not only their time, but the revitalization of such things, in a much more brazen form, during the 60s.
In this way, the film shares a great deal with Yoshida's Eros Plus Massacre, a film set simultaneously (in every meaning of the word) in the 20s and 60s.
Insanity plagues this film, and in some ways I believe it's about losing control of one's ability to perceive the world around them.
It pursues the question "what is real" and "what is imagined", and is, eventually, a Japanese ghost story about friendship and lust.There are four (or five, if you count Otani Naoko's dual role as Koine and Sono (recalling for some, Bunuel's that Obscure Object of Desire, another great absurdist film about identity and lust) virile and virulent characters that set the scene.
This is a small set of people, two couples really, which the triangles and relationships of the film are formed.
It allows Suzuki to play with the characters emotions constantly, using various flirtations, imagined or real, to enhance the dialogue interplay, almost immediately setting up a conflict between the two male characters over a geisha in mourning (Koine).
Fetishes of bones and blood set the stage, against a backdrop of hard lines, and an almost immobile camera (enhanced by gorgeous telephoto lense, full frame 35mm cinematography by Nagatsuka Kazue, responsible for two of Suzuki's best looking earlier films Branded to Kill and Story of a Prostitute.) With symmetry playing a key role in the mise en scene, it's no wonder so much force comes from the desires and soullessness of the participants.What really sets this film apart from so many of Suzuki's others, is his blatant disregard for letting the viewer know what is happening in "real life" and what is going on in someone's head.
By the end of the film, much is thrown into question, and we're better off for it.
As for the pace, I find it to be a regularly paced film, with brief moments of heightened suspense (at times it's as if you're watching a Paradjanov film).
Zigeunerweisen (named after a Pablo de Sarasate piece for orchestra and violin, which is played over the opening credits and a couple more times during the film) proves that as eerie as the truth can be, a ghost story that hides the truth and buries your life in the shadows, is all too haunting an experience.
Amazing film..
Between two worlds....
Away from a studio's constraints, Suzuki shows what he can do on his own, and very beautiful and strange it is too.
A precursor of David Lynch's recent work, we are shown a series of unexplained and inexplicable events which may or may not be "real" within the film's terms.
it has faults- it's leisurely and too long, to make up for years making ninety-minute B-movies, perhaps, though the scenes are so beautiful it's impossible to say which aren't necessary and an important character, Aeoki's wife Taeko, seems incomprehensible rather than mysterious, but it shows Suzuki didn't need the bonds of studio discipline to fight against.
A film about the first encounters of Japan and Europe- especially culturally- it's hard to say what is traditionally Japanese, what from the book, what Suzuki's contribution and every comment I make is tentative.
First of all, there's the contrast between Aochi, professor of German (a culture with its own supernatural literature, which may be referred to here), and the vagabond Nakasago: except at home Aochi always wears European dress- suits and ties, polished shoes, overcoats and hats; he is clean-shaven with a carefully trimmed moustache and and well-cut hair.
At the same time, he looks constricted and distorted by them.
Nakasago is his exact opposite- traditionally dressed and dishevelled with uncut hair and beard, (apparently) open in behaviour and speech, but he was once a colleague of Aochi's and presumably dressed like him then.
Their first encounter is unreal- no matter how deferential the society, a policeman wouldn't just release the suspect in a possible murder case just on the word of a strange professor.
Indeed, Aochi's very presence at the scene is mysterious.As well as the possibility that they are doppelgangers there is something eerie about the route between the two men's houses- grottos cut from stone and mysterious tunnels divide them- which suggests it may be a journey to the afterlife or another world.
Koine suggests she may be a fox- an animal that has magic powers and can take human form in Japanese folklore- and she seems to age less than the other characters in the course of the film.
It may be the way Suzuki cuts or hir refusal to use extras but things happen without visible cause in Nakasago's house.
Equally, there's the contrast between and among the women- Koine and Sano, traditional Japanese "types"- are they different people- either in "reality" or the dream-world of the film or the same person pretending to be two people?- and Taeko and her sister- there's some kind of mystery about the relationship of those two, and just what is the disease that slowly and elegantly kills Shuko while others die of definite and specified causes?
Does her death cure Taeko of her allergies?
What is the meaning- is there a meaning?- of the cod roe she hides- or says she hides- in a cupboard for Aochi?
Who is the child Toyojiro's father?
Aochi may suspect Nakasaya and his wife or having sex but in the film's reality he and Sono definitely seem to have sex.
What is the connexion of the two groups of three blind beggars with the central plot and why the references to European art in their scenes?
They are obviously non-realistic scenes- the girls' instrument has no soundholes so would not make a noise in reality- but who dreams them at any point in the film?
What is the significance of the Zigeunerweisen- an obvious and banal explanation of the film would be that it is a reverie and fantasy inspired by Sarate's gypsy music.It's interesting to speculate on these questions- and others- but I don't think there are answers- certainly not clear-cut answers- and I don't think there are meant to be.
There's a dream-logic to the film which works beautifully and all we need to do is sit back and watch these strange and beautiful scenes and the incidental music- entirely percussive: bells, drums, scratchers, gongs, which makes its own strange connexions between the scenes.
We can look for meanings- humans can't not look for meanings- but they can't be certain. |
tt0044015 | The Secret of Convict Lake | In 1871, six convicts escape from a Carson City prison. A posse loses them in a mountain blizzard, and after the posse turn back, the convicts continue on foot and one of the fugitives freezes to death. The five remaining are Canfield, Greer, Cockerell, Anderson and Maxwell. They make it to a lake called Monte Diablo, where five women live in a settlement while their men are away prospecting for silver. Granny is the elder, watching over Marcia, Rachel, Harriet and Barbara.
Frightened by these men who arrive at night, the women however permit them to use an empty cabin. Granny hides guns where the unarmed men can't find them and they soon realise that the men are escaped convicts. In exposition, it becomes clear that Canfield (Glenn Ford) has returned to this small town for a reason and the other convicts suspect that he has money hidden somewhere in the small settlement. Canfield, we learn, had been convicted of killing a mine owner, Morgan, and $40,000 had gone missing, unfound after the murder.
Canfield learns that the local woman Marcia, to whom he is attracted, is engaged to be married to a man named Rudy Schaeffer. It was Rudy Schaeffer whose testimony led to Canfield being sent to the penitentiary. Canfield claims it was Rudy behind the robbery, that Rudy took the $40,000 and unfairly swore testimony against Canfield, who then reveals that he has returned to the town to seek revenge and kill Schaeffer. Marcia finds it hard to accept his version of events, a damning version against her fiancé, while at the same time she is attracted to Canfield.
A barn catches fire due to Rachel's carelessness and the convicts help put it out. The women are grateful and treat them more kindly. Canfield seems the most decent. The other four plot to get firearms and escape as soon as there is a thaw in the frigid cold, as they continue to suspect that Canfield has returned here for the missing money they. too, want to find. In private conversation it is revealed they have no compunction in killing Canfield once they have all that they want.
Meanwhile, the men of the town are returning from their silver prospecting and stop in a saloon along the way. Rudy Schaeffer spots a wanted poster identifying Canfield and the other fugitives as escapees. He and his men head back on horseback to the lake and their families. Meanwhile, Greer has worked his charms on Rachel (who is Rudy's sister) and she reveals to Greer where the hidden guns are. He, Cockerell and Anderson burst in on Granny, remove her from her bed and find them under her mattress. Marcia meanwhile, terrified that her fiancé is targeted for a revenge killing, rides out of the small settlement to raise the alarm, but is followed by Canfield who eventually catches her settling down to camp for the night in a cave. He convinces her that he is indeed an innocent, good man. She believes him and tries to talk him out of his revenge plot. He says that the mine owner Morgan had swindled him out of the money, that he had come to talk to Morgan about it. Morgan had pulled a gun on him, they had scuffled and the gun had gone off accidentally, killing Morgan. Rudy had witnessed this, but in order to get the money had falsely testified that Canfield had killed Morgan in cold blood.
Canfield and Marcia kiss and both then plan to return to the settlement in the morning. Clyde, the younger convict, who is revealed to have been in jail for being a psycho woman killer is attracted to the youngest, Barbara, and takes her on a long walk and tries to kiss her. Barbara resists, but when she does, he starts to get agitated and attacks her. Canfield, returning to the settlement on horseback with Marcia hears Barbara's cries and goes to help her. In arriving to assist, Canfield sees Clyde pull a knife, about to stab Barbara when Canfield lurches in and fights him, getting stabbed in the shoulder. Barbara escapes screaming and runs through the clearing towards the group of other women who are out looking for her, some carrying pitchforks. Canfield, stabbed, cannot chase Clyde, who runs after Barbara through the trees like the lunatic he is, waving his knife. Unfortunately he runs into the women with their pitchforks and they kill him.
Back at the settlement, Marcia confronts Rachel and tells her that her fiancé Rudy (Rachel's brother) may very well have been guilty of the robbery and not Canfield. Rachel has looked for the missing $40,000 and found it in a trunk belonging to Rudy. She gives it to Marcia who then takes it and gives it to Greer, exhorting him to leave them all alone and go.
Rudy Schaeffer and his men arrive back in the small town and confront the convicts who are attempting to escape. In a gunfight, Cockerell and Anderson are shot. Greer flees and runs up a mountain, the $40,000 flying from his pants in the wind. He stops to try and pick it up and is shot, falling from a ledge on a high cliff to his death. Canfield finally comes up behind Rudy Schaeffer and holds a gun on him, telling him to confess to all the others about the true story of the robbery and the mine owner's death. Marcia runs up behind screaming, scared about what is about to occur. As Canfield turns to see her, Rudy spins around and pulls a gun. However, Canfield turns back and kills Schaeffer in self-defense.
Soon after, the townsfolk are standing around 5 graves. (The 4 dead convicts and Rudy.) They all see a posse arriving on horseback in the distance. Marcia pleads with them all to tell the Sheriff when he arrives that Canfield is innocent and killed Rudy in self-defence. Rachel wants to turn Canfield in for killing her brother, whether he meant to or not, since he had returned to the town initially with the sole purpose of killing Rudy. The others all think that Canfield should go to trial and let a jury decide. Marcia pleads again that the only fair trial he will receive is here and now.
When the sheriff arrives, he walks in on the end of the burial ceremony and sees the 5 graves. He says to Granny that he is looking for 5 convicts, (having found the 6th frozen on the mountain). She points to the five graves and says that the convicts are buried, not revealing that Rudy is in one of the graves rather than Canfield. The Sheriff, believing Granny, then asks if anyone here wants to add anything or make a statement. One by one they all decline. The last person asked is Rachel. She hesitates, then quietly says she has nothing to add. Marcia and Canfield end up together as the posse leaves and the townsfolk file away. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | women and condemned convicts.
Six condemned convicts escape over a mountain pass (one of them doesn't make it, leaving five) in a blizzard and take refuge in an outpost where the men have temporarily left their wives and assorted other females to watch over the property.
It's quite a setup and the movie does not let it down.
Directed by Michael Gordon who did the superior Another Part of the Forest, this film nearly equals that one, with the women acting fairly mesmerizing as they eye these cons first with suspicion and later with sympathy and then a little lust.
It's fairly predictable but that does not detract from the scenes, especially with Ford and Gene Tierney and Scott with Ann Dvorak.
While Glenn Ford is great and has the hero's role, the parts for both Zachary Scott and Jack Lambert as the two heavies, are both excellent.
Shot in black and white, the opening scene of them trekking over a mountain in a full on blizzard looks dark and ominous.
Gordon doesn't waste any character in the film.
Everyone has a background which is revealed with just enough information to leave a lasting impression.
Amazing this film hasn't been seen more..
Effective Western with a fine cast.
In "The Secret of Convict Lake" danger looms in the winter of the 1870's when escaped prisoners hide out at a colony consisting mostly of women.
There's enough drama to hold your interest as the ladies unleash some of their own frustrations as they contend with some slimey characters.
Of course the "secret" is another matter which I won't reveal.
The exceptional cast includes Glenn Ford, Gene Tierney, Ethel Barrymore, Zachary Scott, Ann Dvorak, Jeanette Nolan, Helen Westcott and Ruth Donnelly.
There's also an impressive performance from Robert Hylton an actor with potential who should have had a bigger career in Hollywood..
Bring Your Parka.
Those opening scenes of mushing through snow under arctic conditions made me appreciate the comforts of an easy chair and fireplace.
It's an oddball Western from start to finish with a strong cast and a noirish atmosphere.
Essentially a band of escaped convicts invade a small mountain village whose men are away leaving only the women.
As you can guess a number of subplots evolve from the premise, the most important of which has Glenn Ford trying to clear himself of an unjust murder charge.I love it when evil-eyed bad guy Jack Lambert has a stare-down with gimlet-eyed bad guy Zachary Scott.
It's almost like a couple of Darth Vaders squaring off.
There are a number of good scenes most of which involve Scott, especially when he's vamping the hapless Ann Dvorak.
But, the best scene defies our expectations when the two youngsters run off to the woods.
It's a chilling, well done sequence.
The cast is almost an A-list, with Ford quite good as the resolute Jim Canfield when he stands up to the other four convicts.
Ditto, the other performers who manage to make some difficult dramatic scenes convincing enough.
And catch that ending.
It made me wonder just what does comprise a "duly constituted jury".
It's an unusual resolution for its time, to say the least.
I don't think I ever found out the "Secret" of the title, nor I believe do we ever see Convict Lake.
Nonetheless, there's more than enough going on to fill a lively 83 minutes, and I agree with the others that the movie is generally an under-rated Western..
If you're a thief you think everybody steals.
The Secret Of Convict Lake is based on the proposition in the title, if you're a thief you think everyone steals.
So when Glenn Ford who was framed for a robbery and murder leads a breakout in a Nevada prison and takes six men over the Sierras to a remote town in the foothills.
Ford is looking to even the score with the guy that framed him, but the others who include Zachary Scott, Cyril Cusack, Jack Lambert, and Richard Hylton don't believe him, they believe he's hidden the stolen money there.One of their number dies, frozen to death on a mountaintop, but the others arrive at a small settlement on a mountain lake.
The men are gone and the women are led by tough old pioneer lady Ethel Barrymore.
Ford has a tough time keeping the others in line, especially Scott who definitely has his own ideas.
It's pretty tough among the women as well, they haven't seen their men for weeks and some of them are looking good.
For Barbara Bates especially, a young inexperienced girl who Hylton takes a fancy to.
By the way in those days of The Code, Hylton's portrayal of a sex offender was pretty daring.Barrymore and Gene Tierney are pretty good at reading character and realize Ford is not a real criminal type.
How that all works out you have to see The Secret Of Convict Lake.The film was shot in another remote Sierra town called Bishop, California and in Durango, Colorado.
The cinematography is both stark, forbidding, and strangely beautiful.
It happens to be based on a true story at a place called Monte Diablo Lake renamed Convict Lake as per the film.According to Peter Ford's biography of his dad, Glenn sustained a serious eye infection during the shoot and wore a patch over the infected eye when the cameras weren't rolling.
He also had a great admiration for Ethel Barrymore as actress.
And he and Gene Tierney found each other's company delightful.The Secret Of Convict Lake is a must for Glenn Ford's legion of fans..
This film was a critical and commercial success (Wikipedia).
Some films end up being forgotten and that's the case with this excellent western directed by Michael Gordon (Cyrano de Bergerac, Pillow Talk) and with great black and white cinematography by Leo Tover (The Day the Earth Stood Still, The Tall Men, The Sun Also Rises, among many others).
Inspired by a legend of the Convict Lake (Sierra Nevada, California), it tells the story of men who escaped from jail and go looking for 40000 dollars, through the snow in a lonely group of houses located on an almost unreachable valley.
Glenn Ford and the great bad guy Zachary Scott are the main male characters and Gene Tierney, Ethel Barrymore and Ann Dvorak, the female.
Great script, even Ben Hecht touched it, though uncredited.
Dale Robertson lends his voice as the narrator, also uncredited.
This film was a critical and commercial success and I am sure that it will eventually be back where it belongs, among the best westerns, in DVDs , etc..
Far better than most westerns because it is so unusual..
When the film begins, a group of prisoners have escaped in the Sierra Nevadas.
Most were soon caught but there are six unaccounted for...and headed towards a very, very small town.
To make things worse for the folks in this minuscule town, all the men are gone...leaving everything to the women.
While the women do initially get the jump on the prisoners, they cannot let them freeze to death or starve so they take them in...but keep them under close observation.
There are some obvious problems...when they are healthier, this group of sociopaths are a serious risk to rape, steal or do other mayhem.
Also, one of the men (Glenn Ford) is in this small town for a reason...one of the men from the town set him up to go to prison and he wants revenge.
But he also is a decent man...and might be the only thing between the women and these sickos.In some ways this film reminds me of the Gregory Peck film "Yellow Sky"....which is about a gang of thugs who harass an old man and his daughter.
But this one has quite a few differences and is very good in its own right.
Unusual and well worth seeing...and based, at least in part, on real events.
How much was fiction and how much wasn't, I have no idea..
good Western, hang in there for the second half.
I just want to say that this is a better than average western with a good cast.
The first half was rather slow, boring and uneventful.
I was about to turn it off, but I fortunately stayed with it.
The second half really came to life with lots of action, a fast moving intricate plot and soap opera-like goings on.It's interesting that the resolution is similar to Glen Ford's oater "The Fastest Gun Alive," another good Western.The whole cast shined.
Besides Ford and Tierney, Zachary Scott and Ann Dvorak were compelling.Though not an "A" production by 20th century Fox, it was far from the typical "B" production values.
The cinematography (Leo Tover), acting, music, dialog, etc.
were all top-notch..
Intriguing, if melodramatic, outdoor saga with neatly defined characters....
Unusual, exceptional western has six fugitives from a Nevada penitentiary on the run from the law in a snowstorm, taking refuge in a remote woodland village inhabited only by women, mostly wives of traveling prospectors.
Glenn Ford plays the falsely accused thief of $40,000 out to kill the liar who wrongly fingered him for the crime and stole off with the money himself; Gene Tierney is the crook's unknowing intended, who instead develops a passion for Ford.
Interesting tale plays out melodramatically rather than as a suspense story; still entertaining however, with excellent lead performances and solid work from Ethel Barrymore as the elderly matriarch of the ladies.
There's an exciting wrap-up to the whole thing (topped with a dandy fall from a mountainside), plus a narrator telling us it was all based upon a true occurrence.
That seems unlikely (as rendered here), though it makes for a rugged adventure with romantic asides.
Briefly..
Six convicts escape from a Nevada prison, barely surviving winter storms, and find a tiny village of women, the men all having been called away.
Leader of the convicts is Glen Ford, innocent of the crime of which he's been convicted, of course.
Excluding Cyril Cusack as a good-natured "Limey" comic, the others tend to ride a little on the nasty side.
Zachary Scott, in particular, signals his desire to debauch Ann Dvorak the way a traffic light signals its status.
In this case, Scott, with this toothy grin and salacious experessions, signals "rape."The performances aren't bad and the plot is just complicated and coincidental enough, but the black and white photography doesn't really capture the brutal winter.
Everything just looks grimy..
The Secret Of Convincing Narrative.
I first saw this peak time one Saturday night on UK ITV in the '70's and it's always stuck with me.
It's a B+ Western with a good story and production, good acting and photography, and the very definition of Simple Yet Effective.Six convicts on the run from a posse in blizzardy California in 1871, become five and then apparently stumble across a small settlement solely er manned by women.
It turns out that their menfolk are away on some premise but on their way back while the good convict handsome Glenn Ford was waiting for one of them to return so he could kill him for revenge.
Slimy Zachary Scott played the main bad convict manically convinced there was a fortune to be stolen somewhere.
The women were in the main only lonely but the bad men were hogged up and dangerous even when not armed, and confirmed main old dame Ethel Barrymore's concern that they were wild bears and not men.
The characters were all strong and strongly delineated, if made today the sex would probably be literally in your face but there'd also be a much greater sublety in everything as films are taken more leisurely nowadays.
Everyone followed their correct moral paths right down to the morally ambiguous ending – however I suppose Glenn Ford should really have owned up to save the moral dilemma he put both the townsfolk and the majority of us viewers through who think it a good ending to a good little film..
The Convict Conundrum..
The Secret of Convict Lake is directed by Michael Gordon and collectively written by Anna Hunger, Jack Pollexfen, Oscar Saul and Victor Trivas.
It stars Glenn Ford, Gene Tierney, Ethel Barrymore, Zachary Scott, Ann Dvorak, Barbara Bates, Cyril Cusack, Richard Hylton, Helen Westcott, and Jeanette Nolan.
Music is by Sol Kaplan and cinematography by Leo Tover.I came here to kill one man.
I don't mind killing a couple of others if I have to.It's winter time here at Diablo Lake, and the five convicts who have survived the escape find themselves holed up in a remote village.
Their reasons for being there differ, more notable though is that the men of the village are away prospecting, meaning the village is only currently populated by women.It's a fine bubbling broth of scenarios, each convict is different, ranging from unstable psycho type, alpha male, twitchy youngster, simpleton and on to the calm likeable one who doesn't appear to belong in this company.
So with the reasons for the men being here established, narrative then jostles with the inner fighting of the convicts, and the various emotional strands of the women folk.
Suffice to say there is sexual tensions, mistrust, misrule, macho posturing and of course secrets to be born out.Violence is sporadic but potent upon arrivals (one instance especially grabs you by the throat), and with the mystery of the men's crimes a constant question, intrigue makes for an enjoyable companion.
Tech credits are uneven.
The studio bound feel of the village sequences which fill out 90% of the pic are an itch, making you hanker for the more expansive snowy terrains that greeted us at story beginning.
However, Tover's monochrome photography is suitably mood compliant, even if Kaplan's score isn't, while the lead actors are giving good value to offset some of the histrionics elsewhere.Perhaps not the firecracker it could have been, given all the elements involved - particularly annoying that a strong feminist bent subsides into token play - this is none the less a most interesting piece that holds attention throughout.
THE SECRET OF CONVICT LAKE (Michael Gordon, 1951) ***.
Unusual Western which creates a wonderful atmosphere throughout with the gleaming black-and-white cinematography of the snowy setting; the narrative is set in motion with the appearance of five escaped prisoners (hungry, tired and with the law on their tails) at a small backwoods village, which they presently find inhabited only by the womenfolk.
The former are led by Zachary Scott and, in their majority, expect to have a run of the place but have reckoned without the resilience of the women, who have learned to defend themselves from outsiders.Besides, Scott is constantly at loggerheads with Glenn Ford: the latter had been convicted by the false evidence given at the trial by a local (the intended of heroine Gene Tierney), and Ford has come there expressly for the purpose of revenge while Scott is eager to lay his hands on the fortune he believes Ford stole and, consequently, is hidden there!
Due to a raging blizzard, the women are forced to extend their hospitality to the prisoners; however, the two groups live in isolation from one another, until the barn is accidentally set on fire and the men lend a helping hand which breaks down the barrier if only for a little while.Two other important female roles are those of Ann Dvorak as Tierney's prospective sister-in-law (a shrewish spinster who's subsequently given the runaround by the slimy Scott only so that he can get her to reveal the location of the weapons, which the women have hidden away) and Ethel Barrymore as, naturally, the matriarch of the settlement (bearing a strong will to make up for her fading health).
Among the convicts are Cyril Cusack (the philosopher in the group) and Jack Lambert (the equally unavoidable brutish thug); another is a harmless-looking young man who goes into blackouts when contradicted and is then gripped by a homicidal fury he strikes a friendship with the youngest in the place (Barbara Bates) but is soon forcing himself on the girl when he gets her alone
which leads him to a fight with Ford and then has to contend with the wrath of the other women, who promptly attack him with their pitch-forks!
Of course, Ford and Tierney themselves develop feelings for one another and, ultimately, the latter confesses that she doesn't love her fiancée (having accepted him only out of gratitude for the attentions he gave Tierney when down on her luck).
Eventually, the menfolk of the village turn up and the convicts have to shoot it out with them (minutes only after Dvorak has disclosed the hiding-place of the money stolen by her brother and which Tierney has given to Scott so that he and his companions could leave!); amid all this hubbub, Ford has a showdown with his old nemesis (witnessed by Tierney).
The finale is quite splendid: with the weather now calm, the posse has resumed the chase arriving on the scene just as the townsfolk are holding services over five graves (whose occupants the former take to be the fugitives); at first, the locals were divided over whether to give Ford away or not but, after Tierney has pleaded his case, Barrymore's authority over the community ensures that everyone is of the same mind.Though essentially modest (running for a mere 83 minutes), the film is both good-looking and well-acted very much an under-appreciated genre effort, evoking memories of such classics as THE OX-BOW INCIDENT (1943) and YELLOW SKY (1948), which ought to be on DVD (God knows Fox have done well by their vintage catalogue).
By the way, I've got two more exotic Glenn Ford titles from this same era to catch up with namely APPOINTMENT IN HONDURAS (1953) and PLUNDER OF THE SUN (1953) which thankfully, are on DVD |
tt0032028 | The Three Musketeers | In Venice, the musketeers Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, with the help of Milady de Winter, steal airship blueprints made by Leonardo da Vinci. However, they are betrayed by Milady, who incapacitates them and sells the blueprints to the Duke of Buckingham.
A year later, d'Artagnan leaves his village in Gascony for Paris in hopes of becoming a musketeer as his father was, only to learn that they were disbanded. At a rural bar, he challenges Captain Rochefort, leader of Cardinal Richelieu's guard, to a duel after being offended by him, but Rochefort merely shoots him while he's distracted. Once in Paris, d'Artagnan separately encounters Athos, Porthos and Aramis and, accidentally offending all three, schedules duels with each. Athos brings Porthos and Aramis to the duel as his seconds and d'Artagnan realizes who they are. Richelieu's guards arrive to arrest them, but, inspired by d'Artagnan, the musketeers fight together and win. All four are summoned before the young King Louis XIII and Richelieu urges him to execute them, but Queen Anne is impressed by their bravery and the king condecorates them instead.
Richelieu instructs Milady, now his accomplice, to plant false love letters among Queen Anne's possessions, steal her diamond necklace, and take it to the Tower of London in order to frame her as having an affair with Buckingham, which would force King Louis to execute her and declare war on England. At this point, the people would demand a more experienced leader: Richelieu himself. In order to secure her own position, Milady demands that Richelieu declare in a written authorization that she is working on behalf of France.
The false letters are found and given to King Louis, who is advised by Richelieu to set up a ball at which Queen Anne would be forced to wear the necklace. If she doesn't, then her affair is real, and there will be war. Queen Anne's lady-in-waiting Constance Bonacieux discovers Richelieu's plan and pleads with the musketeers to stop him. They follow Milady and Buckingham to London, while Constance is captured by Rochefort for helping the musketeers to escape from him.
In London, Milady tells Buckingham the musketeers have arrived to take revenge on him and teaches him all their tendencies in battle. D'Artagnan is captured, but turns out to be a decoy, allowing his associates to steal Buckingham's airship and rescue him. Milady's getaway coachman reveals himself as the musketeers' manservant Planchet and delivers her to his masters, who retrieve the necklace from her. Athos prepares to execute Milady for her treachery, but she leaps off the airship, apparently dying on her own terms.
The musketeers depart back to Paris, only to be intercepted by Rochefort in another airship, as Milady had given Richelieu copies of da Vinci's blueprints. Rochefort offers to exchange Constance for the necklace, but captures d'Artagnan and orders an attack as soon as he retrieves the jewels. His superior airship has the upper hand and severely damages the opposing ship, but the musketeers manage to crash both onto Notre Dame. On the roof, d'Artagnan duels and ultimately kills Rochefort. Constance is sent ahead to quietly return the necklace to Queen Anne.
The musketeers arrive at the ball and, for the sake of King Louis and his people, lie by claiming that Rochefort tried to sabotage an airship that Richelieu built for them, and that they executed him for his treason on Richelieu's permission. To convince the king, Athos presents Milady's authorization, which the former accepts. Richelieu, satisfied, offers the musketeers a place in his army, but they refuse, and Richelieu vows they will come to regret their decision.
Meanwhile, Milady is found alive at the English Channel by Buckingham, who declares his intention to exact revenge. He is then revealed to be advancing towards France with a massive fleet of battleships and airships. | good versus evil, action, historical fiction | train | wikipedia | null |
tt2209764 | Transcendence | Dr. Will Caster (Johnny Depp) is a scientist who researches the nature of sentience, including artificial intelligence. He and his team work to create a sentient computer; he predicts that such a computer will create a technological singularity, or in his words "Transcendence". His wife, Evelyn (Rebecca Hall), is also a scientist and helps him with his work.
Following one of Will's presentations, an anti-technology terrorist group called "Revolutionary Independence From Technology" (R.I.F.T.) shoots Will with a polonium-laced bullet and carries out a series of synchronized attacks on A.I. laboratories across the country. Will is given no more than a month to live. In desperation, Evelyn comes up with a plan to upload Will's consciousness into the quantum computer that the project has developed. His best friend and fellow researcher, Max Waters (Paul Bettany), questions the wisdom of this choice, reasoning that the "uploaded" Will would be only an imitation of the real person. Will's consciousness survives his body's death in this technological form and requests to be connected to the Internet to grow in capability and knowledge. Max refuses to have any part of the experiment. Evelyn demands that Max leave and connects the computer intelligence to the Internet via satellite.
R.I.F.T.'s leader Bree (Kate Mara) kidnaps Max and eventually persuades him to join the group. The government is also suspicious of what Will's uploaded consciousness will do and plans to use the terrorists to take the blame for the government's actions to stop him.
In his virtual form and with Evelyn's help, Will uses his new-found vast capabilities to build a technological utopia in a remote desert town called Brightwood, where he spearheads the development of ground-breaking technologies in medicine, energy, biology, and nanotechnology. Evelyn, however, grows fearful of Will's motives when he displays the ability to remotely connect to and control people's minds after they have been subjected to his nano-particles.
FBI agent Donald Buchanan (Cillian Murphy), with the help of government scientist Joseph Tagger (Morgan Freeman), plans to stop the sentient entity from spreading. As Will has already spread his influence to all the networked computer technology in the world, Max and R.I.F.T. develop a computer virus with the purpose of deleting Will's source code, destroying him. Evelyn plans to upload the virus by infecting herself and then having Will upload her consciousness. A side effect of the virus would be the destruction of technological civilization. This would also disable the nano-particles, which have spread in the water, through the wind and have already started to eradicate pollution, disease, and human mortality.
When Evelyn goes back to the research center, she is stunned to see Will in a newly created organic body identical to his old one. Will welcomes her but is instantly aware that she is carrying the virus and intends to destroy him. The FBI and the members of R.I.F.T. attack the base with artillery, destroying much of its power supply and fatally wounding Evelyn. When Bree threatens to kill Max unless Will uploads the virus, Will explains that he has only enough power either to heal Evelyn's physical body or upload the virus. Evelyn tells Will that Max should not die because of what they've done, so Will uploads the virus to save Max. As Will dies, he explains to Evelyn that he did what he did for her, as she had pursued science to repair the damage humans had done to the ecosystems. In their last moment, he tells Evelyn to think about their garden. The virus kills both Will and Evelyn, and a global technology collapse and blackout ensues.
Five years later, in Will and Evelyn's garden at their old home in Berkeley, Max notices that their sunflowers are the only blooming plants. Upon closer examination, he notices that a drop of water falling from a sunflower petal instantly cleanses a puddle of oil — and realizes that the Faraday cage around the garden has protected a sample of Will's sentient nano-particles, potentially saving Will and Evelyn and providing a solution to the worldwide blackout.
The movie ends with the monologue, "He created this garden for the same reason he did everything. So they could be together." | psychedelic, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | I figured since Wally Pfister has been Christopher Nolan's cinematographer since 2000's Memento, maybe some sort of slow-release genius-osmosis had taken place, and Transcendence would be a stellar thriller/head- scratcher like we've come to expect from Nolan.
In other words, it doesn't raise up any concerns or ideas we haven't already seen, and the shallowness of the script gives you plenty of time to question the incongruence of the story.Other than that, Transcendence is pretty good.
But it doesn't, and the lackluster script affects every other technical aspect of this film like a virus, and makes Transcendence a pretty- to-look-at popcorn movie.
For movie purposes, it has great acting, great story (though some may feel it's a little too far fetched, which I personally don't think is too far fetched when you see what the world was like 10 years ago before the mainstream web), and pretty good action scenes.At the heart, it's a story about a woman, Evelyn, who loves her husband, Will, so much she tries to hold onto him by helping him save his consciousness.
Don't know why all the negative review about this movie, but reading their negative comment it seems to me that they expected something else and it is not delivered hence they are throwing a tantrum and choose not to enjoy the movie.While its cons might be the lack of characters development this doesn't change the fact that the story line and concept is better than a lot of other movies and it is presented well.
The story might feel a bit stretched but it give us more time to think and enjoy the development of the movie.It doesn't show too much of the potential of an AI, nor it have a lot of actions scenes, but it does show us a lot of perspective and views on a single ideas, and what misunderstanding and doubt could do.
The movie doesn't show you what is right or wrong, or which is the best solution, it only show us the thinking of each characters and the consequences from their actions.If you love thoughts provoking movie which leave you with a lot of thinking, you will definitely like this movie..
But, as Will begins to grow and expand, can his wife Evelyn and Will's friends stop him before the Will they knew is completely gone?I find it truly pathetic how many people are hating on this movie, and for some of the wrong reasons.
Pfister's style and unique eye helped save this movie from being a total disaster, especially when it came to the action, the way the camera moved with the scene and the characters or just the environment itself.
Johnny Depp was good, but it wasn't until the end of the film when the audience feels emotionally attached to him, as he's usually an emotionless AI, projected on screens and glass.
The visual effects were top-notch and some of the best of the year hands-down, and the musical score by Mychael Danna was haunting, beautiful and intense when it needed to be.Transcendence is an actually good movie that deserves more credit than the immense crap it's getting.
When fatally poisoned by a radical techno-terrorist organisation he and his wife (Rebecca Hall) upload his consciousness into his invention to preserve his life, but the now unrestrained supercomputer soon develops a frightening ambition that blurs the line between humanity and technology.It seems that every few years somebody in Hollywood tries to redo The Lawnmower Man, which is by no means a perfect movie (especially with its laughable, early generation CGI) but it harbours an interesting premise; what happens if we ignore our own judgement and let our technology get the better of us?.
It's an old sci-fi trope going back decades that has definitely become a crutch of story telling to some extent, but any good idea is worth exploring again, and with such an impressive cast and a very promising production team behind it, hopes were high for Transcendence to be a good movie.Unfortunately though, it isn't.
All the parts about technology, philosophy and what it means to be human are all thrown to the wayside, and the movie instead grounds most of its logic on the relationship between two people like its the most important thing in this world.
In a movie where technology is used to heal the sick, rebuild the forests and even cure death, all the movie wants us to care about is how Rebecca Hall cannot possibly go on living without her dead husband and how all that amazing wonderful miracle-making doesn't mean anything.I'm not even sure who the main character is supposed to be.
It certainly isn't Paul Bettany either, he's a prisoner through most of the film and when he's not, the things that are happening are more or less out of his control.Also the vagueness of the films antagonist is a real problem, we're led to believe that Computerised-Depp is the main antagonist, but he's not really, a computer operating by logic is hard to hate as a viewer, because it's just doing what's in its own nature, and many of the miracles its capable of are not, in and of themselves evil either (since when was healing the blind considered unjust?).
Kate Mara gives by far the worst performance, the bad writing of her character hurts her more than others, but she was impossible to buy as the stern, serious leader of an organised terrorist group.There's also a huge lack of understanding of rudimentary film making skills at play.
Wally Pfister is a gifted cinematographer and the film does look good generally speaking, but working cinematography on a movie and directing an entire movie are two completely different ball games.
This is one of the worst Paced movies in quite some time, nothing that happens in the story has any momentum, and this coupled with the poor direction over everything else makes the whole movie completely dull to watch (the biggest mistake is that film begins with the ending, spoiling any and all tension during the movie).I'm not saying that every movie needs to have an action scene either, there isn't a car chase during 12 Angry Men, but Transcendence builds to a huge final engagement and when it comes it's over with way too quickly.
Johnny Depp is currently the highest paid actor in the world, but this and some of his last films "The Lone Ranger" and "Dark Shadows" both had disappointing box office takings, which leads me to believe that maybe Depp's day are numbered, and/or perhaps we're entering a new age of movies where it doesn't matter who you cast, a stinker's a stinker and people wont flock to see garbage..
maybe the annoying wife, the dead scientist in a computer, the annoying friend or the terrible cast of sub characters who all have no substance or any kind of interesting back story.If your doing science fiction based around such an interesting and REAL concept.
"A first-year high school student with a major interest in computer science and technology was asked by his English teacher, (along with all his other classmates), to write a short story of their own choosing, as an introductory stage in order to be assessed on their general language skills for the class.The pupil in question accidentally watched 'The Lawnmower Man' for the first time only days before, and thought it was so great and practically unheard of within his generation, he decided to base his "original" assignment story upon this film, which of course had very little relevance itself to the original Stephen King brief work of literature.Once the project was submitted for evaluation, the teacher, who stubbornly owned a Nokia 3310, a 14" portable TV, and grew up in a generation of scraped knees and weekend World War II re-enactments, thought to himself that it was a reasonably clever concept, but only gave the student a C+, in order to discourage him that the story was of any greatness.
He had also recently watched 'The Lawnmower Man' again and wondered to himself what the hell he was thinking when he thought it was any good in the first place, and then lit another herbal doob."This, in my opinion, is how this film came to see the light of day.
Even the special effects weren't up to much, and it looked like the majority could have been done using Adobe After Effects CS4 plug-ins.Now all I have to worry about now, is for someone stealing my review story of how this film came about, and then making that into yet another sketchy movie for the masses.
But people are afraid of things they do not understand and Dr. Caster is considered a threat to the world that shall be destroyed."Transcendence" is a sci-fi film with a promising premise, great cinematography, good performances and special effects but with a poorly written story with messy characters.
Some scientists refer to this as "the Singularity." I call it "Transcendence."Dr. Will Caster (Johnny Depp) is the foremost researcher in the field of Artificial Intelligence, working to create a sentient machine that combines the collective intelligence of everything ever known with the full range of human emotions.
Combine this pedigree with a veritable who's-who of Hollywood's elite acting talent, and you've got a recipe that seems to all but guarantee success.What we have instead is a film that is an early candidate for the biggest disappointment of the year.The problems with "Transcendence" begin to appear right from the opening frame.
In fact, as the plot becomes increasingly contrived, viewers can practically see deus ex machina at work as characters behave in increasingly erratic ways and Johnny Depp's transcendent abilities seem to come and go based entirely on convenience.
Finally, the film's ending – telegraphed from the very beginning – is so muddled and filled with mixed messages that I actually found myself despising the characters that I was apparently meant to be rooting for.As I mentioned before, "Transcendence" features a bevy of A-list acting talent but, with such a poorly laid foundation, they're left with very little to work with.
The only thing it is good for is wasting your time and making you feel annoyed that you gave a chance to this utter demonstration of complete lack of not only talent, but basic brain functions of the authors of the movie, especially those who "worked" on the so-called "script".
I don't really understand the bad ratings this movie has had so far, since, in my humble opinion, it has all the right ingredients of good film making: good script, solid directing, beautiful images and last but not least a great cast.
Sadly, the film touches on interesting ideas, and leaves one with the feeling that with a slightly more intelligent script, and a little more bravery in tackling uncomfortable issues, it could have been grand, thought-provoking science fiction.
First off lets state the obvious - Johnny Depp, Morgan Freeman and Rebecca Hall have all done wonderful work in this movie.
It is definitely the best movie of the year so far (may not be for everyone but for people who loves to see some thing different from conventional story and has some expectation from the writer to be more imaginative)..
The director isn't trying to give us a message about technology and it isn't promised as an action movie, it is a compelling look at how humanity will react when faced with transcending ourselves.
We get treated to some interesting philosophical questions such as what does it mean to be human.Honestly, this movie warrants a 7+ at least and it seems like there are some other dynamics at work here, perhaps some people feel threatened by the newcomer and are using some sneaky old Distributed Reputation Management techniques..
the characters felt superficial and the writer almost seems conflicted on "who are the bad guys?" so their response was "this is a movie so someone has to be the antagonist and someone has to play the protagonist at every narrative progression." the film allowed no room for the viewer to contemplate considering this is a movie about ethical use of technology which is a highly relevant subject for us today -- it chose sides early on!
The rest of the cast gives in a great performance but it is obvious that Paul Bettany, who doesn't get many leading roles, is grateful for every minute Depp isn't on screen so he can be the main character.Transcendence is in no way a disappointing film.
While director Wally Pfister excels in the visuals (given his previous cinematography with Christopher Nolan in "Inception" and the "Dark Knight" trilogy), the movie feels too jumbled, trying to say more about human evolution and technology's place in it than it really is.
Maybe they played it too safe and ended up with an Okey film, I mean there is nothing really bad about the movie, but it feels so average, specially after watching the trailer..
While Paul Bettany, Rebecca Hall, and Morgan Freeman deliver great performances in the film, veteran actor Johnny Depp is completely depthless.
I don't believe many people will experience the film the way I have because they haven't seen as many science fiction movies as I have.
I never imagined all my end-of-the-world-as- we-know-it fantasies would get transcended in this delicate yet dramatic manner.Depp exploits his ability to seem void of emotion brilliantly, leaving any viewer in constant doubt of his character which, I can only imagine, is very hard given the subject of AI.
That's right - Jeff Fahey outdid Johnny Depp.If you've never seen that movie, then you might say this film starts out with a relatively interesting concept; however, it ends in a "twist" that doesn't really make any sense based on the actions of the characters in the preceding 115 minutes of the film.Not one of the characters is interesting or likable, the pace of the film dragged, and all the members of my party seemed to be waiting eagerly for the film to be over.Don't waste your time or money..
***Contains no spoilers*** "...It's a new kind of thinking..." yet are we ready for it?That's the premise Wally Pfister's directorial debut, Transcendence starring Johnny Depp, Rebecca Hall, Morgan Freeman, Kate Mara, Paul Bettany, Cillian Murphy, Clifton Collins Jr and Lukas Haas.
Written by Jack Paglen, this movie is about a neuro-biologist Dr. Will Caster (Depp) along with his wife, Evelyn (Hall) and fellow colleague Max Waters (Bettany) pitch a new kind of AI (Artificial Intelligence) technology that will do more than just cure cancer.
Transcendence (like last year's Oblivion) is a thinking person's sci-fi / action / adventure type of movie.
Paul Bettany played his Max Waters character as the man who airs on the side of caution throughout the movie having doubts (publicly known as well as hidden from the Casters) about transcendence and its importance despite knowing the potential harm it could do.
Well, this is a must watch movie and as you know, if you are into technology and sci-fi you can't definitely miss this thing, seriously!
I would recommend this movie to anybody who love flicks that makes you think and ponder, leave you to reason your own time and place, appreciate science and technology.
Yes, it does leave a few unanswered questions and perhaps we would do things a bit different in their shoes,BUT if we take our own ideas away and watch a story in front of us, there's a great message about humanity and what is is like to be human.
Johnny Depp plays a brilliant and eccentric scientist who is a leading expert on artificial intelligence, and when he is mortally wounded by an anti-technology extremist/terrorist group, he and his small inner circle of fellow genius scientists embark on an ambitious experiment that will test a radical theory of his.The plot and overall story is pretty standard fare for science fiction, but it still manages to keep things interesting, with various echoes of other classic sci fi movies like 2001: A space odyssey in there as well.
In the end, I can say TRANSCENDENCE is the most original movie I have seen in a while with some interesting ideas and great cinematography, but it is too bogged down by "the meaning of life" questions throughout that eventually, it means nothing.
Transcendence is the story of Artificial Intelligence(AI) scientists, Will Caster(Johnny Depp) & his wife, Evelyn Caster(Rebecca Hall).
Also I know the "open" ending will bother some people, but I think the story closes clearly enough.So, in the end, it's a very good sci-fi movie, I highly recommend it, and I would have liked that it gets better reviews, I think it deserves it.
The plot was ridiculous.At the end of the movie a group of twenty-something guys were exiting ahead of us and one of the guys said, "that was pretty excellent!" I thought, "Well, I guess it's working for its demographic."So, to everyone involved...give up your gun toting, world-is-an- illusion, horrible filmmaking and go put your money to good use...like film school..
So we are left with the interesting question of "What if....had he lived further in his transcendent state?" Thereby I can not call the film a waste of time...
I feel ashamed for these harsh critics and bad reviews - just negative people writing about things they don't understand.Transcendence is a film that depicts an inevitable future of the world as we know it, foreseeing the path we humans are headed.
It's simple, we need technology, it will evolve, and we will evolve with it.Yes, Transcendence is a big budget Hollywood film with A-grade actors, good story telling and superb visual effects, which I love..
Continuing my plan to watch every Johnny Depp movie in order, I come to Transcendence.
This movie was better when the story scales down and let's you think about things. |
tt0276617 | Das weiße Rauschen | Jonathan Rivers (Michael Keaton) is a successful architect and lives a peaceful life with his wife Anna (Chandra West) until her unexpected disappearance. Eventually, he is contacted by Raymond Price (Ian McNeice), who claims that his own son had also died. He says he has recorded messages from Anna through electronic voice phenomena (EVP). While Jonathan is initially dismissive and angered, he later learns about his wife's tragic drowning. Desperate, he begins to believe that the recorded voice is indeed that of his wife. Jonathan becomes obsessed with trying to contact her himself, despite warnings from a psychic, Mirabelle Keegan (Keegan Connor Tracy), who tries to tell him how the recording can attract other, unwanted entities. A woman named Sarah Tate (Deborah Kara Unger), who also came to Raymond for his EVP work because she lost her fiancé, befriends Jonathan.
Raymond is found dead. Jonathan begins to be followed by three demons attracted by his obsession with EVP, and finds that some of the messages he is coming across are from people who are not yet dead, but may soon be. Jonathan hears cries from a woman whom he finds in a car with a child. He is able to save the child, but not the woman. At that woman's funeral, which Jonathan and Sarah both attend, Jonathan approaches the husband and tells him about what happened. The latter thanks Jonathan for saving his son but then asks to be left alone. The husband continues to tell Jonathan to stay away from him and his family. Afterwards, Jonathan sees images of another person, a missing woman named Mary Freeman, while working with his EVP devices. Sarah is later seriously injured by a fall from a balcony while possessed by the demons, that incident which was foreshadowed by Sarah's image being among those on the EVP devices.
Jonathan locates the site of his wife's death by following signs on recordings and he also finds his wife's abandoned car. Jonathan finds a set of computers and electronic equipment on site. A construction worker (Mitchell Kosterman) from his company, who has been doing his own EVP work, is holding Mary captive. He has been under the control of the demons to kill all these people, including Anna. The three demons torture Jonathan by breaking his arms and legs and cause him to fall to his death, but a SWAT team along with Detective Smits (Mike Dopud) arrives and are able to save Mary by shooting the construction worker dead. After his funeral, Jonathan's voice can be heard on the radio through static interference saying "I'm sorry" to his son. The child recognizes the voice and smiles. Sarah, at the graveside in a wheelchair, is menaced by odd noises. And right before the credits roll in, the camera flashes to a TV where Jonathan and his wife are visible. | psychological | train | wikipedia | Gives "A Beautiful Mind" a run for the money. Normally I'm not particularly fond of movies about mental illness and I hate it when an actor automatically gets an Academy Award just because he plays another autistic person or Alzheimer patient. "Das weisse Rauschen" is the exception to the rule. In this film you really get an insight into the mind of a paranoid schizophrenic (played brilliantly by Daniel Brühl - he deserves every award that he got already or will get in the future), because it is so well researched that it appears 100% authentic (the director studied neurology).And yet the film does not become a clinical case study, but tells an interesting story about a young man, Lukas, who moves to Cologne to share a flat with his older sister Kati (Anabelle Lachatte) and her friend Jochen. At first everything is going fine; they spend their days taking drugs and having fun, but when he abandons his university studies on the first day just because he can't find the enrolment office and when a date with a girl goes a little bit wrong ;-) the audience begins to suspect that there's something wrong with Lukas. After the schizophrenia first breaks out, the movie becomes a very intense experience (similar to the films of Darren Aronofsky or even to "Das Experiment"), because on the sound track you hear the same cacophony of voices that begin to torment Lukas.Without exception the acting is great. Anabelle Lachatte's character (sexy as hell, but very down-to-earth) may be the worst help a "madman" can get, but it's always clear that she loves her brother and would do anything to help him. Katharina Schüttler in her small role is as good as always. The cinematography has the look and feel of a "Dogma film", but for once it didn't make me dizzy.All in all, I would say that in comparison to "A Beautiful Mind", "Das weisse Rauschen" is the better film ... much better.. Wow. "Das weiße Rauschen" is probably the first movie that succeeded in giving its audience insight into the tortured mind of a schizophrenic person. "A Beautiful Mind" hammed up the subject by combining it with a love story and mystery elements. This movie, however, is real. So real, that it's hard to watch at times. Director Hans Weingartner makes great usage of Dogma-style camera and avoids all movie clichés. With only a small cast and a low budget this movie comes as close to reality as it gets. It helps us understand this terrible sickness and its victims - the sick person himself, as well as his relatives and friends - without palliating anything. The whole cast is fantastic. Daniel Brühl's performance is just breath taking. He's probably the best German actor at the moment and definitely headed for an international career. All in all, "Das weiße Rauschen" is one of the best German movies I've seen so far. If you can get your hands on it, watch it!. OK to watch once. In short: The movie is about Lukas, a boy who moves from his grandparents to Cologne where his older sister lives with her boyfriend. The three take some drugs and out of a sudden Lukas hears multiple voices in his head. After a suicide attempt he is discharged of psychiatry. The voices return as he stops taking his medication. So far, that's the main plot. I was very disappointed, because I have heard so many good critics. Let's start with the positive aspects: The movie is very real, plain and simple shot to make its point. The effects of the voices are great if you own a Dolby surround receiver with 5.1 speakers. The mental illness is supposed to be delivered in its natural form. This works great, but after some time it gets boring. Very well woven is the relationship to his sister. The negative parts: The story is too flat. I expected some insights into the illness itself, some more advice of the psychiatrist, multiple outbursts in different domains. It would have been more interesting watching the protagonist getting healed by the time or how he gets his life together, finds a girlfriend, gets a real job. By the way, has anything to do in his leisure time, some kind of hobby? He seems pretty much in puberty, only drinking, listening to music, driving car etc.But the main mistake this movie does are the hints given, WHY all this happens. Herety is an important factor for mental illnesses, as well as drug consume. It all doesn't fit together. And instead of showing the options what one could improve or how Lukas learns to cope with his illness they relied on a romantic, Hollywood-like, pathetic ending which doesn't enlist the possibilities one could have with this mental state.If you expect a movie about a teenager and his problems in a well conveyed style don't hesitate and go see "Das weisse Rauschen". What you won't get is information about the aetiology, the progress, proper treatment or realistic perspective of schizophrenia.. Brühl's finest perhaps. "Das weiße Rauschen" or "The White Sound" is a German 100-minute movie from 15 years ago and one of the movies that won lead actor Daniel Brühl a German Film Award that year. I have a bit of a hate-love relationship with him as he seems to have a tendency to go over the top on some occasions in failed attempts to not appear very similar when playing very different characters. There are a couple lauded performances by him that did not work for me at all. But here he is outstanding and it is probably between his Golden-Globe nominated turn in "Rush" and this one here what is his career-best so far, at least in terms of what I have seen from him. He plays Lukas here, a very sensitive character who becomes a schizophrenic after a mushroom trip. The film basically shows us the impact this trip had on his life and how his sister helps him in becoming "normal" again. Will she succeed? Watch for yourself.I thought Brühl was pretty impressive here. Luckily for him, the material allows him to go over the top once again here and it still seems credible. The cinema scene is possibly the best scene from 2001 that I have seen. Really memorable stuff. The female there, by the way, is played by Katharina Schüttler, one of Germany's most known actresses today still fairly early in her career. Apart from her and Brühl, nobody from the cast here is really known anymore today. But writer and director Hans Weingartner sure is. He has a couple more famous movie under his belt. Sadly I cannot say I know about his co-director and co-writer Tobias Amann. So yeah, overall, even if this film may have moments that feel embarrassingly funny, it is 100% drama and a fairly tragic story. It is also a strong message against drug abuse and I applaud the makers and Brühl for the approach they gave this one here. Definitely worth checking out. |
tt0246339 | Yamudiki Mogudu | Kaali (Chiranjeevi) is a small town goon who helps his neighbourhood with his earning. He is good at heart and is loved by everyone in town. He works for Kotayya (Kota Srinivasa Rao) whose rival is Gollapudi. Once, when he goes to warn Gollapudi, he meets and falls in love with Radha (Radha), Gollapudi's daughter. When they decide to marry even without Gollapudi's consent, he gets Kaali killed in an accident and Kaali goes to hell.
There he challenges Yama (Kaikala Satyanarayana) that he was brought wrongly and catches Chitragupta (Allu Rama Lingaiah) red-handed for cheating. To correct the mistake Yama and Chitragupta leave for Earth to find Kaali's body so he can return to Earth. Unfortunately Kaali's body has been cremated and Kaali refuses to enter another body. However, Yama and Chitragupta convince him to enter into the body of a person that is identical to him. Kaali refuses taking heed to warning by Vichitragupta (Velu). They then show him Balu (Chiranjeevi) in a village and tell him it is his last option.
Kaali learns that Balu was a soft-spoken and non-confrontational man who was often ill-treated by his family. Vijayashanti is his love interest. Balu's relatives plan to kill him on his 25th birthday as they have to hand over his property. This is when Kaali's soul is put into Balu's body and he plays black and blue with them. However, he remembers his once he sees Kotayya's photo in a newspaper and returns to the city. The rest of the plot is woven on how he balances the two lives and two girls until Yama sees his determination and willingness to save all the people he loves. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0037366 | Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo | In February 1942, just two months after the Pearl Harbor attack, the United States Army Air Forces plan to retaliate by bombing Tokyo and four other Japanese cities—taking advantage of the fact that US aircraft carriers can approach near enough to the Japanese mainland to make such an attack feasible.
Lt.Col. James Doolittle (Spencer Tracy), the leader of the mission, assembles a volunteer force of aircrews, who begin their top-secret training by learning a new technique to make their North American B-25 Mitchell medium bombers airborne in the short distance of 500 feet or less, to simulate taking off from the deck of an aircraft carrier.
After depicting the raiders' weeks of hazardous training at Eglin Field, Florida and Naval Air Station Alameda, the story goes on to describe the raid and its aftermath.
While en route to Japan, the Hornet's task force is discovered by a Japanese picket boat, which has radioed their position. It is sunk, and the bombers are forced to take off 12 hours early at the extreme limit of their range. However, the bombers do make it to Japan and drop their bombs.
After the attack, all but one of the B-25s run out of fuel before reaching their recovery airfields in China. As a result, their crews are forced to either bail out over China or crash-land along the coast.
Lawson's B-25 unfortunately crashes in the surf just off the Chinese coast while trying to land on a beach in darkness and heavy rain. He and his crew survive, badly injured, but then face more hardships and danger while being escorted to American lines by friendly Chinese. While he is en route, Lawson's injuries require the mission's flight surgeon to amputate one of his legs.
The story ends with Lawson being reunited with his wife Ellen in a Washington, D.C., hospital. | historical | train | wikipedia | Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo is the most accurate portrayal of the Doolittle Raid on Japan during World War II.
All of the characters in the movie were real life people from the Doolittle Raid and from accounts in the book and other sources, they are accurately portrayed by the actors in the movie.
The movie "Pearl Harbor" also has an account of the Doolittle Raid, but it is very, very inaccurate.
It is the classic MGM treatment with a skilled cast including Spencer Tracy and Van Johnson.If you do see PEARL HARBOR, rent this one too so you can see how to tell a real romance set against a historical event.
And if you want the full picture of how the Doolittle raid was made possible, see DESTINATION TOKYO, the film telling the story of the submarine that snuck into Tokyo bay to help guide the bombers over the city..
In fact, just as the Doolittle Raid was carried out to bolster flagging US morale after Pearl Harbor (Dec 7, 1941)and a series of US and allied losses in the Pacific war in early 1942, this movie of the raid again plays the role of morale booster for the home front in 1944.
The flying scenes, as well as the special effects, are pretty good for the 1940's movie making era and perfect for most WWII aviation buffs.
This Hollywood movie version of the book of the same name written by Lt. Ted Lawson and edited by Robert Considine is fairly true to the book, with very minor changes for story continuity and some levity.
The story of the early part of their marriage adds the right tone to this movie and sort of personifies all of these types of marriages and relationships that were "put on hold" because of a war.
The Best War Film of World War TWo. This is the true story of Jimmy Doolittle's raid over Tokyo in April of 1942, which lead directly to the battle of Midway, the turning point of the war in the Pacific.
One of those made-during-the-war war movies that comes with the customary Frank Capra-like homeland security flag-waving and all of that but this is a good flick that stands the test of time.Oh, it's cornball and the soldiers make like scouts at jamboree but there's an edge here--perhaps because the outcome of the WWII encounter was still in doubt at the time.As a movie, though, "30 Seconds" has a lot going for it: romance (Van Johnson-Phyllis Thaxter), buddies (Johnson and a young Robert Mitchum), strong Army-Navy relations, strong American-Chinese relations--and plenty of great character parts played by people like Robert Walker, Spencer Tracy and Don DeFore, later to become George Baxter in TV's "Hazel."There's nothing dated about the cinematography employed here.
When the Ruptured Duck flies over Tokyo, you feel like you're right there in the cockpit and the crew's low-altitude escape to China is nothing less than harrowing.It may not be a 20-20 account of the Doolittle mission to ramp up U.S. spirits after Pearl Harbor but it's a entertaining film with a lot of heavy hitters along for the ride, people like Dalton Trumbo (screenplay)and director Mervyn LeRoy.Yes, it's one-part propaganda, one part-chin uplifter but there's a lot more to it and it makes my all-time top 10 war movie list..
The fact is that the Doolittle Raid DID happen, that in early 1942 the outcome of the war against Japan was at best uncertain, and that Japanese aggression post Pearl Harbor posed a clear and imminent threat to the United States.
The Doolittle Raid marked the beginning of the end for Japan, because it blew away the myth of Japanese invincibility and proved to the world that it was just a matter of time before a fleet of sixteen B-25 Mitchell bombers would be followed by huge air armadas of B-29s that would crush Japanese militarism for all time and eventually convert Japan from an implacable enemy to an allie and a friend..
Having read "I Could Never Be So Lucky Again" by Jimmy Doolittle, I am happy to report that the film's storyline is very much like the events actually unfolded.
Van Johnson, Spencer Tracy and a supporting cast make this movie one of the special few war films that show a naturalistic view of men in combat.
In World War II, several B25 pilots and their crew volunteers for a secret mission, including the recently married Lt. Ted Lawson (Van Johnson), under the command of Gen. James Doolittle (Spencer Tracy).
After successfully accomplishing the bombing and returning to the base in China, the airplane of Lawson crashes on the Chinese coast, and his men and he are rescued by the Chinese soldiers."Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" is a good war movie, but also a clear American propaganda in times of war.
There is a shallow and corny romance in the lead story; the pilots and crew are great friends like a brotherhood and their wives and girl-friends are silly and naive; when Lawson loses his leg, Doolittle says that the army can not lose an experienced man like him; all the allied Chinese are cooperative, submissive and friends; there are lots of nationalism, like for example, the Chinese scouts singing the American hymn.
Van Johnson does his all-American boy bit (has he ever done otherwise) and it emerges as an appealing portrait of an ordinary guy, rather than the slavering war monger Ted Lawson could have been turned into.
Not "Kill More Japs," but, "Gee, I wish this war was over." Phyllis Thaxter does an adequate job of hiding her anxiety beneath her love for her "fella."The film is long and in many ways more detailed than the book and, hold on, in some ways an improvement.
I can't imagine this story conveying the absolute truth of the famous "Doolittle Raid" without some filler; this is a great movie period and amazing it is based on truth.
For the most part, it was historically accurate, although some things were changed by MGM, which isn't unusual for Hollywood.Sadly, one point the movie didn't mention, was the terrible price the Chinese paid for their help in getting our fliers out of China and back home.General Chang Kai-Shek didn't want to support this operation as he knew what the Japanese would do in retaliation and he was right.
This film has legs: six decades later it still holds up as a romance and as a "docu-drama." Based on Ted Lawson's book of the same title, the movie features a solid cast, engagingly sympathetic plot line, and some FX that also hold up extremely well.
Based on Ted Lawson's (played by Van Johnson) autobiographical accounting of the raid in the book of the same name.
Excellent acting by Van Johnson and Spencer Tracy as General Doolittle..
this movie is a great and very precise account of the actual doolittle raid.
Made during the dark days of WWII, this movie is outstanding because it continued the whole purpose of the raid, that is, to boost American moral by striking back at Japan for the Pearl Harbor attack.
It truly is a flight "into the wild blue yonder." Even knowing the historical success of the mission, one still wonders what will go wrong with this incredible plan to launch B-25's from an aircraft carrier and bomb targets in Japan.
Robert Mitchum seems to have solidified his "tough guy" role in this movie, and develops a character much like the one he played two years later in "Till the End of Time." And Scott McKay "shur 'nuff" does a pretty fair job as the popular Texan.
This is a great movie, and true to Lawson's book and Jimmy Doolittle's book.
I bet Doolittle, a real American hero, is turning in his grave when a yellow bastard like Alec Baldwin is allowed to portray him in the 2001 movie, Pearl Harbor.
The movie does not portray the fate of two of the downed Doolittle raiders that were tried and executed by the Japanese before the end of the war.
Classic WWII movie about the Doolittle raid..
Another Van Johnson movie about WWII which I enjoy watching is Battleground.
Doolittle (Spencer Tracy) plans a daring bombing attack launched from aircraft carriers.
Bob Gray (Robert Mitchum) is among the many volunteer flyboys gathered to secretly train for the dangerous mission.This is a classic patriotic war drama based on the real legendary Doolittle raid.
It's a movie of its time and this is very much a patriotic war effort..
"Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" is one of the best movies made during the war years.
While the typical war film made during WWII avoided realism in favor of jingoism and propaganda, this one excels because it tried to get the facts right and plays almost like a documentary merged with a typical Hollywood drama.
When you read about the efforts that MGM went to make the film, you realize it was a real labor of love and the movie holds up remarkably well today.
This film is about the famous Doolittle Raid on Japan which occurred in 1942.
While the actual physical impact of the bombing raid was not especially great, it was a bit public relations victory-- bolstering American morale and reducing the Japanese sense of invulnerability which had been prevalent.
Incidentally, all the planes were lost in the raid...it was intended as a one-way mission.What makes the film strong is not just the emphasis on realism but the acting and direction.
Stunning.By the way, an excellent but over-the-top film about crew captured by the Japanese following the Doolittle Raid is also portrayed in Twentieth Century Fox's "The Purple Heart".
It's an excellent film but occasionally lapses into propaganda mode a few times too often to be taken as seriously as "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo"..
A more respectable (though fictional) wartime effort is Bogart's 'Across the Pacific', which manages to not utterly demonize the Japanese even though it was made less than a year after Pearl Harbor.Basically it's a wartime flag-waving movie which has little to recommend it today.
A young Spencer Tracy (as General Doolittle) looks good in his uniform and gives a decent performance, while the effectively shot sequence of the actual bombing run is the saving grace of this turkey.
James Doolittle(played by Spencer Tracy) to launch 16 fully-loaded B-25s from an aircraft carrier into the heart of Japan, for a "hedge hopping" mission which will see a low-level bombing sweep, in order to take the Pacific war to them for a change, and also as a morale booster for an American public sick of defeats.
Long but engrossing film with good script and acting, and a detailed account of this important part of WWII history..
THIRTY SECONDS OVER TOKYO has men training for a dangerous mission, led by Col. Doolittle (Spencer Tracy) who leads them into an adventure that begins with fully loaded bombers making their ascent into the wild blue yonder aboard Naval aircraft carriers.
The cooperative team efforts between the Navy and the Air Force is demonstrated throughout and the result is a film that looks almost documentary in its approach to the subject matter.But you have to get beyond some sentimental interludes for romance and that's where the story weakens somewhat, despite the sincerity of the moments depicted between VAN JOHNSON (as Lt. Dawson) and his loving wife (PHYLLIS THAXTER).
Nevertheless, by the time the story reaches its powerful conclusion, you'll be rooting for the reunion of the husband (a wounded war hero who has lost one leg) and his wife who is expecting a baby.Sterling performances help put the movie over.
Never for a moment is the acting less than exceptional--and that includes VAN JOHNSON in the leading role, ably supported by SPENCER TRACY, ROBERT WALKER, ROBERT MITCHUM, DON DeFORE, SCOTT McKAY, STEPHEN McNALLY (billed as Horace McNally) and, in an unbilled small role, BILL WILLIAMS.
Relationships between Americans and the Chinese make for the most touching elements in the crash scene and the hospitalization.A fine tribute to the war effort, it's among the best of the service films produced by any of the major studios during WWII..
He sent a telegram back telling his buddy something like: "we have to leave the war to the younger generation." Shortly after the Doolittle raid, he got another telegram from his buddy.
Great WW2 movie, the true story of the Doolittle Raid.
If you watched Michael Bay's romantic threesome flick 'Pearl Harbor', than you've already got the premise of the film.Now, you just need to watch the better version of it.'Thirty Seconds' is easily one of the best WWII films of the 40's, released just prior to the surrender of the Japanese Empire.
It remains true to the original story, based upon the memoirs of the man who flew the mission.In 'Pearl Harbor', we see Alec Baldwin, here we upgrade slightly to Spencer Tracy.
Both play the Colonel Doolittle role well, but Tracy is the original and the best.Though the pacing isn't brisk, the film is worth it and can qualify as WWII epic.Bring popcorn and no bathroom breaks..
To me, "Pearl Harbor" is not a bowdlerization of the kind of WWI romance/action film that "Thirty Seconds over Tokyo" represents but instead is an homage to it.
Complaints that "Pearl Harbor" and "Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo" are historically inaccurate in some details or fail to tell the whole story of the war are pointless.
Sturdy, determined Spencer Tracy (as James "Jimmy" Doolittle) organizes the US response to the World War II attack on Pearl Harbor.
Despite Tracy's presence, the film stars Van Johnson (as Ted Lawson).
Her biggest memory of the homefront during World War II was the news of the Doolittle raid over Tokyo.
The film is based on the real life experience of one of the B-25 crews that Lt. Colonel James Doolittle commanded.
Major Ted Lawson and the survivors of his B-25 crashed on the China shore and with the help of Chinese guerillas, managed to escape the occupying Japanese army.These aren't World War II movie heroics, this was in fact the real deal.
Van Johnson who probably typified the American Armed Service man in World War II more than any other actor, including John Wayne, gives one of his best performances as Major Lawson.
The movie is pretty faithful to the story, making Thirty Second Over Tokyo one of the best if not the best war combat film made in Hollywood during the conflict.Doing the guest star shot as Doolittle himself is Spencer Tracy.
Too bad also that Spencer Tracy didn't reprise the part in such a film after World War II..
This is one of those rare movies.First, it's a good story...based on the historical first raid on Tokyo during WWII.More important to the movie are strong performances.
But after the plane crash is this film, they allowed the terrible scars on his forehead show very clearly Spencer Tracy plays Jimmy Doolittle, although he is in a supporting role here...supporting also in the sense of bringing one really big name to the production, thereby increasing box office.
Directed by Mervyn LeRoy, Army Major Ted Lawson's autobiographical book (of the same name, co-written with Bob Considine) was turned into this above average World War II drama, which details the James Doolittle- led first bombing of Japan after Pearl Harbor, by screenwriter Dalton Trumbo.
The movie won an Oscar for Best Effects, Special Effects; its B&W Cinematography was also nominated.Van Johnson plays Lawson; Spencer Tracy plays the eventual Medal of Honor recipient Doolittle, who's not really central to this story's telling about the men who volunteered for this mission that was executed just 131 days after December 7, 1941.
Some did, though they are only mentioned in the film.In this MGM produced movie, a brief reference is made to some valuable intelligence information which Doolittle's men received from a submarine that had infiltrated Tokyo bay prior to their bombing mission.
This is a rather enjoyable WW II about the Doolittle-raid on Japan, made during WW II itself, that however is given more credit for than it really deserves.Just like basically with every '40's movie is the case, the first halve is formulaic and drags on for too long.
The movie features Van Johnson in the main lead and Spencer Tracy as general Doolittle.
It is unlikely the bombing had any real effect on Japanese industrial capacity but at home, as a morale booster, it was a great success, the air crews and everyone associated with the raid rightfully hailed as heroes.
Van Johnson's Ted Lawson comes across as apple pie ala mode with nary a discouraging word, Spencer Tracy breezes through his unchallenging turn as Doolittle with little to do beyond stern and resolute and Robert Mitchum hits just the right note as a buddy pilot.
Read on, where we will attempt to explain.TO START WITH, this film makes great use of a great number of actors; from the well known "star" type, to the less famous and even those yet to be "discovered." This is all well and good, even necessary; for the number of personnel in a military operation.THE MAIN CHARACTERS are, generally, portrayed by better known players; with Van Johnson and Spencer Tracy (as Lt. Colonel Jimmy Doolittle) being the most obvious examples.
This fine film offers viewers about everything: a uniformly excellent cast, great action, human drama, a touching love story, exciting special effects, and a deep sense of patriotism.
The story is the 1942 raid on Tokyo led by James Doolittle.
The event came at a time when things were very dark for the U.S.A.: the Pearl Harbor attack had just occurred, and American forces were on the precarious defensive all over the Pacific.Van Johnson is the focus of the movie as a bomber pilot, but is surrounded by great co-stars: Phyllis Thaxter (his pregnant wife), Spencer Tracy (Doolittle), Robert Mitchum (pilot), Don DeFore (Johnson's navigator), Robert Walker (Johnson's gunner), and many others.
The action follows the preparation, execution, and eventual escape from the Doolittle raid.Good photography and a very intelligent script round out this rousing war film. |
tt0171546 | Murder in a Small Town | The film opens with a series of scenes in which local millionaire Sidney Lassiter (Terry O'Quinn) has arguments with his son Albert (whom he threatens to remove from his will, if Albert doesn't leave his current lover), his wife Martha (who reveals that she knows that Sidney is unfaithful, and unsuccessfully tries to seduce him), and his secretary, Kate Faxton (who wants him to reconcile with Albert).
After the argument with Ms. Faxton, Mr. Lassiter meets with Carter, who is there to ask for a donation to the theater; Mr. Lassiter responds with unreasonable demands in exchange for his donation, as well as a few subtly bigoted comments about the fact that Carter is a Jew. Carter, despite his own best interest, calls Mr. Lassiter an anti-Semite and storms out of the office.
That night, Mr. Lassiter is surprised in his car by a stranger who had hidden in the back seat; the stranger fatally shoots Mr. Lassiter.
The next day, the detective in charge of the case, Lieutenant Tony "Baloney" Rossini (Mike Starr), informs Cash that Mr. Lassiter has been murdered, and that there is a long list of suspects, due to Mr. Lassiter's temper and penchant for making enemies. Cash agrees to accompany Tony when they go to meet Albert, Martha, and Kate, who are all beneficiaries of Mr. Lassiter's will, and thus at the top of the suspect list.
While interviewing Mrs. Lassiter, Cash explains that his experience in theater has made him an expert on both observation and human psychology, both of which are helpful in police investigation; he demonstrates this by noting that, due to the muscle tone in her legs, the scuff marks on the soles of her shoes, and the lack of calluses on her hands, Mrs. Lassiter is faking the need for a wheelchair.
After interviewing all three top suspects, Cash and Tony conclude that they are all lying about something, but cannot conclude which, if any of them, is responsible for Mr. Lassiter's murder.
Scenes of the investigation are intercut with scenes from Cash's personal life, as he dates Mimi Barnes (Cherry Jones) and copes with the fact that his daughter Sophie (Elisabeth Rosen) is leaving for college.
We also learn how Cash and Tony met, when Tony was assigned to investigate the (still unsolved) murder of Cash's wife; Cash and his wife had been accosted by two thieves who shot Cash's wife while trying to steal her necklace; only one of the thieves was caught, although Tony has sworn to one day find the other. A scene in a restaurant, in which Cash mistakes a random man for the other thief, hints that Cash is still haunted by the murder. | murder | train | wikipedia | A great whodunit!.
I love this movie.The time period sets & characters were very engrossing.I was truly surprised as to the outcome of this movie.I thought I had it all figured out.This film reminds me of the board game "Clue".I will probably purchase this movie.There is a little bit of "CHINATOWN" in the movie's plot.Terrific acting & use of guile to fool the viewing audience.Very entertaining.I hope WILDER reprises his role..
Overall, very nice..
It's been a long time since I have seen old Gene on the screen (couldn't resist).
Gene Wilder's Murder is a class act all the way.
Interesting characters, good mystery, overall very nice.
The third act of the movie did feel hurried.
I think it was less than 15 minutes (screen time) from second murder to conclusion.
I also get the feeling that this was a prep for a series of movies.
Some of the characters were given strong introductions only to disappear (like the daughter) and others were a little weak overall (Gene's girlfriend).
I hope that they do more movies with these characters.
I wouldn't mind revisiting the material..
Gene Wilder plays it straight and does a terrific job..
Gene Wilder is terrific in his over-the-top comedic triumphs ("The Producers", "Young Frankenstein", "Blazing Saddles", and more), but hasn't always been wisely used in more moderate roles.
"Haunted Honeymoon" comes to mind!
This one, though, is extremely enjoyable, and I hope it's the beginning of a series.
His performance is smart, restrained, believable, professional, and witty.
The movie, a lovely period piece murder mystery, is a surprisingly effective vehicle for him.
It has everything for a satisfying couple of hours on the sofa: 1930s costumes and cars, detective work, romance, and light comedy.Let's have more of Wilder in this kind of role..
Mediocre whodunit with a marvelous Gene Wilder performance..
In a mostly straight role, with only occasional moments of humor, Gene Wilder is surprisingly good; his warm and insightful theatrical director/amateur sleuth is like a more humane Hercules Poirot.
The film is well-cast right down the line and has a reasonably intricate plot, but it suffers from the usual limitations of most TV productions, including bland cinematography and slow pacing.
Enjoyable overall, but mediocre.
A fun made-for-TV period piece.
Nothing too heavy, but a wonderful romp into the late 1930's.
An A&E murder mystery true to all the marvelous classic conventions with fine performances by all.
Plenty of humor, good feeling, and eccentric characterizations more than make up for a rather spartan plot.
Just relax and enjoy..
"I don't want to do it anymore.".
You can tell that Gene Wilder was doing exactly what he wanted to do when he wrote and starred in the 1999 made-for-TV film, Murder in a Small Town.
Directed by Joyce Chopra and starring Wilder along with Mike Starr; Murder in a Small Town is a campy little TV movie set in the 20's reminiscent of the movie mysteries that commanded the screen in the era.
When a string of murders begins to occur in the quiet Connecticut town, a widowed playwright will become influential in solving the crimes.
I'm happy for Wilder that he became successful enough to do the kind of stories he wanted to do later in his acting career, Murder in a Small Town definitely fits into this category.After his wife was murdered, Larry "Cash" Carter left his successful post in Broadway churning out success after success as a playwright to move to the sleepy town of Stamford, Connecticut.
Since his move, he transitioned to work in community theater as a writer/director which left him plenty of time to pursue other interests of his.
With a superb eye for detail and a knack for getting into the mind of a criminal, Cash became fast friends with a local detective Tony "Bologna", even helping him solve some of his cases.
When the wealthy town jerk, Sidney Lassiter (Terry O'Quinn) is found dead, Tony enlists Cash's help in order to solve the case.
When a second, yet intertwined murder is committed, Tony and Cash must work quickly to solve the time and protect the small town before it becomes any smaller.
Stamford Connecticut is where Gene Wilder moved to after he left Hollywood and all but retired from acting in the early 90's.
It doesn't go unnoticed that this film takes place in Gene's hometown.
He also worked on the script with his brother-in-law, Gilbert Pearlman.
I've also seen enough interviews of Gene Wilder in where he admits that he enjoys watching mystery movies on TV.
All of this data goes toward suggesting that Gene Wilder was doing exactly what he wanted to do with Murder in a Small Town.
Although the movie is nothing to write home about, and although it's fun, you won't miss out if you skip it; it's still worth watching knowing that Wilder had worked up to the point in his life and career that he could only take on the jobs he really wanted to do.
The later TV works of Wilder's, like this one, are a nice contrast to his more well-known work of the 70's and essential viewing for great fans of the veteran actor's..
Well executed period murder mystery with understated humor.
This is a delightful well executed period murder mystery.
The suspects are developed in the traditional manner early in the movie.
The interaction between the detective and a drama producer is done with understated humor.
There is in fact a lot of between-the-lines humor which Gene Wilder plays off in a brilliant manner.
It is great to see Wilder in a role such as this, contrasting with his more over-the-top style of comedy acting in his early films.
So what is there not to like in a well written story, well acted and with an evocative 1930's setting?.
Excellent atmosphere and impeccable art-direction combine for a very absorbing and enjoyably diverting entertainment!.
Set in the mid-1930's, this excellent diversion avoids the pitfalls of many films portrayed in this period by combining excellent atmosphere and impeccable art and set direction!
This reminded me of the beloved 'Thin Man' series, in that a character who is NOT a law enforcement professional (indeed, Wilder's character is a stage director) assists the police in a murder investigation.
This was consistently surprising, and had a way of making those old cliches work again!
I HOPE this is the beginning of a series of films with this character!
Gene Wilder has been under-utilized for far too long!!
AND, the always excellent Mike Starr even gets a chance to display his operatic chops!
Starr, one of the best character actors working today, was said to have designs on a career in opera before making his niche in Hollywood!
He gets a surprising chance to demonstrate how talented he is in that area!!.
Average film for the undemanding mystery daytime TV fan.
Having lost his wife in a violent crime, theatre director Larry "Cash" Carter moves to a small town in Connecticut to get away from the stresses of bigger city life.
Looking for funding for his latest play, Cash comes into contact with local millionaire Sidney Lassiter who immediately rubs him up the wrong way by being anti-Semitic and demanding.
And so Cash finds himself just one of many people that have a reason to dislike Lassiter.
So later that night when Cash's friend Lt Tony Rossini tells him that he is investigating Lassiter's murder, Cash helps out and gets involved in the case.Having seen "The Lady in Question" and found it bland and undemanding fare, I still decided to give the other film in the stalled series a try.
Like the second film this is very undemanding fare that will fit nicely with audiences that enjoy the basic mystery movies on Hallmark and the like (Mystery Woman, Jane Doe etc).
The plot is interesting without ever getting going although the development of the case is reasonably engaging.
Of course this means it lacks any depth which is rarely a problem when a film is slick and stylish, sadly this one tends to move sluggishly as if it has nowhere to go and nothing to do an approach that rather flies in the face of face of the fact that a murder has occurred!
The director does well if this was her aim but otherwise she plays it far too slowly and with a sense of urgency that was needed underneath.The cast match this meandering approach and with a bit more help could have pulled it off.
As it is they are just reasonably good in an average film.
Wilder is a bit more interesting here than in the second film (where it did feel like he was just moments away from falling asleep at times).
Here he is actually pretty good fun despite the material.
Starr's character doesn't make a great deal of sense but he is a fun character.
The two men have a bit of chemistry but it is difficult to believe they know one another that well because they don't merge that well I assume this is part of the reason that the series didn't catch on.
The support cast features turns from Lost's O'Quinn and Six Feet Under's Conroy and others like Edison and Rosen.
None of them have much to do though and generally their characters are just quite thin.Overall this is a mediocre or average film that might just be good enough to distract viewers who aren't looking for much more than that.
The cast match the amiable and ambling mood which makes for some nice touches but generally just slows the film down further..
Murder isn't always done for free.
Not being a Gene Wilder fan, the memory of Haunted Honeymoon being too fresh, I almost didn't watch this one.
Glad, glad, double glad I did.
The whole thing smacked of the 30's with all the hairstyles, props and settings, and all the well preserved cars.
An excellent whodunnit that had me guessing all the way.
The killer was suspicious, but I never.....
Worst of Wilder.
For all the Hype about this TV Film the dialogue, acting and script was very bad.
First hour never paid any attention to trying to solve or find suspects in the murder.
Loved Wilder in "The Frisco Kid".
Wilder should also get a better hat..
Pretty good (one minor spoiler).
I'd wanted to see this since it first came out, but never had a chance since today.
Gene Wilder turns in a nice, low-key performance, and there are several interesting character roles, especially Frances Conroy as the "invalid" widow.
The scenes between Gene Wilder and the actress who plays his daughter are heartwarming.
The '30's atmosphere is fairly realistic, with cars, costumes, and references to suffering Jews in Europe.I wouldn't say this is a masterpiece (I figured out who the killer was about halfway through), but it was a pleasant way to spend a Sunday morning. |
tt0071780 | Lovin' Molly | Over a span of nearly 40 years, Gid and Johnny, a pair of Texas farm boys, compete for the affections of Molly Taylor, a free spirit who cares for both of them. The story is told by three consecutive segments which is narrated by one of the three lead roles.
The first segment is set in 1925 and narrated by Gid, who introduces himself as well as his best friend Johnny and Johnny's girlfriend Molly Taylor with whom Gid becomes smitten with. Gid works part-time as a ranch hand at Molly's farm and often competes against Johnny for Molly's affections. Despite their frequent feud and arguments, Gid and Johnny's friendship never ends during their excursions and errands for Molly's father to sell and buy cattle for the family farm. Molly eventually sleeps with Gid, as well as Johnny, but she eventually chooses neither one of them and instead marries school friend Eddie after the death of her father. Gid eventually marries Sarah, a local widow with several children, and Johnny leaves town for places unknown.
The second segment is set in 1945 and is narrated by Molly. It was revealed that Molly had three sons from her three different suitors, and each one of them died in combat during World War II which is currently waging. Molly's husband Eddie also died from an illness several years before. Gid had divorced Sarah and began spending most of his free time with Molly, who withheld the news of their son's death in battle. When he finally did learn the news, Gid took it badly and became more depressed. Johnny re-entered their lives after living away and, having had married and divorced his own wife, took a more active part in helping Molly run her late father's farm.
The third and final segment is set in 1964 and is narrated by Johnny. He reveals that Gid is in a local hospital dying from cancer and Johnny has been keeping a bedside vigil over him. Wanting out of the place, Johnny takes Gid away from the hospital for a few days to visit Molly who is still living at her father's farm and is contemplating selling it. After working with Johnny around the farm to relive their "good old days" long gone by, Gid passes away as Johnny is taking him back to the hospital. After Gid's funeral, Johnny meets with Molly where they agree and despite they never got married or had a life in operating her family farm, they will always be soul mates before Johnny leaves Molly for the last time. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | Lovin' MollyLeaving Cheyenne.
It's seems clear that Sidney Lumet was unfamiliar with the setting, the characters, the story...I mean, Gid is a cowboy wearing OVERALLS--Gid's NOT a farmer!
He was afraid of Texas, and moved back east to New Jersey to shoot the remainder of the film--no wonder the film looks like a TV movie.
It should have been directed by someone else, someone who understood the place, and written by a screenwriter who understood the characters and story, like McMurtry himself, perhaps???
Maybe someday it will be re-done, and done justly.
It's a moving and complex story, one that deserves to be told in the affecting way it's written.
Eastwood as director?
It spans a 45-year period, and though challenging, with the appropriate writer and director and actors would make for a timeless, memorable film..
Two friends vie for the same woman through the years..
Coming on the heels of The Last Picture Show, this Larry McMurtry adaptation must've sounded like a sure thing with the likes of Beau Bridges, Anthony Perkins, and Blythe Danner before the cameras and the great Sidney Lumet behind but ultimately this film is a case of too much too soon.
This story, which resembles last year's The Hi-Lo Country, could've been much more interesting in the hands of others.
Bridges and Danner give their acting chops a good exercise but it's a case of bringing on newcomers before their time while Perkins is just miscast period.
Even Lumet shows he's in unfamiliar territory by shooting the outdoor sequences in a flat, TV movie fashion while keeping the performances more in tune with the melodramatic films of yesteryear instead of being true to the times in which the film was made.
Imagine what Sam Peckinpah or Martin Ritt could've done with the material.
Neither being completely horrible or forgivably worthwhile, Lovin' Molly will remain an interesting footnote in the careers of all involved..
Don't read the book first.
Maybe it's not such a bad movie if you haven't read the book.
But after reading the book which has something muggy, something atmospheric around watching the movie is a boring and tedious business.
Even the characters are miscast.
How can you believe Anthony Perkins is Gid?
Besides they should have made ONE story for the movie out of the three perspectives in the book.
Following the book this closely for the movie was a mistake.
Another thing is that the characters don't change age.
They don't get visibly older.
If you think that a movie like Chinatown was made around the same time you see what I mean with lack of quality.
Lovin' Molly is too much a book filming in which they tried to stay faithful to the book.
Anyway, maybe somebody who never read the book can enjoy it..
zzzzzzzzz.
Molly was probably a likable character, and I got the impression Blythe Danner was giving a good performance.
But somehow this movie never registered with me.
I did like the old-time music (Ralph Stanley wouldn't want me to call it bluegrass) and the big-band music used in one scene in the 1940s.My biggest problem was that I could never remember which of the male characters were which (and apparently Molly had the same problem seeing as how she couldn't make up her mind which one to like), and even though I like Beau Bridges, I never saw any of the men as resembling him until the 1960s.This was probably a good movie to those who like novels such as 'Wuthering Heights'..
Texas in Their Rear View Mirror.
In 1925 Texas, lanky farmer Anthony Perkins (as Gid Fry) and chubby chum Beau Bridges (as Johnny McCloud) both want to marry beautiful free-spirited Blythe Danner (as Molly Taylor).
The trio crawl in and out of each other's beds for nearly forty years.
If you don't believe this can get unexciting, just watch them from beginning to end.
The three leads often seem intentionally made-up to look unattractive; however, Ms. Danner has a memorable nude scene in the early running...You wouldn't know to look at it, but "Lovin' Molly" stemmed from a story by "The Last Picture Show" (1971) writer Larry McMurtry and was helmed by "Network" (1976) director Sidney Lumet.
Dramatic television veteran Edward Binns plays Perkins' crotchety father.
Watch for a couple of (then) daytime television stars in small, featured roles...Future big-league actress and "Rocky Horror" participant Susan Sarandon plays Mr. Perkins' neglected other woman, and Conard Fowkes (as Eddie) is a third man involved with Danner.
A "flashback" scene with Mr. Fowkes reveals he has more "chemistry" with Danner than either of her leading men.
Those familiar with his "Dark Shadows" role as the New England lawyer who helped Victoria Winters find Laura Collins' coffin will realize Fowkes' is the film's outstanding performance.**** Lovin' Molly (4/14/74) Sidney Lumet ~ Anthony Perkins, Beau Bridges, Blythe Danner, Conard Fowkes.
I liked this movie.
This movie doesn't have the action and gun-toting violence (thank goodness) of modern-day movies, and I found the story compelling and the actors believable.
It introduces us to an early and charming Blythe Danner; Anthony Perkins is stilted and unapproachable - as the character called for, and Beau Bridges is someone you just want to hug.
It was interesting to see how the producer/director made the movie span about 30 years - both in the actors, and in the setting.
The scenery was beautiful to me - but then I'm from Texas, so I know how beautiful Central Texas is.
Produced before ratings, I would give this a GP because it deals with a beautiful lady and her love of two different men. |
tt0088563 | MASK | Stanley Ipkiss is a shy and unlucky bank clerk working at the local Edge City bank. He is frequently ridiculed by everyone around him, except for his Jack Russell Terrier Milo, and his co-worker and best friend Charlie Schumaker. Meanwhile, gangster Dorian Tyrell, owner of the Coco Bongo nightclub, plots to overthrow his boss Niko. One day, Tyrell sends his singer girlfriend Tina Carlyle into Stanley's bank to record its layout, in preparation to rob the bank.
Stanley is attracted to Tina, and she seems to reciprocate. After being denied entrance to the Coco Bongo, he finds a wooden mask near the city's harbor. Placing it on his face transforms him into a zoot-suited, green-faced, bizarre, wise-cracking trickster known as the Mask, who is able to cartoonishly alter himself and his surroundings at will. Stanley scares off a street gang that attempts to rob him by turning a balloon into a Tommy gun, and then he exacts revenge on his tormentors; he scares his grouchy landlady, and injures the con-artist repairmen who did unnecessary work on his car and charged him for it.
The next morning, Stanley encounters detective Lieutenant Kellaway and newspaper reporter Peggy Brandt investigating the Mask's activity of the previous night. To attend Tina's performance, he again becomes the Mask to raid the bank, inadvertently foiling Tyrell's plan in the process. At the Coco Bongo, Stanley dances exuberantly with Tina, whom he ends up kissing. Following a confrontation with Tyrell for disrupting the bank robbery, Stanley flees leaving behind a scrap of cloth from his suit that transforms back into his pajamas, while Tyrell is arrested by the police as a suspect for the bank robbery.
Based on the piece of cloth, Kellaway suspects Stanley to be the bank robber. Stanley later consults a psychiatrist who has recently published a book on masks, and is told that the object may be a depiction of Loki, the Norse god of darkness and mischief. The same night, Stanley transforms into the Mask and meets Tina at a local park, but the meeting is interrupted by Kellaway, who attempts to arrest him. Stanley tricks a large group of police officers into joining him in a mass-performance of the Desi Arnaz song "Cuban Pete", takes off the mask and flees with Peggy, but she betrays him to Tyrell for a $50,000 bounty. Tyrell tries on the mask and becomes a malevolent green-faced monster. Forced to reveal the location of the stolen money, Stanley is kept hostage in one of the mob's cars while Tyrell's henchmen search his apartment. With the money now in the hands of Tyrell's gang, Stanley is then delivered to Kellaway, along with a rubber green mask, where he is arrested.
When Tina visits Stanley in his cell, he urges her to flee the city. Tina thanks Stanley for treating her like a person and tells him that she knew he was the Mask all along. She attempts to leave the city, but is captured by Tyrell's men and forcibly taken to a charity ball at the Coco Bongo hosted by Niko and attended by the city's elite, including Mayor Tilton. Upon arrival, the masked Tyrell kills Niko and prepares to destroy both the club and Tina with dynamite. Milo helps Stanley escape from his cell, and Stanley brings Kellaway as a cover and hostage in a desperate attempt to stop Tyrell.
After locking Kellaway in his car, Stanley enters the club and manages to enlist the help of Charlie, but is soon after spotted and captured. Tina tricks Tyrell into taking off the mask, which is recovered and donned by Milo, turning the dog into a cartoonish pitbull who wreaks havoc among Tyrell's men, while Stanley fights Tyrell, himself. After recovering the mask, Stanley uses its special powers to save Tina by swallowing Tyrell's bomb and flushing Tyrell down the drain of the club's ornamental fountain. The police arrive and arrest Tyrell's remaining henchmen, while Kellaway attempts to arrest Stanley once again. Mayor Tilton intervenes and commands Kellaway, Doyle and the police to free Stanley and drop all charges against him, concluding after witnessing Stanley's heroism that Tyrell was the original Mask. Tilton subsequently schedules a meeting with Kellaway in his office.
As the sun rises the following day, Stanley, Tina, Milo and Charlie take the mask back down to the harbor. Tina throws the mask into the water, and she and Stanley kiss. Charlie then jumps in the water to retrieve the mask for himself, only to find Milo swimming away with it. | good versus evil | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0053716 | Cinderfella | When Fella's (Jerry Lewis) father dies, he continues to live with his wicked stepmother, Emily (Judith Anderson), and her two sons, Maximilian (Henry Silva) and Rupert (Robert Hutton). His stepfamily takes over the family mansion, while Fella is reduced to living in an unfinished room at the end of a long hallway. He has in essence become their butler, catering to their every whim.
Fella dreams nightly that his father is trying to relay a message to him about where he has hidden his fortune, but he always awakens before he learns the hiding place. His stepfamily knows of this secret fortune and some go to great lengths to discover its whereabouts, while others pretend to befriend him in order to wrangle Fella's fortune away once it is found.
Princess Charming of the Grand Duchy of Morovia (Anna Maria Alberghetti) is in town, so the stepmother decides to throw her a lavish ball in order to get her to marry one of the sons. Fella is not allowed to go to the ball, but his fairy godfather (Ed Wynn) says he will not remain a "people" much longer, but will blossom into a "person."
Before the ball, Fella is turned into a handsome prince. Count Basie's orchestra is playing at the ball when Fella makes his grand entrance. The young man quickly gains the attention of the Princess and they dance. The night is cut short when midnight strikes and Fella flees, losing his shoe along the way.
Back home, one of Fella's stepbrothers realizes that Fella is the supposed "prince." They wind up in a struggle under a tree, in the process discovering that this is where Fella's father's fortune is hidden. Fella gives the money to his stepfamily, saying he never needed money to be happy, he only wanted a family. Shamed, his stepmother orders her sons to return the money to Fella.
The Princess arrives with Fella's lost shoe, but Fella explains that they could never be together because she is a "person" and he is a "people." She tells him that, underneath the fancy clothes, she is a "people" too. | fantasy, satire | train | wikipedia | "Cinderfella" was Jerry Lewis' answer to the classic Cinderella story.
When his father dies, poor Fella (Lewis) is left at the mercy of his snobbish stepmother (Judith Anderson) and her two no-good sons, Maximilian (Henry Silva) and Rupert (Robert Hutton).
Meanwhile, hoping to restore her dwindling fortunes, the stepmother plans a fancy ball in honor of the visiting Princess Charmein (Anna Maria Alberghetti) whom she hopes will marry Rupert.
Eventually, Fella's Fairy Godfather (Ed Wynn) shows up to convince him that he has a shot at winning the Princess himself.
In the meantime, he produced and starred in a low budget item called "The Bellboy" in order for Paramount to have a Jerry Lewis movie for summer release.
He was indeed fortunate to obtain the services of Judith Anderson, who, while not a performer one would expect in a Jerry Lewis film, was nevertheless excellent as the stepmother, bringing just the right touch of arrogance to the part.
Silva and Hutton do what they can as the stepbrothers, but the beautiful Alberghetti has nothing to do but fall hopelessly in love with the hapless Fella.
Below par gender-bending fairy tale a la Jerry Lewis..
Decades before there was a Jim Carrey, the movies unleashed another inspired nut case Jerry Lewis whose 50s and 60s Paramount Studio vehicles tended toward an oil-and-water mix of outrageous physical comedy and mawkish sentimentalism.
1960's "Cinderfella" is a casualty of that uneasy blend.Taking the classic fairy tale and tailoring it to fit his talents, the stretch-faced, rubber-limbed comedian portrays "Fella," a poor, imbecilic, ostracized stepson who lives only to serve his cruel, absurdly wealthy stepmother (Judith Anderson) and her two greedy sons (Robert Hutton, Henry Silva) in their palatial mansion.
The only reason they even allow Fella to still "bunk" at the mans (his bedroom is more the size of a closet) is that Fella's late father has hidden a vast fortune somewhere on the grounds of the estate and the step-kin think the dolt may know where it might be hidden.Jerry is priceless when it comes to engineering clever, complex, high-energy sight gags.
He gets what I call "telethon tender" on us -- trying to work our heartstrings instead of our funnybones.I remember the Marx Brothers having the annoying habit of breaking up their frantic comedy skits with "straight" musical numbers sung by some insipid ingenues that always took away from the fun.
The demure, exceptionally lovely Anna Maria Alberghetti, who complements the lavish surroundings, appears too late in the proceedings to make any difference as the "Princess Charming" character who, for whatever reason, is smitten by the ungainly Fella.
It's too bad she didn't get to sing instead of Lewis.I know it sounds like I'm not a fan at all of Jerry's, but I am!
And in the case of "Cinderfella," Frank Tashlin may be credited with directing, but I think we all know who the director REALLY was on this set.For those who appreciate Jerry as only the French can, I would suggest "The Disorderly Orderly," "The Ladies Man" and his most popular, "The Nutty Professor," to get a better feeling of this man's genius..
This should've been foolproof: Jerry Lewis playing a male variant of Cinderella, unloved and hoping to go to the ball.
I was not a big Jerry Lewis fan when he worked with Dean Martin.
Like Cinderella, Cinderfella was a loving, hard-working and honest person who was treated unfairly at first.
But, like Cinderella, Cinderfella was rewarded in the end for all his hard work.
And when he made his grand entrance into the ball, I couldn't help notice what a smooth dancer Jerry Lewis really is.
After I saw this movie I had such a warm loving feeling in my heart and I really thank God for this touching comedy.
Modern Day Cinderella Story -- Jerry Lewis Style!.
Based on the Brothers Grimm fairy tale "Cinderella", orphaned Lewis is trapped in the situation of being royally taken advantage of by a selfish, scheming step-mother and her two full-grown layabout, playboy-wanna-be sons.
Like Annette & Frankie and their beach outings, a steady supply of 1960s Jerry Lewis films have been shown and shown again on small screens all over the world.
this is a sweet,warm and adorable film but i would feel better if jerry wrote it.
taken from the fairy tale, jerry does it again by being funny and throwing in some cute gags!
ed wynn was great as the fairy godfather and the rest of the cast made this a great, heart warming movie.
the story was written and flowed nicely, but if the ending explained fella's and princess charming's relationship together, it might of been for the better.
i recomend this movie for anyone looking for a cute and touching story with some jerry lewis charm!.
I have nothing against Jerry Lewis - in fact, I've found several of his other movies funny.
The sexes are reversed in this one.This time it's Jerry Lewis victimized by a wicked stepmother and her 2 hoodlum sons.
Who else but Ed Wynn could play a fairy godfather?Dame Judith Anderson, a veteran player of the wicked, is at it again but how can we expect this great lady to add comedy to spice up her performance.
It's a little too heavy for this film.Jerry is funny but his attempts at singing fall quite flat.Nice to show the kiddies that guys can be victimized too..
When you talk to many people about Jerry Lewis and his films, you often get extreme reactions.
So, when I say bad things about "Cinderfella", understand I am NOT anti-Lewis--I just think this film in particular is very, very weak.
Well, three main reasons sink this film--which I'll talk about below."Cinderfella" is a reworking of the traditional Cinderella story with a few big changes.
Instead of women, it's a guy's story--with wicked step-brothers, a male protagonist and a fairy godFATHER.
Another is that it's set in the present day--so you'll see cars, mansions in Beverly Hills and the like.The film finds Jerry playing a person named 'Fella' (??).
Anyway, the rest is a lot like the original story--with a Ball, Fella working like a slave in his home and the rest.So why was I less than thrilled with the film?
While Lewis' singing isn't bad, and occasionally pretty good in some films, here it is rather poor--and he does it many, many times.
CinderfellaThe reason animals don't dress the men in fairy tales is they have appendages birds could mistake for an earthworm.Fortunately, nothing is ripped from the body of the lowly wretch is this comedy.After his mother's death, Fella's (Jerry Lewis) father remarries Emily (Judith Anderson), who has two sons (Henry Silva, Robert Hutton) as wicked as her.When his father passes, Fella is renamed Cinderfella, and banished to an empty bedroom.When a ball is held to find a suitor for Princess Charming (Anna Maria Alberghetti) everyone but Cinderfella gets to go.
By switching the genders of the main characters, this goofy slapstick version of the fairy tale manages to stand out from the throng of lesser Cinderella adaptations.However, no princess is ever going to pick-up a man's abandoned smelly shoe.Yellow Lightvidiotreviews.blogspot.ca.
I used to love Jerry Lewis, and Cinderfella was a favourite.Dean Martin used to get in the way I always thought with a lot of soppy songs!(I must warn you I also like Police Academy (my partner cant believe this) so have a taste for slapstick.)But from memory, I used to think Jerry had fantastic timing to a lot of his routines so you were on the edge of your seat while laughing as well.
I have seen this movie plenty of times and what is bothering me is i don't remember the name of two songs in the movie and would like to know the name of them?.....one song is when Jerry Lewis is at the ball and Count Bassie comes around and is playing Jerrys song....and the other song is when Jerry Lewis is in the kitchen playing the song with his wooden spoons it is fun to watch him think that he is playing that song....I Love this movie and those are the two of the best songs in this movie so if anyone can help me out.....Thank You.....I give this movie a 10 for all the fun the movie gives and it is a very funny movie and i recommend this movie for everyone to see.
CINDERFELLA (1960) ** Jerry Lewis, Anna Maria Alberghetti, Judith Anderson, Ed Wynn, Henry Silva, Count Basie and his World Renowned Band featuring Joe Williams.
Fairy tale sex-change: Jerry's the Cinderella character in love with a princess and Wynn is the fairy godfather.
I love Jerry Lewis, I really do, but.....
I love Jerry Lewis, I really do, but.....
But being a devout fan doesn't mean I'm ignorant of his weaker efforts, and he does have many, of which Cinderfella is one of the bottom dwellers.It's on the premise surface a fresh and interesting spin on the Cinderella story, the sexes are reversed and this is the modern world in setting.
No amount of high energy mugging from Jerry can lift the picture out of its stupor, the songs from Harry Warren & Jack Brooks are weak, while poor Anna Maria Alberghetti (Princess Charmein) is reduced to being nothing but a pretty and well dressed up prop!Ed Wynn as the Fairy Godfather comes out with credibility still intact, and Count Basie's input into the production is like a ray of sunshine on a darkly bleak winter's day.
There's also one great sequence as Lewis goes panto playing various musical instruments, but the irony there is that the best scene in the film has nothing to do with the plot!
No, this is not close to being a good Jerry Lewis movie, and those stalwart fans who insist it is are sadly leading the uninitiated down the wrong path.
This one casts Jerry Lewis as an abused young man whose life changes when he meets his Fairy Godfather (Ed Wynn).
Personally, my favorite rendition of the story was the time on "Gilligan's Island" when Mrs. Howell dreamed that she was Cinderella and Gilligan was her Fairy Godfather.Jerry Lewis does an OK job in "Cinderfella", but now that we know what a jerk he is in real life, it weakens the whole thing.
Yes, I'm biased, but it's still a great Jerry Lewis comedy!.
I watched many of his films, back in the day (though it's hard, three-to-four decades later, figuring out which ones I saw), and loved his work, so I've made a point of getting many of his films from his classic period and checking them out.I loved his take on the Cinderella fairy tale, and thought it was both hilarious and well-made.
It was great seeing two of my favourite character actors, Judith Anderson and an intriguingly-cast Henry Silva, here as well, and seeing the much-and-rightly-lauded 'staircase scene', it was incredible that he did that, since he had suffered so much from back pain at that time (from falling during a show in Las Vegas), and suffered his first heart attack in trying to do it all in one take.This would also be great to see in a double bill with 'Blazing Saddles'--two comedies with The Count Basie Orchestra involved..
Cinderfella is Jerry Lewis's Cinderella story with role reversal.
Jerry is once again a poor schnook living on an estate with his stepmother Judith Anderson and stepbrothers Henry Silva and Robert Hutton.
Anderson is hoping to make a match for Hutton with Ruritanian princess Anna Maria Alberghetti as the family fortune is dwindling.A tale as universal as Cinderella need not be repeated.
Lewis is under the careful guidance of Frank Tashlin who knew how to get the best performances from him, especially as a solo artist.Harry Warren and Jack Brooks wrote some rather serviceable but forgettable songs for Lewis though why Alberghetti didn't have a number who knows.
Standing out in the supporting cast are Ed Wynn also restrained for him as he was one of the zaniest performers ever as Jerry's fairy godfather.
And Judith Anderson was properly sinister as the stepmother.Jerry's fans will appreciate this and it's not bad.
This updated comical parody of the Cinderella story is not only funny, but is also very touching and heart-warming.
The only things I did not like were the overdoing of Ed Wynn as the fairy godfather and the polo game: those parts were almost too ridiculous.
Anyway, here Jerry does a spin on Cinderella, with Ed Wynn as his Fairy Godfather who uses wizardry to put the bungling Jerry in the path of a European princess.
We all know how the story ends, but the difference here is that along the way, the princess has to wade through a succession of truly destructive comic disasters.
in the hands of Jerry Lewis, 'Cinderfella' becomes something special.
Though I wish the big dance number with Jerry had shown more of her.There are some very funny scenes and as sappy as the story gets, it's rather sweet ("Keep breathing fish!).
jerry lewis is an excellent writer and is a very good actor.
i especially love the when fella and the fairy godfather talk about the difference between a people and a person.
jerry lewis uses his creative ideas in the movie to make it funny.
By making Cinderella - Cinderfella - Jerry attacks man's and societies need for perfection, a perfection that is a dream, only.
"Cinderfella" was Jerry Lewis attempt to re-tell the Cinderella story.
It follows the traditional story more or less with mixed results.Lewis plays Fella (Couldn't they have come up with a better name?) who's father instructed as part of his will that his wife care for his son Fella.
Of course the wife becomes the Wicked Stepmother (Judith Anderson) who has two equally wicked sons, Maximilian (Henry Silva) and Rupert (Robert Hutton).
But at the stroke of midnight.................................................................Lewis tries to play the pathos card throughout the film and you do feel sorry for him at times.
Henry Silva looks like a gangster and Robert Hutton is the fun loving playboy.
Look I really thought Jerry Lee Lewis was pure daft during the film but it's just the storyline was much too over the place!
It should've been kept as the traditional Cinderella not over the top comedy film!I mean the stepmother and his stepbrothers aren't meant to play nice to him!
This isn't really a good twist for a film to be honest with ya!They should really have done this better and I say if anyone created a gender bender movie like this, it will be a lot better I'm afraid..
Neal Hefti wrote a piece called "Cute",Count Basie and his orchestra recorded it and Mr J.Lewis dances to it in the kitchen .That 3 minutes or so of screen time encapsulates the peak of his work in the cinema.
Miss J.Anderson,Mr H.Silva and Mr R.Hutton are deliciously rather than unpleasantly evil and Mr E.Wynn has a fine old time as the Fairy Godfather.
Jerry Lewis is Cinderfella in this movie that is a variation of Cinderella, in this case she being he.He has to put up with Wicked Stepmother (Judith Anderson) and her sons Maximilian (Henry Silva) and Rupert (Robert Hutton).One day Fairy Godfather (Ed Wynn) appears and helps him win the heart of Princess Charming (Anna Maria Alberghetti).
Cinderfella is an extremely funny musical fantasy comedy by Frank Tashlin.Jerry Lewis is being him funny self in the lead.Extremely beautiful Ms Alberghetti doesn't only got the good looks but also the acting skills.In one great scene you get to see Jerry dancing with Anna Maria while Count Basie plays his swinging music in the back.Mr Lewis is quite a dancer.Today this amazing comedian turns 79.He has shown us he's the king of clowns.He's one of the greatest comedians off all time.
Lewis can be found from that list with Chaplin and Lloyd and all the other great ones.Jerry has also showed the serious side too.He can go beyond the clown.In this movie he does it occasionally.It doesn't offer only moments of laughter but sadness, too.Cinderfella is a tragic figure when you think about it.He gets kicked in the head by his stepmother and her sons.In one terrific scene Fella sits in one end of the huge table and the rest of the family in the other.All the time they make him come to their end of the table and do some favors.He is in his loneliness dreaming to be something more than he is.Jerry Lewis has said; there is no gap between comedy and tragedy.And that is the truth..
Perhaps the weakest of the Frank Tashlin/Jerry Lewis collaborations, this rift on the Cinderella story has Lewis as the one-legged step child of nasty Judith Anderson.
Anderson, along with playboy sons Henry Silva and Robert Hutton, tries mightily to get "Fella" to reveal the whereabouts of millions his father left him.
Lewis has a couple of funny gags (squeezing oranges, turning NUTTY PROFESSOR-style into a swinger to woo Alberghetti), but the film is pretty anemic when it comes to real laughs.
There is far too little screen time between Lewis & Alberghetti to know if they actually have any chemistry.
Ed Wynn is on hand as the Fairy GodFATHER and the Count Basie Orchestra makes an appearance during the ball scene..
the Frenchies are right about Jerry Lewis.
it also helps to like fairy tales and be a fan of the 'Cinderella' story.
not only are there fanciful little fantasy touches, like an appearance by the "real" Cinderella, Jack and Jill and a Goldfish turned chauffeur, but there are so many things in this that worthy of being thought of as classic film/comedy moments.
it's nice to see someone in film, other than Disney, take advantage of his talent and warm brand of humor.loved the songs, performances, set design and it's poignant, timely message. |
tt0055318 | Posse from Hell | In 1880 four escapees from death row, Crip (Vic Morrow), Leo (Lee Van Cleef), Chunk (Henry Wills) and Hash (Charles Horvath) ride into the town of Paradise and enter the Rosebud Saloon. Crip shoots the town marshal Isaac Webb (Ward Ramsey) and takes ten men as hostages, killing some to ensure the four are unmolested. The gang leaves town with $11,200 from the Bank of Paradise and a female hostage Helen Caldwell (Zohra Lampert) who entered the bar because her alcoholic Uncle Billy (Royal Dano) was one of the captives.
Prior to these events, Marshal Webb had sent for a friend and former gunfighter Banner Cole (Audie Murphy) to take his place in leading a posse to rescue Helen and bring the men to justice. Though not a criminal, Cole is a loner that Webb wishes to enter the community through his being deputised. Cole is enraged to discover that the townspeople have put Webb on a table next to the three dead bodies of those murdered by the four. The doctor (Forrest Lewis) said at first they thought Webb was dead himself, then realised he couldn't be moved so left him among the corpses.
Webb's last act is to deputise Cole telling him to do the right thing, not out of hate, but out of liking people as the townsfolk are good people who have had bad things done to them. Cole agrees only out of liking Webb. The laconic Cole makes his original plan for hunting down the four by himself clear by turning down the offer of Webb's handcuffs by saying "I won't be needing any." However, town elder Benson convinces Cole to follow Webb's wishes and organize a posse.
The men of the town gather but enthusiasm wanes when not as many able bodied men as expected volunteer to go up against the killers, some men leaving because the posse doesn't outnumber the killers by ten to one. Cole's frank assessment of the situation scares others off with Cole saying "If they're afraid of words they shouldn't go."
Cole's posse eventually consists of the aged former Army Captain Jeremiah Brown (Robert Keith), who wishes to lead the posse himself in the manner of his long ago Army days, Uncle Billy, Burt Hogan (Frank Overton), who wishes to revenge his brother Burl (Allan Lane) murdered by the four, Jock Wiley (Paul Carr), a young gunhand seeking the experience to establish his reputation as a gunfighter, Seymour Kern (John Saxon), a bank employee who has just arrived on a special assignment from the New York parent and is browbeaten into joining to look after the bank's missing money and avoid taunts of cowardice from the bank manager (Ray Teal), and Johnny Caddo (Rudolph Acosta), an Indian who merely thinks that joining is "the right thing to do."
Cole doesn't want any of the inexperienced and troublesome men to come with him but he has no choice. The posse discover Helen who has been left behind tied up near a rattlesnake that Cole is able to remove from Helen's vicinity. Helen has been raped and is unwilling to return to the town to face the shame of being vilified by the population. Cole orders the willing Uncle Billy to return her by force if necessary.
Captain Brown demonstrates his aged incompetence by disobeying Cole's orders and opening fire and nearly murdering four cowhands who he mistakes for the four killers. Cole has to wound Jeremiah to stop his shooting spree and orders him back to town with the cowhands who have been waylaid by the killers.
Cole's distrust of his own posse begins to subside when he is impressed by the determination of the inexperienced Seymour who has never ridden a horse or used a firearm before and the quiet Johnny Caddo's acceptance of the prejudicial treatment he gets from the posse. The posse tracks the four to a farmhouse and surrounds it until Hogan makes a noise starting a gunfight. Cole kills one of the outlaws. The boasting Wiley is unable to actually kill a man and is killed as he freezes, allowing the remaining three to escape. Hogan begins shooting the corpse of the outlaw that Cole himself killed telling himself and the posse that Hogan himself killed the man who killed his own brother. When the men note that all the witnesses agree that it was actually Hash who had murdered his brother, Hogan refuses to listen and leaves the posse to return to town.
Cole, Caddo, and Seymour continue tracking the party to the desert but realise that the outlaws have doubled back and are intending on returning to shoot up Paradise. | violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0402127 | The Defender | At Friendship Field, Carman, Manitoba, aircraft restorer and self-taught engineer Bob Diemert and his friend Chris Ball are working on an unusual project which had its origins in the late 1970s. Taking shape in one of the airfield hangars is a new type of close air support or COIN aircraft designed to take on Soviet Union tanks. Christened the "Defender", the unusual design is a throwback to the heavily armoured Junkers Ju 87 Stuka and Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik close air support aircraft of the Second World War.
In order to raise the funds for the Defender, Diemert began to restore one of the rare Japanese aircraft he retrieved from Balalae, Solomon Islands, a Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero fighter, one of very few of the type still in existence. In the past, he had made his mark in the ranks of aircraft restoration when he rebuilt a Hawker Hurricane XII and flew it in the 1969 Battle of Britain film. The sale of the Zero to the Confederate Air Force in Texas has to await the painstaking restoration of the Japanese fighter aircraft. As it is readied for a test flight, Diemert runs afoul of Canadian aviation authorities, who refuse to allow him to fly the aircraft. Trucking the restored aircraft to Midland, Texas is the solution and after successful test flights, the Zero is passed over to its new American owners.
Completing the Defender becomes the sole preoccupation of Diemert and his friend. Trying to ensure that the aerodynamics are properly established leads to a curious use of a bathroom scale mounted on the back of a pickup truck, an example of the unorthodox engineering that is employed in the project. Another example of Diemert's out-of-the-box thinking comes when his children ask him to build a swimming pool. His wife comes back from work to find a swimming pool in the living room, complete with wall-to-wall carpeting.
When the Defender finally emerges from its hangar, Diemert prepares for the all-important maiden flight, but things do not go as planned. | violence, murder, romantic | train | wikipedia | Dolph Lundgren takes up directing duties for the first time here and scores a hit!
The Defender is a film which remarkably for a B-movie offers some thought provoking ideas.
The plot involves political intrigue and corruption but the basic gist is that America wants peace with the international terrorists against them.
A secret meeting is set up between the head of NSA and Mohamed Jamar a kind of Sadam/Bin Laden character.
Dolph plays Lance Rockford bodyguard and leader of a team of highly trained operatives who look after the head of the NSA.
The meeting takes place in Romania in an empty hotel, a fantastic setting.
What happens is that initially Dolph doesn't know who Roberta's Jones (NSA head) is meeting.
So there is now a hotel with a terrorist and the head of the NSA meeting up with bodyguards for each.
They want the meeting to fail, become public and in essence to oust he president and star a war at the same time.
This is an interesting concept in itself but the movie take in an extra interesting twist which you'll have to see for yourself.As a director Dolph does well, raising the question: Why work with so many b-grade hacks in recent years?
He does the best directing job since he had the good fortune to work with John Woo in 98 with BlackJack.
Lest we not forget that Dolph has worked with some good directors, Woo, Russell Mulcahey, Roland Emmerich, as well as some veterans who although past their best when they worked with Dolph, still must have been useful for picking up tips, for example Sidney Furie, Ted Kotcheff and Bruce Malmuth.
The Defender with all it's political intrigue and so called acts of patriotism are comparable to the Bourne films.
This is essentially the low budget sibling to those films and although this is inferior, this is still good work.
Dolph handles the action well and the action is plentiful with the entire last hour essentially one long action scene.
The camera keeps moving creating a real vibrancy and kinetic energy that works well and the action is reality based putting the audience right in there with some great use of sound.
The sound design is the best part of this film, strange as that may sound, but it is so well done it really enhances the action.
At the same time the editing is tight and this gives the films action a great sense of rhythm and pacing, particularly with some excellent hand-to-hand moments.
Cast-wise, Dolph is good in the lead, giving a solid performance.
He is ably supported by Caroline Lee-Johnson as Roberta Jones, as well as Shakara Ledard as a female member of Dolph's security teams.
The rest of Dolph's team are also good.
Particularly good in support is the one and only Jerry Springer as the president!
Anyway Jerry is surprisingly good in fact because acting his not his first profession.
The film is also blessed with a good score from Adam Norden whose subtle synth based score does not try to recreate a full orchestra, but instead plays to the strengths of the synthesiser and he creates some interesting themes.
Also the cinematography from Maxime Alexandre is excellent, making the film look far more polished than Dolph's more recent efforts and giving it the gloss of one Seagal and Van Damme's latest efforts the considerably more expensive Into The Sun and Wake Of Death respectively.
The Defender it must be said is also far superior to those films and is a film I would certainly watch at the cinema, even without my main man Dolph in it.
It has interesting concepts and is a good action film.
I have seen some abysmal films at the cinema like A Man Apart and Collateral Damage, Driven.
All with big action stars, yet Defender is a hell of a lot better than those films.
Adding to their excitement, Dolph is taking up directing duty in his next film too, with him playing a Russian hit-man in The Mechanik, co-starring Ben Cross (Chariots Of Fire).
The Defender is a good watch for any action fan.
I don't like action movies all too much but I got this film and it was very good.
I haven't seen many Dolph Lundgren movies except Rocky 4 and He-man but El Protector was a very good film.
If all his films are like this I shall watch more.The idea is quite good, involving terrorists and quite brave for todays current situations.
The film has a strong plot which helps because it is almost all action.
This is good fun.Dolph Lundgren is quite a good actor for the genre he works in I must admit.
I am a musician myself and would like to get into the movie industry through that, and the score in this film is interesting.This is overall a good movie, worth your time..
And the time has shown that the movies both directed and starred by Lundgren are usually better than those he just starred (with the exception of Rocky and The Expendables, however).
And Lundgren just likes East, whether the Far one (South Asia), Middle one (Arab countries) or the closer one (so-called Eastern Europe)...
And a political mess in the background.Dolph Lundren is good as always, but it was a surprise to see Jerry Springer as the US president.
The other characters were not especially catchy.Watch this 1'20" minutes creation if you like Lundgren, nothing to be ashamed about..
Boring and unoriginal action movie.
I did not like that movie.
Probably because it did not offer anything new or interesting just shooting there wasn't even a good scenario.
As far as the soundtrack goes it sucked as well with exception of the song they played at the very end.At first I thought that the movie will be interesting as is started with an operation in Iraq and you know all these terrorist references which seem to be modern these days.
But as the story unfolds I have lost my interest and was hardly keeping myself awake till the end of it.I guess I am not really into action films, but even if I was I doubt that I will like the way the Defender is filmed.
That's why I am going to give two pints for this movie and a warning that seeing it can be a waste of your time..
I'd read somewhere that Dolph Lundgren got into directing a few years ago, when the next in a long line of straight-to-DVD cookie cutter action movies had its director get sick, so Ivan Drago himself just stepped in and took the reins.
Then I forgot about the movie for four years.I'm flipping channels today, and see the first two names in the credits: Dolph Lundgren ...
I make a bet with myself to watch it until Springer shows up, and Springer is playing the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.With all this going for it, it should be one of the grandest movies of the 21st century.
Except, no.While not the worst movie I've ever seen, nor the worst action sequences I've ever seen, the action is still choppy, shot from entirely too close a range to see what's going on.
The acting isn't terrible (except Dolph, though he's only required to stand there and look chiseled), but the plot is telegraphed in every scene.
Every good guy that turns out later to be shady, acts shady the moment they come on screen.
And Dolph's character is named "Lance Rockford." Seriously.
I am not making this up.Every action sequence is essentially the same, just a whole lot of bullet sound-effects and nothing interesting to look at or remember.
By the time Lance Rockford is faced with a crucial moral dilemma, I honestly don't see how anyone watching it could care.There are better places for your action fix, and better places for your Dolph fix.
Guns fire, people shout a lot, and you'll find yourself getting bored when you're not studying the scars from Dolph's face-lifts.
But hey, Jerry Springer plays the bad guy, so that's worth a bonus point.5/10.
For the tight schedule and budget he had, Lundgren does a really good job.
Here's the reason to watch the flick: It has Jerry Springer as the President!
Dolph Lundgren stars as Lance Rockford who is assigned to protect the prez from terrorists.
Wished he had more screen time though....but the movie has a lot of action.
The Mechanik also directed by Lundgren is awesome!Worth Watching!
Dolph Lundgren stars as Lance Rockford, a secret service agent who protects a politician from a terrorist group called "The Patriots" who see the President's view on terror as underwhelming to say the least.
I actually rented The Defender because I saw that it had Jerry Springer in it and the thought of him as the President of the United States had me curious to say the least.
I was expecting a movie of magnitude ineptitude and was indeed surprised to see that Lundgren was a competent director and that the action sequences were fairly well staged and suspenseful.
The story was (As expected) stupid and full of plot holes but I for one found this to be far better than I expected it to be.* *1/2 out of 4-(Pretty good).
Dolph Lundgren's directorial debut almost put him in the same category as Orson Welles and Ed Wood, namely those who wrote, stared and directed their own movie.
Dolph saved his word processing skills for the sophomore effort, namely the Mechanik.The porn-named hero (Dolph) of this movie is Lance Rockford.
This is a low budget straight to DVD (Seagal-like) movie.
Actually, most of the movie is quite boring.The scenario that ensues is part Assault of Precinct 13, part conspiracy, part Steven Segal and a whole lot of predictability.
Don't even waste your time on this movie.
For example, Jerry Springer plays the cigar smoking, workout-while-I-talk-on-the-phone President of the United States.
The other surprise is to find out that "the Dolph" was still alive and kicking.
Steven has taught Dolph the proper way to shoot a gun.
This movie also gives us the duel between Dolph's 9mm Beretta and a Sniper rifle.
Dolph's return and directorial debut is atrocious and boring.
I was going to give this movie a 1 or 2, however, I have to give a little credit for filming and some production that occurred in Romania.
Until my review of the Mechanik, I highly recommend seeing Red Scorption, Rocky IV, Universal Soldier, Masters of the Universe or Showdown in Little Tokyo for your Dolph fix..
Dolph Lundgren's debut as movie director is bad.
Two interesting facts – it's Lundgren's first movie as a director and Jerry Springer plays the president of United States.
Dolph has to protect the president from the terrorists.
Well , not really , the movie makers do try to tell us some kind of story , but is just boring and predictable .
Some people want to keep war going because it's a good business .
Also Lundgren's back story seems to be made only to make the movie longer.
It doesn't have any connection to the main plot whatsoever.The movie is mostly one shootout after another in big castle.
There is plenty of action but it's so empty because the meager plot that exists makes such little sense.Only for die-hard Lundgren fans.
Defending President Jerry Springer.
Dolph Lundgren wears two hats in his 2004 action-thriller "The Defender." Not only does he star as the hero in "The Defender," but also he directed "The Defender." Mind you, the Swedish straight-to-video star would have starred in this international intrigue actioneer anyway, but original director Sidney J.
The great news is that Dolph pinch-hits a home run with this non-stop, $6-million dollar, shoot'em up that comes packed with surprises galore.
No, Dolph has done better movies, principally Hong Kong director John Woo's made-for-cable action epic "Blackjack," but "The Defender" does qualify as one of Dolph's better direct-to-video action-thrillers.Scenarist Douglas W.
In "The Defender," a bespectacled, cigar-smoking U.S. President (Jerry Springer of TV's "The Jerry Springer Show") dispatches his African-American National Security Adviser Roberta Jones (Carolina Lee-Johnson of "The Saint") to meet with an international terrorist, Mohamed Jamal (newcomer Geoffrey Burton of "Inn of the Damned"), ostensibly a Bin Laden type to seek a peace initiative.
Jones warns longtime security chief Lance Rockford (Dolph Lundgren of "Detention") that nobody must know that this meeting is being held because it could be political dynamite for the President.
well, you'll have to see for yourself because this constitutes one of the many surprises that occur throughout "The Defender." Meanwhile, as director, Dolph doesn't waste a moment in this bullet-blasting gunplay.
The action occurs largely in a hotel in Europe with Dolph crosscutting to the President meeting with his advisors, etc., in shots set in Washington, D.C. Of course, in faraway Romania, the cameo-clad villains pour out of the woodwork like angry fire ants, and our heroes are constantly have to duck fusillades of machine gun fire.
This is just one of the surprises that Dolph springs on us near the end of the movie.
"The Defender" is a lot of fun and the ensuing surprises in the storyline should hold your attention throughout its 90 minute running time.
The performances are adequate and the production values look good for this straight-to-video thriller.
Dolph Lundgren fans should get a kick out of this tidy spy versus spy saga..
Dolph's best work in years!.
Okay, confession time right off the bat - I like Dolph Lundgren movies.
I know there are other people out there just like me.
He will occasionally sneak in a good film but the bad weigh down the scale.
So imagine my shock when this film, his directorial debut, is his best work in years.
The President (Jerry Springer...yes, Jerry Springer) has set up a clandestine meeting between his NSA chief and a Bin Laden type terrorist leader to call a truce.
Lundgren is the leader of Secret Service assigned to protect the female NSA head.
The film has a real ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 feel as Lundgren and his crew fight off mercenaries at a remote hotel.
Lundgren is actually a better director than half the guys he's worked with in the last 10 years.
There are plenty of situations such as this one in the film, but still, the acting wasn't bad and the story kept you going, hence 5/10..
Dolph is the best.
This movie is one of the best movie Dolph has made.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
It look so good.
Why am I hooked on Dolph Lundgren movies?
I have this strange and unhealthy fascination with Dolph Lundgren's terrible films.
There probably is a reason he's never broke into main stream films and The Defender is another example which he not only stars in but helms the picture as well.
Frighteningly this was his first directorial film and I kind of thought it might be worth seeing being that he has always had this passion for action flicks that maybe he could direct his way into a great action flick.
I mean The Defender is not the worst movie I've ever seen and if you like guns well The Defender might be the greatest film you've ever seen.
Sounds like a Dolph Lundgren movie.The aforementioned Mr. Lundgren stars as former Armed Forces soldier Lance Rockford who was held and tortured as a P.O.W. and now works as a Secret Service bodyguard.
His back story is half decently interesting and there isn't any problem with his acting per se but the story or lack thereof doesn't support any good characters really so it's all about him shooting people...and is it just me or does he hold his handgun really weird in this film?
Jerry Springer, yes THAT Jerry Springer, has a small role as The President of The United States.
It's unfortunate that the plot made no sense because it might have made his character even more important.
I lump them together because whether or not they have talent as actors you wouldn't know from this film because none of them have any stand out moments or even personalities.
I mean there is plenty of action but it's so empty because the meager plot that exists makes such little sense.
Even if you are a Dolph Lundgren fan...for the few of you out there or if you're like me and just can't look away...like a car wreck well do your very best to skip over this one because it's one big long shoot out with nothing in the end to satisfy you at all.
I usually like Dolph Lundgren movies (Universal Soldier, Rocky II, The Punisher, Masters of The Universe).
It has a great premise: the head of the NSA goes to Romania for a secret meeting with a mysterious party, who turns out to be the head of a terrorist organization.
Lundgren plays the Secret Service agent who is leading the team that protects her.Most of the major points of the story take place in the first 20 minutes and the the final 10 minutes of the movie.
Most of the rest of the movie can be summed up like this: 10-15 minutes of shooting, 5 minutes of talking, 10-15 minutes of shooting, cut scene of the president, 10-15 minutes of shooting, cut scene of a group of men standing in the middle of a circle of SUVs in the middle of the night talking, 10-15 minutes of shooting.There is a great plot twist near the end.
And it's pretty obvious who the terrorist and president are supposed to be.Overall, I would not recommend this film unless you are really bored and there is nothing else on TV. |
tt0045218 | Target | Charlie Snow (Stephen Baldwin) was a highly decorated war hero, a sniper who never placed emotion before the mission. Except once. Providing cover for an undercover arms dealer sting operation, he was forced into a predicament, as through his scope he saw a hostage crisis unfold.
The decision he made cost his fellow soldiers their lives. But he also managed to ventilate the hostage-taker, arms dealer Lendl Bodnar (Mio Deckala).
Back in the USA, Charlie is now a shell of the man he used to be. He has been ostracized from the government, and his family is falling apart. His wife Maggie (Deborah Worthing) is close to finalizing their split. He is an empty soul, as conveyed by the look in his eyes.
But Charlie's world is about to get rocked. Lendl Bodnar has a brother named Yevon Bodnar (Yorgo Constantine), an arms dealer who wants revenge on Charlie for Lendl's death.
Charlie's existence gets body-slammed when he learns that Maggie has been kidnapped, his daughter Lisa (Steffani Brass) and son Sam (Rory Thost) are in danger, and everywhere he turns, he's being attacked by Yevon's men.
Charlie must summon all the tactics that made him such an effective killer and reconnect with his secret ops government links to rescue Maggie and take Yevon down. | comedy | train | wikipedia | Not one of Tim's best. I'm a big fan of the old B Western and Tim Holt is a particular favorite of mine. I've always thought Tim Holt was one of the most under-appreciated heroes of the old silver screen. While never quite enjoying the popularity of Hoppy, Gene or Roy he made some of the best movies of his genre. Target was 2nd to the last of Tim Holt's Westerns and made at a time when the old B Western was riding off into the sunset. It's sad he couldn't have had a better send off.The Post World War II Tim Holt westerns are some of the best ever made but Target was the worst of the lot. A great western hero, not a great movie, check out just about any other of his old B's and you'll agree Tim Holt rides as tall in the saddle as the best of them.. On the Downgrade. Hard not to agree with the other reviewers—this is not the duo's best oater. The boys appear to be just going through the motions without the usual spark or enlivening banter. Add to that an all-too-familiar storyline, and the results are mediocre, to say the least. I always admired Holt as maybe the only matinée hero with a sidekick bigger and handsomer than he, and no buffoon, to boot. Together, they were an appealing exception to the usual. But, by 1952, the handwriting was indeed on the wall. These matinée cheapo's were about to be absorbed into the living room's little black box. Too bad, Holt and Martin didn't work out a TV deal like, say, the Cisco Kid or Gene Autry. Anyway, about the only memorable part of this 60-minutes, is a leading lady who maybe can't decide on a stage name, but can sure shoot a gun.. "When you're wearing a badge, trouble's your business".. I was surprised to hear Tim Holt give his partner Chito Rafferty (Richard Martin) some bad advice, bad in the sense that it was just what Chito would have wanted to hear. When a famous lawman's daughter (Linda Douglas) arrives in Pecos instead of her father, Tim advises 'don't let that girl out of your sight'! With pleasure Tim! The story line is a typical one for a B Western. A local town boss is buying up rancher land with the prospect of a railroad moving in, and lone holdout Bailey (John Hamilton) expects to be paid what his land is worth. Without much thought given to credibility by the writers, Bailey accepts what he believes to be fifteen thousand dollars for his property, then winds up with only fifteen hundred. Why he wouldn't have counted the money first before handing over the deed was another example of a sloppy plot contrivance to move the story along, and just a groaner if you're watching the picture as an adult instead of a matinée fan back in the day.The film also missed an opportunity by showing what a crack shot Terry Moran was with a rifle, but then didn't use her skill to affect the outcome. Overall, the picture is a rather bland affair for Tim Holt's next to last Western. However the version shown on Encore Westerns last night, in their feature time slot at 8:00 PM, offered unusually crisp black and white photography to make the viewing experience quite enjoyable.I'll finish with a bit of trivia, noting how magnificent Tim Holt's horse looked in the picture. He rode a number of different mounts in his movies, often a palomino named Lightning when teaming with Richard Martin. Winding down his career in Westerns, it looks as if the black horse he was riding in this picture was one called Sun Dance. That's pretty cool. |
tt0088930 | Clue | In 1954 New England, six strangers are invited to a party at a secluded New England mansion known as Hill House. After being met at the door by the butler, Wadsworth, the guests are reminded that they have been given a pseudonym to protect their true identity and asks that they only use that name with the other guests. During dinner, Wadsworth admits a seventh attendee, Mr. Boddy, and announces that each of the guests is being blackmailed:
Professor Plum is a former professor of psychiatry and current employee of the World Health Organization whose medical license was revoked because he had an affair with one of his female patients.
Mrs. Peacock is the wife of a U.S Senator who has been accused of accepting bribes to deliver her husband's vote and claims she must pay their blackmailer to avoid a political witch hunt.
Miss Scarlet is the owner of an illegal escort service in Washington, D.C..
Colonel Mustard is thought, at first, to have been blackmailed for scandalous photographs with one of Miss Scarlet's employees, but it is later revealed that he was a war profiteer who made his money from selling stolen radio components on the black market. He now works at the Pentagon on a private fusion bomb (which is revealed later in the film).
Mrs. White is an alleged "black widow" who was drawn in to avoid a scandal regarding the mysterious death of her nuclear physicist husband. She was previously married to an illusionist, who also disappeared under mysterious circumstances.
Mr. Green is a homosexual, a secret that would cost him his job with the State Department if it were widely known.
Finally, Wadsworth reveals Mr. Boddy's secret to the guests: he is the one who has been blackmailing them. As the guests begin to shout at Mr. Boddy, Wadsworth explains that he has gathered all the guests together to confront Mr. Boddy and turn him over to the police. Confronted by Wadsworth's revelation, Mr. Boddy reminds the guests that, if turned over to the police, he can reveal their secrets while in police custody. Mr. Boddy then distributes to each guest a wrapped gift box which, when opened, reveal one of six weapons: a wrench, a candlestick, a lead pipe, a knife, a revolver, and a rope with a hangman's knot. Mr. Boddy suggests that they use the weapons provided to kill Wadsworth and destroy the evidence, keeping their secrets safe. Mr. Boddy turns out the lights in the room, creating a moment of chaos in which someone shoots the revolver. When the lights come back on, Mr. Boddy is lying on the ground and is pronounced dead by Professor Plum.
Everyone denies killing Mr. Boddy, and Wadsworth reveals that he arranged the event in revenge for his wife who had committed suicide after being blackmailed by Mr. Boddy for having Socialist friends. While trying to decide how to proceed, Wadsworth and the guests check on Mrs. Ho, the Cook, who is found dead in the kitchen with the knife. Upon returning to The Study, Mr. Boddy is gone and is later found dead by Mrs. Peacock in the bathroom from the candlestick. Wadsworth and the guests assume there must be another person in the house that killed The Cook and Mr. Boddy, so they split up in pairs and search the house with the weapons locked in the cupboard. Over the course of search, three weapons (the wrench, the lead pipe, and the revolver) are used to a kill stranded motorist found dead in the lounge, a police officer (after he investigate the motorist's abandoned car) in the Library, and a singing telegram girl in the Hall. Yvette, the maid, is found dead in the Billiard Room with the rope.
Wadsworth announces to the other guests that he deduced the identity of the murderer and runs through a frantic re-enactment of the entire evening, scene by scene, with the guests in tow. Wadsworth points out that each of the victims had a connection to one of the guests and were actually accomplices that enabled Mr. Boddy to find out the secrets he later used to blackmail the guests.
The cook had earlier been employed by Mrs. Peacock.
The motorist was Colonel Mustard's driver during the war and knew of his involvement with the black market.
Yvette had worked for Miss Scarlet and had an affair with Mrs. White's husband, which made Mrs. White hate her, and led her to kill her husband. Colonel Mustard's scandalous photographs were of him and Yvette "in flagrante delicto" (caught in the act).
The police officer had been on Miss Scarlet's payroll for his silence.
The singing telegram girl was one of Professor Plum's patients. He once had an affair with her.
The accounting is interrupted by an evangelist at the front door warning "the 'Kingdom of Heaven' is at hand", who is encouraged to leave. Wadsworth then flips the electricity to the house.
At this point, the story proceeds to one of three endings: A, B, or C.
=== Ending A ===
Having used her former call girl Yvette to murder Mr. Boddy and the cook, Miss Scarlet killed her and the others to keep her true business of "secrets" safe, planning on using the information learned tonight for her own benefit. While Miss Scarlet holds Wadsworth at gunpoint with the revolver, Wadsworth tells her that there are no more bullets in the gun, but Miss Scarlet insists she still has one left and threatens to kill him. Wadsworth reveals himself to be an undercover FBI agent and arrests Miss Scarlet as police arrive and secure the house. The evangelist is revealed to be the chief. Although still insisting to Miss Scarlet the revolver is empty, Wadsworth realizes she was right when he accidentally fires the last bullet into the air, hitting a chandelier and causing it to crash closely behind Colonel Mustard.
=== Ending B ===
Mrs. Peacock is revealed as the murderer of all the victims and escapes after holding the others at gunpoint. However, Wadsworth reveals himself as an FBI agent with the night's activities set up to spy on Mrs. Peacock's activities, believing her to be taking bribes by foreign powers. As Mrs. Peacock makes her way to her car, she is captured by the police, and the evangelist is revealed to be the chief.
=== Ending C ===
This ending is dubbed by the movie (on the home video release) as "But here's what really happened." Each murder was committed by a different person: Professor Plum killed Mr. Boddy in the hall with the candlestick, Mrs. Peacock killed the cook in the kitchen with the knife, Colonel Mustard killed the motorist in the lounge with the wrench after unlocking the cupboard where the weapons were kept and getting into the lounge via a secret passage from the conservatory, Mrs. White killed Yvette in the billiard room with the rope, and Miss Scarlet killed the cop in the library with the lead pipe. Mr. Green is accused of shooting the singing telegram girl in the hall with the revolver. Wadsworth then reveals not only did he kill her himself, but that he is, in fact, the real Mr. Boddy and the man Professor Plum killed was simply his butler. He had brought the other victims, who were his accomplices in the blackmail scheme, to the house to be killed by the guests and thus plans to continue blackmailing them now that there's no evidence against him. Mr. Green then draws another revolver and kills the blackmailer. Mr. Green reveals to the others that he is actually an undercover FBI agent and the whole evening was a set-up to catch the criminals. The police and FBI arrive and arrest all the guests for murder as the evangelist is revealed to be the chief. Mr. Green then declares that he killed Mr. Boddy, "In the Hall, with the revolver." He tells the chief to round everyone up, then smiles and says, "I'm going home to sleep with my wife." | comedy, mystery, murder, cult, violence, flashback, psychedelic, humor | train | wikipedia | Superbly casting some superlative film talents into the board game roles of Colonel Mustard et al, this throws the greatest over-actor of them all in as the butler and lets rip.
I cant say I'm a fan of that board game (although I sometimes play it on the quiz machine in pub), but I am a fan of murder mystery - and while this film is more of a joke than anything, it generally plays it's cards right and what we have here is a very entertaining little flick, that really does deserve your time!
Based on the board game of the same name by Parker Brothers, six guests, Colonel Mustard, Mrs. White, Mr. Green, Mrs. Peacock, Professor Plum and Miss Scarlet are invited to a Victorian mansion for a dinner party.
I mean, this movie is just fantastic, marginally better than Murder By death, which I didn't understand at the end, though that is a good film.
The first movie based on a board game deals with several characters must unravel a lot of murders at a bizarre mansion.
. This popular charade deals with a fistful of famed stars (Lesley Ann Warren , Christopher Lloyd , Michael Mckean , Madeline Kahn , Martin Mull , Eileen Brennan) incarnating suspect criminals , as six guests are invited and must cooperate with the staff to solve a murder mystery .
The film takes place in "New England," 1954 as revealed in the opening scenes , as various characters are invited to a spooky mansion full of secret passages and spinning rooms , there they are received by an eccentric butler (amusingly played by Tim Curry who had previously starred in another comedy set in a gigantic mansion, that was The Rocky Horror Picture Show ,1975) and the buxom French maid Yvette (Colleen Camp though Jennifer Jason Leigh, Demi Moore and Madonna were considered for the role) .
It is an entertaining and fun comedy of murders in which the laughs pile up before your eyes , director has got success in keeping the bizarre and grotesque appearances of the actors in hyperactive movement , shouting and frantic running around , principally from Tim Curry .
The screenplay is funny and high quality in which it's not difficult to work out on which murder-solvers each of them is modeled ; furthermore , stand up Tim Curry as a botcher as well as hyperactive butler and a suitably eccentric Lesley Ann Warren , of course , Christopher Lloyd is appealing too .
Madeline Kahn is so sexy as femme fatale Mrs White, Lesley Anne Warren has the most sensational figure (although Dr who fans may agree, when we first see her she looks like a vervoid.) However it's Eileen Brennan's Mrs Peacock that I enjoy most, she delivers some hilarious lines with a slick and easy manner.
Clue has various guests at a house trying to solve a series of murders, all of them played by fun actors in full on hilarious camp mode.
Well, what do you know, "Clue" is one of the most fast paced and wittiest play-like comedies ever committed to film!
Even though I was mainly watching this for Christopher Lloyd (who starred in "Back To The Future" that same year, which is kinda hard to believe if you compare his looks in the two movies), Tim Curry (whose performance here seriously rivals all his other great roles like Frank 'N' Furter and Pennywise The Clown) and Michael McKean (great as ever), the whole cast really blew me away, because it had such a great on screen-chemistry together.Up until the ending (the three different endings, that is), "Clue" is one hell of an entertaining ride that doesn't bore you for a second.
Based off of the famous board game, Clue is a fantastic movie for people of all ages.
Scarlet the temptress, and of course you can not forget the amazing Tim Curry who plays cool and composed Wadsworth, the butler.As I said before, this is a movie for people of all ages.
The fact that this film also emulates this trend is more of a strength than a weakness in that it is just as focused on it's murder/ mystery theme as well as it's comedic theme.Besides this the performances of the entire cast in this film are first rate especially Tim Curry who steals this film with his over the top performance of Wadsworth the butler (which I feel was his best one to date!!).
Clue also features an excellent soundtrack which denotes the fifties setting in which this film and boardgame is based (I particularily like the energetic piece of classic music that is played throughout the film).Clue is a wonderful film whose entry excels in each of it's genres such as comedy, murder/ mystery and of course the "movie based on a game" genre.
It's very difficult (probably impossible) for me to review this movie in any kind of objective way because growing up I loved it so much and watched it so many times I can likely recite the dialogue from start to finish.
As a spoof of whodunits, "Clue" gleefully overplays all the usual genre clichés: a ridiculously huge and spooky old mansion, secret passageways, a nighttime setting, a loud thunderstorm, a fire in the fireplace, gloved hands of the killer, and multiple suspects, all of whom have motives for murder.Of course nothing is to be taken seriously here; the film is played strictly for laughs.
Madeline Kahn as Mrs. White, and Tim Curry as Wadsworth the butler, are also good.Most of the predictably heavy dialogue is not especially funny, but some of it is, as this exchange between Col. Mustard (Martin Mull) and Wadsworth.
The two songs "Shake, Rattle And Roll" and "Life Could Be A Dream", along with those antique autos the suspects drive are the main "clues" to the film's setting in the early 1950s.Although the film is not nearly as good as "Murder By Death" (1976), a similar spoof, "Clue" is still an enjoyable film, especially for the fine performances of Eileen Brennan, Madeline Kahn, and Tim Curry..
Another fine aspect of the film is its multiple endings, some better than others, admittedly, my favorite being the 'they all did it' ending, the funniest of the lot."Clue" isn't a perfect movie, some of the jokes fall flat, the score is problematic, and Lynn's direction is flat.
Now that he's dead i have a life." The cast are clearly having a complete riot with Tim Curry, Eileen Brennan and the late, great Madeline Kahn coming off with particular sparks.
Eileen Brennan's 'Mrs. Peacock' is flawless, as is Madeline Kahn's 'Ms. White,' Tim Curry's 'Wadsworth' and Michael McKean's 'Mr. Green.' If Hollywood made more movies with ensembles as competent across the board as this ( a la Eastwood with "Mystic River" and "Million Dollar Baby"), cinema would be a lot more satisfying..
Sure, it wasn't like the game, but it was a laugh-out-loud comedy to watch again and again.The cast/acting is perfect.
Tim Curry steals every line as Wadsworth to keep me laughing my head off right to the very end, Eileen Brennan was flawless as Mrs. Peacock with a much better edge, Madeliene Kahn was hilarious as Mrs. White with her fantastic lines "Husband should be like Kleenex: Soft, Strong and Disposable" and "Life before death is as improbable as sex after marriage", Christopher Lloyd did his best with his subtlety and drama as Professor Plum, Michael McKean did a hilarious job as the whiny and timid, but hilarious Mr. Green and Martin Mull did great with his comedic moments as Colonel Mustard while most of the actors did well.This movie also has some great music, both haunting and beautiful along with it's nice visuals and some brilliant cinematography, but the two things that stood out the best are the clever story and it's gem of a script.
Well, the filmmakers succeeded with flying colors.Despite what the naysayers have said, "Clue" has a fairly complex story intertwining the lives of the famous characters from the board game and throwing in blackmail, murder and a whole lot of stupid boob jokes.
With everyone from Michael McKean to Martin Mull to Madeline Kahn, the cast is simply perfect although I gotta admit that both Tim Curry and Bill Henderson really stand-out as the fastidious butler and a cop who looks like he was trained by Elmer Fudd.The set design is really appropriate for the genre with a spooky Victorian house set against a dark and stormy night.
In a similar way to 'Murder By Death' the film thrives on comedy and confusion and, although you may find it confusing at times, everything makes sense when compiled at the end as it leads towards (on the DVD) one of three surprise endings.
But the film is still good, delirious fun, and those who like drawing-room mysteries and ensemble comedies (yes, Tim Curry steals the film, but Lesley Ann Warren's great work should not be overlooked) will probably consider this film a treasure.
Hence, the connection to the board game.You have a great comedic cast, even if there is not much of a story and the entire film is focused on the characters really doing nothing more than running all around the creepy mansion, engaging in a few amusing miscalculations.
I suppose because they weren't sure how to end such a simple story (and given all of the possibilities you're offered in the game), they have this is a movie with three different endings, each starting with..."if it happened that way." But, this comedy is particularly saved by a tremendous cast, especially Madeline Kahn (I love the "flames" routine she does) as the scheming Mrs. White.The story is quite similar to the 1945 mystery drama, "...And Then There Were None," based on the Agatha Christie novel.
When a few of the guests in the house end up murdered, the other guests must work together to figure out the identity of the killer...Based on the popular board game Cluedo, Clue is a wonderful idea for a film and it certainly had bags of potential (and indeed a lot of this potential is highlighted at the start of the film when the mysterious guests first become acquainted), but once all the introductions are out of the way the film, for me, sadly went downhill very fast...There is far too much exposition and not enough action in the first half of the film; I get that some exposition is necessary to establish the characters and how each of them slots into the story, but I do think that this aspect of the film could have been trimmed down somewhat to prevent audiences from nodding off.
In fact it's hard to believe that John Landis was involved in this crap as he has shown both before and after this film that he's capable of much better.I certainly liked the idea of making a film based on the popular board game of Cluedo, but sadly like a lot of the murders depicted in the film Clue is badly executed....
Frenetically paced, "Clue" features a never ending series of (sometimes subtle) one-liners, a cast of mysterious characters and a bewildering array of possibilities as to the identity of the killer(s) of 6 people in a mansion where a group of apparently unconnected people were invited to attend a dinner party.To give marks for originality, this may be the only movie I've come across that's based on a Parker Brothers (or any other) board game.
Being an avid admirer of the Cluedo board game this film couldn't have missed, for me anyway.Six people are invited to dinner in a creepy old mansion on a dark and stormy night (of course) where they are to be addressed by fake names (Colonel Mustard, Professor Plum etc.).
Characters like Lesley Ann warren (playing miss scarlet) makes the film sexy but deadly, Madeline Khan (Mrs white)keeps it mysterious and and intriguing which makes the pair nearly opposites.
Based on the board game Clue (Cluedo in Australia and Europe) the story tells of six people being summoned to an American Gothic mansion for an evening of revealed secrets and murder.
having never seen this movie before,i was kinda looking forward to it.i thought it might be interesting.turns out i was dead wrong.the only thing that seemed to be happening in this movie was a lot of meaningless noise and aimless chaos.it was just too stupid.plus,it made next to no sense.maybe i just expected too much.if i had see it when it had originally came out,i might have enjoyed.if so,it sure hasn't held up well.i tried to watch it to the end,but i just couldn't make it.there are some good comedic actors here,but they have nothing to work with.of course,that's just my opinion.i could be out to lunch.my best advice,try and find it on cable or as a cheap rental.for me,Clue is a 3/10.
As said before it is a slow film which won't be liked by people who are not aware of the famous broad game.Performances by all the actors are commendable: Tim Curry is impressive as the butler, who takes a summer salt in the end.
Eileen Brennan's performance is a stand out, and good old Tim Curry keeps the plot moving.If you're looking for crass, obvious humour, this film isn't for you.
Being greeted by the butler Wadsworth (Tim Curry) and informed that they must stick to their given aliases, the only thing initially that links Miss Scarlett (Leslie Ann Warren), Colonel Mustard (Martin Mull), Mrs Peacock (Eileen Brennan), Professor Plum (Christopher Lloyd), Mrs White (Madeline Kahn) and Mr Green (Michael McKean) is that they are being blackmailed by Mr Boddy (Lee Ving).
But how about this?Though noticeably flawed behind frequent microscopic analysis, 1985's "Clue" is well-deserving of its cult status as an under-appreciated comedy as well as for its amazing repeat value on par with, perhaps, Monty Python.Using the famous board game favorite as a springboard, the film mixes the game's familiar characters with a horror movie set, 1950's paranoia, and a preposterous scenario suitable for use by either a dinner theater or Agatha Christie.
RELEASED IN 1985 and directed by Jonathan Lynn, "Clue" is a comedic murder mystery based on the board game featuring an "all-star" cast (Tim Curry, Madeline Kahn, Christopher Lloyd, Eileen Brennan, Lesley Ann Warren, etc.).This is a good movie if you're in the mood for an amusing mystery that takes place during the McCarthy era (1954) almost entirely within a vast gothic mansion on a stormy night.
Based on the board game; the film stars Tim Curry as Waddington, the Butler of Mr Boddy.
Believe or not this film is also another childhood relic of mine, I saw this film when I was about 8, I was fascinated with the mystery/detective and noir genre since I was into the TV show "Magnum P.I" even the film "The Great Mouse Detective" but I never saw a live action movie mystery/suspense thriller in my life, when I bumped into this film I was blown away, so this was literally the first one I saw and it's still one of the best.What makes it even more interesting was the fact it was based on my favorite board game "Clue".
Each of the cast members play the mixed and colorful characters from the board game well, their not exactly characters but more the typical character archetypes from any of the old murder mystery mancion stories.The late great Madeline Kahn is great as Ms. White, whom is pretty much the Black Widow whom has a heart of ice.
One favorite quote of mine is "Comunism is a red herring." it's funny because it's true it was a common cliché in most suspense thrillers at the time where the perpetrator was usual a spy for the Russans.I really love the three scenario ending which I thought was brilliant, and makes sense since the board game "Clue" was also about a single player constructing any mystery scenario they want, to set up anyone to be the guilty culprit.
Since then I have seen it many times and it is now one of my favourite movies.It's 1955, and a Butler, a Maid, and 6 guests, are invited to Hill House where they quickly get involved in 6 murders!
The acting in fact is solid all around; everyone in the cast gives a great performance.At the end of the movie they show three alternate endings each one more insane and hilarious then the other; even though some endings may not make sense or may even seem impossible it is still great because it is so insane and funny.Fans of the board game will definitely like the movie.
The movie certainly has the feel of the game and the house even looks like the board.
The acting is good and the movie is chock full of stars like Tim Curry, Martin Mull, Christopher Lloyd and other big name stars.
In fact, I will go ahead and say that Clue is my favorite film based on a board game.
Considering that this movie is based on a board game, it's best not to expect an Oscar-winning film.
Tim Curry plays Wadsworth the butler, who hosts six guests(played by Michael McKean, Madeline Kahn, Martin Mull, Eileen Brennan, Christopher Lloyd, and Lesley Ann Warren) who become involved in an elaborate murder mystery involving their host, the maid, a singing telegram girl, etc.
Based on the board game Clue (or Cluedo to us Brits and probably everyone else outside of America), it tells the story of a group of misfits with a lot to hide arriving at a remote mansion, with butler Wadsworth (Curry) playing the host and guide.The group consists of Mrs. Peacock (Eileen Brennan), Mrs. White (Madeline Kahn), Professor Plum (Lloyd), Mr. Green (Michael McKean), Colonel Mustard (Martin Mull) and Miss Scarlet (Lesley Ann Warren), who after eating dinner are ushered into the rest area to meet their blackmailer, Mr Boddy (Lee Ving). |
tt0070706 | Slaughter's Big Rip-Off | Slaughter (Jim Brown), a fierce Vietnam veteran and ex-Green Beret, had avenged the death of his parents by killing the gangster who was responsible for their death in Mexico. He is now relocated in Los Angeles, California, a place that Slaughter sought to escape the past events and begin his attempt to have a tranquil life.
Slaughter goes to a friend's house for a lavish outdoor picnic and celebration. Meanwhile, a new crime boss, Duncan (Ed McMahon), is now after Slaughter, for having killed ex Mafia boss Dominic Hoffo earlier. An old World War I biplane is seen flying by the outdoor celebration and then opening fire on the guests at the picnic. It results in the graphic death by headshot of Slaughter's friend, which reignites the old spark of fury and rage that Slaughter had when told of the death of his parents.
Duncan's first assassination attempt in essence is a failure and only succeeds in waking a sleeping beast. Duncan hires a new hit-man named Kirk (Don Stroud) to bring Slaughter to his demise. Rather than being in protective custody under the supervision of Duncan's crooked cops, Slaughter remains on the streets.
Slaughter's new friend is a police official, Det. Reynolds, who warns that his life is in peril. Slaughter also has a girlfriend, Marcia (Gloria Hendry), who is also being targeted by the mob, under Duncan's orders, to further provoke Slaughter.
Slaughter makes an agreement with Reynolds to obtain confidential documents of the Mafia's operations. He coaxes a drug-addicted pimp to assist him in breaking into Duncan's safe house and successfully escape with the documents. After gun fights, Slaughter and his pimp sidekick kill several of Duncan's guards and associates. In response, Duncan sends Kirk to kidnap Slaughter's girlfriend, a fatal mistake on Duncan's part. | violence, murder, blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | Don't ask me how it happened, but I suppose having the film feature Ed "I'll Sponsor Anything" McMahon as a tail-chasing crack hustler had a bit to do with it.Frankly, I was disappointed with Slaughter's first outing in 1972.
Big Jim Brown seems stronger as Slaughter here than in the first.
Perhaps this is due to the fact that one year later he had something to work from, instead of his simple "Be like Shaft" motivation before.The most outstanding part about the film is the soundtrack provided by pimp-daddy number one, James Brown.
I should also point out this film is also an excellent period film to represent a time in motion picture history when Jim Brown and Ed McMahon could actually GROW hair.Double the chicks, double the blow, triple the body count, and factor in Ed McMahon and James Brown.
For my money, Slaughter's Big Rip-Off can play ball with any Blaxploitation film ever made.
The movie itself is pretty good - but only the ORIGINAL version with the awesome soundtrack by James Brown.
Jim Brown kicks ass effectively, Gloria Hendry proves again that she can bring life to even the poorest roles, and Brock Peters is decent as The Cop Who Plays By the Book.
Of the two Slaughter movies, this is the better and even though its hardly a Schindlers list in complexity it is bloody funny.
Jim Brown also proves hes a private dick for all the chicks and again he kicks whitey ass in every direction.
This sequel to the original Jim Brown "Slaughter" vehicle is similarly bad ass entertainment, with big Jim showing off plenty of cool as always.
There's a fair amount of violence to enjoy, and a bit of sex, too - even some full frontal nudity courtesy of the delectable Judith Brown.Slaughter is now being hunted by mafioso types who want to get back at him for his activities in the first film.
Determined police detective Reynolds (Brock Peters) soon ropes Slaughter into stealing important documents from Duncan - to be precise, a list of people who've received payoffs."Slaughter's Big Rip-Off" isn't wall to wall action, but it is enjoyable, particularly for seeing Mr. McMahon in a film of this type.
There's a bunch of familiar faces in the supporting cast, among them Gloria Hendry as Marcia, Slaughter's gal pal, Dick Anthony Williams as flamboyant pimp Joe Creole (a pimp who's also talented in the art of safecracking), Art Metrano as the sleazy Mario Bertoli, Hoke Howell as one of the Parker brothers who make the foolish mistake of not cooperating with Slaughter, Russ Marin as top cop Crowder, the always lovably genial Scatman Crothers (you wish he was in the film longer) as Cleveland, Pamela Des Barres in a sexy bit part, George Gaynes as the ill-fated Warren, and an uncredited Adam Roarke as Harry.The pacing is mostly efficient, the action when it happens is always viscerally effective, and there are some good laughs to be had as well.
It's just a shame that the original James Brown soundtrack got replaced for the DVD; the new score is adequate but hardly inspired.Seven out of 10..
Here's another another golden oldie, a well made feature film, blaxploitation tale, with some thrilling action, especially the start, with the fake orange and reddy gore.
We too, have hot broads, as well as the big black dude you don't mess with, as referenced by other black dudes: The one and only Jim Brown (Fireball in The Running Man) who makes most men look small.
Some people want Slaughter dead, where he must of crossed some really bad guys, half the fun in the story, that has us, wondering if he'll survive, which we probably know he will.
Stella Stevens is off on the Poseidon Adventure, so Slaughter has to find a new girlfriend in this sequel in his battle with the mob.
Of course, Gloria Hendry is working hard to keep him on a leash.It was a treat to see Ed McMahon and Don Stroud, and Scatman Crothers, along with Brock Peters.
They definitely made the sequel more interesting.Dick Anthony Williams plays a classic pimp with the jive talk and flashy threads who joins Slaughter in a rip off scheme.
Stroud makes a classic mistake, however, and Slaughter is ready for action.The cool dude just does the job..
Slaughter's Big Rip-Off (1973) * 1/2 (out of 4) Violent sequel sees a mob boss (Ed McMahon) taking a hit out on Slaughter (Jim Brown) who of course has to seek vengeance when a couple of his friends are killed instead.
This sequel to the 1972 hit comes as a major letdown because we've got a pretty good cast here but sadly they're given very little to do and this film runs out of gas before we even hit the thirty-minute mark.
Not only do we have Brown and McMahon but we also have a brief appearance by Scatman Crothers and Don Stroud as well as Brock Peters who most will remember from TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD.
The biggest problem with this film is that the entire set up is just boring and never really gets us interested in what's going on.
As soon as the movie starts we witness this hit and we have no reason why it's happening or who the people are that are getting killed.
What we do get are a few fun performances with Brown once again delivering the good lines and kicking enough heads in for some slight entertainment.
It was very funny seeing McMahon playing the womanizing gangster and Peters turns in a good performance as a cop helping Slaughter.
If you are looking for a bad-ass, funky film to watch some night, this is just right.
In addition to Jim Brown in the lead part, this movie is filled with some of the biggest names the blaxploitation scene has to offer.
How about Scatman Crothers, Dick Anthony Williams, Gloria Hendry and Brock Peters.
Brown returned to his role from the year before (in "Slaughter") for this rough follow-up film.
When the first assassination attempt fails, Brown is back in action once more, kicking gangster butt all over the place while trying to protect his new girlfriend Hendry.
While the original film was, overall, a better and more coherent movie, this one delivers all the exploitation aspects in far heavier doses, making it more pleasing to fans of the genre.
Stroud makes an impression as an intense, racially-bigoted hit-man while Peters adds just a tinge of class as an upright police detective who enlists Brown's aid.
Sadly, no mention at all is made of Brown's original sidekicks Don Gordon and Stella Stevens.
The film spends a lot of time in the sewage of organized crime, drugs, prostitution and other vices, but it retains interest through the creativity of its action scenes and the now-startling lack of political correctness.
9 out of 10 film-goers agree: if you put Jim Brown on screen, whatever film he happens to be in will immediately improve noticeably for as long as he remains on screen.
There's just something about the guy's presence and charisma, even in a non-action setting, that makes you want to see what he is going to say or do next.
So a film with Jim Brown up front and center for the entire duration is going to be fun to watch even if the surroundings are second rate.
That is certainly the case here.This was a pure blaxploitation flick that doesn't pretend to be anything else, so the audience for it is going to be fairly self-selecting - a title like "Slaughter's Big Rip-Off" is not going to pull in the Merchant Ivory crowd or fans of British comedy.
The filmmakers knew the kind of film they wanted to make, and they made it: a film about guns, drugs, sex, soul power, cussing, funk guitar and muscle cars...and mostly about Jim Brown and how cool he is.
So if you don't think about it too hard, it's OK.One really odd note to the seamless blend of guns, goons, and funk is the appearance of Ed McMahon right in the middle of things as a Boss type.
When Brown finally shoots him, I was praying that he would also call in an air strike to obliterate McMahon's wardrobe, so that it would never sully innocent eye-balls again.Anyway, "Slaughter's Big Rip-Off" might have been OK, or even good, with another actor in the role, but Jim Brown makes it a great period piece.
(SPOILERS ALERT) After knocking off a number of top mobsters from the L.A Syndicate down Mexico way Slaughter-no first name necessary-played by Big Bad Jim Brown, the baddest dude on the planet, becomes a marked man with the mob having a contract put out on his life.
By being blown away by him by the time the movie is finally over.In between we have Slaughter have some action with the ladies who ends up either dead or beaten into a pulp, by the mob, for associating with him.
There's also Slaughter's two top adversaries in the film mob boss Duncan played by a buffoonish looking Ed McMahon and his top hit-man Kirk played by real life hero, who lost the sight of one eye breaking up a mugging in NYC, Don Stroud.
To make things even worse for Stroud or Kirk is that he ends up beaten into raw hamburger meat by a gun-less Slaughter and then shot to pieces by him when he obviously had broken his fists banging them against the helpless man skull.
That's without Kirk, who looked either drunk or on sleeping pills, never even bothering to throw a punch back in return in trying to defend himself!Slaughter of course has no trouble slaughtering anyone who gets in his way and on top of that the local police don't even bother arresting and questioning him for all the slaughtering he's done in the movie that must have push the body count higher then the body count of 1992 L.A riots!
With his job now done after wiping out the entire Southern Califronia Crime Synadicate Slaughter who had unearth a list of all the politicians and police higher ups working for the syndicate is then allowed to leave town on an all expenses paid vacation, courtesy of the LAPD, to Paris France to continue his slaughtering exploits there!P.S I was bracing myself for a sequel to the movie "Slaughter's Big Rip-Off", which incidentally was a rip-off of the original "Slaughter", to follow in it's blood splattered and bone crushing footsteps.
Sure, Slaughter is a tough, gun-toting, Black man but it's more of an action picture regardless of the color of the leading man or the bad guys--and a very good action picture at that.For the second and final time, Jim Brown plays the title character.
Now, in a horribly bungled and clumsy attempt, the guys in the plane kill and injure quite a few people but miss Slaughter.
And, because the job was bungled so badly, the mob boss (Ed MacMahon!!) orders the pilot and gunman killed by his brutal assassin (Don Stroud--in a very typical sort of role for him).
So, to help him along in his own private vendetta, Brock Peters (who plays a cop) tells him who the mobsters are who ordered the hit and got Slaughter to agree to help by doing some illegal undercover work.
So, Slaughter and his pimp friend break into the mobster's mansion and steal a list of payoffs to key government and police officials.
And, naturally, there is a lot of shooting and bloodshed in the process.Stroud isn't about to let Slaughter get away with this and kidnaps Slaughter's girlfriend.
Being a tough but gallant man, you might just be able to guess much of what happens next.The action is very good in the film and Jim Brown is menacing and tough.
A Slight Improvement Over the 1972 Film "Slaughter".
Although the former Green Berets soldier by the name of "Slaughter" (Jim Brown) is not killed, several of his friends lie dead and dying all around him and he immediately vows to kill those responsible.
Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this turned out to be a fairly decent "Blaxploitation" film with good action and solid acting all around.
Likewise, the addition of Judith Brown (as "Norja") and the aforementioned Gloria Hendry certainly didn't hurt the scenery in any way either.
Even so, I thought that this sequel was a slight improvement over the 1972 film "Slaughter" and I have rated it accordingly.
Slaughter's Big Rip-Off. A mob kingpin(Ed McMahon) murders Slaughter's(Jim Brown) associates and he seeks to get even.Duncan(McMahon)puts a hit out on Slaughter, but his friends get shot instead while the gunner flew over his party in a Spearman.
A revenge actioner where big Jim Brown takes out a mobster's goons as Kirk targets him for extermination.
Duncan is in bed with the chief of police(..and other city officials) and Slaughter must secure a list with his name on it for detective Reynolds(Brock Peters).Fans of Jim Brown and blaxploitation should enjoy this, but the plot itself really isn't anything to write home about.
Brown, built like a mack truck, makes both black and white women swoon and kicks a lot of ass..a tailor made vehicle designed specifically to make him look cool while defeating those who wish to kill him.
Dick Anthony Williams steals the film as a sneering pimp, Joe Creole, who also has a reputation as a safe cracker and is enlisted by Slaughter to lift the list from a safe in Duncan's mansion.
Stroud inhibits the usual heavy role of Kirk, a ruthless, cold-blooded henchman who has obviously eliminated a lot of Duncan's competition.The yummy Judith M Brown has a minor role as a former squeeze of Slaughter's who negotiates with him over information regarding those he is after in return for sexual favors(..and, we get to see her fabulous nude body as she disrobes for Slaughter, who didn't need too much coaxing).
Gloria Hendry(Live and Let Die) is Slaughter's girlfriend, Marcia, her life soon threatened as Kirk desires the list for his boss.
Hoke Howell has a funny cameo as a plane mechanic who, at first, doesn't give out the name of the person who hired the Spearman which flew over gunning down Slaughter's friends.
Plus, the whole opening sequence doesn't properly set the stage for the revenge of the movie(..shouldn't we get to know Slaughter's comrades a bit before they are murdered?).
It does deliver the violence, though, as Slaughter lives up to his name, blowing away quite a many of Duncan's men, with blood all over the place.
It's too bad the film doesn't use McMahon more because he is fun to watch as the mafioso with those big shades and ugly suits..
Slaughters Big Ripoff could be called junk, but that is like calling Birth of A Nation Junk.Is it a good film,no.
However it is an interesting film to analyze.Unlike the first Slaughter movie, this one is different in tone.
Slaughter has no well meaning white partner like Don Gordon.
In fact, except for the beginning, there is no good white male in the entire film.
Here, an elderly white man, the only good white man in the whole film, who has just lost a close horse race to Jim Brown as Slaughter, is killed by this plane, as is another black person.
Even here, it is implied somewhat that while blacks and whites can be polite, they cannot be together.Later on, we will meet African American Brock Peter, who at first appears to be antagonistic to Slaughter, while his white boss, who appears to be a "nice guy", we will later learn is corrupt and dealing with the mob, led by all people Ed McMahon (I guess Johnny Carson show didn't pay him enough.
Brock Peters however, will help Slaughter, and they form an alliance.The "White World" is shown to be decadent and in decline.
The only good white person from here on end, is a white woman, who just wants to have sex with Slaughter, somewhat suggesting that for her white men are of no use.
Slaughter complies, but in no way does he seem to love this woman, while he is making love to a black woman later on, and we feel that he certainly cares more for her.
Also a black pimp, who appears to be a sleaze, is allowed to show courage, and that even he, has more good character qualities than "the white man".Don Stroud makes an interesting villain.
But in the end, when Slaughter faces him, he will be no match for Jim Brown's Slaughter.
As Jim Brown faces the bad white gangsters in the end, I am struck by his getting his guns ready to put the massacre on these white baddies.
However, metaphorically, one could see Slaughter getting his guns ready, to go after the people behind James Earl Ray who wanted King dead.This is no classic, it is not even good cinema, but Slaughters Big Ripoff is none the less an interesting movie for what it is saying..
Big, bad Jim Brown encores as rugged ex-Green Beret Slaughter, who finds himself targeted for termination by a bunch of vicious mobsters who are angry at Slaughter for killing a bunch of Mafiosa off in the first movie.
Soul brother number one James Brown delivers a supremely funky score.
The first-rate supporting cast really carries the day: Gloria Hendry as Slaughter's concerned loyal gal pal Marcia, Don Stroud as blithely brutish racist hit-man Kirk, Richard Williams as flamboyant pimp Joe Creole, Brock Peters as hard-nosed detective Reynolds, Scatman Crothers as a kindly old pimp, the foxy Judy ("The Big Doll House") Brown as a sexy informant who has a steamy interracial love scene with Slaughter, Art Metrano as a freaky, greasy coke-snorting hoodlum, Hoke Howell as a charter plane pilot, and AIP biker film regular Adam Roarke as an ineffectual assassin who Kirk strangles in a pool. |
tt1324058 | Separation City | Simon (Joel Edgerton) is a decent fellow, married to a lovely woman Pam (Danielle Cormack), living comfortably with two children. He has grown tired of the lack of sex and is attracted to a cellist friend of his wife, Katrien (Rhona Mitra).
Katrien travels to New Zealand to follow her husband Klaus (Thomas Kretschmann) in an attempt to rekindle their marriage. However, she catches him in bed with a young arts student and so their marriage collapses. Katrien, now available and lonely from the breakdown of her marriage, is susceptible to Simon's attraction.
The two become fascinated with each other, but don't immediately start an affair. She doesn't want to destroy his greatest appeal, which is that he is upright and reliable. They eventually attempt some meetings, but something always goes wrong. Either he arrives late and the children are coming, or he ejaculates prematurely.
Opportunity comes when they discover that they are both going to be in Germany the same week. Simon books a hotel room in Berlin, where he and his boss are attending a convention. Katrien comes to his room, but before they manage to have sex, his wife surprises him by showing up. Katrien escapes to an adjacent room through an interconnecting door and Simon and his wife make violent love, which Katrien hears through the wall. She gets upset because they were just about to have sex and he is having sex with his wife.
Pam sees Simon sneak into the hallway during a speech and hears Katrien's voice on the other end of his phone, figures out what they are doing, and flies back to Wellington angry. She soon asks for a separation.
Simon professes his love to Katrien, but she says she doesn't love him, so he goes back to Wellington to live near to his wife and children, whom he sees often (his wife slept with Katrien's husband and wants a divorce). His wife eventually forgives him and as the movie ends, we find that Katrien has accepted a job with an orchestra and lives blocks away from her ex-husband who now takes care of the kids.
Early on in the film the five or six wives suggest that the men form an encounter group that meets regularly. At least one of the wives makes it a condition that her husband would be allowed back in the house. The discussions are amusing, but the group disbands after a session that turns into a free-for-all fist fight. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt3614516 | Ankhon Dekhi | Rajesh Bauji (Sanjay Mishra) is a man in his late 50s, living a dreary but eventful life in a small house in old Delhi with his extended family. The movie starts with Babuji narrating his dream where he sees himself flying like a bird free from all the worldly affairs. A random incident is going to change his life in a dramatic way, though he does not realise it at the moment. Bauji's daughter has been seeing a boy of ill repute. When that fact is revealed to the family, after much deliberation they decide to lock up the girl and go beat the willful boy.
When they confront the boy, to Babuji he seems like a very nice person. This event radically changes his life — he decides that he will believe only what he can see, hence the title Ankhon Dekhi. After a while he refuses to worship god and treats prasad as just another sweet. He is working as a travel agent and refuses to book tickets to Amsterdam as he has notever seen Amsterdam. To uphold his ideals, he quits his job. He resorts to a very idealistic mode and takes things to extreme levels to explore his theory. At first his neighbours consider him a lunatic old man, but over time they start admiring his logical reasoning and start following him.
Once while intervening a petty loan issue with a loan shark he refuses to believe the bad reputation of the shark. He concludes that he is a good person, based on his observation. He forms a rapport with the loan shark and is recruited by him in his illegal gambling den. His followers join.
He gives consent to his daughter's marriage to the boy she loves and almost sorts out the emotional issues with his estranged brother.
Now free from all responsibility, he leads a life where there are almost no blind spots and a lot of clarity. He takes his wife for a vacation.
While chatting he narrates to his wife that he feels very light, like a bird flying in free skies. His wife jokes about his experience, inadvertently challenging his own theory that he doesn't know how a bird actually flies. In the middle of the night he walks towards a cliff. Babuji narrates his dream (as in the beginning of the story). He has yet to experience flying. As the film ends, Bauji is seen flying down a cliff. | cult | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0066258 | Puppet on a Chain | After three hippie drug-dealers are murdered by "the assassin" in a house in Los Angeles, the U.S. government sends special agent Paul Sherman to track down the Dutch source of heroin that is causing the drug war. On arriving at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport, Sherman witnesses an agent, Jimmy Duclos, who was there to meet him, shot dead by the assassin.
Sherman is originally from the Netherlands, but it is clear that Amsterdam's chief of police, Colonel De Graaf is unhappy with having the Americans interfere in Dutch affairs. However, Sherman’s direct contact, Inspector Van Gelder is more cooperative, since his niece, Trudi, suffers from severe brain damage caused by a heroin overdose eight years earlier.
Sherman makes contact with a deep-cover agent from Washington named Maggie. Sherman is then followed around Amsterdam by the assassin, indicating that the drug dealers have someone on the inside. Sherman gets away from him and later tracks him down in a hotel room, where Sherman kills him.
Sherman meets Duclos' girlfriend Astrid Lemay and her drug-addicted brother George. Soon after, George dies of an overdose and she is murdered. Sherman is attacked by a man on a boat and shoots him dead. Drug lord Meegeren, who had killed Astrid, then kills Maggie and holds Sherman prisoner. Meegeren leaves on a speedboat. Sherman escapes and follows him on another speedboat. The chase ends with Meegeren accidentally crashing his boat and it being destroyed by fire.
Sherman and a colleague arrive at a warehouse where the drugs are being distributed. There he meets Van Gelder and his niece. He finds out that they are part of the trafficking gang and that Trudi had been faking her mental disability. A shootout leaves Trudi dead and Sherman wounded. Van Gelder tries to escape, but is killed by Sherman. | revenge, neo noir, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1111918 | La linea | Veteran assassin Mark Shields (Ray Liotta) is hired to track down the head of an elusive drug cartel centered in Tijuana, Mexico. Shields takes the assignment in a weary daze, as he is fresh off a case that claimed the life of a woman he continues to see in his mind.
Meanwhile, Javier Salazar (Andy García), the head of the cartel Shields is assigned to, is dying. Salazar hands over his position to his nephew, the cocky Pelon (Esai Morales). Pelon takes charge with a different agenda, however, planning to change the cocaine being transported to heroin from Afghanistan.
Shields recruits Wire (Kevin Gage), an old friend, to help in an assassination attempt. Pelon is leaving one of his warehouses when he is attacked not only by Shields and Wire, but a different group set up by a contractor named Anthony (Bruce Davison). A shootout ensues, ending in Anthony's team being forced to withdraw. Shields aborts the operation, but Wire is kidnapped.
Pelon sees Padre Antonio (Armand Assante) after the shootout. Then he goes to talk to Salazar, who tells his nephew that their operation won't ever be in jeopardy if the Americans simply keep taking out the leaders. Salazar believes that someone will always be there to take the seat of the fallen leader.
Shields is mugged but is found by a local woman named Olivia (Valerie Cruz), who takes him into her home. Shields stays until he recovers, then leaves. He later finds out that Wire was tortured and killed.
Pelon is attacked once more by Shields, and is kidnapped. Shields takes Pelon to Salazar's home. It is revealed that Salazar faked his illness, hired Shields and set up an elaborate twist for his nephew. Pelon is executed by Padre Antonio, another dupe set up by Salazar. Shields then gives his pay to Olivia (local woman) and boards a cab. On a ride to the airport Shields realizes that he was shot sometime when he was kidnapping Pelon, and he slowly lays down in the back of the cab and dies. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0052862 | The Great St. Louis Bank Robbery | George Fowler (Steve McQueen), a diffident former collegiate football star, is recruited for a bank robbery gang by Gino, the cold hearted and unstable ex-convict brother of George's estranged flame, Ann. George, initially insisting the limit of his involvement is strictly as get-away driver, is coerced deeper into the plot by John Eagen, the calculating plot leader. Gino also succeeds in pressuring the reluctant George (George being burdened with responsibility for the expulsion of both Ann and himself from college) to reconnect with Ann to beg for a subsistence stake to tide them over pending the anticipated robbery booty. Tensions of dislike and distrust seethe within the gang.
Ann, happening to spot Gino leaving the gang's bank surveillance activity, soon extracts from George enough information to deduce that a bank robbery is about to occur. Dismayed, Ann attempts to derail the plot in hopes of saving George with a lipstick-scribbled warning on the bank's window. The warning is however detected by the 4th gang member, Willy (John's bullied but sneering minion from prison). John and Willy burst into George's and Gino's lodgings to extract the facts behind the betrayal. Gino, financially desperate to consummate the plot to avoid his own pending reincarceration, reveals Ann's identity and past relationship with George. George is forced to take the gang to Ann's apartment but is sent away, dubiously hopeful that Ann is being flown off to Chicago to silence her. Gino also abandons Ann on John's orders. John, recalling his hatred for his abusive alcoholic mother, hurls Ann to her demise off the fire escape. Unaware of this murder, George is instructed that Willy is now the wheelman, forcing the inexperienced George to a role inside the bank, but he meekly declines one final opportunity to withdraw from the plot.
The next day, the robbers commence execution of the heist, having neglected to bring a police-frequency scanner and unaware the bank relocated a switchboard from the lobby, foiling key aspects of the plan. The silent alarm is triggered and police swarm the bank exterior. John is shot down attempting escape behind a female hostage. Gino, failing to find an escape route and hemmed in by prison-like bars, commits suicide in the basement vault. After momentarily considering to battle the police Willy flees, abandoning his partners, although identified and pursued.
George, hobbled by a gashed leg, initiates a panicky escape behind another female hostage, but his spirit fails when the newly wed hostage's husband summons the courage to offer himself in her stead. Having realized that Ann's death was due to his own cowardly and naïve actions, he tries to surrender his pistol to a bank customer who disgustedly rejects the gun back to the sobbing and broken George. George is dragged away into a paddy wagon and the film concludes with his view of the world receding behind metal bars. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0062262 | The Shooting | Willet Gashade (Oates), a former bounty hunter, returns to his small mining camp after a lengthy absence and finds his slow-witted friend Coley (Will Hutchins) in a state of fear. Coley explains to Gashade that their partner, Leland Drum (B. J. Merholz), had been shot to death two days before by an unseen assassin. The killing was possibly committed in revenge for the accidental trampling death of "a little person" in town, which may have been caused by Gashade's brother, Coin. Coin had inexplicably rushed away from their camp moments before the shooting death. Gashade and Coley become increasingly paranoid, and Gashade takes his friend's gun away from him.
The following day, a young woman (Perkins) shoots her horse to death immediately outside of the camp. The sound of the gunshot temporarily sends the frightened Coley into hiding. Gashade examines the dead horse and notes that it appeared to be perfectly healthy. The woman offers Gashade a thousand dollars to lead her to a place called Kingsley. Although openly distrustful of her, he grudgingly accepts the offer. Coley, apparently smitten by the woman, accompanies them.
The young woman is rude and insulting to both Gashade and Coley. She refuses to tell them her name. The three stop briefly in Crosstree. Gashade learns that Coin was seen there only a day or two before. As they continue traveling slowly through the hot desert, Gashade observes that they are being followed by a stranger dressed in black, Billy Spear (Nicholson), who continues to keep his distance from them. Gashade sees that the woman appears to be signaling to the man. Coley makes attempts to talk to the woman but she continually taunts and insults him. She also repeatedly refuses to answer any of Gashade's questions regarding the purpose of their journey.
At night, Spear suddenly walks into their camp and joins them. Hired by the woman as a gunslinger for reasons unknown, Spear is suspicious and hostile toward Gashade and contemptuous of Coley. He repeatedly threatens both of their lives. Gashade advises Coley to keep away from Spear.
The woman rides her horse hard. When it dies of exhaustion, Coley gives his horse to the woman and Gashade allows Coley to ride with him. Later, the woman loses the trail and asks Gashade to lead on. Gashade's horse shows signs of fatigue so Gashade tells Coley to join the woman on her horse, but Spear forbids him from doing so. The woman says that the journey would be much easier without Coley. She and Spear demand that he be left behind. Gashade, under threat by Spear, reluctantly agrees and tells Coley he will come back for him soon.
The three see a bearded man (Charles Eastman) sitting in the middle of the desert nursing a broken leg. The man tells the woman that the person she is seeking is only one day's ride away. She leaves him a canteen of water. Meanwhile, the bearded man's lost horse is found by Coley. He mounts the horse, and rides back to the group. He charges Spear. Spear shoots him dead. Gashade buries his friend in the sand.
All of the horses die. The group runs out of water, but they still keep moving. Gashade sees Spear growing weaker and attacks him. After knocking him unconscious, Gashade grabs a large rock and crushes the killer's gun hand. Gashade walks after the woman, who is now closely following a man up the side of a rock formation. The man turns around and Gashade sees that the man is his look-alike brother, Coin. Gashade attempts to tackle the woman as she pulls out a gun and takes aim at Coin, but it is too late: Coin and the woman shoot each other dead. Gashade, lying next to the woman's corpse, whispers, "Coin." Spear stumbles aimlessly under the hot sun. | murder, allegory, cult, violence, tragedy, revenge | train | wikipedia | By 1967 the ripples Leone's movies are about to make in the American film-making business are around the corner, which leaves The Shooting hanging in a peculiar time and place.
As Warren Oates, Jack Nicholson (in an early role here but showing the potential he would fulfill later on in his career) travel through the barren desert, in search of something or someone, The Shooting slowly but gradually peels back the layers of conventional film-making to reveal an off-beat, gritty and fascinating movie.
Some of the editing used by Hellman (day to night and vice versa) only serves to disorient the viewer more.Not only is this a rare, one of a kind western but in all its psychotronic, b-movie glory, it's one of the best of its kind America has to offer.
Their greatest collaborations were the two 1960s westerns 'Ride In The Whirlwind' and 'The Shooting', filmed simultaneously, but released separately.
Both movies are close to being masterpieces, but rarely get mentioned except by other film makers, like Quentin Tarantino, who is a major fan, and enlisted Hellman's help in getting his debut 'Reservoir Dogs' to the big screen.
Not just Nicholson, and the legendary Warren Oates, but also Will Hutchins (of 50s TV western 'Sugarfoot'), and the beautiful Millie Perkins, who also appeared with Nicholson in 'Ride In The Whirlwind', though her role here is much more substantial and impressive.
Willet and Coley are approached by a woman(we had seen her shoot her horse for no obvious reason) who offers $1000 to be escorted to Kingsley but refuses to reveal her name.They travel toward Crosstree where Leland learns Coin bought a horse 2 days ago.
His relation to the woman is unclear.They encounter day-old horse tracks as Billy and Coley threaten each other.
The elements continue to take its toll on people and animals.The woman rides while the men follow on foot.Willet charges at Billy, tosses his gun away,beats him and crushes his hand with a rock.
This especial Western with allegoric qualities deals with a mysterious woman (Millie Perkins who wore a hairpiece) bent on vengeance , she forms a group (Will Hutchins and Warren Oates who in his biography he said that he had a crush on co-star Millie) to escort her across a warming desert .
Later on , the posse is joined to a cocky gunfighter (Jack Nicholson) until a surprising finale.Outlandish and difficult western is packed with thrills , exciting pursuits , noisy gun-play and strong performances .
His movies are full of similarly independent-minded stars as Jack Nicholson and Warren Oates (his habitual actor) and result to be appreciated by the critics but virtually suffer lukewarm reception by the public .
Later on , Hellman has not got his balance right , film-making flops as the Western ¨China 9, Liberty 37 (1979)¨, adventures ¨Iguana (88) and commercial terror as ¨Silent night, deadly night 3 (1989)¨.
In Monte Hellman's subversive western The Shooting, just released for the first time on DVD, Warren Oates is Willett Gashade, a bounty hunter turned mine owner who returns to find his brother Coin missing, his partner dead, and a fellow worker in a state of panic.
Hellman shot the film on a limited budget in eighteen days in the desert country near Kanab, Utah with B-movie producer Roger Corman and a young actor named Jack Nicholson.
Slow-witted but good humored Coley (Will Hutchins) is fearful as he tells Gashade that he was asleep when he heard an argument between Willett's partner Leland Drum and Coin.
He says that Colin fled, and Leland was shot dead by an unseen gunman and tells Gashade something about Coin having ridden down "a man and a little person, maybe a child," but Coley's not sure about that.
Soon, a woman (Millie Perkins) who is not named arrives and offers to pay Gashade to guide her to Kingsley, a town that lies some hours away, beyond a dangerous desert.
Along the way, Coley, Willett and the woman meet up with Billy Spears (Nicholson), a nattily dressed gunman with a sadistic smirk, and it becomes apparent that the purpose of the journey may be to track down the person or persons responsible for shooting Leland.
Whatever its ultimate meaning, The Shooting is an involving ride full of twists and turns and Jack Nicholson's mighty performance as Billy is worth the price of admission.
Actually the meaning may be revealed when Gashade says to Millie, "If I heard your name I wouldn't know it, would I?" She says, "No." Then he says, "then I don't see no point to it." She says, "there isn't any." Perhaps like life, The Shooting doesn't mean anything.
Most casual film viewers will find Monte Hellman's "The Shooting" to be slow, boring, and pretentious.
Weird desert-survival 60's Western with Jack Nicholson & Warren Oates.
The story involves two men (Warren Oates and Will Hutchins) who are hired by a mysterious woman (Millie Perkins) to accompany her to a town located many miles across the Utah desert.
The movie is also a must for anyone who likes lost-in-the-desert flicks.While the ending seems nonsensical, the answers are there, if you look closely and chew on the details...
Since this is so, why didn't the woman assume Willett (Oates) was the person who killed her child since he looks exactly like the one who did, Coin?
It was shot on a more-or-less-comparable shoestring budget alongside Ride in the Whirlwind by Monte Hellman, and both feature actors like Harry Dean Stanton, Millie Perkins, Warren Oates, and of course Jack Nicholson.
Oates plays a cowboy who along with a slightly dim but alert younger cowboy are hired by a woman (just called Woman, played by Perkins with a bit of a b***h streak in a so-so turn almost in spite of a great presence to her character) who wants them to take her across a ways to a small town.
Why they're hired they can't figure, and it bugs Oates all the more when another fellow starts to follow them: Billy (Nicholson), a bounty hunter with few words, black gloves and a streak of tough-guy talk whenever he speaks, follows along with them also getting a cut of the stake at hand from the Woman.
And the climax, while at the very end needlessly ambiguous to what may or may not be a twin or revenge or whatever (not that it detracts from the mood much), has also a spirit that goes aways to make this just a tinge more than what we're expecting, from the performances and the script.It takes a little while to start, but once the halfway mark comes and Nicholson comes on the scene- in possibly his first significant bad-ass role- it improves into something like a precursor to the recent Seraphim Falls.
With her little girl face, she is totally not convincing as a hardened female gunslinger."The Shooting" is a slow moving, low-key Western with some great visuals and a fine performance by Will Hutchins.
Monte Hellman directed this strikingly unique, original, yet experimental western that stars Millie Perkins as a mysterious woman with no revealed name who hires two cowboys named Willit & Coley(played by Warren Oates & Will Hutchins) to track down a man for mysterious reasons, though it appears to be Willit's brother who may have been involved in an accidental death with another cowboy who is later shot dead.
Jack Nicholson costars as a cold-blooded gunfighter assisting the woman in the hunt, which leads them to the barren hot desert and a surprise ending, which will no doubt either intrigue or infuriate the viewer, but fine acting and direction keep it on track, especially by Perkins..
How exactly do you make a film with Jack Nicholson in it this bad?Millie Perkins plays a woman of mystery who shoots her perfectly healthy horse because she said it had a broken leg, then she offers the guy who comes running at the sound of the gunshot - Gashade (Warren Oates) - big money to lead her across the desert to a place named Kingsley.
The girl is rude, makes stupid decisions, and refuses to explain herself, the gunslinger keeps threatening to kill everybody for no particular reason, they are following somebody but the girl won't tell them who it is, and for some reason - maybe curiosity, maybe Darwin at work - Gashade won't turn back and just say, in the words of Han Solo, "No reward is worth this!"The dialogue is non-existent, the acting is bad, and the girl has some kind of aversion to being touched even when it is to render her aid when she faints.
Willett Gashade (the late, great Warren Oates) and Coley Boyard (Will Hutchins) are two cowboy associates, hired by a mysterious young woman (Millie Perkins) who refuses to give her name.
The stakes get raised when a newcomer joins them on the journey: a hired gun named Billy Spear (Jack Nicholson), who similarly chooses to be rather cagey.Under appreciated filmmaker Monte Hellman is just one of many who began his career working for the legendary Roger Corman.
With Corman as the (uncredited) executive producer, and Nicholson and Hellman as producers, this was filmed simultaneously with another indie Western, "Ride in the Whirlwind", but released separately.
The woman who hires Oates to find the person who accidentally killed what is probably her son or brother, leaves no doubt as to her madness in the desert.
Warren Oates and his skittish cohort Will Hutchins are hired by Millie Perkins (the star of "The Diary of Anne Frank") to help her navigate the desert to the next urban centre, or so she says.
Willet Gashade (Warren Oates), a former bounty hunter, returns to his small mining camp after a lengthy absence and finds his slow-witted friend Coley (Will Hutchins) in a state of fear.
I just sat threw this drek of a film at my buddies place for movie night.Yeah it's true the dialogue is either horrendous or just plain unintelligible...yeah that coke that ends up on the desert..i think Nicholson and Hellmen sniffed it while making this film.
For people who always like to watch the next "best" "cult-movie" this western may be a work of art.
Bounty hunter turned miner Warren Oates returns from a trip to find one of his partners dead and his brother on the run, after a drunken incident in town that apparently killed a man and a child.Offered a large sum of money to escort prissy mystery woman Millie Perkins across the desert, it soon becomes clear that Oates and his dim-witted partner Will Hutchins are being manipulated into tracking his fugitive brother.Co-produced and co-starring a young Jack Nicholson, this is an intelligent western picture that's equally at home in the drive-in or the art house, with great performances and a simple yet compelling script.If you haven't seen this, be prepared for the abrupt finale which on the first viewing prompts many to scramble for the rewind button.Shot at the same time as the Nicholson scripted Ride In The Whirlwind, this is pretty much acknowledged as the superior of the two films, though Whirlwind (the more traditional of the two) is also definitely worth watching..
I have absolutely no idea what this extremely slow Western saga is about.Who are these people?Why does Jack Nicholson have a perpetual sneer on his face?Who's idea was it to make this movie,anyway?Although,this film is certainly not for everyone,in my opinion this is the weakest of Jack's early performances.When you see him play Poet in "Hells Angels on Wheels" or even his role with Karloff in "The Raven",you knew you were watching something special and the beginning of a great career,but this one is just incredibly slow and practically unwatchable..
It was a Low-Budget ($75,000) Movie with the help of an Uncredited Roger Corman.All four Actors give believable, Edgy Performances with Warren Oates, Jack Nicholson, Will Hutchins, and Millie Perkins delivering Dialog that smacks of Western Slang along with Gritty Insight and Existential Exuberance.Nothing on the surface is Clear and the Dusty Terrain adds to the Obscurity.
Mysterious woman (Millie Perkins) hires two men, former bounty hunter Willet Gashade (Warren Oates) and his slow witted friend Coley (Will Hutchins) to accompany her to a town located on the other side of the desert.
There isn't much backstory of the characters and not much dialogue, but actors (especially Warren Oates and Jack Nicholson) fill the parts enough substance to make them interesting.
Monte Hellman and Nicholson tried make something different in this dry western where has a always fine Warren Oates on an outstanding performance,in other hand Millie Perkins as a mysterious girl who came from nowhere and no name and later appear a gunfighter and all them in pursit the unknown killer.....the final scene has a enigmatic ending,missundertood maybe....but a unique certanly!!!Resume:First watch: 2018 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 7.
A mysterious woman (Millie Perkins) finds herself at the camp after shooting her lame horse.
Willet (Warren Oates) returns to his claim only to find that his partner is dead, his brother gone and a simple-minded young man minding the place.
If he doesn't go with them under that pretense, they will be out to kill him before he gets to Coin.That much is clear.Now,as for another poster's question: why the woman wouldn't shoot Will Gashade on sight when he looks exactly like Coin, I couldn't say.
Maybe it's because I've seen El Topo, the bar-none king of incomprehensible Westerns, but The Shooting is lucid, well-plotted, and perfectly understandable if you're willing to just think a leeeeetle bit as the movie unrolls.Warren Oates is his classic surly self, grumping his way through a taciturn Western with an idiotic associate he feels slightly responsible for, a cranky woman who is dragging him through the desert as her guide on a quest for vengeance against the man who killed her husband and son (Coin, Oates' brother, as set up in the first three minutes of the movie), and a psychotic hired gun played by Nicholson, who was obviously enjoying the hell out of the whole thing.The beauty of The Shooting is in its spartan simplicity -- it's a story stripped down to the minimum, a Western bleached to the bone by the relentless desert sun.
and who shoots who in the end.The performance of "the woman" is a very difficult role and done quite well by Millie Perkins.
Everyone lives and dies having known only part of the story they've lived through.Some clues in the movie that I think have been missed by many are as follows: The woman is more disturbed than would seem to be appropriate for being simply distraught over the death of husband and child.
The woman (Millie Perkins) must have let the mule go free, but what happened to Coley's horse in the desert?
Now, in the movie, we're confronted with characters whose identities remain puzzling, especially the woman, Billie and the bearded man.
Instead, we're simply confronted with their raw existence, in much the same way as Coley and Willett are confronted by the raw existence of the woman, Billie, and the bearded man.
If this sounds pretty bleak, so is a movie that I can't imagine playing in a downtown theatre of the time.Naturally, viewers don't have to take such claims as true of the real world in order to take the film as reflecting these philosophical points of view.
This movie is the best western I've seen in a long time despite its obviously low budget.
Westerns are wonderful films, completely native to American film making and Hellmans aim was to make something different, The Shooting is a product of originality and I urge people to give it another viewing!!!
THE SHOOTING is a very low budget American western directed by cult favourite Monte Hellman, a former Roger Corman man.
This features Will Hutchins and Warren Oates in the lead roles, playing a couple of cowboys who are employed by the pretty Millie Perkins to guide her across an arid desert landscape in pursuit of a fugitive.This entire film consists of a handful of characters, their horses, and the harsh Utah landscapes.
A reluctant bounty hunter (Warren Oates) and his naive hireling (Will Hutchins) are hired by a mysterious woman (Millie Perkins) to help her track down an unknown man.
But in this one it just feels like Hellman's odd fascination with Perkins (who starred in quite a few of his more serious films) is undermining things.Right up to the rather rushed existential ending, which anybody with half a brain can see coming a mile away, and the whole scene with Perkins rushing up the hill after this man (reminiscent of Jennifer Jones in "Duel in the Sun"), the film kept me glued to the set.
Like the bearded man - what was his role in the story?I would have given this movie a 1 or a 2 rating if not for the cinematography, which is very good considering the budget and quality of equipment they had to work with..
I have to take my hat off to Jack Nicholson and Warren Oates for everything that they achieved prior to this movie and later on but this is something that is not worth watching.
After reading many reviews of this western, I want to go on record as saying I thought it was one of the biggest wastes of my time I've ever spent viewing a movie.I like the kind of show where you spend the early part of the film wondering how this and that will tie together, and why so-and-so did what they did.
Shrewd bounty hunter Willett Gashade (the incomparable Warren Oates, who's splendid in his first meaty lead role) and his dimwitted partner Coley (amiable Will Hutchins) are hired by an angry and mysterious woman (well played with fierce intensity by Millie Perkins) to track down a man who has run off into the desert. |
tt0211465 | Knockaround Guys | Matty Demaret (Barry Pepper) is the son of a mob boss, but he is used as little more than an errand boy. His relative and friend Chris (Andy Davoli) shares this urge to be part of something bigger, and Matty finally convinces his father to give him a job, with the help of his father's right-hand man Teddy (John Malkovich). Matty and Chris get their friend Johnny Marbles (Seth Green) to fly up to retrieve a bag full of money for Matty's father Benny "Chains" Demaret (Dennis Hopper), as there have been mysterious shortages in their money lately.
On the way back with the cash, Marbles stops in a small Montana town to refuel his personal plane. He has been instructed to guard the bag with his life so he takes the bag with him as he goes to pay for the fuel. However, Marbles sees the sheriff & his deputy and is paranoid that they may question him about the bag's contents. Marbles is also in possession of cocaine which he dumps on the runway. He drops the bag amongst a pile of luggage waiting to be loaded onto another flight, and despite telling the cashier to keep the change, the other flight takes off before he can retrieve his bag. Unknown to him, the bag of money was taken by two local teenage pothead skateboarders who work as baggage handlers at the airport.
He calls Matty and tells him the news. Matty, though upset, knows that he must fix the situation quickly and quietly if he ever wants to work for his father. Matty, Chris, and their friend Taylor (Vin Diesel) fly to the small town of Wibaux, Montana to help Marbles search for the missing money.
While in town, Matty and the other guys attract the attention of two local law-enforcement officers (Tom Noonan and Shawn Doyle) who find out about the money and want to keep it for themselves. The mob guys then try to negotiate with the officers to get the money back but are turned away. Matty calls Teddy and Teddy arrives in Wibaux with two other mob henchmen. Chris decides to leave for home and disappears. Marbles hangs around in a bar with the two mob henchmen who secretly hate him, while Taylor and Matty wait in their hotel for word from the Sheriff. After taking him outside in a friendly manner, the two mob men throw Marbles to the ground and ask where Chris is. Marbles, defending his friend, tells them he doesn't know and one of the men shoots him dead and puts his body in a trunk.
Later that night, a deal is arranged for the Sheriff and Deputy to meet Matty and Taylor in a warehouse. When they arrive, the lawmen are planning to kill Matty and the others and keep the money, but Teddy and the two mob men show up when Matty and Taylor do and the entire thing turns into a Mexican standoff. Chris arrives and shoots the Sheriff's cousin who came to help the Sheriff, and Matty and Taylor inquire about Marbles. Chris says that he thought he was with them. Teddy gives a signal to the two henchmen and they all fire on Chris who is killed. The Sheriff and Deputy, in the chaos, shoot the two mob men. Taylor then kills both of the lawmen. As Teddy prepares to shoot Matty, Taylor is shot instead in the arm when about to defend his friend from the bullet. Teddy's gun is out and Matty holds him at gunpoint. Matty says that it is Teddy that has been stealing and causing shortages from his father all along. Teddy tries to reload and shoot Matty claiming that Matty doesn't have the guts to shoot him. Teddy turns around and attempts to shoot Matty but Matty quickly shoots Teddy in the chest several times, killing him. Matty and Taylor get the money and return home. Matty hands the bag of money to his father and quits the family business. Matty and Taylor then drive off as the credits begin to roll. | murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | The story is basic, about a mobsters son (Barry Pepper) who has grown up disparaged by the life of crime his family are involved in, but in his adults days he is unable to get the sort of legit career he wants, as a sports agent, because no-one will hire him for the simple reason that he is related to Dennis Hoppers character.
Matty takes two of his friends over to assist Marbles in getting the money back, and on ensures a tale of deception and murder, with dirty cops, double dealing mobsters, and unwelcoming locals.It's a fairly simple film that is nicely placed and very well acted.
Barry Pepper is very good in the central role as is Vin Diesel as his best friend Taylor, who offers support and advice as well as muscle when it's needed.
John Malkovich and Dennis Hopper are good in their small roles although they are cruising really but it is Tom Noonan who steals the show in a delightfully seedy role as the bent small town sheriff Decker.All in all this is worth a rental, if you're a fan of Diesel like me you'll appreciate his performance in a role that has more depth to it than XXX.
Almost all of my recent reviews have been very negative, but this movie is worth watching if you are a Vin Diesel fan.Summary: Matty is the son of Benny, a mobster and he is as bad as they come.
Vin Diesel was great in this movie as a tough guy Taylor, he played his part perfectly.
His three friends have to come out and help him get the money back and all kinds of problems develop.There is some black humor in here which helps spice up the film, which then turns very serious about halfway through with a few shocking twists near the end.There are two famous veteran actors in here - Dennis Hopper and John Malkovich - and four young ones who becoming better known these days as well: Seth Green, Vin Diesel, Barry Pepper and Andrew Davoli.The only problem I had with the movie is Pepper, who played Roger Maris, the famous baseball player in the film '61." He looks so much like Maris that I can't believe him as anyone else!
Chris Scarpa (Andrew Davoli)who is a sweet talking mob wanna be, and Taylor Reese (Vin Diesel) is the only one is the whole movie who actually looked and acted like a real gangster.
Matty (Barry Pepper), Taylor (Vin Diesel), and Marbles (Seth Green) are the main and interesting ones who end up losing $500,000 of the mob's money and must find the money within 2 days or the mob is in huge trouble.
John Malkovich, even when this guy is acting half as good as he usually does ( like in this movie ) he is still very entertaining.
Born the son of a powerful and fearsome crime boss, wannabe mobster Pepper recruits low-rent pals Diesel, Green, and Davoli to make a routine delivery, impress his old man, then finally go into business with him.
The son (Barry Pepper) of a mobster (Dennis Hopper) and his best friend (Seth Green) lose half a million dollars that they were sent to pick up for Pepper's father.
He does get some nice assistance from Seth Green ("Austin Powers" movies) and Vin Diesel, Tom Noonan, Dennis Hopper and John Malkovich.
I thought Barry Pepper was great as the protagonist of the film and his friends in the movie Vin Diesel, Seth Green, and Andrew Davoli also did a great job.
The only classification I have for it is "fiction." It is a waste of whatever money you spend to see it.On the bright side, Vin Diesel plays an excellent tough-guy in this movie, and John Malkovich is great like always.
A Action/Thriller/Crime/Drama about 4 guys Matty Demaret(Barry Pepper,Saving Private Ryan),Taylor Reese(Vin Diesel,The Fast And The Furious),Johny Marbles(Seth Green,Rat Race),and Chris Scarpa(Andrew Davoli,first movie).Who get a opportunity from a mobster named Benny chains(Dennis Hopper,Speed).The job is they will fly to Canada get some money and bring it back.
But Marbles loses the money and it finds its way into the hands of a sheriff and his deputy.Vin diesel played a guy that didn't really talk a lot his purpose in this movie was to be the big strong bad*** and he did it well he did what he was supposed to do and for that i say he did a good job in this movie.But none of the other actors gave a good performance they didn't give bad performances but they didn't give good ones either.The directing reached the medium but not even close to passing it.The screenplay was what you would expect out of a mobster movie.The storyline could have been better but it was what it was i guess.Best actor/actress-Vin DieselA pretty average movie-Jake HydenI gave this movie a 5 out of 10Rated R for violence, language and some drug use.5/10.
Barry Pepper ("25th Hour") plays Matty, the young man whose father, Benny Chains (Dennis Hopper), is an important figure in a Brooklyn crime family.
The pathos of whether to follow in his father's footsteps isn't as interesting as how the characters try to get the money back, but the film is still pretty good..
Knockaround Guys never goes to achieve much with it's story, and the characters are not terribly important to care about like in past gangster movies (better ones), but it works since it doesn't go for the big-bad rip off and has the feel of a B gangster movie, a decent one.
Some good fun along the way, mainly from performances from Hopper as Pepper's father and Malkovich as another key character, just don't expect Sopranos-type entertainment if you pay for admission.
Knockaround Guys is a crime film about the four sons of the big mobster who have to involve in the serious situation, their father's money.At first, I am "very" very surprised that Vin Diesel received the supporting role as Barry Pepper's "friends" (or actually the bodyguard).
Physically there was an odd resemblance, and personality wise you could feel the tension between them.Malkovich would be good if all he did for two hours was stand on a stage and recite the alphabet, so as the under boss his particular brand of oddity worked well.Whats not to like about Dennis Hopper.Seth Green in some ways was the least believable of the characters, somehow I just couldn't buy him as a pilot.
You have to wonder, given that it was filmed before Vin became famous, but released after, whether they recut the movie to refocus on his role.Despite the shaky character development, there is a useful theme of delayed coming of age, the value of trust, and the risks of wanting to be someone you aren't.Great for fans of Vin, good genre movie..
Likewise, this movie has lots of good pieces - with actors and characters who I quite enjoyed personally, unlike some others here - yet the story never quite gets airborn.
I thought that they did a pretty good job from keeping some scenes away, but even in a fistfight they showed a puddle of blood even though the person is dead.I liked that the movie was easy to follow.
This movie, focusing on four young would-be mobsters (Vin Diesel, Seth Green, Barry "Thank God for '25th Hour' " Pepper, and Andrew Davoli) trying to retrieve half a million dollars from a corrupt Montana sheriff, should be used as merely one public example to show how far American filmmaking has swirled down the toilet.
Vin diesel is in my opinion the best he's ever been as a very tough wannabe gangster who is the best friend of pepper's character Matty & the other actors like seth green & Hopper & Malcovich are all great but it's Barry Pepper who is the main guy & lead here even if it'sreally an ensemble Piece really but pepper gives a powerful performance as a troubled young hood who really doesn't want to be a gangster he wants a normal job & out of that life & away from his mob boss father's shadow (Hopper) & pepper is very serious & intense & shows he's oneof the best actors out there & so underrated & under appreciated but hey I'm a huge fan of his work!!!
They did a great job casting veteran actors like Malkovich and Dennis Hopper to play the crime bosses, but they really blew it when it came to casting their kids.
The premise is a gangster loses money at a small town airport so his three friends travel there to help him find the money so they won't get killed.Barry Pepper is the lead, he plays Matty, I forgot his last name, it's not important, the son of a New York Mafia under boss.
Barry Pepper, Vin Diesel, Seth Green and Andy Davoli are all the privileged sons of mob bosses and it shows.
This will add elements of comedy in there some cool action by Vin Diesel of course but the storyline is what it fails at it is just such a lame ass ending that you just think wow they really had no clue where they were going with this.The story is about these four wannabe mobsters when I say wannabe they are in the business but the guys higher up see them as lackeys and use them to do small tasks.
Chris Scarpa (Andy Davoli) who is some playboy who just wants more then to run a restaurant, and you got Johnny Marbles (Seth Green) is a recovering addict and just wants to prove he is not a screwup last the big guy Taylor Reese (Vin Diesel) who is actually done with "the life" and can't get out.So the pilot Johnny is to transport a bag of money from point a to b simple but he screws up and loses it which means he will probably die.
John Malkovich plays the role of Barry's uncle and he just is not a good mobster he isn't threatening and doesn't seem like his plans are even thought out.
Acting everyone but John Malkovich was good that is not his fault it was just how his character was.Overall this film is a low rental close to just saying see it on cable but if you rent it you would have some fun.
Unfortunately, they get themselves into more trouble than anyone could imagine in Knockaround guys.My Spiel: Staring Barry Pepper, Vin Diesel, Seth Green, and Andrew Davoli as the 4 sons.
As I watched this movie I liked Vin Diesel hardass character, and have always been a fan of Barry Pepper from Saving Private Ryan movie.
Though it's obvious that the movie tried to make you like Barry Pepper & Vin Diesel's characters more then any of the others.
It's easy to understand the attraction the mafia does on modern filmmakers' imagination.The representation of that kind of life represents how society hates that.Since the movies were young that kind of life has been portrayed at both sights,like villains or the anti-heroes.But a lot of movies about that make a glamorization of that sad sight of the human existence.So,it's very weird to see the cruelty and consequences of that activity with honesty and on a realistic mode.Knockround guys has a glamorization about that kind of life but it shows honesty,realism and a face very little seen about that kind of life.When Hollywood's big studios try to tell a story like the one which has Knockround guys,it's common to see how the story finishes on a second sight to take importance the famous actors or director that are the opposite the story requires.We have seen that on films like Casino,which are multimillionaire inversions,but they feel very shallow because of Hollywood's intervention.The best movies of that genre are the independent ones.So,Knockround guys is next to other great films of that genre like The yards,The usual suspects or Reservoir dogs,which their low budgets are better used to tell that kind of stories than the multimillionaire inversions the big studios do.Knockround guys is a great movie,totally fun.Barry Pepper is great on his role and he gives humanity to his character.Seth Green is an awesome actor and he does a superb performance here.Vin Diesel makes a great and very controlled performance and I think this is his best performance.Dennis Hopper and John Malkovich are unforgettable.Hopper has an excellent performance and he brings the movie's best dialogs.Malkovich makes his character very realistic.Knockround guys is a great and very fun film.I had a great time watching it..
I mean it has interesting characters played by great actors like Dennis Hopper, John Malkovich, Vin Diesel and finally Seth Green.
I'm usually not a big Vin Diesel fan but I thought he did a very good job as Taylor Reese, I like Seth Green but I woulda liked his character to be a little different, he acted the same as he did in Austin Powers.
Hence, we have Barry Pepper as our main star; a bit conflicted as to what to do with his life, Vin Diesel as his tough guy best friend; Seth Green as the miscast badly-hair dyed screw up; and a fourth guy whose name I can't remember.
`KnockAround Guys' has a lot of action like other classic mob movies.
The money then goes missing, forcing Matty, Taylor, et al, to try to find the money before Benny and Teddy find out.The best performances in this movie are by John Malkovich who, as always, brings a mixture of menace, sensuality and humour to the role, and Vin Diesel, as a surprisingly sensitive hard man.
The four sons (Vin Diesel, Seth Green, Barry Pepper, and Andrew Davoli) of Brooklyn mobsters bond together to reclaim a quarter of a million dollars lost in a small Montana town run by a crooked sheriff (Tom Noonan).
Of the younger actors, Canadian Barry Pepper shows his chops as the conflicted Matty, while Vin Diesel oozes charisma, but by the film's closing scenes you wish that these talented actors had more of a script to work with..
Surprisingly good, certainly not the best movie ever but well worth your time, especially compared to everything else Vin Diesel's starred in.He wasn't the main guy in this, though.
I have become a fan of Barry Pepper, Seth Green and Vin Diesel over the last few years.
Most people would assume this movie would have tons of action, simply being it's a mobster movie, with Vin Diesel, Barry Pepper and Dennis Hopper involved.
If you are looking for a mob/gangster drama with little action and great acting, character development and an actual plot, then I recommend this movie for you.
Berry Pepper and Seth Green did wonderful jobs, and I was surprised Vinny didn't have a huger part like the rest of his movies but he still did excellent.
The film starts a bit slow and is pretty talkative, but when the guys arrive in Wibaux, Montana, it gets better.Barry Pepper, whom I had only seen before as the sniper in Saving Private Ryan, gives a great performance as Matty.
My friend said he heard that they played a gay couple in the movie (he hadn't seen it), and honestly, it sort of comes across that way (they actually play brothers-in-law).So, in summary, this is a pretty fun little movie that will probably be forgotten and then seem really cool to a kid going through the DVD racks 20 years from now ("Wow, Barry Pepper and Vin Diesel did a movie together?
Pepper turns to John Malkovich (Uncle Teddy), who is his father right-hand man, to convince his father that his crew (Vin Diesel, Seth Green, Andrew Davoli) can handle and important job of picking up a bag of money in another state and bring back to Hopper.
Pepper and his crew are force to retrieve the money before the Mafia kills his father.The movie `Knockaround Guys' shows how hard it is to live a legitimate life, if you are the son of mobster.Although the cast members were average, I thought Vin Diesel's character is one worth mentioning.
In fact, the studio probably couldn't push a movie with just Pepper as the star, so since supporting actor Vin Diesel has become a huge star since the filming of this one the marketing machine has decided it was about time to see if the Guys are worth anything after all.
Tom Noonan, Andrew Davoli, and (surprisingly) Seth Green provide good support, but the always-solid Dennis Hopper and John Malkovich round out the impressive cast and give the movie its true thespian cred.
It was, however, much worth it to see Barry Pepper, Vin Diesel, John Malcovich, Seth Green, and Dennis Hopper all in the same movie, all in fine form.
i loved watching barry pepper as the main character (finally) and i liked watching great actor john malkovich with a ny accent (but it sounded weird - and i noticed his ears move a lot when he talks).....but i was entertained throughout this entire movie.
i'll admit, BARRY PEPPER, seth green and john malkovich were the reasons i went to see this movie, but it was still entertaining.
Vin Diesel(who, in my opinion is not at all a good actor) did a fairly good job as a tough-man(surprise!) friend of Pepper's character.
Barry Pepper and Vin Diesel did an excellent job in this film.
Barry Pepper has the best performance of them all playing the son, Matty, of crime boss Benny Chains(Dennis Hopper) who is told is not cut out for the mobster life while he cant get any legitimate jobs because of his father's chosen profession.
I love Barry Pepper and I think Vin Diesel is hot so when I found out that they would be together in a film again I knew I had to see it!
Barry Pepper, Seth Green, Dennis Hopper, John Malcovich and (Dare I say it) Vin Diesel.
Barry Pepper is a good, underrated actor and I liked his role in this movie. |
tt0107211 | Indecent Proposal | High school sweethearts David (Woody Harrelson) and Diana Murphy (Demi Moore) are a married couple who travel to Las Vegas, hoping they can win enough money to finance David's fantasy real estate project. They place their money on red in roulette and lose.
After gambling away all of their savings, they encounter billionaire John Gage (Robert Redford). Gage is attracted to Diana and offers them one million dollars to spend a night with her. After a difficult night, David and Diana decide to accept the offer, and a contract is signed the next day. Gage flies Diana to a private yacht where he offers her a chance to void the deal and return to her husband if he loses a toss of his lucky coin. Gage calls it correctly and she spends the night with him.
Although he had hoped to forget the whole incident, David grows increasingly insecure about his relationship with Diana, consumed with a fear that she remains involved with Gage; this insecurity is heightened by the fact that Diana discovers that Gage has bought their home/property while it was going into foreclosure. As tension between them builds, David and Diana separate.
Gage renews his advances on Diana. Although she initially resists, Diana eventually consents to spending time with him and a relationship develops. David, meanwhile, hits rock bottom and then slowly pulls his life back together. When Diana files for divorce, David signs the divorce papers and gives the million dollars away.
Diana tells Gage "I think we should talk". Gage, perhaps sensing what's coming, recognizes that, even if Diana stayed with him, their relationship would never achieve the intensity she had with David. Realizing that she longs to return to her husband, Gage makes up a story that she was only the latest in a long line of "million-dollar girls". Diana understands that Gage is doing this to make it easy for her to leave. Gage gives her his lucky coin, which is revealed to be double sided. She returns to the pier where David is waiting and he proposes. They join hands. | cult | train | wikipedia | Afterwards they get together to play some pool and Gage turns the conversation to the idea of what money can and can't buy specifically offering the Murphy's a cool $1,000,000 for one night spent with Diana.When this film came out, the basic concept was enough to give it lots of free advertising by getting the nation asking itself "what would I do?" and all the hype over that allowed the producers of the film to avoid people finding out that there really wasn't much worth seeing passed this question.
David and Diana are basic but the real failing is in Gage; he should be a rather sinister figure who plays with people like he plays with his money but instead he is just a twinkling eye and a sly smile in fact, he is Robert Redford.
He takes a fancy to Demi, and since he's a gambling man he makes the couple an "indecent proposal:" one million dollars for a night with the little woman.At this point you need watch no more of the film because you can put the details together in your sleep.
If it doesn't, there's no happy ending for the sake of box office.The absolute best thing you can say about INDECENT PROPOSAL is that Demi Moore looks good in a black dress.
This is the titular "Indecent Proposal", on which millions of viewers, men and women, have been debating for years, placing themselves in the same tricky situation than David (Woody Harrelson) and Diana (Demi Moore), the ill-fated couple who met the devilishly sexy John Gage (Robert Redford) in Las Vegas.
We'd all need money to achieve our dreams and selling one's soul for one night with one handsome rich guy and one million dollars isn't too high a price.But the film is cleverly provocative because it already admits the venal nature of women, which provoked the anger of feminists.
In many other films, that the husband is an architect and the wife a real estate agent would only be details, but they're pivotal factd in "Indecent Proposal".Indeed, after the bursting of the US housing bubble, there was no offer for Diana and no demand for David.
The one problem that the movie suffers from is that Robert Redford was cast as John Gage , the middle aged billionaire who desires the company of Demi Moore's character Diane Murphy .
Some defenders may claim that Redford equals good box office and certainly this movie did superbly as far as world wide receipt's go , but it's a movie whose main selling point must be the simple central idea and would have perhaps ended up a much better film .
INDECENT PROPOSAL isn't a great movie despite the great premise and I found Lyne's directing style a bit too 1980s with a couple of scenes that are a bit too pop video for my liking but despite not being the greatest actors in the history of cinema both Moore and Woody Harrelson do enough to make the audience feel for their characters who find themselves in a dilemma .
Something's going on here, and I think it's because most reviewers here are male, and we are threatened by the prospect of losing our wives to a Robert Reford look like billionaire, because we know for a fact we wouldn't stand a chance, even without the million bucks.With divorce rate at 50% as it now, i am not even married but I suspect when a billionaire ( with a heart nonetheless ) came calling, my wife would leave me in a heartbeat.sorry but everything does come with a price tag, even your marriage..
Indecent proposal, is not an ordinary story about two lovers who face some problems in their life, but it reflects how deep love can make the young couple (Demi Moore & Woody Harrelson) overcome any obstacle in their life.And we are not just talking about any ordinary obstacle here, we are talking about a millionaire (Robert Redford) that takes advantage of the couple's money problem and offers Woody Harrelson a million dollars if he lets him spend one night with his wife.What will happen next....................!!!!!
Demi Moore and Woody Harrelson star as couple David and Diana Murphy, who are financially in trouble and in danger of losing their dream home.
While on a trip to Las Vegas, they meet billionaire John Gage (Robert Redford), who offers them 1 million dollars in exchange for a one-night stand with Diana.This film was actually pretty good I thought - it kept me engaged and kept me wondering how the unpredictable plot would unfold at the end.
Harrelson gave a thoughtful performance of a husband in financial and relationship troubles who strives to overcome his woes and pick up the pieces to move forward; Redford gave an eloquent portrayal of the invincible, but heartfelt billionaire; and Moore exhibited complexity and vulnerability in her character as she faces the choices she has to make between the two men.I have to admit the movie is mind-boggling at certain points, I mean, the thought of seeing a marriage torn apart of an out-of-this-world proposal, and the implications that resulted from it.
Having taken the deal from John Gage (Robert Redford) to give away his wife for one night in return for a Million dollars, Harrelson realizes too late that the choice he has made would damage the relationship beyond repair.
I thought the acting was good, I really got a sense that David Murphy (Woody Harrelson) and Diana Murphy (Demi Moore) were actually in love.
The one complaint that I have for this movie was the way that John Gage (Robert Redford) would try and make it a point that money is everything.
Love lost and true love.Did this movie go over the heads of those who gave it a poor rating?Indecent Proposal is not about sleeping with someone for money as other reviewers have stated.
It is about a man who missed the opportunity to be with his first love, and a happily married couple who lose sight of their values and vows.When John Gage (Redford) first sets eyes on Diana (Moore) at a Casino pocketing chocolates, he's smitten.
After falling in love with the soundtrack before watching the film, I was already anticipating a good sob-fest!John Barry captures the delicate emotions with his score in a simple melody that will play in my head for days to come.
A different approach to any other love story I've seen, exploring issues of trust, power and money in new ways that make you look at things with a new perspective.Overall, a very lovely film with a perfect ending, turning an old movie into a new favourite!How do you think you'd react to this situation?This film is definitely worth a watch...
The indecent proposition makes the husband a TOTAL loser, deficient in every positive male characteristic, and makes the wife a cheap strumpet seduced by money rather than confused by another potential love, a woman devoid of moral center and self-respect.All the impressive talent (acting, directing, cinematography) wasted on this film -- and it was an impressive amount -- couldn't save it from its splashy-but-too-trashy $1 million pitch line.
opportunities we should leave to write a happier ends for every body's fate ....what a complicated touchy collection of emotions & experiences in such a case scenario ......nice but not super performance from Robert Redford (he was supposed to be the evil side in such a romantic story but i really couldn't hate him ...may be i was on his side allover this film ) also woody harlleson did a good job ....but the master's performance of all was the great Demi Moore ...
Long, boring, idiotic, and based on a non-issue (should a woman take a million dollars to sleep with Robert Redford?), Indecent Proposal represents everything I hate about Hollywood.
Woody Harrelson does a bit more credible job of delivering sappy, unintentionally funny lines with a straight face, but there's not much he could have done with lines that seemed like rejects from a daytime soap opera.The saddest thing about this movie, however, is that the once true film star in the group, Robert Redford, was reduced to accepting such a ridiculous role.
It must have been strictly a money thing for him because, if he actually saw any artistic merit in playing this role, then he has truly been out in the sun way too long.The most satisfying aspect of watching this movie was the fact that I didn't waste a dime to see it - just a little time..
If however, your of the 'love em and leave em' kind, or if your a 'I've had many relationships that last months/years, and when it ends, it doesn't really bother me' kinda person, then you might wanna watch something else.The film isn't really about the money either, which could be a million or a billion, or maybe only a few hundred.
Whilst there, they meet a charismatic billionaire (Robert Redford) who offers them one million dollars for one night with the wife.Demi Moore has never looked better than she did in 'Indecent Proposal' so it's easy to see why Redford would be willing to pay $1,000,000 to spend one night with her, and Redford is very charming here, despite what is a very sleazy offer.
If you have seen Indecent Proposal then you will absolutely love The Box. I would like to end by saying although Diana and David marriage was put to the test one theme that tells the truth about this couple is coming of age.
Notoriously provocative film made at the apex of the "Greed is Good" culture of the late 80's / early 90's and without doubt the worst film I've ever had the misfortune to watch.No doubt the director thought he was positing a high moral dilemma for adults but like today's version of the question which I've read more than once in celebrity interviews, which goes along the lines of "For you to collect £50 million, one unknown person in China has to die", the answer's a no-brainer and in any event totally inadequate to carry a movie.
i cant help it but i like love stories and this is one of the best very romantic and a great movie to watch with your woman.
I believe that the theme of Indecent Proposal is that it is not worth even one million dollars to have an affair on your spouse as everyone involved suffers major emotional, financial, and spiritual consequences as they did in this film.
Woody Harrelson plays David Murphy, Demi Moore plays Diana Murphy, and Robert Redford plays John Gage.David and Diana are a young married couple who are very much in love.
The interesting thing for me : Yes Robert Redford is devastatingly handsome even aged in his fifties in this film but Diana and David are very much in love but totally broke and they need the money desperately.Why it is interesting ?
The fact that he is handsome is interesting because you feel at the beginning of the film that David could be jealous of John Gage not only because of his money but also because of Gage's looks and great presence.
And he's right because Diana is attracted to John GAGE maybe not consciously at the beginning but she is later in the film when she realizes that he is a real gentle man looking for love.
Demi and Woody play a struggling married couple who go to Las Vegas on a gambling run and meet up with rich guy Redford who is so smitten with Demi(??) that he offers her $1 million for a night with her.
Furthermore I personally feel that the three mainroles are played in a most great way; they're convincing in their roles and - Demi Moore is of course always a pleasure to watch as is also Robert Redford.
I remember when the movie was out in the theatres and the many sound bite talk show people would ask guests and people on the street if they would do what the couple Demi Moore and Woody Harrelson did in the film; so many fools said "yes, in a heartbeat" and I wondered about the education system of our country!
The line of the stylish Robert Redford when Demi Moore accused him (while slowly being seduced by him) of being a man "who likes to own things" summed up the whole movie: "You think I need to BUY women?" Redford, a man in this movie who as a billionaire has seen and caused the birth and death of multi-national corporations the size of ancient civilizations, knew EXACTLY what would happen to their marriage, and to their mind- and to her heart, if they knowingly accepted this proposal most indecent.
It's a good guy/girl movie as well, because Woody Harrelson is so much the All-American man, full of rambunctious flaws and money problems (can't relate), where Robert Redford is, well, Robert Redford; he is the next best thing to Sean Connery's James Bond in this movie when it comes to the debonair, power- broker man the women couldn't resist if he had a 30k a year job, let alone making 30k every couple of hours.
A happily-married, but down on luck and money, couple, David and Diana Murphy (Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore), go to Las Vegas.
They meet a powerful billionaire, John Gage (Robert Redford), who makes them an offer - one million dollars for one night with Diana...An interesting moral dilemma, and that's it.
During a bust economy a loving married couple Diana (Demi Moore) and David Murphy (Woody Harrelson) risk foreclosure on their house after troubles with their well-paid jobs respectively as a realtor and an architect.
Despite a relatively intriguing premise, and a good first half; this steamy nineties romance-come-thriller falls flat on it's face in the second half, turning what could have been a great expose of love and money into a turgid sentiment packed drama, with little care for keeping it's plot or characters consistent.
After trying to gain some cash through gambling, a billionaire takes a liking to the female of the pair; and after finding out that she "can't be bought", he offers her $1 million...for one night with her.Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore take the leads roles.
The plot, as most people know, centers around a wealthy business tycoon (Redford) offering a young couple (Moore and Harrelson) $1,000,000 if she agrees to sleep with him one night.
This movie would be realistic only if the wealthy person offering the indecent proposal was Ernest Borgnine rather than Robert Redford.The setup where the couple get into 'hopeless' debt shows the short sightedness and "want it now" of American society.
Robert Redford plays John Gage.David and Diana are a young married couple who are very much in love.
The film boasts very impressive performances from Demi Moore, Robert Redford and Woody Harrelson, who made the best out of this mediocre script, I think the scenes between Moore and Harrelson are the best, they are very intense and it is very believable that they are husband and wife.
Indecent Proposal (1993) *** (out of 4) A married couple (Woody Harrelson, Demi Moore) hit a string of bad luck and are about to lose their home so they decide to go to Vegas and win some money.
They end up losing everything they own when a billionaire playboy (Robert Redford) offers them a million dollars for a night with the wife.
They meet a billionaire named John Gage who is attracted to the lovely Diana (hardly surprising, given that she is played by Demi Moore) and offers David one million dollars to spend a night with her.
Billionaire John Gage offers the couple one million dollars if he can spend the night with Diana.Based on Jack Engelhard's novel, Indecent Proposal covers the wants and needs of relationships and what couples need to do to survive.This idea of buying people, although quite crude, is well established and portrayed in this romantic drama by director Adrian Lyne.Though Robert Redford's (The Sting) character and acting isn't brilliant he does what he needs to do to dive right into the couple and exploit their problems.
David (Woody Harrelson) and Diana (Demi Moore) are the perfect couple who promise each other eternal love till the day comes that they're bankrupt.
David decides to go to Las Vegas hoping for getting the needed money but all ends in a financial fiasco till multimillionaire John Cage (Robert Redford) proposes the couple to give them one million dollar if he might spend one night with his wife...
If this film is realistic or not is an unnecessary thing, it's just that during the whole movie you feel so bad for Woody Harrelson that you are hoping to punch your fist in Robert Redford's face...
Quite frankly, we'd have been better off if we didn't have a movie.Our married (and financially troubled) couple are played by Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore.
Anyhow, a billionaire, played by Robert Redford, takes a liking to the wife and makes the million dollar offer.
in the movie there are couple of friends, that love very much each other, and then some rich man offering them 1 million dollar for one night with the woman.
I warmed to both Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore's characters immediately and thought there love for each other came across as beautiful on screen.I think the casting for Robert Redford's character was perfect, unlike many other people.
Indecent Proposal revealed struggle of love, fidelity, and morality between David and Diana when money is offered, I realized in the film that worse decisions are made when people are in problems and at the end of the day, they regret ever taking the drastic decisions. |
tt0242256 | Alai Payuthey | Karthik Varadarajan (Madhavan) is an independent and free-spirited software engineering graduate establishing a software start-up with his friends. At a friend's wedding, he meets Shakti Selvaraj (Shalini), a student of medicine at Madras Medical College. They continue to bump into each other on local trains that they both use on their daily commute, and fall in love. Karthik pursues Shakti aggressively and proposes marriage; Shakthi, however, is reluctant. Karthik manages to convince Shakthi and requests his parents to formally ask Shakti's parents for her hand in marriage; however, when the parents meet, they do not get along, and Shakti calls off the relationship altogether and leaves for an extended medical camp in Kerala.
While apart, both Karthik and Shakti realize that they are desperately in love and decide to get married without the knowledge or consent of their parents. They continue living separate lives after marriage, meeting outside of their homes and hoping that their parents will see eye to eye at some point in the future and can be informed of the marriage. However, when Shakti's older sister Poorni (Swarnamalya) is on the verge of getting engaged, developments ensue resulting in Shakti's parents attempting to fix her marriage to the groom Raghu's younger brother Shyam (Karthik Kumar). Shakti confesses to her parents and Raghu's family that she is already married; Poorni's engagement is called off and her parents throw her out of the house. Karthik too divulges the same to his parents and is also asked by his father to leave his house.
Karthik and Shakti start living together and while all goes well for a while, they soon find that marriage is not as easy as they expected and living under the same roof results in a large number of conflicts. The marriage gets increasingly tense as both cope with frustrations and disappointments.
Shakti learns that her father is seriously ill and requests Karthik to visit him. Karthik declines, citing her father's hatred of him as the main reason. He eventually agrees, but by the time they reach her house, Shakti' father passes away. Wracked with guilt, the two return home, their relationship taking a turn for the worse.
The two stop talking to each other. Meanwhile, Karthik takes it upon himself to sort out Poorni's love life and her broken engagement to Raghu. He arranges a blind date between the two, which initially fails, backfiring on Karthik, however, with more meetings, Poorni and Raghu become closer. This development takes place without Shakthi's knowledge. Karthik waits until Poorni and Raghu's marriage is confirmed before deciding to tell Shakti. However, Shakti witnesses Poorni hugging Karthik in gratitude at the train station and unable to see Poorni's face, misunderstands what she has seen to be Karthik hugging her sister she assumes he is having an affair with.
Shakthi eventually learns from Poorni of her husband's efforts in getting her married, and is overcome with guilt and love. Karthik sets off on the same evening to the railway station to pick up his wife as is their usual routine. However, Shakti in her rush to get home and make up with Karthik meets with a serious accident. Karthik waits for his wife, and as she fails to turn up searches desperately for her throughout the city, ultimately discovering her in the ICU of a hospital, registered under another name and having undergone brain surgery. Shakti is in a coma.
An IAS officer Ram (Arvind Swamy) admits that he caused the accident and admitted Shakti in the hospital. Karthik is inconsolable, wracked with grief and anger, and takes his frustration out on Ram. However, Ram's wife (Kushboo) intervenes and lets Karthik know that she was the person who caused the accident and injured Shakti, and her husband was merely trying to protect her by taking the blame himself. Karthik observes Ram and notes that he has a lot to learn from the latter. He proceeds to Shakti's bedside and admits that he could have been a better husband. Shakti proceeds to wake up from her coma and the two reconcile, admitting their enduring love for one another. | romantic | train | wikipedia | Mani Ratnam Attempts An Urban Love Story.
With 'Alai Payuthey', Mani Ratnam comes back with an urban love story set in contemporary India.
'Alai Payuthey' solely focuses on Karthik and Shakti's love story and how it develops from before till after marriage.
Ratnam's storytelling is sincere and even though one has witnessed such story numerous times in Indian cinema, 'Alai Payuthey' feels fresh.
The chemistry between Madhavan and Shalini, the romantic moments, Karthik and Shakti's struggle post marriage, the guilt etc..all of it is well demonstrated.
A.R. Rehman's melodious soundtrack is mesmerizing but a few of the songs, especially the item number, could have better been left out.
The two leads are outstanding but the 'Alai Payuthey' belongs to Madhavan.
Shalini too is brilliant though at times she's a little over the top.
Overall, this is another winner for Mani Ratnam and I hope he comes back to making good films like he did before 'Yuva'..
At first sight this may seem like just another feel good film about love.But the core theme of this film is the complexities that lovers-turned-couples face.The chemistry between the film's lead pair is good.the hero steals your heart with his expressions right from his introductory song.
the score is exceptional in the original version.But in the Hindi version the lyrics suffer proving that the music is complex.The lyrics deserve a special mention.
especially when the lyricist tries to visualise the colour red through the legs of a new born baby and brings out the difference between marriage and love.Cinematography is the hallmark of this film.
various parts of India such as Kashmir,kerala,chennai and goa are picturised beautifully in the song sequences.The maker has been successful in bringing the muted emotions to the fore.The film sends a subtle message that love before marriage is shortlived and more of illusion while the affection that blossoms after marriage is permanent and real..
A great movie on human relations.
The story of Alaipayuthey may be simple(like any other love story)but the way it is shown,i think all the credit goes to the brilliant Mani Ratnam,A.R.Rahman and cinematographer P.C.Sreeram.Every frame has some meaning in this movie.This movie is not only technically good,but also has moral sense.The lead roles played by madhavan and shalini are very impressive.Every single person who acted in this movie have given their full skills.I personally liked every single scene in this movie.Songs given by A.R.Rahman is one of his best.I think this movie is one of the best in tamil cinema's history.A must see movie for all movie lovers.I'd recommend the DVD if you don't know the language..
Heart warming love story!.
I have NO words to describe HOW WELL this movie has been made.
This movie rediscovers the beauty of LOVE, long after the success of DDLJ, when creativity started dwindling with more and more movies trying to replicate it rather than coming up with something altogether different or FRESH.
We thought to ourselves, WILL WE EVER GET TO SEE A DECENT AND TOUCHING LOVE STORY??!!!!
Mani Rathnam heard us and gave us `Alai Payudhe'.As we all know, Mani is the JACK-OF-ALL-TRADES and MASTER of none, but after watching this movie, we feel that is an UNDERSTATEMENT to praise such a talented Filmmaker who's always filled with new ideas.
Hats off to him and his GREY CELLS, which come in use ever so often.It is the way in which he goes about telling the story which GLUES us to our seat and makes us LAUGH till we CRY.
The treatment is what is important in a LOVE STORY and NOT the Cast or the Locales, which has been given MOST importance in Bollywood and nowadays, even Madrasi filmmakers are going the same way.
Mani tries to prove all of them WRONG.Truly different, this movie has the Best of Mani's creativity, Rahman's music, P.C.Sreeram's cinematography (though it's a bit shaky in the climax), and SUPERB performances by the WHOLE cast.
Well worth the money I spent on the VCD!!!Pros Award winning Direction, Music, Cinematography, Dialogues, First rate performances by the whole cast, simple storyline and Superb screenplay.Cons Few clichés, minor glitches in photography, tear jerking climax and the scantily clad Sophiya Haque song..
Another Heart Soothing Movie ....
Mani Ratnam has once again created a movie par excellence.
A movie with a romantic touch takes you through a romantic journey in which you are glued to your seat on account of the excellent cinematography...A.R.Rehman's ear soothing numbers add color to the movie..Pleasing choreography and camera work for the song "Pachai Niramae" is a treat for eyes...Unique editing adds to the success of the movie..Overall a movie that any movie buff does not want to miss...
Mani continues to mesmerize people with his simple telling techniques..
Creativity added with good script has been always been Mani Ratnam's trademark..
"Roja","Nayagan","Thalapathi" and now "Alai Payuthey" speak why Mani Ratnam is one of the best directors' India has ever seen....
Many friends recommended this movie by Mani Ratnam.
I had been impressed by the Hindi Dil Se (1998) by this director, so even though I don't know a word of Tamil, I rented the DVD since it has English subtitles.I was not disappointed!
The location shooting is also vintage Mani Ratnam.The DVD by Aingharan U.K. is superb---much better than most Indian DVDs, and comparable to the DVD of Dil Se by DEI.
The colorful song sequences can be enjoyed by themselves..
This is Love in India.
Most Indian movies that you see are mostly belong to this category.1) Boy sees a girl .
2) Boy falls in love but the girl rejects.
3) Then the girl realizes that she also like the boy so they start loving.
5) After all the hurdles they get married and the end.But this movie doesn't just end after the marriage , it shows the problem in marriages and what true love really is.Also watch this movie for great song picturisation.Super hit movie with super hit songs..
A Love story that goes after Love...
It is an urban love story.
Not like usual love stories in which heroes will be diving over boards and bikes to fight against the will of (mostly) heroine's dad or some wicked uncle, this one goes some months after a love marriage and tries to look in the problems somewhat realistically.
Basic elements of love story such as good songs, photography and interesting scenes are amply available.
I watched this movie between 15 to 50 times(max).
It's unfortunate that she did not continue acting after her marriage.
She gives a good performance with Madhavan(introduced in this film).AR Rahman's songs of this film are still standing melodies.
The film was a huge hit in A and B centers in TamilNad, India.
I even know certain instances of marriages following this film's logic.
Heard somebody said this one was from an English movie and all.
Another interesting thing to me in this film is the narration style.
If the same story narrated in a linear mode then it would not have evoked the same emotions one would feel.
I bet at least 70% of Chennai city lovers would have watched this movie.
This is a well made, perfectly acted, scored, photographed and scored movie.
Oh..+ 2(just for Shalini alone).Watch it to get your mind wavered with love(alai payuthey's literal meaning is '{my mind} is wavering')..
Movie with eternal subject and wonderful team!.
In fact watching it after such a long time also is a very pleasing experience.
The way movie starts and then moves back and forth in time is wonderfully presented.
Especially for the transition frames with changing color schemes and well-captured emotions which are simply mind-blowing!!
Even the last frame of the movie which could be little disturbing because of the surrounding and situation also seems so beautiful and picturesque that instead of being sad you are awestruck.
I am very thankful to Mr. Mani Ratnam for eventually including the songs (as I read in reviews that he was aiming for a song-less movie).
And finally the soul of the movie: Actors and Mr. Director!!
Definitely this is one of the all-time watch movie..
10 stars for the Songs, -2 for the movie.
While this movie is incredibly stupid, boring and uses the same old formula again and again, the songs by AR Rehman are absolutely mind blowing.
The acting is OK but the story and flow is not what you expect from Mani ratnam.
So why does this movie deserve 8 stars?
Its because without the movie and plot itself, the songs may have never seen the light of day or given AR Rehman the appropriate ideas.
The situation (not plot) is very similar to Thiruda Thiruda where the movie itself is garbage but the songs were ground breaking and downright unbelievable.
Along with Thiruda Thiruda, this film has to have the best songs ever produced from India and some of the best in the world.
Extraordinary musical love film.
It's the love story for all generations with best melody songs(exclusively that colors song)..
I saw the Bollywood remake of this film as a kid, but after seeing the original Tamil version, I can say for sure that this one is even better!
The lead actors have absolutely incredible chemistry and there's this beautiful innocence in the relationship they portrayed in the film.
Madhavan and Shalini created fire on screen in this movie.
Also, this movie is family-friendly and there are no excessive public displays of affection.
The language was not known to me, and this was also the first time I was able to sit through a movie with subtitles.
Here, I was so engrossed in the story and the characters that I hardly paused the film.The romance was so organic and nothing felt forced.
From the first look, the first conversation, the proposal to their marriage, Shalini and Madhavan created magic together.
So much so, that every time they had separate scenes in the movie, I longed to see them together again.
I am usually very skeptical when it comes to romance in movies, so I was pleasantly surprised to see something like this happen.
The story, the direction, the acting, everything is of a superlative degree in this film.
Incredible is an understatement for this movie.A.R Rahman creates an almost perfect album.
Every track (except for one) found its own spot in the film and it did not seem like the filmmakers were using the tunes as fluff.
The songs pushed the story forward and the chemistry of the lead actors, again, did most of the work on the visual front.
That, backed with the picturesque cinematography, turned all the songs into snippets of viewing pleasure.
When compared to the music of the Bollywood remake, Saathiya, it seems that even though the music is the same, the lyrics are different, thus making most of the songs drastically different.
That paired with the lead actors, the innocence in their eyes, the looks shared between them, their conversations...
made this movie a masterpiece.
Words will fall short if I try to compliment Madhavan and Shalini.
The supporting actors were also well suited for their roles and nothing, not a thing of the main story, felt out of place.
I really wish more movies in India were like this.
Suffice it to say, Alai Payuthey is in a league of its own, and even though Saathiya is a good tribute, this movie and the beautiful feelings associated with it, cannot be replicated that easily..
Karthik goes to meet his wife at the train station but finds that she hasn't turned up.
However the film flashbacks to their first meeting, courting, conflict over being different classes, their secret wedding and the reality of day to day marriage.I'm not a big fan of this genre but will always give them a stab just to be fair and not prejudge the genre.
This film is, as almost all of them are, overlong by about 30 minutes, but it still worked quite well.
The plot is a different type of love story and can be quite moving at times, it isn't afraid to show the reality of married life and how things do change as the type of love changes.
I found it quite hard to watch because it resembled my own life in some ways but it was moving without the parallels.The songs are actually pretty good and, for the first time for me, actually sound different across the film as a whole.
There is one artificial dance number (the beach party) but the others, even if they have dancing, seem less work and fit into the film.
Technically, the sound quality is good and doesn't sound totally different during the songs.
Also the cinematography is great apart from a few ill judged slow motion moments towards the conclusion.The two leads are quite good.
They can do the usual genre stuff of falling into romantic love, but they also really perform in the marriage and make it feel like a real couple battling it out and being insensitive to each other daily.Overall this is not a great film mainly because it is a little flabby and overlong didn't it have editors?
The songs are good (first time I've said that in a review of this genre) and the plot is quite moving at times..
Alai Payuthey is a 2000 Tamil romantic drama film directed by Mani Ratnam which stars Madhavan Ranganathan and Shalini Ajith in the lead roles while Swarnamalya, Aravind Swamy, Kushboo Sundar, Jeyasudha Kapoor, Ravi Prakash, V.
The film carries a popular soundtrack which was composed by the Academy Award winning composer A.R Rahman and the lyrics were written by ''Kaviperarasu'' Vairamuthu.
Srinivasan who was Mani Ratnam's elder brother produced the film.The film revolves the story of a troubled couple who fell in love and got married against their parent's wish.
Karthik (Madhavan Ranganathan) and Shakthi (Shalini Ajith) are two young individuals from different class of family.
They both meet for the first time at a wedding and later begin to meet on suburban trains frequently.
They both fall in love, but Shakthi denies to get married to him without her parent's consent.
Karthik's parents meet Shakthi's parents and ask for their consent to a marriage between Karthik and Shakthi, but eventually disagree because of misunderstandings and cancel the wedding plans.
Shakthi breaks up with Karthik and decides to move on.Shakthi later goes to a medical camp in another city and Karthik decides to go after her.
While Shakthi is at the medical camp and Karthik is traveling to find her, they both realize that they miss each other so much that they can not live without each other.
When Karthik arrives the medical camp, Shakthi hugs him and asks him to marry her.
One day when Raghu (Venu Aravinth) and his family come to ask Shakthi's parents to a marriage between him and Shakthi's elder sister Poorni (Swarnamalya), his father asks Selvaraaj for his consent to a marriage between Shakthi and his younger son (Karthik Kumar) as well.
Shakthi denies and tells the truth that she is already married to Karthik.
Both Shakthi and Karthik get kicked out of their house and they move together to an apartment and begin to live their married life.After several months Shakthi meets her mother (Jeyasudha Kapoor) and Poorni on a suburban train.
Shakthi then decides to not go to a house where people do not respect Karthik, but Karthik changes his mind and they both decide to go and visit her father the next day.
Her mother gets angry, tells Shakthi to get out of the house and the relationship between the two young lovers begins to walk on the edge.
Misunderstandings gradually turn out to be suspicions and the silence begins to speak.The couple stop talking, but Karthik re-arranges the wedding plans for Poorni and Raghu to win back Shakthi's heart.
One day when Shakthi gets to know that Poorni and Raghu are going to get married and that Karthik was behind everything, she decides to go to Karthik's office to meet him and ask for apology.
On the way to Karthik's office Shakthi gets into an accident and is taken to the hospital.
Shakthi is admitted at the hospital and fights for her life while in Karthik's mind Shakthi is missing.
How Karthik finds Shakthi forms the crux of the story.Madhavan Ranganathan (credited as R.
Madhavan in films) made his debut as a big screen actor with this movie and quickly got everybody's attention because of his acting skills and his look.
Both him and Shalini were faithful to their roles and they had a beautiful chemistry throughout the film.
The film had great visuals and colorful locations which not only made the couple to look beautiful, but the whole movie beautiful.
It did not surprise me that the film carries a popular soundtrack.
With A.R Rahman's music and ''Kaviperarasu'' Vairamuthu's lines you can be 100% sure and say that the soundtrack will definitely be a hit and this soundtrack did not fail to win everybody's heart.
Songs like ''Endrendrum Punnagai'', ''Pachai Nirame'' and ''Snegithane'' have turned out to be nowadays youngster's favorite songs when it comes to Tamil Cinema Music.
If you ask for my opinion I would say that this album is the finest work by both A.R Rahman and Vairamuthu.Like Mani Ratnam's earlier films this film does not have focus on politics, terrorism and today's society.
This film explores a marriage life and learns the audience about how important the word ''sacrificing'' is when it comes to marriage.
I am sure that every married couple who love their life-partner from the bottom of their heart will enjoy this film and learn the meaning of true love.
Alai Payuthey will definitely be one of the best romantic drama films in Tamil Cinema's history for the next 20-30 years.
According to me this is the finest work by Mani Ratnam till date.Verdict: Alai Payuthey...
A treat of love! |
tt0016029 | The Little Colonel | Shortly after the American Civil War, southern belle Elizabeth Lloyd (Evelyn Venable) marries a northerner, Jack Sherman (John Lodge). Her father Colonel Lloyd (Lionel Barrymore) disowns her in anger and retaliation. Elizabeth and Jack move west where they become parents of a girl they name Lloyd Sherman (Shirley Temple).
Six years later, Lloyd Sherman is made an honorary colonel in the Army. Elizabeth returns to the south with little Lloyd and settles in a cottage near Colonel Lloyd’s mansion while her husband Jack remains in the west prospecting for gold. When Colonel Lloyd discovers his daughter living in the neighborhood, he treats her with disdain. Little Lloyd learns of her parents’ past from housekeeper Mom Beck (Hattie McDaniel), and, when she meets her grandfather for the first time, throws mud at him. The two eventually become contentious friends.
Elizabeth’s husband returns from the west with a fever. He has lost everything in his prospecting venture, but the family is saved from complete ruin when the Union Pacific Railroad requests right of way across Jack’s western property. Jack's former prospecting partners have heard of the Railroad’s offer and try to swindle Jack. They resort to holding the Sherman couple hostage until the deed to their valuable property is located.
Little Lloyd runs through dark woods for her grandfather but he refuses to help. He changes his mind when little Lloyd says she never wants to see him again. They arrive at the cottage just in time to save Elizabeth and Jack. The film ends with a brief Technicolor sequence featuring a 'pink party' for little Lloyd, her friends, and her reconciled family. | cute, entertaining | train | wikipedia | Crusty old Colonel Lloyd (Lionel Barrymore) is used to having his ornery way so when he finds out his daughter Elizabeth (Evelyn Venable) is determined to run off with Yankee Jack Shermon (John Lodge) to be married, he confronts her in a heated exchange and vows never to see her again if she does, and then she leaves.Several years later Elizabeth, with her husband and their young daughter Miss Lloyd (Shirley Temple), decides to return to a small house that belonged to her mother and which happens to be next door to her stubborn father's home.
Troubles descend on the Sherman family through some persuasive dishonest men who are out to rob them of their legal rights, and things start to get serious but grandpa comes to the rescue.Becky (Hattie McDaniel) and Walker (Bill Robinson) certainly add some amusing dialog during their stroll, as in spelling out "pohos"; and Robinson's tap dancing is superb.
Having earned her nickname due to her stubborn temper, THE LITTLE COLONEL courageously tries to reunite her splintered family.Shirley Temple smiles, pouts, tosses her curly locks and completely runs away with the movie.
Never was a despot so welcomed or a tyrant so loved.As one of the industry's finest character actors, crusty Lionel Barrymore gives the little lady a run for her money.
Always entertaining, he knows when to purr or when to roar to maximum effect, even if he doesn't quite eclipse Little Miss Personality.Hattie McDaniel adds her own unique gifts to the role of Shirley's faithful servant, never allowing her dignity to be demeaned.
They are perfectly matched - one ramrod straight & ebony, the other tiny & blonde - and their minutes together on the screen is the stuff of which movie magic is made.Evelyn Venable & John Lodge, as Shirley's parents (it's rare for her to have both all the way through a film) do nicely with the romantic angle, but it's kept to a minimum, as is usual in a Temple film, where the spotlight is kept firmly focused on her.
Sidney Blackmer appears as a smooth swindler who makes the serious mistake of angering THE LITTLE COLONEL.Although the film is given good production values by 20th Century Fox, it is the interaction between little Shirley and the other performers which far and away is the most important aspect of the picture.It should be noted that there are elements of racism in the story line, a not uncommon occurrence in Hollywood films of the 1930's.The final scene segues into early Technicolor - a pleasant way to end the story..
It's odd that Shirley Temple made two similar movies in the same year, both involving Civil War-type story lines and her character being very similar.
"The Littlest Rebel" took place during the Civil War and "The Little Colonel" took place right after the war.For some reason, I get an extra feeling being choked up seeing Shirley melting a crabby old man's heart as she did in some of her films, this being one of them.
Here, it's Lionel Barrymore who was fun to watch in any film.The lead female role was played by Evelyn Venable and she really wasn't up to the standards, beauty-wise, set by previous Temple adult feminine leads such s Gloria Stuart, Karen Moreley, Rochelle Hudson, etc.
But, that's not important.The story was more important and in case - surprise - I found this to run a distant second to the aforementioned "The Littlest Rebel." This movie was, frankly, boring in comparison.I am not one of the crying Liberals who boycott Temple''s films because blacks in these movies were denigrated.
Everyone's Mr. Nice Guy (mine, too) Bill Robinson, didn't come on the scene and dance with Shirley until later in the film when I had lost interest.Temple, meanwhile, is so cute that she's even likable when she's a brat, as she acts several times with the old man (but apologizes later for her behavior).It's still a good film but I prefer the "Rebel" over the "Colonel" in the battle of these 1935 Civil War-themed stories..
In this movie she has an amazing support cast of Lionel Barrymore who plays the part of a crusty grandfather but Shirley with her cute and charming ways soon melts the heart of the old grandfather.Hattie Mac Daniel plays the faithful servant and once again it made you realize just how much these beloved negroes sometimes knew more than " The white folks".
The story line can be weak in places and the acting might be a bit corny to todays standards but if you need a feel good movie then drag out a Shirley Temple movie .
With all of her usual show-stealing spark, Shirley Temple delivers another fun family classic as Lloyd Sherman in "The Little Colonel." Proving yet again that there's no problem she can't solve, Shirley reconciles an old grudge between her young mother (played by Evelyn Venable) and her crusty southern grandfather (played by Lionel Barrymore), who disowned his daughter for marrying a Yankee.
Shirley's classic tap dance up the staircase with Bojangles Robinson will remind all of her fans of what a true dancing prodigy she really was.
Don't get me wrong: Shirley shines in fast, snappy songs, but her voice was not made for slow numbers like this one."The Little Colonel" is a nice family film, but except for the iconic staircase dance, there is little to distinguish it from most of Shirley's childhood flicks.
The claim that this film smashed through racial barriers by placing Shirley Temple opposite African-American screen legends Bojangles Robinson and Hattie McDaniel is almost laughable.
Watch him stand idly by while Barrymore fusses and fumes at him, because he knows "the old colonel don't mean no harm." Meanwhile McDaniel is a Mammy figure, loyal, caring, and always glad to serve the white folks (McDaniel later won an Oscar for playing the same Mammy figure in "Gone With the Wind").
Instead he was enjoying, sharing, giving a lovely dance thing with one of those little white girls whose socks never slid down under their heels."But one cannot really expect better from a film made in 1935, when America was, unfortunately, still in the Dark Ages as far as African-Americans and their rights were concerned.
Such clichéd roles were the only acting jobs available for African-Americans at the time, and so Robinson's and McDaniel's talents are largely untapped as their characters completely lack the depth given to white actors.
For example, Lionel Barrymore's Colonel Lloyd has both positive and negative characteristics: He is a temperamental hothead who remains bitter over the Civil War, but he is also a southern gentleman who immediately brings his new neighbors a bouquet of flowers to welcome them..
Nobody wanted little Shirley to grow up, so I must say my favorite film of hers was "The Little Colonel" in which she sang and danced so well with the famed Bill Robinson.
In that film she played against the great Lionel Barrymore..
THE LITTLE COLONEL (Fox, 1935), directed by David Butler, stars Shirley Temple in one of her more famous movie roles during her early years as a young performer.
Aside from her initial teaming with legendary dancer Bill "Bojangles" Robinson (4th billed during opening credits, bottom billed in the closing), with whom she does a memorable "stair" dance, it places her against odds with the crusty Lionel Barrymore, on loan out assignment from MGM, sporting white hair, bushy eyebrows and droopy mustache in the old Southerner/ or Claude Gillingwater Sr. tradition, and what a pair they make.Based on a story by Annie Fellows Johnston, the plot opens with a prologue set in 1870s Kentucky on a Southern plantation where Colonel Lloyd (Lionel Barrymore) disowns his beloved daughter, Elizabeth (Evelyn Venable) for eloping with a "Yankee", Jack Sherman (John Lodge).
During their six years in Philadelphia, Jack and Elizabeth have been blessed with a child, Lloyd (Shirley Temple), whom they witness being commissioned as a "little colonel" by soldiers on a western outpost.
With John remaining at the post, Elizabeth returns to Kentucky where she and Lloyd settle in an old cottage left to her by her late mother that happens to be next door to her father.
In spite of their rugged start and similar personality traits, Grandpa eventually warms up to Lloyd, though his stubbornness keeps him from having anything to do with his daughter, even when learning of swindlers Swazey (Sidney Blackmer) and Hull (Aden Chase) in their home threatening the ailing Jack and Elizabeth to turn over the deed to worthless property they sold him that has been proved valuable.THE LITTLE COLONEL, a leisurely paced story with familiar theme, relies mostly on the strength of its leading players, Temple and Barrymore.
Dressed in "Aunt Jemima" attire, she shares amusing moments with Colonel Lloyd's butler (Robinson), sharing time together with the "little colonel" at a spiritual gathering witnessing a woman getting dunked in the river where she's having her sins washed away as Negroes sing "The Sun Shines Brighter." Aside from the aforementioned "stair dance," Temple and Robinson do an encore tap dancing to Stephen Foster's "Oh, Susannah" in the stable to harmonica playing by May Lily (Avonne Johnson).
Others in the cast include William Burress (Doctor Scott); Geneva Williams (Maria); and Robert Warwick (Colonel Gray).Priot to 1985, THE LITTLE COLONEL played frequently on commercial television with the closing segment, filmed in Technicolor, usually absent, with story coming to an abrupt conclusion either after Barrymore's closing line or next scene of McDaniel successfully breaking down the door after being locked in by one of Sherman's "guests." When distributed on video in 1988, the closing Technicolor segment was restored, and shown intact at 82 minutes on cable TV broadcasts on the Disney Channel (early 1990s), American Movie Classics (1996-2001) and finally the Fox Movie Channel.
THE LITTLE COLONEL is currently available on DVD in black and white or colorized versions.The success of THE LITTLE COLONEL brought forth a similar theme and title of THE LITTLEST REBEL (1935), reuniting Temple with Bill Robinson once again, with plot set during the Civll War instead of after-wards.
Both classic films with Temple (and Robinson) at the peak of their careers.
The film begins just after the US Civil War. The Colonel (Lionel Barrymore) hates Yankees and is shocked when his daughter announces she's marrying one.
Time passes and now after several years, the daughter returns to her hometown with her adorable child, Lloyd (Temple).
Partly it helps because in this film, Shirley does not play all sweetness but is also delightfully bratty and strong-willed.
She also is MAGNIFICENT in the scenes where she dances with Bill 'Bojangles' Robinson--the best of their several movies together.
All in all, a completely delightful film--one of Shirley's very best.
Also, although black characters fare much better in this film than in other Shirley Temple films of the era, some might blanch at the fact that all the black people are VERY happy living in the segregated post Civil War South..
The post-Civil War south...Hollywood--and Shirley Temple--style.
Crusty former Army colonel Lionel Barrymore is encouraged to patch things up with his estranged daughter after her marriage to a Yankee produces an adorably outspoken child who emulates her bossy grandfather.
It's Shirley Temple in the Old South after the Civil War, scuttled after by housekeeper Hattie McDaniel and dancing up the staircase with butler Bill Robinson, and some will surely quibble with this Hollywood-ized version of time and place.
The main joy here is in watching little Shirley outwit her elders, although the baptismal sequence at the river (complete with spiritual "wailing") provides an eerie shimmer that nearly seems to belong to a different film altogether.
Lionel Barrymore is wooden in his role as Temple's grandfather, and the plot is beyond lame; but Shirley Temple still is fully convincing as Lloyd Sherman--a precocious, color-blind, and happiness-inducing five- year-old child of the 1870s.
Hattie McDaniel, Bill Robinson, and Avonne Jackson are amazing in their rapport with Temple.
America's favorite moppet Shirley Temple may have met her match in scene stealing with Lionel Barrymore playing her grandfather.
Just watching Barrymore taking back his scenes from Temple makes The Little Colonel an enjoyable film to watch.Barrymore complete with white suit, Panatella, and goatee with long white hair looks like the spitting image of Colonel Sanders.
So she and John Davis Lodge go first north and west and have themselves a daughter.When Lodge goes into the west with a couple of shifty partners in a prospecting deal, he sends Venable and the little girl they have now back south to live with grandfather.
But as these Shirley Temple movies go, you know it's Shirley who brings all the warring parties together.
Who could resist.The Little Colonel is known for that famous dance that Bill Robinson does with Shirley Temple on the staircase.
The last couple of minutes are in color in which all the principal players appeared in that for the first time.The scenes with Barrymore and Temple are absolutely precious.
1st watched 12/17/2004 - 4 out of 10(Dir-David Butler): Cute but minimalistic fare from the Olsen Twins of her generation, Shirley Temple.
The best parts of this movie are the dance routines with the black slave butler-like character and Miss future Temple-Black.
We really don't get enough of these and the story itself, set in post-Civil war times in the south is pretty flimsy and setup just so "the cute one" can save the day with her charm.
Temple is charming but the plot is the same old thing....
I always get THE LITTLEST REBEL and THE LITTLE COLONEL mixed up when I think of SHIRLEY TEMPLE films, but while they both have the same sort of background (the Civil War and post-Civil War), the quality of entertainment is vastly different.This one gets off to a painfully dull start, with Shirley's mother (EVELYN VENABLE) running off with a Yankee (JOHN BOLES), and later returning home with her little girl only to find that the grandfather has never forgiven her for marrying a Yank.
Naturally, it's up to little Shirley to melt the heart of the crusty grandfather (LIONEL BARRYMORE) and we all know how that's going to turn out.What makes the film interesting are the dance segments with BILL ROBINSON, as the tap dancing servant, most memorably in the staircase dance that is always shown whenever there are film clips from any of Shirley's Fox films.
Personally, I think this is Shirley's best movie.
It's got a good story (rare in children's movies), my favorite actor (Lionel Barrymore), great acting from a 5-yr-old child (Shirley), great dance numbers with Bojangles, lots of servant put-downs of their masters (as when Bojangles calls his master a fool)and also lots of humor, as when Shirley throws the chess set onto the floor, strikes an angry pose, and tells her Grandpa, "You're a bad man!".
It's a great introduction to the actress Shirley Temple, and you can see why she was the number one star in 1936, 37, and 38..
" Little Shirley Temple Humiliates Lionel Barrymore ".
When watching this Shirley Temple film, it is easy to see why The Little Colonel was such a crowd-pleaser.
This film has a long Old South story to tell, that is both sentimental and predictable.
The story has young Shirley Temple up against gruff old Lionel Barrymore, as her stubborn grandfather.
At the time this movie was being filmed, Mr.Barrymore was suffering with severe arthritis, in extreme pain he had difficulty walking.
During filming he was stumbling on his lines and innocent Shirley Temple told him what his line was-- 'Mr. Barrymore, you're supposed to say so-and-so here.'The humiliated veteran actor exploded, yelling "I'm thirty years in this business!" Being warned not to swear in front of the child, Mr. Barrymore tried his best to storm of the set to his dressing room.
As always, little Shirley Temple saves the day.
It should also be noted that Shirley was known as "One Take Temple" because of her amazing ability to memorize her lines as well as all of the other players, before she could even read or write.
The sheer magnetism of Shirley Temple always makes The Little Colonel a very enjoyable film to watch..
Shirley is there to charm the viewer, but it is obvious that her performance is one that suffers from too much direction rather than creating a fleshed out character.Old southern colonel Lionel Barrymore has disowned daughter Evelyn Venable for marrying a northern soldier.
They return years later with young daughter Shirley who quickly charms the mustache off of grumpy grandpa, dances up the stairs with butler Bill Robinson and goes to a baptism with lovable maid Hattie McDaniel and listens to classic negro spirituals.
I found her being made an honorary colonel quite a cloying moment, but the magic hits when she teams up with Robinson in dance.
Shirley, Barrymore and Robinson steal this one..
Yes, Bill Robinson and Hattie McDaniel fill roles typically filled by African Americans of the 1870s, as before slavery was abolished, the African Americans often butcher proper English language, and Lionel Barrymore, as Colonel Lloyd, does once call African American children pikaninnies.
Robinson serves as Shirley's dance companion and friend ,as well as Colonel Lloyd's butler and companion.
Shirley and Robinson do two dances together.
One is between Colonel Lloyd(Barrymore) and the family of his daughter, Elizabeth, which includes Shirley.
She takes her rank quite seriously, as seriously as does her grandfather, who soon finds out she is as stubborn as he and her mother.The second major conflict is between Shirley's father: Jack, and his 2 prospecting partners.
He decides to return to Elizabeth and Shirley, who are living in an abandoned cottage Elizabeth inherited from her mother, near Colonel Lloyd's mansion.
Shirley runs for help from the Colonel, who reluctantly decides to travel to the cottage.
Evelyn Venable, who played Shirley's mother was quite beautiful, classy, and smart.
Shirley was the dominating personality in the film, as cute and mischievous as ever. |
tt0067810 | Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song | A young African American orphan (Mario Van Peebles) is taken in by the proprietor of a Los Angeles brothel in the 1940s. While working there as a towel boy, he loses his virginity at a young age to one of the prostitutes. The women name him "Sweet Sweetback" in honor of his sexual prowess and large penis. As an adult, Sweetback (Melvin Van Peebles) works as a performer in the whorehouse, entertaining customers by performing in a sex show.
One night, a pair of LAPD officers come in to speak to Sweetback's boss, Beetle (Simon Chuckster). A black man had been murdered, and there is pressure from the black community to bring in a suspect. The police ask permission to arrest Sweetback, blame him for the crime, and then release him a few days later for lack of evidence, in order to appease the black community. Beetle agrees, and the officers arrest Sweetback. On the way to the police station, the officers arrest a young Black Panther named Mu-Mu (Hubert Scales). They handcuff him to Sweetback, but when Mu-Mu insults the officers, they take both men out of the car, undo the handcuff from Mu-Mu's wrist, and beat him. In response, Sweetback uses the handcuffs, still hanging from his wrist, to beat the officers into unconsciousness.
Sweetback makes a flight through South Central Los Angeles towards the United States–Mexico border, but is captured by the police. Sweetback is violently interrogated about his previous assault on the arresting officers, but escapes when a riot breaks out. Sweetback then goes to a woman who cuts his handcuffs off in exchange for sex. With his handcuffs off, Sweetback continues onward, only to be captured by a chapter of the Hells Angels. The female leader of the gang is impressed by the size of Sweetback's penis, and agrees to help him and Mu-Mu escape from the police in exchange for sex. The police find Sweetback and Mu-Mu at the bikers' hangout, but Sweetback escapes on foot while Mu-Mu goes away with the bikers. Mu-Mu and one of the bikers (John Amos) are killed.
After his escape from the bikers' hangout, a white man sympathetic to Sweetback's cause agrees to switch clothes with him, allowing the usually velour-clad Sweetback to blend in. The police find Sweetback's former foster mother, who reveals that Sweetback's birth name is Leroy. The chase concludes in the desert, where L.A. Police send several hunting dogs after Sweetback, who fights them back and continues running. Sweetback makes it into the Tijuana River and escapes into Mexico, swearing to return to "collect dues". | violence, cult, avant garde, murder, blaxploitation | train | wikipedia | Considered the first blaxploitation film, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song features Melvin Van Peebles (who also directed, wrote, produced, edited and did music for the film) as Sweetback, a Los Angeles-area "male prostitute"/"sex performer" (who only has relations with females).
In terms of quality, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song gets my vaunted 5 out of 10 rating, which is usually reserved for "so bad they're good" films.
Peebles also frequently layers musical tracks, so two or more can be playing at once for a minute or two.The film is also notable and admirable for its abundance of almost graphic sex scenes and gratuitous nudity.
We need much more of this kind of material in contemporary films.At one point, Peebles and/or director of photography Robert Maxwell appear to have hit the streets of Los Angeles, filming people at random after they asked them if they've seen Sweetback (the character).
The sound is awful--I couldn't make out about half of the dialogue (at one point I thought "this is more like watching a silent film"), and it doesn't help that some characters "jive talk"; if ever a film needed subtitles, it's this one.
A lot of shots--scenery, cityscapes, etc.--look like they may have been randomly taken by Peebles with his home camera with the hopes of one day using them in a film.Still, for fans of weirdness and "so bad they're good" films, not to mention any blaxploitation fan with his or her weight in barbecued ribs, Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song is a must see.
Make sure you also check out How to Get the Man's Foot Outta Your Ass (aka Baadasssss!), Peebles' son Mario's 2003 film about Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song..
It took some pretty strong courage to make this move when you consider the time frame that it came out in; the early seventies, a period that saw a shift from "I have a dream" to "By any means necessary." I believe this film opened the doors to allow black artistic media to be critical about white America, society, politics and corruption that generally would have been censored before.
My father, a white man, told me that when he went to see this film back in 1971, the audience screamed and cheered during the opening scene when across the screen it read to "all the Brothers and Sisters who are tired of being held down by the Man." Nowadays people wouldn't really respond to that, not even black society I don't think, but back then it could have gotten you lynched, even in 1971.
So when people screamed and cheered in the movie theater when they saw this, I think you can imagine how important a film like this must be in film history.
Sweet Sweetback's Baad Asssss Song (1971) was a independent marvel from Melvin Van Peebles.
According to Mr. Peebles, after the surprise success of this film, the producers of SHAFT changed his character into a black man.
They wanted him to doctor some scripts and make them "black" (the term he used can be found in his back about the making and selling of Sweet Sweetback's Baad Asssss Song (1971).
That a black man can make a unique film without the restraints of the studio system and not have to answer to investors and anxious producers.I have to give a hand to Mr. Van Peebles.
That said, technically Sweetback isn't a blaxploitation film at all as it was financed and produced entirely by a black man.
Since their construction is so obvious, it is not the same as the way blacks were portrayed in a film like "Birth of a Nation." Melvin Van Peebles put this thing together by himself (with a little monetary help from Bill Cosby), and while the technical quality is not exactly Hollywood, neither is the content.
The film makes it clear that white men are all racist jerks and have no problem with killing black guys.
I wonder how grown-up Mario feels about his own father having done this to him?The film is certainly anti-white, but I fail to see how anyone can call it pro-black.
You'd have a hard time finding a worse depiction of black life than this one -- where the main characters perform kinky sex shows for groups of leering onlookers, just to take one example.The director's attitude towards women is despicable.
In spite of this reputation, few have actually seen it.The truth is that SWEET SWEETBACK'S BAAD ASSSSS SONG, in spite of the good intentions of its message, is poorly made pornographic trash.
Not too much time goes by before we see grown up Sweetback (director Melvin Van Peebles) performing in a live sex show.
There are a number of scenes where the cops are asking members of the black community (the film's real star) as to the whereabouts of Sweetback.
1st watched 4/22/2001 - 8 out of 10 (Dir-Melvin Van Peebles): Important film for the black community because it portrays the realities of how in many places blacks were treated by whites.
The film is paced by the Director like a journey that we as the viewers are on as we follow Sweetback as he runs from the police and meets up with various friends, lovers etc.(not unlike a road picture) after he killed a couple of white cops who unfairly beat up a black brother.
Sweet sweetback's baadasssss song IMO should get an award as worst film ever made ,so Bad asssss it will make you physically sick, maybe the idea was to get stoned and then view it.
Such films like ' "manos the hands of fate" in comparison seem classic.The films sound score contains a single song played monotonously throughout that doesn't make a soundtrack as for great camera work all vomit,the main character seems to always end up in meaningless orgies because of his sexual prowess but the scenes lack any imagination strictly missionary and aren't erotic, there's a meaningless chase scene which you cant really tell who he's running from.The film ends abruptly, the producer must have run out of money ,give a monkey a film camera and you'd end up with a better movie.I disliked this film because it seems devoid of developed characters and plot it felt as if the story was conceived as the filmed rolled.IF you want to watch a true blaxploitation classic I recommend "hitman.".
reading others reviews of this film, I find myself both agreeing to some degree, and alternately being in complete disagreement."sweet sweetback" is a confusing movie.
(A.K.A. How to Get the Man's Foot Outta Your Ass), made by the directors son, Mario Van Peebles.It is very easy for a modern audience to perhaps overlook this film as one of the slew of 'Blaxpliotation' films produced in the 70s, however this stands out firstly as virtually the originator of that mode of films, and as a crusade for a young, talented black artist and director to make a film that is both honest and challenging about the representation of black people in cinema.If nothing else you must respect Melvin Van Peebles for the Guerrilla film making techniques that created this movie.This film is a great argument for the importance to minority groups within any society to gain access to and control of media production in order to challenge dominant ideologies and representations put forward in mainstream media.It is also virtually impossible to view Baadasssss!
Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song is Melvin Van Peebles harsh, incisive, intentional baffling and revolutionary take on the black experience in America.
Sure, it shows the film's hero (and believe you-me, Van Peebles IS a bad-ass hero, at least in some circles) having sex with a LOT of women, mostly black and some white thrown in at random moments, and it has a completely one-sided view on the Caucasian presence in America (either rabidly racist and crooked cops, or women with a 'craving' for the Sweetback, and the occasional bikers).
But it also intends to be a movie by black people, of black people, and FOR black people, to make what is intended as a statement on not just the image of African Americans in the country at the time, but what wasn't shown in movies at all.In this latter sense, Van Peebles is making an attempt, much like Godard did with his early films (particularly Breathless and My Life to Live), to break through and re-configure conventions into something that is kind of f***ed up, but is alive and interesting in ways that more expensive or resourceful movies would have.
Peebles makes his movies sort of out of junk-yard avant-garde parts, like some kind of garish vision taken in via superimpositions, montages, and a soundtrack as a combination of great Earth, Wind and Fire songs and a collage of voice-overs during Sweetback's run.
Peebles is also so intense with his camera- and rightfully so- that he lets his script sort of go into a better lack of focus; a lot of the time I only had a slight understanding of what was going on, and sometimes just not at all.This being said, it's a tremendous credit to Peebles as an independent filmmaker that the film even got finished; he had many production difficulties, as later chronicled in the film Bad Asssss.
First of all, the director of the movie didn't have a better idea that using his OWN LITTLE SON performing a simulated SEX SCENE, completely naked and moving on top of a naked middle-aged woman.
In the second place, the "hero" of the "movie" - Sweetback- is nothing but a prostitute and -as the story develops- a murderer running away from the police.
WOW!I loved this !!Melvin is a genius filmaker of his time ,and anybody who was there in his time knows there was only a little exageration in this.Much of America tried to ban this picture which the man not only stars in but directed and wrote.I recall that many critics not only dismissed the film ,but many said Peebles was insane .I feel he was crazy like a fox because in those days a Black man just did'nt finance a movie , certainly did'nt direct one and if he appeared in one he was usually serving something.The fact is movies reflect the society that create them ,and Sweetback is no different .Stunning in its intensity ,filled with colorful characters ,this is the film white America does'nt want you to see ,besides "Mandingo" perhaps .I got 3 copies as soon as I could.Melvin was a deep thinker and it shows ,this is hardly for young kids though .Run get a copy theres the directors cut out now!.
I saw this film on opening night in Philadelphia, Pa. The audience consisted of almost entirely young, Black men (mostly) and women who were obviously active in the civil rights movement,judging by the reactions of the men in the audience when Sweetback gave "the man" his definition of justice - beating the living crap out of them.
Melvin Van Peebles plays Sweetback, a radical who on the run after murdering some cops.
Director Melvin Van Peebles surpasses even Orson Welles in his attempt at the full-on auteur thing in Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, having written, produced, directed, scored, and starred in what is a fairly standard man-on-the-run film.
Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song is a film whose reputation is based almost entirely on its historical importance.
Director and star Melvin Van Peebles was nothing if not a visionary though, as this was the first film to tap into the African American audience in quite this way.
A sex show performer called Sweetback kills a couple of cops who are beating up a fellow black man and then goes on the run through South Central L.A. on his way to the Mexican border.
The women in the film seem to only exist for Sweetback to have sex with, while the often reported fact that Van Peebles was really having sex on film in these scenes is just too sleazy for me.This is definitely a landmark movie, though, there is no doubt about that.
It tells the troubled story of a male prostitute named Sweet Sweetback who, after witnessing police brutality against a fellow black man, beats up a police officer.
Now on the run from the law, Sweetback must do what he can to avoid and evade the police, even if that means involvement from the Hell's Angels and using his "talent".The big question is, how does the film hold up today?
This film is just good guys, meaning the black community, and the bad guys, meaning white police officers.
The film has a lot of radical imagery, and most of that comes when Sweetback is actually running from the man.
I'm not going to spoil any surprises, but I will say that somehow this film gets it right.When we first see Sweet Sweetback, he is only a little boy, played by Mario Van Peebles (Melvin's son), who appears hungry, dirty, tired, and starved.
I think, despite what you may think of Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, that this says more about independent film and black cinema than most films would have the balls to say.
Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song (1971)** (out of 4)Male prostitute Sweetback (Melvin Van Peebles) gets tired of seeing a black man getting beaten by two white cops so he kills the cops.
Sweetback takes off trying to evade the police who are hot on his trail.Thanks to its classic title and the fact that it's a historically important film, SWEET SWEETBACK'S BAADASSSSS SONG has become somewhat of a folk/cult movie.
I'm sure a lot of people would watch this film today and call it all sorts of things but I think it's important that people realize that this was released just a few years after black people were still being beaten by the police and had water hoses turned on them.
There's no question that Melvin Van Peebles broke all sorts of new ground and he deserves a lot of credit delivering this type of movie.With that said, there's still no question that the film itself isn't all that good.
He's given very little dialogue but that look tells you everything you need to know.SWEET SWEETBACK'S BAADASSSSS SONG isn't a masterpiece but it deserves to be called a classic since it did break through so many new levels..
While it's a great time capsule of 60's attitudes towards sex, it comes across as more of a reason for Melvin to get it on with actresses.But apparently it didn't matter--the movie made money.
but back in the 60s the very *idea* of a film centered on a black hero on the run from some less-than-perfect police officers was enough to blow peoples' minds.
The movie has the occasional sex scene in it, no doubt all put in there so Melvin Van Peebles could allow himself to have some fun.
And believe me, at least some of the sex in this movie is real, since Melvin Van Peebles actually contracted gonorrhea from an 'actress' while shooting this movie.It was also weird seeing an 14-year old Mario Van Peebles having a sex scene in this, as a young Sweetback, with an adult woman.
At times it's really hard to say what's going on since the picture quality is too bad or a scene gets too dark at times to tell what's happening.I can most certainly appreciate and like a good old fashioned blaxploitation flick but this movie just isn't very good or fun to watch.4/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
But it's weird to think that a movie about racism had some stereotypes (namely, the sex scene portraying the black man as great in bed).
The plot of course has political activist Sweetback (Melvin Van Peebles) running from The Man after killing some cops who were attacking a Black Panther.
Director Melvin van Peebles (father to Mario), who also plays the eponymous hero, funded the project himself (with a little help from Bill Cosby), and the film went onto gross $4.1 million.
The film became required viewing for members of the Black Panthers, and Sweetback himself can be seen giving the Panther first sign.As socially and historically important as this film is, it's still not very good.
Whatever the case, Sweet Sweetback's Baad Assssssss Song came off to me as a vibrant exercise in bad taste, bad acting, a barely discernible plot, VERY bad editing, and lots of stupid, stupid white people.
When you watch the movie, you are there on the streets with the characters, you just have a hard time trying to follow what they're doing, what they're talking about, who's chasing who and why a black man is dancing on a stool while some idiot white guy stands directly behind him, staring at his backside and laughing hysterically.
The thing that really gets me is that white people are portrayed as so stupid and incompetent and endlessly idiotic in these movies, and yet at the same time they are the people who's power and influence black people simply cannot escape.
I had heard a lot about Sweet Sweetback's Baad Asssss Song over the years, but finally got to see it yesterday, 5-2-04.I have to say that I can see how it opened up a new genre..the Blaxploitation films.
It's powerful from the opening when we read about people in the black community oppressed by 'THE MAN' to the end when Sweetback escapes safely to Mexico (after killing hound dogs)!There is a lot of symbolism as well.
There are a few things you need to know about this film before you see it: 1) It includes pretty graphic sex scenes, one of them featuring the director's teenage son Mario (in the first few minutes).
Van Peebles acts, produces, composes and directs well enough, despite the fact the film is rather weird, with all the sexual behaviour, violence and prostitution element but it is I suppose important in the history of filmmaking, as it does not (completely) stereotype black people, and it is a different non-mainstream film, a strange but kind of fascinating blaxploitation. |
tt0118523 | 'Til There Was You | Gwen Moss (Jeanne Tripplehorn) has spent the better part of her life waiting for the man of her dreams, unaware she briefly bumped into him at school as children and has had several close encounters ever since. She aspires to have a life like her longtime friend Debbie (Jennifer Aniston), a successful doctor with a beautiful home but a marriage that may not be as perfect as it seems on the surface.
Gwen is hired to ghostwrite the autobiography of former child star Francesca Lanfield (Sarah Jessica Parker), whose career virtually ended following her stint on a long-running Partridge Family-Brady Bunch hybrid sitcom. Francesca owns La Fortuna, a picturesque vintage apartment complex (filmed at the historic El Cabrillo). Architect Nick Dawkan's (Dylan McDermott) boss Timo wants to buy and demolish the complex so his firm can construct a modern condominium development in its place. Francesca agrees to the sale as long as Nick is placed in charge of the project, and the two embark on a somewhat tempestuous relationship. Both are damaged emotionally; Francesca has overcome an addiction to drugs but still craves the spotlight, while Nick is dealing with the memory of a father who failed as a songwriter and became a hopeless alcoholic. Meanwhile, Gwen is shocked to discover her father Saul never loved her mother Beebee and is devastated when the two decide to divorce. Her parents' story of how they met from her childhood turns out to be false: Saul got stood up by his date that night and Beebee thought that he was interested in her. They only married to "avoid an argument", as Saul puts it.
Gwen moves into La Fortuna and finds herself surrounded by an assortment of odd but lovable neighbors who have created a family of their own. When the tenants are presented with eviction notices, they decide to fight back. Having discovered the property was designed by Sophia Monroe, one of the first female architects of note (and coincidentally Nick's mentor during the early stages of his career), and served as home to silent film star Louise Brooks, Gwen hopes she can have it declared an historical landmark with the assistance of Jon Haas, the city councilman she is dating. Nick is prepared to fight for his firm until he sees La Fortuna and learns its history and decides it might be worth preserving after all. Though ultimately unsuccessful in preserving La Fortuna, they finally meet at the Nicotine Anonymous meeting, are then happily married, and have a daughter together. | flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1105731 | Kuntilanak 2 | Samantha "Sam" is an orphaned young woman who moves to an isolated boarding house in North Jakarta, trying to avoid the advances of her pervert stepfather. The landlady of the house, Yanti, tells her that the house was previously a batik factory of Mangkoedjiwo family, with its current leader, Raden Ayu Sri Sukmarahimi Mangkoedjiwo having lent the house under a condition that the second floor is locked up with no one allowed inside. While listing other restrictions, including about a chair in front of a Javanese mirror in Sam's room, Yanti chants durmo, a Javanese poem said to be able to summon Kuntilanak, a female ghost with half the body of a horse rumored to be living in a weeping fig in front of the house. Meanwhile, Sam mentions her recurring nightmares of a woman in a fire with a Kuntilanak to her boyfriend, Agung. Agung learns from his eccentric friend, Iwank, and his mother that the Mangkoedjiwo is long rumored to be a black magic sect maintaining a Kuntilanak, itself can only be summoned by antique objects. At the house, Sam befriends Dinda, who tells her that there are actually three other mirrors identical to the one in Sam's room: two of which are in herself and Ratih's rooms.
One day, Sam breaks the rule about the mirror, glimpsing a Kuntilanak in the process. Her neighbor, Mawar, who is with her boyfriend (when males are forbidden to step on the third floor), threatens to kill Sam, but Sam suddenly enters a trance and chants durmo, making her puke maggots and materialize a strange scar as well as causing Mawar to have nosebleed. At a motel, Mawar is killed when an electric fan drops on her neck. The next night, Sam tries to peek on the second floor, but is harassed by a neighbor, Alfon. She enters into a trance and chants durmo again. Haunted by terrifying apparitions, Alfon tries to escape but is killed in a car accident. In the light of recent events, Sri Sukma pays visit to the house. Yanti apologizes for her foolish act in introducing durmo to Sam, although Sri Sukma says that it is her destiny to keep it. While reading a book about Mangkoedjiwo factory in Iwank's house, Sam spots the sentence Sing kuat sing melihara ("the strong one is the one that masters [Kuntilanak]"). During a conflict with Agung, Sam chants durmo; the next day, she learns Agung has disappeared. She hears Agung's faint cries from the second floor. Sam discusses Agung's disappearance with Dinda, but misunderstands Dinda's comfort as her being attracted to Agung. Chanting durmo, Sam passes out when Dinda goes out to take shower where she is killed by Kuntilanak.
Having had enough, Sam breaks over to the second floor and finds Agung bleeding in front of the fourth mirror Dinda previously forgot to mention. She is confronted by Sri Sukma, who explains that the Mangkoedjiwo does indeed maintain a Kuntilanak summoned by a wangsit (a supernatural mandate) kept by their heirs, but since Sri Sukma is unable to bear children, she has chosen Sam as the next carrier of the wangsit. When Sam refuses, Sri Sukma chants durmo to summon Kuntilanak, though Sam counters with her own durmo, eventually winning out when Sri Sukma has nosebleed. Pleading Sam not to kill her, Sri Sukma says that the Kuntilanak can be stopped by removing its entrance to the living world; by breaking all mirrors. Sam manages to break the mirrors in her, Dinda, and Ratih's rooms, but forgets the one in the second floor long enough before Kuntilanak kills Sri Sukma. Two ghost children appear to take Sam, who manages to break free, only to be cornered by Kuntilanak. However, she continuously chants Sing kuat sing melihara until the Kuntilanak obeys and goes back to the mirror. The next day, Sam decides to keep the mirror so she could use it for her own deeds, disturbing Agung. She happily chants durmo as apparitions of Kuntilanak come out of the mirror. | revenge | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0310281 | A Mighty Wind | The film is structured as mockumentary about a memorial concert for (fictional) folk music producer Irving Steinbloom. Upon his death, his children organize a concert, which they hope to feature his three most famous acts: The Folksmen, The New Main Street Singers, and Mitch & Mickey.
The Folksmen trio — Mark Shubb (Harry Shearer), Alan Barrows (Christopher Guest), and Jerry Palter (Michael McKean) — were once the most popular of the acts but have not appeared together in decades. They had several minor hits, and their most famous song was "Old Joe's Place." Despite not playing or seeing each other for many years, their reunion (a cookout) is a very positive affair as the Folksmen give each other big hugs and are happy to see one another.
The New Main Street Singers are the second generation of the original Main Street Singers, formed by George Menschell (Paul Dooley), the only living member of the original group. Menschell sings and holds a guitar he cannot play. Performers include Terry Bohner (John Michael Higgins) and his wife Laurie Bohner (Jane Lynch). Laurie, a former adult film star, and her husband are founders of Witches in Nature's Colors (WINC), a coven of modern-day witches that worships the power of color. Another member is Sissy Knox (Parker Posey), a former juvenile delinquent and daughter of one of the original Main Street Singers. They are managed by Mike LaFontaine (Fred Willard), whose fifteen minutes of fame came by way of a failed 1970s sitcom, Wha' Happened?. The show lasted for less than one season and has largely been forgotten, but LaFontaine is constantly quoting the titular tagline to the puzzlement of others. The group, which is otherwise entirely white, includes one Filipino American member, Mike Maryama (played by Mark Nonisa), and is known for their needlessly complex nine-part harmonies.
Mitch Cohen (Eugene Levy) and Mickey Crabbe (Catherine O'Hara) comprised Mitch & Mickey, a former couple that released seven albums until their dramatic break-up years before the setting of the film. Mickey seemingly moved on and has married a medical supply salesman, but Mitch had an emotional breakdown and has never fully recovered. Their most famous song was "A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow," at the end of which the pair would actually kiss on stage.
The three groups, which had sunk to various levels of musical irrelevance since their respective heyday, agree to the reunion performance, to be held at The Town Hall in New York and televised live on PBN (a reference to PBS). The film features rehearsals for the show along with interviews with the performers discussing their activities over the previous years and their feelings about performing again. The Folksmen are very enthusiastic, and work hard to relearn their songs, and hope to wow the audience. Mitch and Mickey (particularly Mitch) are very apprehensive about how it will go.
The show itself goes off with only two hitches: The song that The Folksmen intend to open their set with is played first by the New Main Street Singers (a song called "Wanderin' ", which the Folksmen sing in a rugged, emotional manner consistent with the spirit of the song, while the New Main Street Singers perform it in their usual peppy, upbeat way), and Mitch temporarily disappears minutes before he and Mickey are to perform. It turns out that Mitch had gone to buy a rose for Mickey, which she accepts with gratitude as they go on stage. Mitch and Mickey perform "A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow", and after a suspenseful pause, they do the much-anticipated kiss at the end. In the finale, all three acts join together to sing "A Mighty Wind."
The film then jumps to interviews with many of the performers six months after the concert in which they detail subsequent events. Mickey is performing "The Sure-Flo Song" (about a medical device used for bladder control) at her husband's trade show booth. Mitch is writing poetry again, claiming to be in a "prolific phase." Mickey claims that Mitch overreacted to their onstage kiss, while Mitch insists that Mickey's feelings for him returned. LaFontaine is trying to drum up interest for a sitcom starring the New Main Street Singers. He wants to call it "Supreme Folk" and have each play Supreme Court judges by day, folk singers sharing a house by night. The Folksmen have reunited, but with Mark Shubb now a transgender woman, she continues to sing in her deep bass voice. | psychedelic, satire | train | wikipedia | null |
tt5378734 | Tres veces Ana | Ana Lucía, Ana Leticia, and Ana Laura Alvarez Del Castillo are identical triplets with very different personalities. Their parents died in a car accident when they were younger. It was believed that Ana Lucía had drowned in the river in which the family car fell and only Ana Leticia and Ana Laura survived. Local woman, Soledad Hernández, who was suffering from the loss of her young daughter, finds Ana Lucía in the river and raises her as her own.
Several years later, Ana Laura is a sweet but quiet and lonely girl who wants to find her missing sister, refusing to believe she is dead. She lost a leg in the car accident as well. She falls in love with Ramiro but doesn't feel worthy of his love and thinks he feels sorry for her. Ana Leticia is glamorous, selfish, and manipulative, always needing to be the center of attention, especially with her grandmother, Ernestina (who also believes Ana Lucía is alive), and her uncle, Mariano, the twins' guardians. She's allied with Iñaki who becomes her lover and accomplice to her evil plots and deceits. In San Nicolas, Ana Lucía meets Santiago (really Marcelo) who had an accident caused by Evaristo Guerra from orders of Ana Leticia, his wife, 3 years prior and as a result, has no memory of his true identity or past and is presumed dead. Given a home by Remedios, Santiago leads an ordinary life as a taxi driver and has dreams of Ana Leticia, but her face is blurred causing him to mistake the sisters. Soledad doesn't want Ana Lucía close to Santiago, due to Marcelo having threatened her before the accident, and they separate. Ana Lucía and Soledad come to Mexico City, where they meet Remedios and unexpectedly cross paths with Santiago. Ramiro, Marcelo's best friend, finds him and Ana Lucía. Remedios comes to know Soledad's secret but remains quiet. Blood ties will eventually join the sisters, interweaving their lives in an unexpected way, bringing back together what was once separated. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1998395 | Killer Eye: Halloween Haunt | Jenna (Rhodes) invites Rocky (Edmundson), Catalina (Madix), and Kiana (Furs) to help her decorate her family's home for Halloween, while her mother is away for a week. The girls decide to take a break from decorating so that they can drink and dance. Rocky discovers a copy of a horror movie The Killer Eye, complete with a plastic replica of the titular Eye. The girls begin to watch the movie, but find it terrible and split off to do other things. Out of sight, the plastic eye comes to life. It has the same hypnotic powers as the Eye from the movie, and uses them to hypnotize Kiana into doing a striptease. When she starts to break free of her trance, the Eye kills her first.
Next, The Eye hypnotizes Jenna into making out with Catalina, but they are interrupted by Giselle (Alexander), who has crashed the party. While Jenna brings Giselle downstairs, while Catalina tries to sleep, she woke up and screamed very loud, then the eye attacks and kills her. Later, Giselle wanders into the living room and is hypnotized by the Eye. The Eye has learned how to take control of human bodies, and the hypnotized Giselle tells Rocky and Jenna that they will fall under the Eye's power and allow it to reproduce with them. Rocky attempts to destroy the Eye, but she gets killed in the process.
Jenna manages to snap Giselle out of her trance (twice), but the Eye resurrects Rocky and Catalina's dead bodies as human disguises to capture the two remaining girls. Jenna discovers a welder's mask that can block the Eye's hypnotic rays. As the Eye closes in on her, Giselle (wearing the mask) crushes the Eye with a sledgehammer to end its madness for good as well as avenging Rocky, Catalina, and Kiana's deaths. | flashback | train | wikipedia | A group of girls (who look like they're from the adult film world) gather in a house to decorate it for halloween, and watch "The Killer Eye." There's a crystal ball that has powers, and their Killer Eye doll gets possessed and eventually turns on them.As this film features the girls watching the first Killer Eye movie, there are frequent flashbacks to that film (maybe too frequent- at times it can be confusing which movie we're watching).
The girls personalities aren't developed (except for the fact that one of them apparently likes girls).
There are opportunities for humor (such as when the girls watch the movie and make jokes about it) but they're not as funny as you'd hope, given some of Full Moon's other efforts.There's plenty of nudity and not as much suspense or horror as you might hope for.
Killjoy 3 is a much better recent Full Moon release..
Eye approve!.
Not having seen the original Killer Eye, but otherwise being well versed with most other Full Moon titles, I actually found Killer Eye 2: Halloween Haunt to be pretty freaking enjoyable.
Granted, I am writing this review as an insanely immature twenty-something male cinephile, but that also makes me exactly the target audience for this kind of crap.
And yes, it is crap.
But it's also fun crap.
And anyone who says that you can't have fun with crap has obviously never set a bag of dog poo on fire and left it on an unsuspecting neighbor's doorstep.
Anyway, back to the review of the...film?
I guess you could call it.
Well, whatever it is, I recommend watching it with your buddies.
Again, I am a male in his twenties with too much free time on his hands.
That being said, this film is perfect for a night out with the guys, or night in, or whatever.
It is filled with nudity, blood, dumb chicks, and of course, a killer mutant eyeball.
This title is obviously not the best feature Full Moon has ever released but given the circumstances, it is far from their worst.
Give it a rent, or even buy it, because this little gem is worth the watch and sure to inspire repeat viewing..
So Bad It's Good?
When Jenna (Erica Rhodes) asks her girlfriends to help convert an old mansion into a Halloween Haunt, they decide to party instead!
Things get steamy between the girls when they accidentally unleash the half-pint, horrible Killer Eye, a perverse party crasher from beyond.Anyone who has been the films Charlie Band and August White have pumped out in the last five or ten years will not be the least bit surprised by this one.
Low production value, amateur actresses, and a push for gratuitous nudity.
Shockingly, this one has enough humor to make it more palatable than "Gingerdead Man" (though I do think the sequels are funny).I cannot imagine a good reason to watch this.
If you like topless women, that might be a good reason, but you could easily find that elsewhere.
Why torment yourself with this film to get such a reward?
If this movie has any redeeming value, it is its inclusion of scenes from the original "Killer Eye".
Not saying that is a classic, but compared to this?
Give me a Rolfe Kanefsky script any day..
EVERYONE RAISE THEIR HAND AND SAY "AYE.".
This film is a throw back to the whimsical "horror" films of the 80's which featured topless women.
It is a watered down version of "Evil Toons." A group of young ladies decide to fix up a house for Halloween, one that has a bunch of weird stuff that didn't fit into the plot...like the crystal ball.
The girls watch a movie called "Killer Eye" with a "Killer Eye" prop.Soon the girls are running and screaming around the house in various stages of undress and blood attempting to escape those possessed by said eye.A film for mindless fun.
Film was barley an hour long.F-bomb and nudity (Erica Rhodes, Olivia Alexander, Ariana Madix, Lauren Furs, Jacqueline Lovell- from first film).
Didn't kill my eyes!.
This is film is great if you like hot girls, nudity, violence, girl on girl action and blood.
I'm a big fan of Full Moon features and Charles Band.
I like this movie because for a low budget film the special effects are actually decent.
The acting is sub par, but that's what you'll expect with amateur actors.
I can see why this film doesn't appeal to a lot of people.
This film is aimed at a target audience.But ultimately I love how the story incorporates the killer eye from the 1999 film.
Who doesn't love an eye that goes around killing people?!
Overall, this film isn't that horrible.
It's an eyeball that kills, is it supposed to be a critically acclaimed film? |
tt0103129 | Truly Madly Deeply | Nina, an interpreter, is beside herself with grief at the recent death of her boyfriend, Jamie, a cellist. When she is on the verge of despair, Jamie reappears as a "ghost" and the couple are reconciled. The screenplay never clarifies whether this occurs in reality, or merely in Nina's imagination. Nina is ecstatic, but Jamie's behaviour – turning up the central heating to stifling levels, moving furniture around and inviting back "ghost friends" to watch videos – gradually infuriates her, and their relationship deteriorates. She meets Mark, a psychologist, to whom she is attracted, but she is unwilling to become involved with him because of Jamie's continued presence. Nina continues to love Jamie but is conflicted by his self-centred behaviour and ultimately wonders out loud, "Was it always like this?" Over Nina’s objections, Jamie decides to leave to allow her to move on. Towards the end of the film, Jamie watches Nina leave and one of his fellow ghosts asks, "Well?" and Jamie responds, "I think so... Yes." At this point the central conceit of the movie has become clear: Jamie came back specifically to help Nina get over him by tarnishing her idealised memory of him. | cult, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0111127 | Serial Mom | Beverly Sutphin appears to be a typical suburban housewife living with her dentist husband, Eugene, and their teenage children, Misty and Chip, in the suburbs of Baltimore. However, she is secretly a serial killer, murdering people over the most trivial of perceived slights, including mere faux pas.
During breakfast, Detectives Pike and Gracey arrive to question the family about the vulgar harassment of their neighbor, Dottie Hinkle. After the police and her family leave, Beverly disguises her voice to make obscene phone calls to Dottie, because Dottie stole a parking space from Beverly. Later that day, Mr. Stubbins, Chip's math teacher, becomes Beverly's first known murder victim after he criticizes Chip's interests and questions the boy's mental health and family life, as well as berating her parenting; Beverly runs him over with her car, and is witnessed by Luann Hodges, a young woman smoking marijuana nearby. The next day, Misty is upset when Carl Pageant stands her up for a date. Beverly spots Carl with another girl at a swap meet and murders him in the bathroom with a fireplace poker.
Eugene discovers that Beverly has hidden a collection of serial killer memorabilia beneath their mattress. That evening at dinner, Chip comments that his friend Scotty thinks that she is the killer. Beverly immediately leaves in her car, prompting the family to rush to Scotty's house for fear that Beverly plans to kill him; however, Beverly has actually gone to kill Eugene's patient Ralph Sterner and his wife, Betty, for calling Eugene away to treat her husband's chronic toothache on a Saturday they were supposed to spend birdwatching and for eating chicken that reminds her of the starlings. She stabs Betty with scissors borrowed from Rosemary, and causes an air conditioner to fall on Ralph, who caught her killing his wife. Meanwhile, the rest of the family arrive at Scotty's house only to find him in his room masturbating to an old porn video.
That Sunday, police follow the Sutphins to church and a news report names Beverly as the suspect in the murders of the Sterners. The church service ends in pandemonium when a suspicious sound causes everyone to panic and flee the church. Police detectives confirm that Beverly's fingerprints match those at the Sterner crime scene and attempt to arrest her, but she escapes. She hides at the video rental store where Chip works, but a customer, Mrs. Jensen, argues with Chip over paying a fee for failing to rewind a videotape and calls him a "son of a psycho". Beverly follows Mrs. Jensen home and bludgeons her to death with a leg of lamb while she sings along to "Tomorrow" on her rented copy of Annie. Scotty witnesses the attack through a window, Beverly sees him, and a car chase ensues. Catching him at a local club, Hammerjack's, Beverly sets Scotty aflame onstage in front of a deranged crowd during the set of an all-girl band called Camel Lips. The Sutphin family arrive, as do the police, and Beverly is arrested.
Beverly's trial becomes a national sensation. The media dub her "Serial Mom", Chip hires an agent to manage the family's media appearances, and Misty sells merchandise outside the courthouse. During opening arguments, Beverly's lawyer claims that she is not guilty by reason of insanity, but she fires him and proposes to represent herself, citing various law books she has read to her prosecutor's dismay. The judge reluctantly agrees and the trial begins. Beverly proves to be extremely skilled and formidable in defending herself, systematically discrediting nearly every witness against her by; using trick questioning to incite Dottie to contempt of court by repeated obscenities, finding a transsexual-themed magazine in Detective Gracey's trash, invoking judging a person by what they choose to read proves nothing, badgering Rosemary into admitting she doesn't recycle, and fanning her legs repeatedly at pervert Marvin Pickles, whose over-arousal causes him to commit perjury. The only witness she does not discredit is Luann Hodges, who cannot provide a credible testimony due to being under the influence of marijuana. During a second detective's crucial testimony, the entire courtroom is distracted by the arrival of Suzanne Somers, who plans to portray Beverly as the heroine of a television film.
Beverly is acquitted of all charges, stunning her family, who vow to "never get on her nerves". Throughout the trial, Beverly has been displeased that a juror (Patty Hearst) is wearing white shoes after Labor Day. Beverly follows her to a payphone and fatally strikes her in the head with the receiver. Suzanne Somers then angers Beverly into an outburst by trying to pose for a picture that will show Beverly's "bad side", just as the juror's body is discovered.
The film ends with a close-up of Beverly's wicked smile and a caption stating that Beverly "refused to cooperate" with the making of the film. | comedy, psychological, murder, violence, cult, satire, revenge | train | wikipedia | An uproariously witty satire on "petty" bourgeois American values, John Waters brings his own distinctive madness to the screen by focussing on cardboard cut-out caricatures of pop culture Americana.Turning his outrageous gaze on an archetypally perfect housewife and mother from the Baltimore suburbs in Maryland, supportive to her loving husband and teenage kids and possessing a real tlent for cooking, it appears that she is everything a stable, hard-working business man could want.
She is also a serial killer.Mom's tendency to take bloody revenge on any poor neighbouring housewife who fails to observe her rigid socially acceptable guidelines, like not recycling rubbish or driving too fast, is so barmy you are sure to find it absurdly and darkly funny.
Kathleen Turner, alternating between dizzy, unquestioning devotion to her family and clinically cool, yet psychotic anger to offending neighbours, either appears to possess a martyr's yellow halo above her head, denoting divine lightness and freshness, or a focussed smile as she carefully contemplates her next victim.If you are on the lookout for some perfectly vibrant, yet malicious black comedy, subscribe to "Serial Mom", one of the most ruthless, patronising skits on good manners and nosey, voyeuristic neighbours ever to hit the screen.
Only a film like this can combine so many great elements into one entertaining movie.Kathleen Turner is just purely brilliant as sweet mother Beverly Sutphin, who would look more at home in a show like Bewitched.
I love any movie that takes a classic element (in this case the innocent housewife) and completely turns it on its head.And so the film leads us on a journey through Beverly Sutphin's life and motivations.
Her kids think it's cool, and her husband is duly worried...Kathleen Turner takes the lead role, and does an excellent job of performing in a serious, yet jokey way; which does the film no end of favours on the parody front.
John Waters has made a name for himself by creating odd and twisted films, and although I haven't seen a great deal of them; Serial Mom is his best as far as I'm concerned.
Maybe, a little too respectable so that when someone speaks ill of one member of her family, Beverly is ready to kill to defend her family!Only one filmmaker seemed designated to shot this highly entertaining black comedy: John Waters, the king of bad taste and extravagance.
Ever have that day when someone gets on your nerves and you feel like pulling the axe on them?That's exactly what John Waters demonstates in his dark comedy Serial Mom.After starring in the cheesy family movie "House of Cards", Kathleen Turner has created one of the best performances in her life as the beautiful, heroic, misunderstood, law-obeying serial killer Beverly Sutphin.Eversince six murders, she has been placed with some "terribly untrue charges" and the only 'serial' she knows "anything about is Rice Krispies!".But she has good reason for butchering six people: they all commited a crime that no one understands, like dumping her daughter, eating poultry (because Beverly loves birds),smart-alacing about her dentist husband, refusing to rewind a rental tape, critisizing about her family skills, and witnessing one of the other five crimes.You may think she's insane, but really, she's just expressing things we'd rather hide inside of us.Like, say you work in a store and someone wants to return something but they don't have the recipt.It can't be returned without the recipt, so you tell them "No can do".Then they start cursing you out like you're worthless.Wouldn't you get the urge to shove a bullet in their brain?Well then, you now know how Beverly Sutphin feels when someone decides to be a wise guy.This movie is perfect for anyone who loves to laugh.Plus, the DVD contains the theatrical trailer, a behind-the-scenes featurette, several TV spots, four interview clips, and extra behind the scenes footage.I give this one a 10/10!.
I really enjoyed this movie because Kathleen Turner and John Waters just let loose with the demented psychotic energy of a parent who takes many legitimate parental urges to the next level - or maybe the next 5 levels.
It's like when you've just watched a gag in extremely poor taste done pleasantly with such giddy amusement that you just shake your head and say, "That is just wrong!"Kathleen Turner plays the mother who, underneath her thin veil of perfect mother normalcy, has a latent desire to murder those who offend her sensibilities.
Lake, the daughter in search of a boyfriend, is the first to suspect her mother's dark side and Lillard, the son with a love for classic gore horror movies, is interested when he's told his mother may be a killer.It's sort of like a David Lynch movie, if you were to focus only on the "gee whiz" part of America and replace all of Lynch's darkness with campy situations, like a punk rock band called Camel Lips.A lot of the dialogue and the satirical jabs were pretty obvious, but I wasn't quite sure whether this was just unsubtle comedy or if the joke was in how obvious some of the stuff was ("I made a killing!).The acting by Turner reminded me of Annette Bening's in "American Beauty," but demented instead of one-note.
It's not so much that there's no satisfying resolution, it's that some of the more shocking moments come in the beginning and middle of the film.The best way I can think to describe the movie is that it exists in a realistic place populated by unrealistic characters.
Kathleen Turner is perfectly cast as Beverly (Serial Mom) and this is the definite must-see for all interested in superbly written comedies!.
Kathleen Turner plays a sweet and perfect suburbia mom who suddenly decides to kill the people who don't do the right thing (just like bother her kids, not rewinding the rented videos or wearing white shoes after Labour Day).
Kathleen Turner does a great job portraying Beverly Sutphin, a June Cleaver-esque, devoted happy homemaker who doesn't even allow gum in her house, but has a short fuse and keeps a secret scrapbook (I wonder if it was from Waters personal collection) of clippings about serial killers.
We don't act on it (well, *I* don't anyway, maybe some of you have and I just don't know about it) but Serial Mom sure does.Again, only Waters could have pulled this movie and subject matter off.
Many probably would have been extremely offended by a movie about a lovable serial killer played for laughs (especially those who knew the victim of a violent crime) but the tone of the movie is so light and over-the-top that only people with no sense of humor could think it might condone murder.
The above is just one of MANY great lines offered up by the cast of 'Serial Mom'.....The Sutphins seem to be the picture of a normal 50's-esque family - dad (Sam Waterston) is a dentist; mom (a FANTASTIC Kathleen Turner) is a grand house wife homage to Donna Reed, June Cleaver and such; daughter (Rikki Lake) and son (Matthey Lillard) seem to be your average teens with a perfect family life....
Or is it?Based upon actual real life events, John Waters manages to bring us another great film - and this time - he takes dead aim on the 'celebrity' we make of murderers and criminals....I'm sure that many of us have gone through our lives, being annoyed by this person or that object and we've never done anything about it....
From minor annoyances (white shoes after labor day!) to major anger management issues, Betty takes matters into her own hands - by going on a killing spree - taking 6 victims to an early grave....Sure, in typical Waters way, it's a bit over the top and corny, but the film is great!
It's shocking to hear the language on "mom" (Kathleen Turner) but that's the idea here: shock.The film is a spoof on serial killers, horror movies and wholesome family values.
I wasn't familiar with director John Waters or dark/black humor-except the Addams Family movies.
Demented-talk about bizarre) Cry-baby-some good musical numbers, both versions of Hairspray-both fairly enjoyable to me, and lastly, Pecker is probably my least favorite, Serial Mom remains my all-time favorite John Waters movie, to this day..
And if you ever-ever do anything to make anyone in her perfect, little family feel even slightly bad, then you're dead meat on a stick, baby - Sure enough.Serial Mom (in its warped and twisted, little way) is a demented, over-the-top social satire that skewers the media for turning killers into celebrities and turns a one-note joke into a savage romp down good, ol' "Slasher Lane" that is definitely not suited for everyone's tastes..
Watching this film was a complete waste of my time, except for the fact that it will keep me away from any other Waters movies..
Plus, this is one of the few Waters films you can watch with your kids--provided they are older and not terribly impressionable!Kathleen Turner turns in her best performance as a combination between June Cleaver and Ted Bundy--complete with the pearl necklace.
DEMENTED, it's an interesting satire that is a way over the top look at America's fascination with celebrity and how we admire and are fascinated with anyone if they are famous--even the vile and horrific.NOTE--Like many of John Waters' later films, this one features a cameo by Patty Hearst..
Wow she was right, I see where I get my sense of humor from that's for sure.I went into this one with only knowing the name of this movie, within the first few minutes you get a vibe of this one and its so enjoyable.If you like dark comedies this one is a staple point..
It's been years since I had seen this movie so I remembered a little bit but I guess I didn't fully appreciate the genius of Jon Waters at that tender age of whatever the hell age I was in 94 (I don't feel like doin' math and I'm too busy doin' this bad ass review for all of u to be destracted by time consuming stuff like addition and numbers and all that jazz.
The use of satire and the way Water pisses all over the "perfect nuclear American family" is just plain fun for anyone who doesn't have a stick up their ass and enjoys a dark comedy and a savagely original film.
If you like anti heroes, dark comedy and you have a bit of a twisted sense of humor then watch this movie...after all it's based on a true story and Serial Mom is due for parole anytime..
Kathleen Turner shines in one of her best roles as Beverly Sutphin, a beaming suburban mom with a loyal dentist husband (Sam Waterston), a lonely daughter (Ricki Lake), and a horror genre obsessed son (Matthew Lillard, warming up for his not dissimilar role in "Scream").
SERIAL MOM is one of my all-time favourite black comedies, a genre that's notoriously difficult to get right (I mean, seriously, how many good ones can you think of?).
I'm no fan of John Waters - in fact, this is the only film of his I've ever seen - but in this he has created pretty much the perfect antidote to the psycho-thriller genre.Kathleen Turner bags the role of a lifetime as Beverly R.
The murder scene set to ANNIE is by far my favourite moment and one of the funniest things I've ever seen.What I like most about SERIAL MOM is the plot.
Still, the plot does have its moments, like when Beverly dutifully puts on her seat belt as she gets into a stolen van to chase down a guy for not wearing his seat belt.The film's plot takes place over a two to three day period, during which the weekday and time are displayed on the screen, to give the plot a diary feel.
I did not care for all the gore; but I guess it is to be expected, given that this is a John Waters film."Serial Mom" is worth a one-time viewing, mostly for the terrific story concept.
"Serial Mom" is a wonderful black comedy about perfect housewife turned serial killer.The mom is played perfectly by Kathleen Turner in one of the best performances of her career.Matthew Lillard is very memorable as a young horror freak.There is a bit of gore and some scenes are rather tasteless,so some people may be offended.The short clips from "Blood Feast","Strait-Jacket" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" are also a nice touch.Highly recommended,especially if you like John Waters movies..
However, maybe the one thing they do have in common (besides sharing space in my DVD collection) is that they basically tell you all you need to know about the film in the title, therefore you should know what you're in for before you sit down to watch.Kathleen Turner plays the titular 'Serial Mom' - a wife and mother to a typical American suburban family who, on the outside, are perfect in every way.
Not only it brings back memories, but makes me laugh, like I did (a few) many years ago.Kathleen Turner's work in here is unique, and very impressive, The score is also very very good and Poledouris manages to keep you watching it with plenty of engagement.I was introduced to the fine music of Barry Manilow with this movie, and I'm very thankful for that..
Soccer mom by day, and serial killer by night.Only the mind of John Waters can come up with a perfect combination of gross and funny.The Sutphin family also includes Sam Waterston, Ricki Lake, and Shaggy (Matthew Lillard).
This was my first John Waters movie, but after having seen POLYESTER, what i say is one of the MOST useless films in history that i've seen, I think SERIAL MOM is not as gross as i had first perceived it.
"Serial Mom" was directed by John Waters, who is known for his seriously disturbed comedies, which I am pretty sure I wouldn't be a fan of.
(That's not to say that this film is completely void of shocks.) Kathleen Turner's performance as the perfect mother with homicidal tendencies is a comedy classic.Rent now for some twisted fun."The only serial I know anything about is Rice Krispies!".
Kathleen Turner plays Beverly, the seemingly perfect, cheerful housewife and Mom (who also happens to be a foul-mouthed serial killer on the side), in John Waters's consistently sharp, amusing satire "Serial Mom." As far as plot structure goes, "Serial Mom" isn't all that impressive, but Turner's sheer comic energy as she kills typical suburban people for stealing parking spaces and not rewinding their rented videos carries this one quite a ways.
The Cosby connection is even more unusual in light of all his terrible behavior.Roger Ebert awarded it an average two stars (out of a possible four) finding some of Waters' satire effective but feeling that Kathleen Turner's decision to portray her character's mental illness with realism instead of in a campy fashion, while brave, made the character difficult to laugh at, writing, "Watch Serial Mom closely and you'll realize that something is miscalculated at a fundamental level.
If it hadn't combined Kathleen Turner's amazingly over-the-top acting skills and John Waters' genius writing, Serial Mom would've been lost cause and a complete missed opportunity.
Whether it be her kids' (Lake and Lillard) teachers, a short fused customer, or Mink Stole playing the perfect nervous neighbor, Beverly will find a way to get even with them.Serial Mom doesn't take itself seriously, and knows exactly what it is; a silly satire built on top of cutesy characters who couldn't possibly do anything wrong.
Serial Mom (1994)** 1/2 (out of 4) Kathleen Turner plays a sweet and loving mother from Baltimore who takes care of her husband (Sam Waterston) and children (Ricki Lake, Matthew Lillard).
What no one realizes is that she's also a psychopath who goes on a murder spree to destroy anyone who doesn't fit into her idea of a good person.John Waters' SERIAL MOM certainly isn't a classic movie and it's not even a good one.
Serial Mom (1994) is a black comedy starring Kathleen Turner, Sam Waterson, Matthew Lillard and Ricki Lake.
You get the same reaction from "Serial Mom", where Beverly Sutphin's murders come across as being somewhat on the level of laugh-inducing college pranks.The cinematography is superb, the co-stars (Sam Waterston, Mink Stole, Ricki Lake, Matthew Lillard, Patricia Hearst, Traci Lords, et al) are spot-on well cast, the pacing is excellent, and the film wraps with a very satisfying denouement.
like this movie or serial mom might kill ya.
Kathleen Turner plays serial murderess Beverly Sutphin who on the outside is a loving mother but upset her family in any way and she will kill you.
There's also that dark side of the norm that the Cleavers and Ozzie and Harriet didn't show, and its depicted in this 1994 John Waters film.Beverly Sutphin (Kathleen Turner) is your typical suburban housewife and mother--she keeps the perfect home, recycles, cooks "the perfect meatloaf,"loves her dentist husband Eugene(Sam Waterston), loves birds, and keeps tabs on her two teenage kids, daughter Misty (Waters mainstay/veteran Ricki Lake) and son Chip (Matthew Lillard, in his breakthrough role).
Serial Mom is a dark and funny satirical comedy from director John Waters.
Kathleen Turner's performance as the wholesome, some times deadly, but always shaggable Serial Mom is perfect.
Serial Mom is a good satire of suburban Americana and a great film that is very funny and holds up well..
Kathleen Turner is hilarious as a mass murderess in director John Water's "Serial Mom" about a housewife who embarks on a homicidal rampage in Baltimore, Maryland.
Serial Mom starts like any other day in the Sutphin house, Beverly (Kathleen Turner) cooks breakfast while her husband Eugene (Sam Waterston) get ready to go to work while their children Chip (Matthew Lillard) & Misty (Ricki Lake) prepare to go to school. |
tt0153464 | Up at the Villa | The action takes place in the late 1930s. 30-year-old Mary Panton, whose extraordinary beauty has always been one of her greatest assets, has been a widow for one year. Her late husband Matthew, whom she married at 21 because she loved him, turned out to be an alcoholic, a gambler, a womaniser, and a wife-beater. Mary endures all the hardship and pain inflicted on her by her husband (including his having sex with her while drunk). When he drinks and drives, he has a car accident. A few hours later, he dies in Mary's arms. This, she concludes, is a blessing for both of them.
The Leonards (a couple who are not in the novel) offer Panton their 16th-century villa on a hill above Florence, Italy, for an extended stay. She gladly accepts the offer. The old villa is staffed by Nina, the maid, and Ciro, her husband and manservant—but it is otherwise empty. Mary, whose parents are both dead, enjoys the solitary life up at the villa. Occasionally, she joins other residents of, and visitors to, Florence for a party or luncheon. She enjoys driving round the countryside in her car. So far as a widow she has not taken a lover. She says it has been an easy decision as she has never been tempted.
During dinner at a restaurant with some of her acquaintances—among them the old Princess San Ferdinando, an American who is said to have been a "loose woman" in her day—they listen to a young man playing the violin. He is dressed in folkloric clothes and does not play well. At the end of the evening, the Princess tries to set Mary up with Rowley Flint, a young Englishman of independent means and risky reputation, by asking her to give him a lift back to his hotel. Flint makes a pass at her, but she rejects him, and laughs, even when he proposes to her.
After she has dropped him off, Mary drives back home. On her way, although it is late at night, she stops to have a look at the scenery. She senses someone nearby and learns that it is Karl Richter, the fiddler from the restaurant, who is also admiring the view. They begin to talk, and Mary learns that he is a 23-year-old Austrian art student who has fled his country because of Nazi persecution. Without a passport or documents, he is staying as an illegal immigrant in a rented room near the Leonards' villa.
Mary takes pity on Richter, and invites him to look at the paintings in the villa. Learning he had gone without dinner, Mary fixes him some bacon and eggs. They have wine with their improvised meal. They end up in bed.
When Mary thinks it is time for Richter to leave and the latter, to her dismay, asks when he will be able to see her again, the idyll quickly deteriorates. Mary remembers the revolver her suitor, 54-year-old Sir Edgar Swift, has forced upon her as a means of protection. When Richter starts threatening her, she pulls it out and aims it at him. She cannot pull the trigger and advises him to try and escape to Switzerland.
After she tells him she slept with him from pity, Richter attacks her verbally. He picks her up and throws her on her bed, before covering her face with kisses. She tries to get away from him but he overpowers her. Seized with remorse over what he sees as the impossibility of life since escaping his homeland, Richter says, "You asked me not to forget you. I shall forget, but you won't." He shoots himself through the breast with Swift's gun.
The maid Nina hears the shot and comes to the bedroom door. Mary panics and sends her away. She phones Flint and asks him to help her. Mary is prepared to accept full responsibility for her actions. But Flint suggests they try to dispose of the body.
They put the body in the car and drive out into the country, where he dumps it. A car full of drunk Italians approaches and must slow to try to pass. When the party see Mary and Flint embracing each other as they pretend to be lovers, they start singing "La donna è mobile" and drive on. The next morning, Flint returns and leaves the revolver with Richter's body.
Mary sleeps almost until noon. She has an invitation for luncheon, and Flint has urged her not to show any signs of panic or fear, so she attends it. Her guilty conscience is her constant companion.
Sir Edgar Swift, who has known her and her parents since she was a little child, arrives, planning to renew his suit since she was widowed. He had told her of an impending promotion to a high government post in colonial India and his need for a suitable wife. He proposes to Mary before a short trip to Cannes on urgent government business. Mary tells him she will give him an answer when he returns.
Mary confesses everything when Swift returns. He says that he forgives her and that he still wants to marry her. But, he says he must give up the promised post because of the risk of her past being exposed. He suggests that he can retire, they will marry and move to the French Côte d'Azur. Mary, finally says that she does not love him and could not be around him all the time.
After Swift has left, Flint turns up at the villa. When he mentions owning an estate in Kenya, and having read Dr Johnson, he appears more attractive. Agreeing with him that life is about taking risks, Mary decides to accept his proposal. | violence, intrigue | train | wikipedia | "You're never a great man, when you have more mind than heart." E.P. Beauchene In a nutshell, Mary, (Kristin Scott Thomas), a distractingly beautiful English widow has more heart than mind in this period piece.
I found it hard to believe that anything with Sean Penn and Kristin Scott Thomas would be awful and had to check out the film for myself.
"Up at the Villa" addresses these topics as good as any other period film.I recommend this movie to those who, like I, enjoyed more than one of the following:The Talented Mr. RipleyGosford ParkHowards EndCountry LifeThe Wings of the DoveA Room with a ViewThe Remains of the Day. Good performances all around..
Sir Edgar Swift (James Fox) is the distinguished governor of Bengal who has come to court the widow Mary Panton (Kristin Scott Thomas).
No chemistry with Kristin Scott Thomas at all.How can you make a dull, uninspiring film in an exotic setting with great actors in a highly charged brink-of-war scenario?
I was stunned by Kristin Scott Thomas when I first saw her in The Tenth Man (co-starring with Derek Jacobi in that movie too) many years ago.
I don't like most of his roles in other movies - never have -, but he played a different, more complex and realistic yet rogue-ish character here than the hysterical ones he usually embraces (for God knows what reason), and I thought this actually worked.
Great actors...Kristin Scott Thomas, Sean Penn, Anne Bancroft, James Fox, Derek Jacobi ...if you can't get memorable performances out of this `A List' then the problem with this movie must be blamed on pitiful direction and an inadequate script.
Kristin Scott Thomas is the lead,(cross between Bette Davis & Gene Tierney) Sean Penn is a charming gigolo type & very subdued & with a very strange accent,(at least it is understandable.
Radiant performance by Kristen Scott Thomas, excellent performances by Sean Penn (understated) Ann Bancroft and James Fox as well as the actor who plays the Austrian refugee--make this one of the year's most underrated and best films.There are many nuances, plot twists, great dialogue, urbane situations to entertain and invoke thoughtful questions about love and marriage.
I suppose part of the reason I like little films like this is in reaction to the Hollywood over the top blockbusters.The characters is this movie are well developed and believeable.
The British lord looking for a wife that he can handle and that he can show off, and picking up Kristin Scott Thomas for cheap, he thinks.Anne Bankcroft playing the insultated lying Princess, way over the hill, but trying to still pretend she is in the elites.Sean Penn, Rowley, the American scoundrel with integrity.Rather than rehash the main details which is what everyone else has done, I just wanted to try to balance the negative comments of some, saying that this movie I would very interesting and quite entertaining and delightful.A light suspence costume drama set in beautiful Italy under the fascists.
If you like stories about the British upper class and their foibles abroad, you'll enjoy"Up At the Villa." (What a rotten title!) Edward Fox is the perfect gentleman (isn't he always?) Sean Penn is the perfect cad.
Even the wonderful Anne Bancroft could do little to rescue this film from being a rather colourless account of well-to-do stiff-upper-lip British people hanging out in Florence on the eve of the Second World War. The dialogues are stiff, wooden, lending much lacklustre to the proceedings and is clearly visible in the performances offered by what, on paper, is a solid cast.
But one could not really care whether Kristin Scott Thomas finally made it with Sean Penn, James Fox, or the wretched violinist Jeremy Davies.
However, 'Up at the Villa' does serve as a pointer inasmuch as it may show in which direction serious attempts at character-driven or dialogue-driven films may be heading, whether period pieces or not.Nice photography in the Italian countryside, and am wondering if part of the film was in fact shot further north of Florence, maybe even in the Lombardy region..
Actually, it is even worse!What was so special about that small colony of English expatriates in Florence before the Second World War that the British movie industry might feel justify to devote as many as three feature films to it - first A ROOM WITH A VIEW, then TEA WITH MUSSOLINI, and now this well-packaged turkey?
Here, the only patches of colour are provided by Derek Jacobi, as a stylish old queen in exile, and Anne Bancroft, as a wily American princess who thinks that she might one day outwit even the Nazis (and might very well end up doing so, if only she could stop drinking all of those gin sodas and thus gives herself a chance to live that long).Edward Fox also provides some comic relief in the role of a British senior civil servant (perfect in that role, old boy, perfect!) just about to take up an important position as a provincial governor in colonial India and who talks as if he expected that the locals would actually WELCOME his presence there.
But even he gets boring after awhile - about midway through his 3-minute scene.As for the two principals (Sean Penn and Kristin Scott Thomas, both on automatic pilot), you cannot really feel sorry for them, as they spend the first half of the movie involving themselves in the most stupid mess, and then the second half painfully extricating themselves out of it.
It's low rating on IMDB is unwarranted because it is one of the year's best.Kristin Scott Thomas puts in an absolutely marvelous performance as Mary, a young British widow, penniless but beautiful.
Two such lovers in the persons of Sean Penn (a married American of devastating charm but uncertain background) and Jeremy Davies ( a poor, young Austrian refugee) appear.The plot never slackens or loses interest as we follow Mary through a labyrinthe of unexpected twists and turns.
W. Somerset Maugham's story is adapted for the screen by Belinda Haas and directed by Philip Hass and t proves to be a rather credible tale of the British and American outlooks on love and life all in the setting of pre-WW II Italy.
If this all sounds a bit confusing then it should be noted that the story (and film) are more about human actions under pressure of circumstances, about relationships, flights of fancy, slip-ups, weaknesses, trust and emotional maneuvering than a simple straightforward Italian/British/American tale.The cast is varied - Bancroft gives one of her signature performances, Sean Penn seems out of his element - but the beauty and skill of Kristin Scott Thomas make the film worth savoring.
Anne Bancroft, Sean Penn, Derek Jakobi...these are actors that Ilive to see perform together.Usually Kristin Scott Thomas is not my cuppa tea.
This is a period piece, plain and simple...there is no sense of climax or anticipation or "thrill".....It's not a bad movie.....It's just a movie, somewhat on the bland side....To me, it's not much of a romance, for you really never feel that Kristen Scott Thomas and Sean Penn have much chemistry between them, like Thomas and Fiennes did in the English Patient.
Despite some quality elements, foremost among them a lovely performance by Kristin Scott Thomas, 'Up at the Villa' emerges as a fairly dull, ultimately unsatisfying tale of stiff-upper-lipped romance played against a wartime backdrop.
In a way the film serves as something of a companion period piece to the recent 'Tea With Mussolini' since both films involve wealthy American expatriates living and flourishing in Italy in the days leading up to the Second World War. Thomas stars as Mary, a young British widow who, while she is occupying a Florentine villa, finds herself the object of romantic overtures by an assortment of men including a wealthy but married American man, Rowley Flint (Sean Penn), and a penniless Viennese refuge (Jeremy Davies) with whom she has a one night stand.
One of the problems with the story, based on a Somerset Maugham novella, is that, although Mary comes across as a sympathetic and often even a complex character at times she is a caring, well-intentioned woman whose pampered existence leaves her unsuited for confronting the harshness of much of the world around her - the men whom she involves herself with emerge as both incredible and shallow.
The film is indeed stunning to look at, filled with views of beautiful Florentine architecture and the lush Italian countryside, but the look of the movie is not enough to distract us from the overall languid pacing, the undramatic exposition, and the lightweight histrionics of Mr. Penn.
As a result of such unequal pairing, Kristin Scott Thomas seems almost as if she is occupying this film alone for long stretches of time.
but the story seems be without precise end or the fundamental piece who complete the puzzle.film about duty of heart, about profound honesty in dark period, with an admirable performance demonstration by Anne Bancroft and a Sean Penn in a real good role, it is the frame of Kristin Scott Thomas work who transforms her character in a sort of scent drop.a sensitive story and a good adaptation.
As it's a Somerset Maugham adaptation, the simple tale deals with folks whose manner does not allow for much passion, who live in a period where reasonable marriages are prized--and that is the problem our repressed heroine, Kristen Scott Thomas faces as she grapples with oncoming age and a lack of financial resources; she meets American rascal Sean Penn, who is not Cary Grant nor was meant to be, but a playful lover who lives for the moment; it's refreshing to see Penn stretch different acting muscles without the usual angst and anger; There are numerous side benefits for those who enjoy an immersion in period--Tuscany during the rise of repressive Fascism, the Villa on well-manicured grounds, and Anne Bancroft deliciously dishy as a self-indulgent American princess.
I really like the scenery and the sleepiness of the pacing which picks up after the first half of the movie.Then in the second half of the movie, in an expected turn, the widow, who seems much too naive for her age and station, is the catalyst for an event which causes the roguish character (Sean Penn) to saunters into her life.
Somerset Maugham novella from which it is taken.Kristin Scott Thomas was exactly my idea of the heroine Mary Panton, a British widow in late 1938 Florence, who in short order has a marriage proposal, falls in love and has a one night stand and then gets mixed up in a sub-Hitchcockian plot with Sean Penn.There's a great cameo from Anne Bancroft as an ex-pat American (with a cruel streak towards the end).Not outstanding, but it hangs together and you feel you've had a bit of high and low culture by the end.
Sean Penn and Anne Bancroft are their usual marvellous selves, and everyone else is very good, too..
One day, Mary goes with their friends to a restaurant, where she meets Rowley Flint (Sean Penn), a man with bad reputation, and she gets upset with him.
Anne Bancroft has an outstanding performance, and Sean Penn, Kristin Scott Thomas, James Fox and Jeremy Davies has a great acting, as usual.
The greatest problem, in my point of view, is the lack of chemistry between the characters of Kristin Scott Thomas and Sean Penn.
Were this not the case, a magnificent film might have emerged.Overcoming the shortcomings are the dialogue, exceptional casting (Anne Bancoft is terrific and Massimo Ghini is machismo, charming and threatening -- think James Mason), Firenze, and inspiring photography and costuming, all embraced by a charming and captivating story.If you find Scott-Thomas to be an English Grace Kelly, and love the pre-WWII period in Italy, this unappreciated jewel is a feast..
Very interesting story, typically good Scott-Thomas, appropriately low-key Penn.
It is also good to see cinematic attention given to Somerset Maugham's work.Kristen Scott Thomas and Sean Penn held the limelight throughout, and that's no bad thing.
Veteran English actor James Fox, who only occasionally appears in films, is fine in a small but important role as a British diplomat with the hots for the very available Kristin Scott Thomas.
But it's Kristin Scott Thomas and Sean Penn who carry the film with their romantic chemistry, playing cat and mouse to the point of no return.
Scott Thomas' role and the performance she renders requires a sultry, emotionally seething character who, though desperate, has to play her cards carefully and appear in control.The film's production values are more than adequate, though it would be hard to make Florence look bad.
The film opens at a ballroom in 1930s Italy which is populated by vulgar Americans and uptight upper class Brits , but in truth UP AT THE VILLA plays out far more like a Merchant -Ivory production which is very bad news because it`s a very slow , and I do mean very slow romantic drama with some of the romance being very unlikely .
I like to watch films after I read the books but when I saw Sean Penn and Kristin Scott Thomas I thought to myself...
Mysteries are a favorite of mine and so the plot kept me interested and, to another point, I thought Sean Penn's performance was wonderful considering the role.
Yes, it was understated which I found wonderful, and yes, after a momentary pause to think, the romantic relationship between Kristin Scott Thomas and Sean Penn seemed a bit odd, they don't seem to fit well together in that context.
I liked the actors Sean Penn and Derek Jacobi and I love Somerset Maugham's books.
I found out quickly that the characters were not at all likable but that ended up enhancing the story.The movie started getting interested when the main character, Mary, ends up having an affair with a poor young refugee because she feels "sorry for him" and is emulating the behavior of her rich, awful, self centered friend the queen (played brilliantly by Anne Bancroft).
Well, this affair ends with tragic results and then the movie becomes quite engrossing and the characters really become interesting.I really enjoyed Kristen Scott Thomas' performance and felt that she portrayed her complex character well.
Derek Jacobi actually ended up being the only likable character in the film even if he was over the top at times.I was less than thrilled with Sean Penn's performance and am surprised at the positive reviews of him.
I went to see this movie with a girl friend, I hadn't seen a "love" film for a long time, so I thought why not.She hated it.
As already mentioned the acting was very good but in my opinion there was not 'something in the air' with Kristen Scott Thomas and Sean Penn.
A rich period piece centered on the lives of wealthy residents of pre WWII Florence, `Up At The Villa' is lovely to look at, but dull to watch.
The story focuses on about four days in the life of Mary Panton (Kristin Scott Thomas), an English socialite living in Florence.
Mary's serene and boring life is turned upside down by a proposal from Sir Edgar (James Fox), a very wealthy man she doesn't love; her fascination with Rowley Flint (Sean Penn), a roguish playboy who irritates and attracts her; and a peccadillo with an indigent Austrian refugee.
This natural beauty in conjunction with some excellent lighting effects made this film a feast for the eyes.Kristin Scott Thomas' performance was marvelous despite the haplessness of her character.
It is too bad she didn't get more screen time.I rated this film a 7/10 on the strength of the photography and a great performance by Anne Bancroft.
Oh well, I still think adults will like this film for it's actors- Kristen Scott Thomas, Sean Penn, Anne Bancroft and Jeremy Davies, who made a breakthrough in Saving Private Ryan, and almost saves the movie here.
Set in Fascist Italy, specifically in the countryside above Florence, Up at the Villa sees Kristin Scott Thomas taking centre stage as an aristocratic English rose (much as she did in The English Patient) in the lead role of Mary Panton, a young lady torn between the romantic overtures of Sir Edgar Swift (James Fox) a kind but emminent English gentleman she is fond of, but does not love, and her search for a man that she can truly get excited about.
The story takes a dark and unexpected turn, when after a one-night stand with the violinist, Panton's spurning of the young man's advances, leads to an extreme action on his part.This romantic thriller sees a reunion of director Philip Haas working with actress Kristin Scott Thomas (they worked together on Angels and Insects) and plus points here include the writing of Belinda Haas which on the whole is entertaining and intuitive and the performances of Kristin Scott Thomas and Sean Penn who are both strong in the lead roles.
Haas directs with skill, so go see if you like seeing Sean Penn and Kristin Scott Thomas on form because both turn in decent performances here..
I also like Anne Bancroft, Kristen Scott-Thomas and James Fox, so selecting this movie from my video rental store was easy.
How daft an assumption.There are some great actors here (Penn, Jacobi) and some at least competent ones (Bancroft, Thomas) -- Kristin sure has made some bad choices in films.-- But these walk through their parts, reading the story to us.
Guess how the story ends...?UP AT THE VILLA is not a bad film.
Sean Penn is good as always, even if his character is a big dude.
It was interesting to know that the director is the same of ANGELS AND INSECTS (also starring Kristin Scott Thomas), another so-so period drama, but more audacious than this. |
tt0110950 | Reality Bites | Four friends who recently graduated from college live together in Houston, Texas. Coffee-house guitarist Troy Dyer and budding filmmaker Lelaina Pierce are attracted to each other, although they have not acted on their feelings except for one brief, drunken encounter. Troy is floundering, having lost several minimum wage jobs—the last of which he loses early in the film for stealing a candy bar from his employer. Lelaina was valedictorian of her university and has aspirations to become a documentarian, although initially having to settle for a position as production assistant to a rude and obnoxious TV host.
Lelaina meets Michael Grates when she throws a cigarette into his convertible, causing him to crash into her car. The two soon begin to date. He works at an MTV-like cable channel called "In Your Face" as an executive, and after learning about a documentary she's been working on, wants to get it aired on his network.
Lelaina's roommate Vickie has a series of one-night stands and short relationships with dozens of guys; her promiscuity leads her to confront a very-real risk of contracting HIV after a former fling tests positive for the virus. Vickie works as a sales associate for The Gap, and is later promoted to manager and seems content with her new job. Her friend Sammy Gray is gay; he remains celibate, not because of a fear of AIDS, but because forming a relationship would force him to come out to his conservative parents.
After an impulsive act of retribution, Lelaina loses her job, which causes some tension with her roommates. Eventually, Vickie's AIDS test comes back negative and Sammy comes out to his parents (and he even starts dating) and the two manage to resume their lives.
Meanwhile, Lelaina's relationship with Michael dissolves after he helps her sell the documentary to his network, only to let them edit it into a stylized montage that she feels compromises her artistic vision. Lelaina and Troy then sleep together and confess their love. The morning after, he avoids her, and after a messy confrontation, leaves town. After Troy's father dies, he forces himself to reevaluate his life, deciding to attempt a relationship with Lelaina.
Troy and Lelaina reunite and make amends after Troy returns from his father's funeral in Chicago. While we do not see what happens to Michael, during the credits there is an abrupt break where two characters, "Laina" and "Roy", who are obvious parodies of Lelaina and Troy, have an argument about their relationship. As the "show's" credits roll, Michael's name is revealed as the producer, implying that he has turned the failed relationship into the subject of a new show on his network. | cult, romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0046005 | Little Johnny Jet | The cartoon follows the story of a B-29 Bomber named John, who is married to a Douglas DC-3 named Mary. John can't seem to find work at any airport because they're looking for jets. Mary later reveals that she's going to have a baby, and needing to find work to support his family, Johnny heads off to reenlist in the Air Force, but finds even they won't take him back in, as they're looking for jets as well, which further angers him. When Junior finally arrives, John's happy to have a child...until it turns out that Junior is a jet as well, which makes John lose his mind (but he doesn't take it out on Junior).
When reading the paper the next day, the Hot Air News, John sees the ad for a jet contest held by the United States Government where the winner gets a huge contract. Plenty fed up with jets, he goes to enter the contest as well to try to show them up. Realizing that risk that her husband is putting himself, Mary (with Junior in tow) goes after John. En route to the contest, John meets a B-29 general who smokes Douglas MacArthur's trademark corncob pipe and has Bataan written amidst his five stars. When John asks him, the general declines to enter the contest and states, parodying MacArthur's farewell address to the U.S. Congress, that "older planes never fly, they just fade away," before literally fading away.
At the contest, John lines up at the starting line with the rest of the jets. Mary and Junior catch up to him and Mary tries convincing John not to go through with the race, but John refuses to listen to her. While this was happening, Junior gets out of the baby buggy and gets in the fuselage of John, and by the time Mary realizes that her son's there, it's too late.
At the green flag, the jets all but disappear while John, in comparison, sputters badly to take off and run the race. Within no time, his engines had had enough and detach from his body and fly away on their own, sending him into a nose dive for Earth. Junior realizes what's happening and after a brief struggle with the door, manages to get out of him in time to grab him by the tail and save him. When John notices that he hasn't crashed, he looks back and sees his son holding his tail and flying him along. After happily praising him for saving him, they then kick it into high gear and run the race, tearing past the other contestants (freaking them out in the process), and are shown flying around the world, going by certain landmarks with funny things happening (the Eiffel Tower pulling itself open to let them through, the Leaning Tower of Pisa tilting the other way, they fly by a huge cloud of smog which is completely removed to reveal Los Angeles, The Statue of Liberty's dress blows open to reveal then-rather risqué lingerie on her (leaving Junior perplexed), etc.), and a few non-landmark things as well (a blimp gets cut in half to look like a watermelon, a sky-written ad for a cola changes to read "BURP!", an ocean liner gets shrunk down to a tugboat, and a rainbow literally tied up like a bow, etc.).
They easily win the race and the government contract...for Junior. While John's happy for his son, his joy is soon (somewhat) crushed when the government tells him that they need ten-thousand more just like him—John realizes that he and Mary have some serious procreating to do. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | The best of Tex Avery's cartoons giving human characteristics to inanimate objects. This cartoon was nominated for an Oscar, which is welcome although a bit puzzling, as this is a prototypical Tex Avery cartoon-take something ordinary, twist it in some odd or extraordinary way and fire sight gags at the audience for the bulk of the cartoon. Avery often gave inanimate objects human traits, as he does here and this is a marvelous cartoon, but he did at least a dozen that were as good or better that weren't nominated. Which proves that the Academy Awards process is as much chance as anything else. This shows on Cartoon Network often. Recommended. 'One Cab's Family' with aeroplanes. 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. 'Little Johnny Jet' is not one of his best, animation limitations show in some of the backgrounds and it lacks the imagination and hilarity of his best work. It is nonetheless a very nicely done cartoon with a good deal to like, managing to make a story about an aeroplane family entertaining, endearing and full of human emotion which can't have been an easy thing to do but was achieved.'Little Johnny Jet' for much of the length is very amusing, and perhaps funnier than 'One Cab's Family', and then without feeling disjointed has a more dramatic second half that has excitement and pathos.The characters are very engaging and easy to like and the voice work is wonderful from Daws Butler.Expectedly, Avery fares very strongly in the directing, even if other cartoons show off his unique wild and wacky style more.Some limited backgrounds aside, the animation is colourful and expressive. The music is lushly and cleverly orchestrated, with lively and energetic rhythms and fits very well indeed, a lot of the action is even enhanced by the music.In summation, very nicely done but Avery is not at his best. 8/10 Bethany Cox. Alright, so your son is a jet!. "Little Johnny Jet" is a fine MGM cartoon produced by Fred Quimby and directed by Tex Avery. I never would have guessed you could make talking characters out of airplanes! John (wonderfully voiced by Daws Butler) is an old-fashioned airplane who goes ballistic at the mere thought of jets. His loving & patient wife Mary lets him know a baby is on the way. And guess what that baby turns out to be? A JET! My favorite scenes from "Little Johnny Jet": Mary spoon-feeds Junior and changes his diaper while he flies back & forth buzzing his dad. During the climactic race, director Tex Avery employs a plethora of sight gags: the Sphinx head shaved bald; the Statue of Liberty's undergarments; the thick smog cloud revealing the city of Los Angeles; the ocean liner transforming into a toy boat; and the jet streaks "Drink Zippy Cola" and "Burp!" "Little Johnny Jet" actually saves his papa's life, for which his parents are grateful and proud of him. But the story doesn't end there! |
tt0118691 | The Beautician and the Beast | An American beautician named Joy Miller (Fran Drescher) teaches students to groom hair, but is put out of business when one of her students accidentally ignites hair spray with his cigarette, eventually leading to the school burning down. Joy ends up being highlighted in a newspaper article after she helps her students and the caged animals escape the building successfully.
The article is seen by Ira Grushinsky (Ian McNeice), a diplomatic representative of a small Eastern European country called Slovetzia (bordered by Hungary, Romania, and Ukraine), a country she never heard of. Ira has been sent to the United States to find a tutor for the three children of Slovetzia's President, and, mistakenly thinking that Joy is an academic teacher, offers the job to her. Joy accepts, and it is only after they arrive in Slovetzia that Ira realizes his error. By then it is too late, and Joy agrees to keep up the ruse of being a "real" teacher for the time being.
The initial meeting of Joy with the President, a dictator named Boris Pochenko (Timothy Dalton), gets off on the wrong foot, but Joy gets along well with his four children Yuri, Katrina (Lisa Jakub), Karl (Adam LaVorgna), and Masha (Heather DeLoach). Joy teaches them of life outside Slovetzia and helps them gain confidence in themselves. Joy frequently clashes with Pochenko, who is disturbed by her fierce independence and the fact that he cannot frighten her.
Joy's presence in Slovetzia is due to Pochenko's desire to change his reputation among other Western nations as a "beast". His second-in-command, Leonid Kleist (Patrick Malahide) is against Pochenko's "softening" strategy, and wants to crush the growing rebellion among Slovetzia's youth. Joy eventually learns that Katrina is in love with Alek (Timothy Dowling), one of the leaders of the youth rebellion. Alek is captured by Pochenko, but Joy secretly helps Katrina sneak to his cell to see him.
A summit of visiting emissaries are arriving in Slovetzia to meet with Pochenko, and Joy convinces him that the best way to prove that he is a modern-thinking man would be to throw a party. Joy is put in charge of preparations, and during this time she and Pochenko grow closer.
On the evening of the dinner, Joy confesses that she is not an academic teacher, but by this time Pochenko does not care about her credentials, only that she has brought happiness to him and his family. Later, Leonid confronts Joy with the fact that she has been helping Katrina meet Alek. When this information is brought to Pochenko, he argues with Joy on her meddling, and Joy decides to leave Slovetzia for good.
Some months pass. Leonid has quietly taken over administrative duties and signing sentences in Pochenko's name. Pochenko, made aware of this fact by Ira, confronts Leonid and strips him of his duties. Pochenko realizes that he has spent many months depressed and discontent after Joy's leaving, and decides that it is time to change his ways.
The film's final scene shows Joy back at home with her parents. She has also been depressed after leaving Slovetzia, but then receives a surprise visit by Pochenko. The pair reconcile. | comedy, romantic | train | wikipedia | Fran Drescher absolutely blew me away, I had no idea she was so talented -- in this movie she absolutely shines!!
Her character "Joy Miller" is the Nanny all over again...but this time she has been hired (mistakenly) to teach the four children of a eastern-European dictator.
She has amazing comic timing and plays well of off co-star Timothy Dalton, who is a wonderful President of Slovetzia, the tiny (made-up) country that most of the movie takes place in.
The plot is a mixture of "The Sound of Music," "The King and I," "Beauty and the Beast," and a kind of twisted Cinderella...but it all meshes together for an endearing (though very predictable) movie.
A change from Tim Dalton's usual dramatic/spy movie genre...who knew he could be so funny?
But he is, and the movie is adorable and I would highly recommend this if your a fan of Fran Drescher, Tim Dalton or romantic comedies in general!!.
I have never enjoyed The Nanny, but I'm a fan of Timothy Dalton.
It seems inconceivable that any casting director thought to put these two actors together, but, by some warped cosmic thing, it kind of worked in this movie.
I don't care if Timothy Dalton has a shitty accent in this movie.
I love a movie, where I can put my brain on stand by and just enjoy it.
What's not to like about this movie that is charming, cute, innocent, and funny??
Fran Drescher may have been type-casted right off the Nanny, but who cares!!???!!
What did you expect her to act like in the film!?!
I had no expectations for this movie (nor should anyone have) besides a good laugh.
Fran is absolutely perfect for the role of Joy Miller and she is even more charming and funny in this movie than Sandra Bullock is in Miss Congeniality (another great movie by all accounts, and I'm not downing the always fantastic Sandra).
Fran Drescher Shines Like Daylight in an Otherwise Clichéd Rom-Com.
'The Beautician and the Beast' follows the line of the immensely 'The Sound of Music' and Drescher's own popular sitcom 'The Nanny'.
Her character is no different from her unique persona as Nanny's Fran Fine but even so, her wit, charisma and comic timing are perfect.
Those who find her annoying in 'The Nanny' would most likely hate this movie but for me, this actress makes it somewhat likable.
Timothy Dalton as the beautician (just kidding) is quite adequate (his fake accent is hilarious) and both actors share a good chemistry.
The acting's pretty average, there seem to be so many plots going on at the same time, but it still makes for an entertaining and interesting watch, if only to see the Nanny in her first major big-screen role.
She brings the trademark we know so well to the movie - her nasal voice and pre-occupation with the trivial stuff, but she also brings a kind of sensitivity we've never seen before in the Nanny series.I quite like some of the scenes - how she teaches the kids what she knows (airline miles), the massage scene, the home-coming, and a lot of others that just seem to be made just for her..
I think that Fran Drescher was really lovable in this movie and Timothy Dalton, for once, seemed to take on a somewhat light-hearted role..
Timothy Dalton was fantastic in his role, and made me laugh a number of times.
The film did begin to lose momentum as Timothy Dalton became less beast-ly and the film is about half an hour too long, but those are really the only bad points.
NBC doesn't show "Law & Order" at 8:00 (or 7:00 if you're in Mississippi like me).Nitpickiness aside, when I heard that she was doing a movie titled "The Beautician and the Beast," I was quite skeptical.
Granted, the movie is VERY dated (for the most part, Communism is dead), quite predictable (can you say "The Nanny?") and can get downright stupid (what's with the chicken?).But it can also be funny, like when Joy, Fran's character, gets the workers to strike, in the tradition of Norma Rae, thus angering Boris Pochenko, played adequately by Timothy Dalton.
And, without giving anything away, I thought the begining was really cute as well.Not to mention that I was really impressed with a scene near the end of the film where she stands up to Boris.
That may explain how she got a part in a Woody Allen movie, even if it's a bit part.This film isn't for everybody, especially if you're put off by Fran's voice.
While *I* think she's funny (like I said before), I believe her humor is too raunchy for family entertainment.
I also like Fran Dresscher in "The Nanny".
A lot of people like this show.) Once in a while I like to watch light, fun, mindless movies.
I suppose this all pretty well explains why I enjoyed "The Beautician and the Beast".Fran plays almost the same familiar role, except instead of Mr Sheffield we have President-for-Life Pochenko of Slovetzia (Tim Dalton).
I watched the film on TV in Croatia, so I don't think they mind.I see this movie is rated rather poorly here on IMDb.com.
If you like "The Nanny", you'll enjoy this movie too..
Fran showed more depth of character and independence in this movie than she did (or was allowed to do) in her TV series.
Timothy Dalton was OK as the Beast, but it was Fran's movie, and he might have been graciously stepping out of her way..
Fran and Timothy play their parts well and look like they're having a ball..
Joy Miller (Fran Drescher) is a night school hair instructor in the New York City area.
It just so happens that a minister from the eastern European country of Slovetzia is looking for a teacher for the ruler's children and he hires Joy, not realizing that she teaches cosmetology alone.
This darling little film will please both fans of romantic comedy and those who love Drescher.
I give this movie a 10 because of the tremendous amount of comedy within the dialog, matched with the comic timing skillfully done by Dalton and Drescher.
Especially when Boris (Dalton) speaks in bad sounding English and Joy (Drescher) mimics him.
Fran is also in her element, because in a movie such as this (vs the sitcom 'the Nanny') she gets a chance to show us her serious side--and she is as believable as when she's zinging those classic comic one-liners.
By the by--if you get to watch this movie on DVD, Fran's commentary is a stream of extra laughs!.
I don't know about "Beauty and the Beast", or "The Kng and I", but I thought the movie was a take off on "The Sound Of Music" another movie I love to watch.
"She was there to sell make-up, but the Eastern European dictator saw more.""She had style, she had flair, she was there - that's when she became - the teacher!"Exactly the same sort of "Miss Fine!!" situations.I haven't seen the whole thing, but I'm assuming that he'll tell her he loves her, and then will take it back.
I am Timothy Dalton's self declared #1 fan - and I adore Fran Drescher.
When this movie came out I looked SO forward to seeing it as it was a film that was going to allow TImothy to show everyone else how funny he can be and what a multi-dimensional actor he is.
They are wonderful!Life is so full of stress, sadness, loss, tragedy now, more light hearted, comedic movies like this are needed sandwiched in to take us away and be entertained in fantasyland for a while.
There are a few close calls, so to speak (that are hilarious)There is a very lovable chicken in the movie, a surprisingly fine little actor herself, very cute ~ with some adorable scenes.
Its touching, worrisome at times...and cute, I swear she gets the most precious "expressions".-With all due respect and targeting no one in particular, it seems in our world today many people have become so jaded they can't enjoy a great, light hearted hilarious romantic comedy that is CLEAN, without calling it "cheesy" or "corny".
People have just gotten so much more afraid to show emotion and care for each other and we need more of that and perhaps more movies like this would unconsciously encourage it.Timothy is at his usual flawless best, playing both "sides" of: the ill tempered dictator, whose ego seems large enough to have its own zip code you can't get to from here; and who thinks things are just hunky dory with "his people", but are they?; to his other self -the gorgeously handsome man,with that deep sexy voice, which is more apparent when he isn't yelling or fussing about something.(And I HAVE to say he is handsome both with mustache and sans mustache).
I think the movie is written very well, and when he first starts to become- challenged by Joy Miller's lessons for HIM, and goes out amongst "his people" - well, just wait and see-its truly a priceless, clueless "moment" for him, (We get to watch him as Tim pulls the cluelessness of this guy off SO well, chest puffed up, strutting, smiling and waving as if he does it every day...) And quite a shock for "the people".Fran is terrific and gorgeous too, and I think the pairing of those two was sheer genius and they make a beautiful couple in heart, spirit, and yes,look.
I know I was jealous of lucky Fran AND the "mythical couple" and it took me away to that place all women who love romantic stories love to go - where YOU are the female lead character!This is a GREAT MOVIE AND ITS NOT JUST A "CHICK FLICK" EITHER, GUYS - if you like comedy I recommend it to you also and there IS Fran.
Fran Drescher has her fans coming from The Nanny.
The plot is a blended mixture of The King and I, The Sound of Music, The Beauty and the Beast, The Nanny,etc., all following the proved successful formula of routine entertainment for masses.
A typical USA yarn showing how easy things can be solved in movies when some naive good looking Brooklyn girl strikes the heart of a stupid foreign dictator.
After looking at some of the scores people gave this movie I honestly didn't think it would amount to much.
Fran Drescher plays "Joy Miller" who is a beautician in New York City.
Timothy Dalton is "Boris Pochenko", a brutal tyrant of a small Eastern European country (Slovetzia) who has mistakenly hired Joy to teach his four children.
I also liked the way she and Timothy Dalton worked so well together.
In closing, I thought this was a thoroughly enjoyable movie and well worth the time spent..
Actually, this is a pretty harmless way of spending an hour and a bit if you can accept that this is basically a vehicle for Fran Dreschler, and that, presumably, she has some fans in America who both like her and know who she is.Dreschler plays a beautician who gets mistaken for the new tutor of an eastern European dictator and ends up importing consumerism and the American way of life by stealth to the previously contented communist kingdom of Slovetzia.
I was full of compassion when I saw how poor Mr. Dalton had to act against Ms. Drescher, who seems to be unable to show (we better don´t use the word "acting" here)anything else than "Nanny Fine", or better: herself.
It comes near to heroism, when I imagine that Mr. Dalton had to stand close besides when Ms. Drescher opened her mouth, and THIS VOICE came out.
Although I could have changed the language of my DVD to german, because Ms. Drescher´s german voice is not half the drama than her own, but I felt a kind of paralyzed, like in a horror film, when you know that it´s not to stand but you can´t close your eyes.
This kissing-scene with Ms. Drescher: It was obviously hard to act this scene, because it looked like he wanted to be on north pole this moment.
Fran Drescher and Timothy Dalton play opposites so well..
I have never been able to watch Fran Drescher for any length of time.
All in all, I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it for anyone who would like a pleasant diversion and not be forced to think a lot..
Fran Drescher was not at her best, and Timothy Dalton's performance was substandard, though given the script he had to work with, it probably wasn't his fault.
All in all, it was worth watching if you are a Timothy Dalton fan, or you like a romantic comedy.
I could actually go lower but it is hard to believe that there are actually efforts in cinematography that are much worse than Fran Drescher in her over played nanny role.
When I seen this move I started to like Fran Dresher.
her sit-com the nanny is also a good one but this movie is so funny.
This is like one of the worst movies I ever wached.
But this movie was just The Nanny set in Eastern Europe.
I liked Timothy Dalton's character because it was a different look at him.
The character was gruff but he played him a comic twist which he looked like he enjoyed.
I would like to see Fran Dresicher in something besides The Nanny especially since the series in now over..
Although i love Fran Drecsher as an actress, she should have never been cast as Joy Miller..
Fran Drescher showed some extremely good acting......okay, it might be a bad movie, but she is possibly the nicest, light-hearted person to watch.
Fran Drescher and Timothy Dalton star in this 1997 romance comedy.
Joy Miller (Drescher) is a beautician from New York who is soon hired to help an Eastern European Dictator, Boris Pochenko (Dalton) with his children.
I've always liked this film and Fran and Timothy have good chemistry.
For six years, Fran Drescher made some people cringe but many laugh with her deliciously nasal accent as Fran Fine, the hairdresser who turned to selling beauty products and ended up becoming the nanny to the three children of a successful and dashing widowed Broadway producer.
Charles Shaugnessy was always charming and commanding as the somewhat stuffy Maxwell Sheffield, but in his place here, we have Timothy Dalton as the widowed dictator like president of a tiny Russian like country who has four children who are in desperate need of help since their father tends to neglect them.
A massage scene with Drescher and Dalton is very similar to a gag on "The Nanny" when Fran, posing as a nurse, had to "shave" Mr. Sheffield.
I have only watched five minutes of the pilot episode of the nanny, as well as the closing minutes of a number of episodes and have decided that I don't particularly like it.
The Beautician and the Beast is basically the Nanny made into a movie, with a few things altered.
The movie is quite funny in parts but a really do not think much of Fran Dresure (sp?), especially how I heard the comment that her character in this movie is exactly the same as her character in the nanny.This movie makes numerous assumptions about 'decadent American society' in which it destroys.
Rather it attacks the eastern European dictatorship and makes America look like a wonderful place.
The promiscuous American is destroyed with Fran's character: she is not interested in guys until the right one comes along, and it is obvious that it was going to be Pochenko (Timothy Dalton), and as the movie draws to the close the idealistic Hollywood ideal of love is emphasised in the most sickening way.The movie blatantly has a go at how these communist nations allegedly altered history to suit themselves.
Yet Fran is extremely cynical about democratic politicians as she quotes "they're politicians, you can't trust them." Beautician and the Beast is really a remake of Sound of Music with the music replaced with comedy.
Beautician & the Beast-Nanny Goes to Eastern Europe **1/2.
Fran Drescher, as nasal as ever, is mistaken for a science teacher and is whisked off to an East European country to instruct the 4 children of widower dictator Timothy Dalton.This is definitely a ripoff of the television series The Nanny.
He learns about life from Drescher and the two are finding love until a political situation threatens to end all that.The film is routine in nature.To paraphrase the song from the television show:She was a beautician in the borough of Queens.Until a fire broke out in one of those crushing scenes.What was she to do, where was she to go, she was not working?So to Eastern Europe she flew when she was thought to be a teacher.
WRONG!BRR,it still gives me the chills thinking back of it.Everything about this movie sucks:the acting,the story,everything!First of all the acting:Fran Drescher is probably one of the most annoying people ever and not only because of that nagging voice.She just can't act!
And they probably chose her for the role since she did nothing more in that terrible sitcom "The Nanny" and maybe cause she should be beautiful.(NOT!) Timothy Dalton then.Not a bad actor,yet in this movie he puts on an accent that makes no sense at all.It always freaks me out that those Hollywood movies use those over the top accents for Russians or Germans or whatever.It is quite insulting to the natives of those countries,if you ask me.The story is even worse,cause there actually ain't any!
The Beautician and the Beast (1997): Dir: Ken Kwapis / Cast: Fran Drescher, Timothy Dalton, Ian McNiece, Lisa Jakob, Patrick Malahide: Formula satire settling for someone who brings beauty to another.
Fran Drescher stars as a beautician mistaken for a science teacher and she is spirited to London. |
tt0066122 | Deep End | Mike (John Moulder Brown), a 15-year-old dropout, finds a job in a public bath. There he is trained by his co-worker Susan (Jane Asher), a woman ten years his senior. Susan is a tease who plays with Mike's and other men's feelings, acting sometimes warm and affectionate and other times cold and distant. Working in the bathhouse turns out to involve providing services to clients of a more or less sexual nature, in exchange for a tip. For example, an older woman (Diana Dors) is sexually stimulated by pushing Mike's head into her bosom and talking suggestively about football. Mike is confused by this and at first does not want to accept the tip he gets, but Susan tells him that these services are a normal practice, including exchange of her female clients for his male clients whenever a client prefers the opposite sex.
Mike fantasizes about Susan and falls in love with her, even though she has a wealthy and handsome young fiancé, Chris (Chris Sandford). Mike also discovers that Susan is cheating on her fiancé with an older, married man (Karl Michael Vogler) who was Mike's physical education teacher and works at the baths as a swimming instructor for teenage girls, touching them inappropriately. Mike begins following Susan on her dates with Chris and the instructor and trying to disrupt them. Although Susan often gets angry at Mike for this, she provides just enough encouragement to cause him to continue the behavior. Mike's infatuation with Susan continues despite his friends mocking him, his mother being treated rudely by Susan, his bicycle being destroyed by Susan, and his activities drawing the ire of Susan's boyfriends, local police, and Mike's boss at work. Obsessed with Susan, Mike refuses other outlets for sex, such as his former girlfriend and a prostitute who offers him a discount. While following Susan on a date, Mike sees and steals a life-size advertising photo cutout of a naked girl who resembles Susan. He confronts Susan with it on the London Underground, flying into a violent tantrum in front of other passengers when Susan teasingly refuses to tell him whether she posed for the nude photo. Mike then takes the cutout to the deserted baths after hours and swims naked with it, embracing it.
The next morning, Mike disrupts the instructor's foot race and punctures the tyres of the instructor's car while Susan is driving it. Susan gets mad and hits Mike, in the process losing the diamond from her new engagement ring in the snow. Anxious to find the lost diamond, Mike and Susan collect the surrounding snow in plastic bags and take it back to the closed baths to melt it, using a lowered ceiling lamp outlet to heat an electric kettle in the empty pool. While Susan is briefly out of the room, Mike finds the diamond in the melted snow, and lies down naked in the dry pool with the diamond on his tongue. He teases Susan by refusing to give her the diamond until she undresses. She does so, he gives her the diamond and she is about to leave, but she reconsiders and lies down next to him. They have a sexual encounter, although it is not clear whether Mike is able to perform.
Chris then telephones and Susan rushes around the empty pool hurriedly gathering her clothes to go and meet him. Mike begs her to stay and talk to him, but Susan insists she has to leave. Meanwhile an attendant has arrived, who, unaware of the presence of Mike and Susan, opens the valve to start filling the dry pool with water. Mike becomes more insistent, chasing Susan around the rapidly filling pool, and finally hitting her in the head with the ceiling lamp, severely injuring her. She falls (along with a tin of red paint that resembles blood) into the water of the pool. Mike embraces the dying, nude Susan underwater, just as he embraced the photo cutout. | tragedy, psychedelic, romantic | train | wikipedia | The film follows the adolescent obsession of a 15 year old (John Moulder Brown) seedy (Newford) Bath House attendent.
He falls under the romantic spell of a red haired tease (brilliantly played by Jane Asher), that toys with his emotions to the brink of taking him over the mental "deep end".
It contains the song "But I Might Die Tonight" by Cat Stevens as the title track, and different variations of that theme supplied by either Cat Stevens or (Kraut rock group) Can. It also contains one of Can's most amazing tracks "Mother's Sky" in a great scene where the boy stalks his obsession to a London Club, then to a seedy Nude Girl joint which contains a cardboard cut out of her, then to an out-of-commision prostitute, and then finally to the London Underground where he confronts Jane Asher.
From Asher's red hair (in the film itself and in the promotional poster where it trails off into blood), to the new color being painted on the walls of the bathhouse, to the blood that punctuates certain climatic moments in the story.Skolimowski was Polanski's screenwriter for "Knife In the Water" and stylistically "Deep End" has a Polanski flavor (it certainly has its "Repulsion" moments).
Just out of school, 15 year-old Mike (John Moulder-Brown) goes to work as the towel boy at a seedy London bath house.
This and the film's innate mastery instantly time-travel me back to days that were simultaneously more innocent and more complicated than today, late night smoky college discussions in a candle-lit apartments.And that film would be "Deep End" directed by Jerzy Skowlimowski, pal of Roman Polanski, with the same great mix of bizarre sensibilities and takes on life, done in professional, Hollywood-caliber production, even if on an indie budget.It's from 1970, featuring music by Cat Stevens (Yusef Islam now to the non-infidel) and two unbelievably strong leads: a 15-year-old John Moulder Brown and 25-year-old Jane Asher (Paul McCartney's 1960's trophy girlfriend.) I never even knew Asher had these acting chops: she outdoes Susan Sarandon (similar upper class background) for letting us in on the nuances of a naturally pretty, fairly low-class young person.
What starts out as a tender coming-of-age story devolves into a story of sexual obsession and missed connections in "Deep End." The story has bicycle riding teenager Mike starting his first job at a run-down public bathhouse which caters to both men and women.
The exterior locations are expertly filmed also, and give a great impression of the U.K. at the end of the 1960's.The acting of the two young leads is top-notch and utterly believable at all turns, with John Moulder-Brown especially likable and appealing.
Mike begins the film as such a sweet young guy who's concerned about his future and his family, that's it's almost unfathomable as to why he'd go off the "deep end" like he does.*** out of *****.
Within it occurs the film's climax, in the pool, with the two of them, his obsession,and her sexy acquiesence, leading to the ending that makes this a movie that you may not always think about, but probably won't forget..
Writer-director Jerzy Skolimowski does a really good job of telling his story too, which means that deep End is an easy film to get along with.
Trouble is, Susan already has a fiancé and while she kind of likes Mike, she doesn't take him seriously...leading Mike to become frustrated and willing to do anything in order to have Susan all for himself.The two central performers are really good and responsible for a lot of the film's success.
Fifteen-year-old Mike (John Moulder-Brown) has just left school and starts a new job as a Public Baths attendant, under the wing of Susan (Jane Asher) - a streetwise twenty-something female attendant.
Cute working class fifteen-year-old John Moulder-Brown (as Mike) gets a job an attendant in a London bathhouse and falls "head-over-heels" in love with his co-worker, sexy red-haired Jane Asher (as Sue).
He meets "ladies of a certain age," like overweight Diana Dors, "who favours young boys" - but, Mr. Moulder-Brown can't stop fantasizing about the delectable Ms. Asher; she was the inspiration for many of The Beatles' love songs, "And I Love Her"..."Deep End" is an imaginatively shot, by Jerzy Skolimowski with Charly Steinberger, story involving obsessive teenage love, with Moulder-Brown very effectively essaying the "mature for his age" protagonist.
electric.****** Deep End (3/18/71) Jerzy Skolimowski ~ John Moulder-Brown, Jane Asher, Diana Dors, Karl Michael Vogler.
Deep End is so true to Life - for any teenage boy who becomes infatuated with an older (but young and sensual) woman who he then sees romantically with a chauvinistic and nasty man - he wants to 'save' her.But where any of us ordinary young men would have long stopped their pursuance of justice, young Mike here takes things to the very end, fulfilling the dreams of us mere mortals.
You know all along that he'll never get the girl, that's never in any doubt, but the madness as is pushes him further into trouble.That Mike's (John Moulder-Brown) 15 and just out of school and his first boss is the gorgeous and sexually aware Jane Asher and his job entails attending to allsorts at some public baths, including some randy older women, no wonder his hormones are all over the place.It all starts out as light-hearted nonsense (the incorrigible Diana Dors scene a real hoot) but gradually gets darker, to a jet black and tragic end.
But, all he's actually doing is stalking the girl that he works with, as he sees how her 'other', more glamorous life, away from the bleach and rubber gloves at the baths, is both lived - and funded.True, John Moulder-Brown's acting lacks depth, or finesse, but imagine a 15 year old actually in those scenarios.
Deep End looks like but is not a coming-of-age film.
The two main protagonists, 15-year-old Mike (John Moulder Brown) and 24-year-old Susan (Jane Asher), unfortunately never come of age.
It is basically unclassifiable but is definitely closer in tone to Clockwork Orange than to The Graduate.Darkly erotic and sexually ambiguous, the film opens with a vision of dripping red paint backed by the music of Cat Stevens singing "But I Might Die Tonight." Mike, a high-school dropout, has gone to work as a pool attendant at Newford Baths, a sleazy and deteriorating public pool that is filled with middle aged patrons looking for something other than a swim.
Having been accosted by a bosomy, obese middle-aged woman (Diana Dors) for her own pleasure, Mike realizes that his first job experience may not look good on his resume.
The boy's interest is channeled to his co-worker Susan who reassures him that harassment by patrons is just part of the job, one that could lead to some liberal tips.A part of the job he had not bargained for, however, is his growing infatuation and obsession with the 24-year-old Susan, who has a fiancé (Christopher Sandford) and boyfriend, a married former high school teacher (Karl Michael Vogler), and also may just be an expensive call girl.
The boy actor reminds me of the young Roman Polanski and Jane Asher still looks like a teenager, so her character's immaturity doesn't come across as weird.
West German production, set in England and filmed both there and in Germany, concerns excruciatingly vapid 15-year-old boy who gets his first job working as an attendant at a community bathhouse.
Managing with precision to communicate the sensory effect of these emotions, Deep End is almost a primal film, and is told largely from the perspective of its lead male character, mirroring his understanding of the world as one of absolutes and intensities.
This is a drama film that's set in London and stars John Moulder-Brown as 15-year-old Mike, who works at a swimming pool.
Actors like Diana Dors playing a character who fantasises about football while having sex, Jane Asher as a flirty young madam in a mini skirt and good old Burt Kwouk selling hot dogs.
15 year old Mike (John Moulder-Brown), takes a job in a typical Victorian, city bathhouse in London.
In this act he falls upon a life-sized cardboard cut- out of Susan outside a strip club in the red-light district of Soho.Whilst the film is primarily a marginally twisted drama, there are some intentionally funny scenes that elevate the narrative.
15 year old Mike (John Moulder-Brown) gets a job as a towel boy in a seedy British bath house.
There isn't one likable character in the film--Mike is obviously disturbed and Susan comes across as a real bitch--but you can't stop watching.
It's set at the tail-end of the Swinging Sixties, taking place in a grubby, run-down old swimming baths where new recruit John Moulder-Brown develops a crush and then an obsession with cute attendant Jane Asher.Like many such realist productions, this is a meandering story which depicts various episodes in the life of its protagonist.
Moulder-Brown (VAMPIRE CIRCUS) is excellent as the protagonist and Jane Asher equally good as the young and lovely object of his affections.
Teenager John Moulder Brown (Mike) gets an attendant's job at a swimming pool and public baths.
This film is a neo-realist look at working-class Britons in a seedy setting one would hardly recognize as Swinging London (made years before anyone had ever heard of Mike Leigh).
For many years a somewhat obscure and unseen semi-avant garde melodrama,DEEP END has had a recent revival in digitally restored fashion in cinema,DVD and television,and has an undercurrent of strangeness running through it's entire oeuvre.Set in post-swinging 60's London,but an American/West German co-production directed by Polish-born Jerzy Skolimowski mostly filmed in Germany,with an eclectic cast and musical score,a dubious story and related characters.This overall oddness does not necessarily equate to greatness,but DEEP END still nevertheless manages to hold the attention throughout.A decidedly gauche,awkward 15 year old youth,Mike (John Moulder-Brown) starts his first job at a grimy,dilapidated London municipal bathhouse,and falls in love with a beautiful but uninhibited female co-worker,Susan (Jane Asher),a few years older than him.Susan is apparently engaged but uses and exploits other males for her own pleasure,including the hapless Mike himself.The attraction gradually seems to become more mutual,if dangerous.Coming at the end of the optimistic,happy-go-lucky 60's and populated with rather unlikable characters,DEEP END is packed with so much symbolism as to be in peril from drowning in it.The setting of the seedy,crumbling bathhouse is an obvious metaphor for being literally thrown into the deep rather than shallow end of life,with the related problems,frustrations and behaviour on show signifying this.For a while,DEEP END comes across as a familiar but wispily charming essay on the pains of growing up,with an amusing cameo from Diana Dors (who became a better actress as she got into early middle-age),holding Mike to her bosom while mumbling platitudes about football,though it's not long before it all becomes progressively darker,with dubious behaviour from a male swimming instructor (who Susan has a dalliance with) towards young female students,and an increasingly unhealthy relationship between Mike,so wet behind the ears as to be soaking,and the voluptuous Susan.Moulder-Brown is fine as the hopelessly naive adolescent,though as with many teens his character's behaviour and traits often becomes very irritating,while Ms Asher is convincing as his and other males object of desire,outrageously sexy and knowing it,teasing and cajoling as many males as she can muster,mostly for her own entertainment and amusement in the skimpiest clothing imaginable.With all this symbolism (such as Mike stealing a cardboard life size poster of Susan from London's underground) and semi-Freudian obsession,DEEP END has little in the way of plot,and much of the cast are not British but mainland European (mainly German).This sometimes gets in the way of authenticity for the more pessimistic mood of late 60's/early 70's London (not surprising as much of the film was apparently filmed in Munich),and Skolimowski often seems not to have an ear for the English language,with some scenes allowed to ramble with somewhat stilted dubbed and non-dubbed dialogue.There is much use of hand-held camera and other scenes which have an improvised feel,which is not necessarily a bad thing as said moments have a more spontaneous,humorous and natural feel to them.Such locations as the bathhouse and Soho (which features a funny cameo from Burt Kwouk) add to a sense of decline and seediness while observing the dubious behaviour of the main and secondary characters involved,which inevitably leads to the climax in the swimming pool,with the symbolism at it's height as it being empty and drained of water,but there is a twist in store.....With it's dreary,seedy setting and unsympathetic characters,DEEP END could have been utterly disposable,yet it's very style deem it oddly compulsive and curiously watchable,with it's best moments reserved for it's finale with haunting and extraordinary imagery that linger in the mind long afterwards,confirming it's reputation of being a bizarre,rediscovered cult classic.RATING:7 out of 10..
Jerzy Skolimowski writes and directs a movie about a 15 year old boy who, having been thrust into the work place and a world of underlying sex and violence he doesn't comprehend, loses all sense of social normative awareness and quite literally goes off the deep end.Mike (John Moulder-Brown) is out of school and gets his first job.
He's immediately smitten by the ten-year-older Susan (Jane Asher) who, unfortunately for Mike, is a confused aged-beyond-her-years tease and man-user who has no real way of interpreting the world around her except by sleeping and flirting with other men for her gain: her fiancé because he's rich, even if he is a tool and ridiculously clueless; her ex-swim coach because he's older and has given her a job; and now Mike because of his persistence and insistence in getting her attention and approval.With no other life to distract him, no money to support him, nothing but his low-class existence and his desire for Susan, Mike quickly goes from a crush to confused love to stalking to outright obsession, with absolutely no awareness of the negative effect of his actions.
This earthy, unromanticized and fiercely unmawkish coming-of-age adolescent angst sleeper centers on awkward, gangly, sexually frustrated virginal blue collar klutz Mike (exceptionally played to moody, ungainly, temperamental perfection by "Vampire Circus" 's John Moulder-Brown), who gets a job as an attendant at a seedy bathhouse.
Mike falls madly (and badly) in obsessive love/lust with loose, worldly and assured co-worker Susan (an excellent portrayal by enticing redhead looker Jane Asher), a wild and uninhibited sort whom the other employees hold in disregard.
As Mike, John Moulder-Brown has the right fish-out-of-water look as the obsessed adolescent who hasn't got a clue but, for me, his performance never really convinces.
I'm all for films with unique, personal perspectives of the seamier side of life, but I'm baffled at reviews that describe "Deep End" as a coming-of-age story.
This look at the disturbingly creepy fascination a 15 year-old bathhouse worker (John Moulder-Brown) develops for his hardened but lovely co-worker (Jane Asher), "Deep End" struck me more like "Taxi Driver: The Teen Years." I haven't read much that details the film as a psycho-sexual drama that depicts the gradual unraveling of an already damaged teen's psyche.
Jerzy Skolimowski's "Deep End" stars John Brown as a young Londoner who takes up work at a local bath house.
Here he meets and becomes infatuated with a beautiful woman, played by Jane Asher."Deep End's" use of colour would be praised by a young David Lynch, whose own "Blue Velvet" would be heavily influenced by its coming-of-age plot.
A working-class variation of Diana Scott (Julie Christie) in "Darling", she plays with the affections of multiple male suitors and effortlessly uses sex as a bargaining chip.Toward the film's end, Skolimowski has John dive into a pool with a one dimensional, cardboard cutout of Jane, the scene suggesting something about John's deeply submerged, unconscious desires.
(I also think he may have written the song just for the movie, inasmuch as, at one point, a bureaucrat tells the young man, "Someday, if you apply yourself, you might be sitting behind this desk!" In the Cat Stevens song, the singer sings "Work hard boy/you'll find/one day you'll have a job like mine.") While it certainly was filmed while London was swinging, this is not about sexual liberation.
Naive concerning the wider world, Mike begins his first job alongside Susan at the local swimming bathes which happens to be a place where sexuality is ripe in an astonishing manner.
John Moulder-Brown gets a job at a public bath house and is soon smitten with co-worker Jane Asher.
Deep End. I assumed this was a foreign film I found listed in the book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die, it was directed by Polish director Jerzy Skolimowski, but it had elements of West German production, but it is a certainly a British set story, and one that sounded interesting.
Basically fifteen year old Michael 'Mike' (John Moulder-Brown) has just left school, and finds himself a job at the local swimming pool and public baths, being trained by Susan (BAFTA nominated Jane Asher) who is ten years older than him but he cannot help but find her attractive.
I've recorded in VHS this movie from "FUORI ORARIO" a cult night transmission and I will save the tape until I won't be able to buy a good DVD version but for instance most of the movies of Jerzy Skolimowsky must be issued on laser disc.Deep end is the perfect combination of good ingredients : the locations of a gray and dark London, two perfect young actors, the talent of a great underground director in his best moment.Skolimowsky lead us along the corridors inside the dirty toilets of the public bath where Mike(Moulder-Brown) has just come for his first job after he has left the school.
Susan(a great Jane Asher), the girl that already works and sleeps inside the bath house is a little bit older than him and of course has already done experiences with boys. |
tt0479863 | Black Widow | Mark Sherwin (Ayres) is driving in the country when he notices a man lying at the side of the road. Assuming the man is the victim of a hit-and-run, he stops to offer assistance, only to be coshed and left stunned while his wallet and car are stolen. On recovering his senses, he staggers towards a nearby farmhouse where he collapses. He is found by the farm owner, who summons a doctor. Meanwhile, the car thief comes to grief while speeding round a corner on a clifftop road, the car plunges over the edge and explodes in flames.
Sherwin regains consciousness, but is suffering from complete amnesia with no idea of his own identity or how he came to be found in such a remote location. The farm owner and his daughter agree to look after Sherwin while he recuperates. The police investigate missing persons reports but find no case to match Sherwin's age and physical description. Some days later Sherwin is on the mend, and happens to find in his overcoat pocket a ticket stub from a theatre in a town some 50 miles away. Hoping to find some clue as to his identity, he takes a train to the town and walks the streets to see whether anything will jog his memory.
He comes across a house which he seems to recognise and walks in through the unlocked door. Inside he finds a flower-covered coffin in the front room. A woman (Norden) enters and on seeing Sherwin, screams and faints. This jolts Sherwin's memory back into gear and he recognises the woman as his wife Christine, who has believed him dead since there was no reason for anybody to consider that the body found in the burned-out car was not his.
Sherwin is bothered by his wife's odd demeanour, particularly her excessive concern about whether or not anybody could have seen him in the street or arriving at the house. His suspicions aroused, he decides to continue to play the amnesiac. Saying he is going upstairs to rest, he eavesdrops on her telephone calls and soon realises that she is speaking to a lover of some time standing, the gist of the conversation being the need to dispose of Sherwin quickly before anyone else finds out that he was not the crash victim. Gradually, he finds out that Christine and her lover (Anthony Forwood) had been intending to sell the house and cash all his assets, and his inconvenient reappearance has derailed their plans. Aware now of Christine's true colours, he decides to play along with her schemes until he can engineer a suitable come-uppance for the pair. | neo noir | train | wikipedia | null |
tt3721936 | American Honey | Star (Sasha Lane) is a teenager living in Muskogee, Oklahoma. She takes care of two younger children while being groped by their father (Johnny Pierce II). While trying to hitchhike home she spies a car full of teenagers and makes eye contact with Jake (Shia LaBeouf), one of the boys.
She follows them to a local K-Mart, and returns Jake's phone after it falls out of his pocket. He kisses her on the cheek and tells her to come with him to Kansas, where he will offer her a job. Star declines but Jake nevertheless tells her to meet them in the parking lot of the local Motel 6.
Star changes her mind. Packing her belongings, she takes the children she watches to the club where their mother (Chasity Hunsaker) dances, telling her it is her turn to care for them. Though the mother refuses, Star runs away from the club and sleeps outside the van of the strangers till morning.
Jake is delighted that she came. She is interviewed by Krystal, who runs the entire crew, and who hires her after she establishes that Star is 18, no one will miss her, and that Star promises to work hard.
In the car on the way to Kansas, Star meets the other members of the crew including Pagan (Arielle Holmes) who is obsessed with Star Wars, in particular Darth Vader, and death.
The crew breaks up into groups of two to sell magazines door to door. Since Star is new, she is paired with Jake, the veteran of the group. Star finds it difficult to sell as Jake lies to a potential customer (Laura Kirk) in order to make sales. She also distracts Jake by flirting and eventually kissing him.
Krystal calls Star in, and tells her that Jake has posted his lowest sales ever. She has Jake put tanning lotion on her body as Star watches. Star promises to improve.
The following day, annoyed by Jake, Star vows to outsell him. She is picked up by three strangers in cowboy hats who offer to help her, thinking she is being harassed by Jake. They bring her to their home and offer to buy several magazines if she drinks the worm at the bottom of a bottle of mezcal. Star does, and makes the sale. Jake however, fearing the worst, arrives and threatens the men with a gun before stealing their car. Initially angry at Jake, Star is later touched that he came to find her and the two have sex. When they return to the hotel for the evening, Jake tells her not to mention their relationship, and then gives the money Star earned to Krystal.
For a while things between Jake and Star are tense, and Krystal threatens to drop her on the side of the road if she keeps causing trouble. The crew ends up living temporarily in a rundown house, and Jake and Star renew their relationship. She asks him what his dreams are, and he shows her his private stash of cash and gold, items he's stolen from the houses he visits, which he intends to use to buy a home.
Krystal dumps the girls off where oil workers are about to go to work in the morning. Star climbs in the back of their truck and tries to sell them magazines, but one of the oil workers tells her he'll pay her five hundred dollars to go on a date with him. Star asks for a thousand, and prostitutes herself for the money. After the man drops her off she hears him being attacked. Shortly after, a bloodied Jake asks her if she was hurt by the man and later asks if she slept with him. He throws a fit, smashing the belongings in the house before running off.
The following morning the crew get in the car and there is a new girl there, while Jake is missing. Krystal calls Star to her room and informs her she has let Jake go and that she paid him money for each girl he recruited and that he slept with all of them. Krystal later takes them to a poor area in Rapid City, South Dakota, to sell magazines. Star enters a house and meets several affable children whose mother is on drugs. As Star's own mother died of meth she feels sympathetic towards them, and goes out to buy them groceries. At the pickup that day Jake is in the van and Star is confused as to whether to be happy to see him or not.
That evening the crew light a bonfire and celebrate. Dancing around the fire Star is pulled aside by Jake who privately hands her a turtle. Star takes it to the edge of the water and releases it before following the turtle into the water. She immerses herself fully before rising out of the water. | storytelling | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0787985 | Robin Hood | Alan-a-Dale introduces the story of Robin Hood and Little John, two outlaws living in Sherwood Forest, where they rob from the rich and give to the poor townsfolk of Nottingham, despite the efforts of the Sheriff of Nottingham to stop them. Meanwhile, Prince John and his assistant Sir Hiss arrive in Nottingham on a tour of the kingdom. Knowing the royal coach is laden with riches, Robin and Little John rob Prince John by disguising themselves as fortune tellers. The embarrassed Prince John then puts a bounty on their heads and makes the Sheriff his personal tax collector, who takes pleasure in collecting funds from the townsfolk including hidden money from the crippled blacksmith Otto and a single farthing from a young rabbit, Skippy, who had just received it as a birthday present. However, Robin Hood, disguised as a beggar, sneaks in and gives back some money to the family, as well as his hat and a bow to Skippy in honor of his birthday.
Skippy and his friends test out the bow, but Skippy fires an arrow into the grounds of Maid Marian's castle. The children sneak inside, meeting Maid Marian and her attendant Lady Kluck. Skippy "rescues" Marian from Lady Kluck, who pretends to be a pompous Prince John. Later, when she is alone with Kluck, Maid Marian reveals she and Robin were childhood sweethearts but they have not seen one another for years, and Kluck consoles her not to give up on her love for Robin. Meanwhile, Friar Tuck visits Robin and Little John, explaining that Prince John is hosting an archery tournament, and the winner will receive a kiss from Maid Marian. Robin decides to participate in the tournament disguised as a stork whilst Little John disguises himself as the Duke of Chutney to get near Prince John. Sir Hiss discovers Robin's identity but is trapped in a barrel of ale by Friar Tuck and Alan-a-Dale. Robin wins the tournament, but Prince John exposes him and has him arrested for execution despite Maid Marian's pleas. Little John threatens Prince John in order to release Robin, which leads to a fight between Prince John's soldiers and the townsfolk, all of which escape to Sherwood Forest.
As Robin and Maid Marian fall in love again, the townsfolk have a troubadour festival spoofing Prince John, describing him as the "Phony King of England", and the song soon becomes popular with John's soldiers. Enraged by the insult, Prince John triples the taxes, imprisoning most of the townsfolk who cannot pay. A paltry coin gets deposited into the poor box at Friar Tuck's church, which gets seized by the Sheriff. Enraged that government has meddled in his church, Friar Tuck lashes out at the Sheriff, to which he is quickly arrested for "attacking a lawman, interfering with the Sheriff's legal duties and high treason to the Crown". Prince John orders Friar Tuck hung, knowing Robin Hood will come out of hiding to rescue his friend and give the potential for Robin to be caught and a "double hanging".
Robin and Little John, having learned of the plot, chose to sneak in during the night, with Little John managing to free all of the prisoners whilst Robin steals Prince John's taxes, but Sir Hiss awakens to find Robin fleeing. Chaos follows as Robin and the others try to escape to Sherwood Forest. The Sheriff corners Robin after he is forced to return to rescue Tagalong, Skippy's little sister. During the chase, Prince John's castle catches fire and the Sheriff figures he has Robin where he wants, either to be captured, burned, or make a risky jump into the moat. Robin Hood elects to jump. Little John and Skippy fear Robin is lost, but he surfaces safely after using a reed as a breathing tube. Sir Hiss says he tried to warn Prince John, and now look what he did to his mother's castle, causing the Prince to exclaim "Mummy!" and suck his thumb and chase the terrified snake into the burning castle.
Later, King Richard returns to England, placing his brother, Sir Hiss and the Sheriff under arrest and allows his niece Maid Marian to marry Robin Hood, turning the former outlaw into an in-law.
=== Alternate ending ===
The alternate ending (included in the "Most Wanted Edition" DVD) is a deleted version of the story's conclusion, primarily utilizing still images from Ken Anderson's original storyboard drawings of the sequence. As Robin Hood leaps off of the castle and into the moat, he is wounded (presumably by one of the arrows shot into the water after him) and carried away to the church for safety. Prince John, enraged that he has once again been outwitted by Robin Hood, finds Little John leaving the church, and suspects the outlaw to be there as well. Sure enough, he finds Maid Marian tending to an unconscious Robin Hood, and draws a dagger to kill them both. Before Prince John can strike, however, he is stopped by his brother, King Richard, having returned from the Crusades. King Richard is appalled to find that Prince John has left his kingdom bleak and oppressed. Abiding his mother's wishes, King Richard decides he cannot banish Prince John from the kingdom, but does grant him severe punishment (which explained how Prince John, Sir Hiss, and the Sheriff ended up in the Royal Rock Pile). King Richard returns Nottingham to its former glory (before leaving for the Third Crusade), knights Robin Hood as Sir Robin of Locksley, and orders Friar Tuck to marry Robin Hood and Maid Marian.
A short finished scene from the planned original ending, featuring King Richard and revealing himself to vulture henchmen Trigger and Nutsy, appeared in the Ken Anderson episode of the 1980s Disney Channel documentary series Disney Family Album. This scene, at least in animated form, does not appear on the Most Wanted Edition DVD. | historical fiction | train | wikipedia | After the first 15 minutes of the BBC's new drama 'Robin Hood', I was pretty much certain that I wouldn't go further than the first episode.
What made sure I came back to watch the second, third and eventually entire series of this show was Lucy Griffiths as Maid Marian and Keith Allen as the deliciously ruthless Sheriff of Nottingham.
It isn't really until the seventh episode "Brothers in Arms" that things really start to pick up with the drama and story lines, and from seven onwards it is a brilliant roller-coaster ride sure to make the previous six lack-luster episodes worth the watch..
I just couldn't get on with the actress playing Maid Marion at all.I never thought I'd hear myself say this but even Kevin Costner's mediocre version of the myth of Robin Hood was more believable and much more enjoyable.
This series is a lot of things but it is definitely not the Robin Hood story.
Absolutely lack of production, the soldiers clothes look plastic, Guy of Gisborne uses a Matrix like plastic jacket, poor scenarios, foolish plots, the worst Robin Hood I've ever seen.Robin of Locksley was a noble and in the series his home was not a castle but a small house in a villa.I am an archer and you take time to shoot arrows and in this series Robin shoots arrows like from a gun machine.Look at the arrows shafts they are field points no hunting or killing shafts.The only thing that worths it is Lady Marian, she is a beauty.
When I saw that a new series of Robin Hood was coming to Prime TV, and that it was British, I found myself looking forward to seeing it, having fond memories of the 1980s series with its romance and mysticism.The new series has disappointed me thus far (five episodes so far), despite having the Sheriff of Nottingham played by the deliciously OTT Keith Allen.
Guy (Richard Armitage) is, despite being one of the baddies, by far most attractive thing in the show and he really can act.Purely as an action adventure, it's not too bad, but there's a great deal in it to deplore.The costuming, for a start.
Outlaws dressed like 21st-century street kids, complete with hooded jackets (and I could swear one of them was wearing a machine-sewn, knit-fabric tunic!), a Sheriff who dresses in what look like black polo jerseys and full-length coats with fur collars (a bit of bling and he could just about pass for a gangland pimp), and a Marian who looks as though she buys her clothes in some Seventies-revival boutique.The dialogue is an uncomfortable mish-mash of stilted pseudo 'Olde Englishe' and gratingly modern expressions, and they've taken gross liberties with the story itself.
The makers of the series really don't seem to have thought things through at all.The legend of Robin Hood, with its romance and adventure, its chivalry and championing of the common man, has well and truly stood the test of centuries, but this latest retelling might just manage to sink it.
If you wanna see a good Robin Hood, I recommend watching Errol Flynn then you will realise how terrible this BBC production is..
the supporting cast are great and Jonas Armstrong puts in a great cocky performance for an unknown actor.The back ground characters are a bit week but this is probably more due to the fact there grasp of English is limited as the series is filmed in Hungary.
Got to hand it to the BBC, take a well loved folk hero, with a cinematic pedigree of nearly a hundred years and then create the most awful version of the legend (and yes I am including the Noooo Adventures of Robin Hood).
This programme is very much like the US TV series Hercules or even Xena Warrior Princess, with the wobbly dialogue, acting and special effects except that the BBC probably spent far more per episode.
First things first, the sheer level of class in the production shows the amount of effort the have put into making this TV series, unfortunately having grown up watching Robin of Sherwood this fails miserably in comparison in every other aspect, the fact the casting director must be blind being that Robin Hood and Maid Marian are both Wayne Rooney lookalikes(just look at Marian's man jaw!) and Little John in fact being a dwarf like person instead of a giant is plain ridiculous, not to mention that they have made Robin a mouthy smart arse doesn't help, shut up and fight i say!It is a shame they have lost that essentially English feel with the dialogue seeming a bit American, the same as Dr Who.So to sum it up the effort is there, as is the budget but the execution is poor with really bad casting and boring story.
Jonas Armstrong could perhaps be a good Robin Hood - I like his gymnastic stunts, and he has a cocky swagger and arrogance that could be interesting - but he is stuck with this terrible, terrible script.
This, coupled with the shows love of attributing any scientific break though to Saracens, including at one point "Greek Fire" just reeks of, and I really hate this phrase, true Political Correctness Gone Mad. What happened to "rob from the rich and give to the poor"?Every week Robin and his Merry Men manage to stretch reality by gaining entry into Nottingham Castle via convenient hatches, holes and ladders and every one of the soldiers left guarding the place seem to go down after one punch.
I have a hard time believing anyone would enjoy this: it's neither action packed, well-written, well-acted (with a couple of exceptions), nor fun to watch.Robin's 'acting' is appalling and worst of all he has zero charisma: you can't imagine people following him to the nearest tavern for a pint of whatever ale they drank in ye olde Englande, let alone into the woods to live a life of outlawery.
The only one with charisma is Guy of Gisborne and while I love a good villain, it is a bit of a problem for a show called 'Robin Hood' when Guy is more interesting than Robin.If they can't write they should at least throw more action on the screen to ensure we don't have to hear their excruciating dialogue.
A lot of us feel that we have hit the "mother lode" because the majority of "home grown" programs in North America are for the most part a great wasteland of mindless drivel.I had looked forward to seeing "Robin Hood", but have been rather disappointed so far.
I just caught the first episode of this show, and if that was anything to go by, things need to improve greatly for this to rate anything more than awful.The pacing of the show was pedestrian, the lead actor made Kevin Costner look animated, Much was portrayed as a moron, rather than the simple miller's son of the story.Keith Allen's portrayal of the Sheriff of Nottingham was way too campy.It came across as politically correct drivel, not so much Robin Hood, more Robin Hoodie.The writing was awful.Sorry but Robin Of Sherwood with Michael Praed/Jason Connery in the lead role is still the definitive portrayal of the legend.I only gave it 1 out of 10 because a zero rating is not supported..
The story lines are repetitive and uninspiring, and rely on sporadic bouts of violence to relieve the tedium; apart from Allen and Armitage, the acting varies from the indifferent to the indecently bad.It seems a mistake was made when Marian was disposed of in the previous season; with her went the sole interesting character dynamic of which the show could boast.
Some of the finest and best versions, most recently (in modern times), of the Robin Hood legend have been Michael Praed/Jason Connery's interpretation in Richard Carpenter's "Robin of Sherwood".However with the BBC's take on the bow-shooting, swash-buckling action series filling in the Doctor Who Saturday night void this version has left me feeling that there could have been better pieces of tripe on TV than this.
Yes, people have a tendency to slate things before they are given a real chance, but with me it's been given every possible chance to turn around and really "WOW" me
failing miserably I might add.The acting is terrible (save for Keith Allen's scenery chewing Sheriff), the stories are poorly construct, the action is ridiculous, clichéd crap and Lucy Griffiths is the blandest-looking Marion I've seen.
Maybe a little, but either way I'll stick with my "Robin of Sherwood" DVD's & I'd urge anyone who's maybe too young to know what that series is like to give it a go & be prepared to see something light years ahead of this poor incarnation of the green-tighted bandit..
I watched the new BBC adaptation of Robin Hood last night.
You're not interesting in being drawn in (if it were at all possible - believe me, it isn't), because they keep kicking you back out of the story by either using a stupid camera technique when none were needed, or by just plain stupid camera work.The BBC needs to take a good hard look at what passes for drama these days outside of their own network, as this fails by the longest shot Robin is capable of (which is probably about eight miles if his powers in this version are anything to go by).
The whole look and feel of the show is far too modern for the period and the producers seem to have randomly changed the spellings of both character names (eg GUY OF GISBURNE) and places (LOXLEY) from previous incarnations of Robin Hood.
(I haven't been able to establish whether Paul actually had a hand in episodes 1 and 2 so, if he didn't, my apologies for casting aspersions on his writing talents.) If this series takes off, it'll either be due to the quality of Keith Allen's performance or the good looks of Richard Armitage.Give me Robin of Sherwood any day!.
thats all i can say, i think you fail to realise what a great Hero Robin Hood is you were just taking the mickey out of him, i couldn't believe how bad the show was the director is a total shambles and i'd be amazed if he finds work after this job, All the shots of the town were miserable and lifeless there was nothing there and it was made worse by the terrible terrible performances, Much and Robin were attempting to be a comedy duo that feel on there face a pierced the flesh straight away.
Oh dear.The BBC's much publicised new version of Robin Hood makes the Patrick Bergin movie version look like a masterpiece.Zero appeal from the eponymous character, a humdrum script, middling action scenes and the revelation that mascara apparently was developed in the era of merry men - well, that's one excuse for having one photogenic character parading around like something from a 2006 fashion mag.Only Keith Allen as the Sheriff of Nottingham makes this worthwhile.His deliciously corrupt tyrant adds levity and menace to the rest of the poorly realised scenario.With David Tennant as Hood and Billie Piper as Maid Marian, this could have worked...
To some extent, any historical telling of Robin Hood is doomed by this same problem - everyone's heard the story a million times and there's not much you can do about that.However, this BBC rendition manages to be disappointing in that all they've done is go read the usual books, write a screenplay based on just that and go film it without even trying to be artistic.They could have done a swords and sorcery version - but didn't.They could have done a martial arts version - but didn't.They could have done a painstakingly-detailed historically-accurate-to-the-period version - but didn't.They could have done a comedy version - tried, but failed IMHO.It ends up dull -hence the vote of 3.
I particularly liked the fact that she doesn't welcome Robin back with open arms when he finally returns after 5 years (given that he had left her and his obligations back home to go fight in a pointless war).And I have to say, I loved that the series was so light-hearted and anachronistic and over the top.
In fact, I felt a little let down when they went for the more serious feel and historically accurate costumes in series 3 (no doubt to try and appease the critics).There is plenty of good old fashioned fighting, but no real violence and no images of blood and gore, even when people get run through or shot with an arrow.
Other problems with the show is that it makes to much of a effort to have a political sub-context, such as comparing the relationship between England and the Vactian to current Anglo-American relations and being political correct, having black and Muslim characters that wouldn't have been around in the Middle Ages.It's just not a good show and there are better versions of Robin Hood out there..
Although I can appreciate Morgan Freemans character Azeem, in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, which had a ring of truth to it, I cannot understand a black man playing Friar Tuck and a woman vying for the position of Sheriff of Nottingham.
They're living in Sherwood Forest but Hannibal Smith has been replaced by this sensitive looking guy who escaped from the WB (good grief, Maid Marian is more butch than he is!) But not to worry the rest of the gang is there and, just like in the old days, there's lots of weapons but none of the bad guys are ever killed by the good guys.There's some new twists - the Sheriff is a surrogate for the U.S. which is fun for awhile and a black guy's the Sheriff's Master at Arms (no really, there were lots of educated black people in Britain during the 12th century).
The character Much is adorable, Robin Hood is ruggedly handsome and heroic, Marian is amazing and inspiring, Guy of Gisborne is hot in leather and the sheriff is the best villain since Darth Vader.
It's action packed high kitsch entertainment, it is amusing but it would be nice to actually not overly glamorise him, Jonas is a good choice as you could have the bad boy thing going on with him, but why is he always portrayed as a knight in shining armour for people, only one tale really mentions much charity from him, he mostly robbed from the rich and kept for himself and his band of men, plus his love is always portrayed as Marian which was a much later addition to the tales and his true love before her arrival was Little John.
Second, a bit of direction for a cast that has promise: Richard Armitage is wasted (he looks more like a panto villain from amdram land most of the time - and he is a LOT better than that!) and Keith Allen - an actor with great presence (watch him as a devil worshipper in a Morse re-run to see evil incarnate), needs more to do than a walk-on imitation of Alan Rickman's sheriff!
The story lines don't even have to be that realistic to make the show watchable (and in spite of myself, I have watched most of it; perhaps hoping for better things?) - remember Robin of Sherwood, which got heavily into the mystical side of the legend (Herne the Hunter, etc).
Sadly enough, Robin Hood was so creepy that I found the romance with Guy/Marian far more touching and at points even tragic and beautiful.The realism and historical accuracy are very bad.
The Robin Hood in this case is in the first part of the series a rather uninteresting character, but became a little clearer at the end of the second part.
I loved the Adventures of Robin Hood on TV back in the 60s and it still has appeal today with fine actors and good story lines, and if you ever get chance to give it a rewatch then do.
The casting of the characters is brilliant, jonas armstrong plays a great robin, and the sheriff and gisbourne have both been cast very well.
I really like Richard Armitage as Sir guy of Gisborne and Jonas Armstrong does well as robin.
I'd just like to say that the BBC's new Robin Hood is really good.
As to Jonas Armstrong (Robin Hood) being ugly, I thought is was really cute and quite good looking.
I thought the script was very well written and is definitely the best Robin Hood in a long time, it was exciting, entertaining and a jolly good ride to say the least.
He seems to have based his sheriff on Alan Rickmans in robin hood prince of thieves, and while i enjoyed that, I'm not sure how Keith Allen's similar performance will hold out in a 13 part series.
Really the only that I have ever ventured to pay for to buy the series DVDs (which are always expensive).Once a week, my parents and I sit down together to watch Robin Hood (taped) on BBC America.
So far I've watched all but one of the episodes aired on BBC1, and I've had mixed feelings.If what you're looking for is something to entertain the kids, with swooshy noises and men in leather, this series is an excellent way of spending 45 minutes of your Saturday evening.
I still loved the whole Robin Hood story so will watch it a little longer and give it a chance and I do enjoy Keith Allen as a baddie..
Robin Hood was far more fun to watch than Doctor Who - which was far better but was marred by boring long dialogue scenes in favour of action and death.
I love this modern day type robin hood, i think that there is a good strong cast.
i also think that the sheriff is played great by Keith Allen with a great cocky Robin Hood played by Jonas Armstrong to annoy him. |
tt0047479 | Shield for Murder | Lieutenant Barney Nolan (Edmond O'Brien), a 16-year veteran of the police force, has had enough. In a secluded alley late one night, he fatally shoots a bookmaker in the back and steals the $25,000 he was carrying. He then claims the man was killed trying to escape custody. Sergeant Mark Brewster (John Agar), his friend and protégé, believes him, as does the Captain of Detectives, Captain Gunnarson (Emile Meyer). However, newspaper reporter Cabot (Herbert Butterfield) suspects otherwise.
Packy Reed (Hugh Sanders), the dead man's boss, sends private investigators Fat Michaels (Claude Akins) and Laddie O'Neil to tell Barney he wants to see him. Packy gives Barney one chance to return the money, but Barney is uncooperative.
Barney takes his girlfriend, Patty Winters (Marla English), to see a house for sale, then slips away to hide the money outside. When he asks Patty to marry him, she accepts.
Deaf-mute Ernst Sternmuller goes to the police station, but gives a note explaining he witnessed the crime to Barney, not recognizing him. Barney goes to his apartment to try to buy his silence, but when Sternmuller turns him down, angrily pushes the old man away. Sternmuller falls, strikes his head, and dies. Barney stages it to look like an accident, unaware the man had written down his account. Mark finds it and takes it to Gunnarson, who initiates a manhunt for Barney.
Meanwhile, Barney runs into Michaels and O'Neil at a restaurant. Furious that the pair had harassed Patty, he savagely beats them both into unconsciousness with the butt of his revolver.
When Barney finds out he is a wanted man, he persuades Patty to pack up and start a new life with him (without telling her he is on the run). Mark tries to take him in, but is knocked out. Barney changes into his old police uniform and goes into hiding. He arranges for passage to Buenos Aires, but when he goes to pick up the ticket at a crowded high school pool, finds he has been set up. He and a bandaged Michaels shoot it out, while panicked swimmers dive for cover. Barney manages to kill Michaels and heads to the house to retrieve the money. Mark learns from Patty (now aware her boyfriend is a fugitive) the only place the $25,000 could have been hidden. The police converge on the house. When Barney starts shooting, they have no choice but to kill him. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0095560 | Mac and Me | A NASA spacecraft has landed on an unknown planet and begins to take rock and soil samples. Four aliens discover it and are sucked up through its vacuum, after which it makes its way back to Earth. The aliens are able to escape from a military base by using their powers (with which they can destroy or heal anything they touch). During the escape, the youngest one hides in a passing van, occupied by a wheelchair-bound boy named Eric Cruise, his older brother, Michael, and their single mother, Janet, who are moving to California from Illinois.
Shortly after the Cruise family arrives at their new home, Eric becomes suspicious of the alien's presence. The next morning, he finds that the creature ends up ruining much of the house and learns its identity, but is blamed alongside his brother by their mother for what has happened. After seeing the creature again, Eric tries to catch up to him, but ends up sliding down a hill and falls into a lake, where he nearly drowns, but is rescued by the alien. Eric is not believed at all when he tries to tell his family about the creature's actions.
Later that night, he sets a trap with the help of his new friend, Debbie, who had also seen the alien. The two trap him inside a vacuum cleaner, which malfunctions and causes the entire neighborhood to suffer a power surge. After the alien is released, Michael now believes Eric, but it leaves before Janet can be convinced. Eric's behavior towards the alien changes after he fixes all of the damage he caused to the house, and leaves behind several newspaper clippings which Eric believes are an attempt to communicate.
FBI agents Wickett and Zimmerman, who had been present when the four aliens had escaped from the base, have tracked down the youngest one to the Cruise residence. The two are immediately recognized by Eric and Michael. Eric is forced to take the alien, whom he has now named MAC (Mysterious Alien Creature), to a birthday party at the McDonald's where Debbie's older sister, Courtney, works. Wickett and Zimmerman follow, but, now disguised in a teddy suit, MAC starts a dance number as a distraction and escapes with Eric on his wheelchair. After Wickett and Zimmerman chase them through a nearby neighborhood and shopping mall with additional help, they are rescued by Michael. After catching up with the agents, Janet inadvertently learns from Wickett that MAC is indeed real.
Eric, Michael, Debbie, and Courtney decide to help reunite MAC with the other three aliens, revealed to be his family. With MAC's help, they travel towards the outskirts of Palmdale, California and manage to find them in an abandoned mine. While stopping at a gas station, they accidentally alert security. After MAC's father steals a gun from a security guard, the police arrive and an unintended shootout takes place in the parking lot followed by an explosion, with Eric being caught in the crossfire and killed. Once Wickett, Zimmerman, and Janet arrive by helicopter, MAC and his family use their powers to bring Eric back to life.
For saving Eric, MAC and his family are granted citizenship, with the Cruise family, their neighbors, as well as Wickett and Zimmerman in attendance at the ceremony.
The final scene shows MAC's father driving his family, along with the kids who helped them. MAC, who is chewing gum, blows a bubble that bears the message, "We'll be back!" (The planned sequel was later cancelled.) | cult | train | wikipedia | But this poorly done film made its way onto one of my cable movie channels last night, and I feel the need to have a violent, outward reaction outside of the projectile vomiting I experienced.People, this film is bad.
And forgive me, but anybody who finds this 95-minute commercial for McDonalds and Coca-Cola to be warm-hearted or well done in any way knows not a thing about what makes a movie good, and needs a great deal of emotional counseling.First, let's reiterate that point about this being an extended commercial.
Next, there are basic things that make a film "good," like strong acting, a well-written script, superior camerawork or quality special effects.
Not only is the plot just a poor carbon copy, but even the title of this attrocity becomes an act of thievery when it's revealed that "Mac" stands for "Mysterious Alien Creature." I'm not even the biggest fan of uber-cutesy "E.T." either, but at least there the attempts at manipulation are somewhat subtle.
Product placement, Bad dialogue and a Musical song and dance number (in a McDonalds nonetheless) makes this movie a cult classic.
Perhaps someone who has watched the movie repeatedly and considers it a cult favorite could enlighten us....?I do like the fact that the producers cast a kid in a wheelchair as the star, but the writing was awful and the plot was laughably bad.
However, out of morbid curiosity, I watched this film from opening to closing credits.From start to finish, from effects to acting, from dialog to directing - Mac and Me is a very bad movie.
Overall, I recommend this movie to any soccer mom you wants to promote bad haircuts,junk food, and night mares of gangly, demented looking aliens who are obsessed with pucker ing their lips to their kids..
(In case you don't remember, Coke was featured throughout the film, and in the end it was the magical cure for whatever was ailing the goofy aliens.)Good gosh.
So, I went to YouTube (no way was I going to plunk down one red cent to rent this piece 'o crap) and proved myself right.Bad acting, shameless product placement,the most stupid looking aliens in cinematic history and totally unoriginal storyline (E.T. anyone?), not to mention an 80's break dance scene included for no apparent reason only makes one wonder how this could have made it to "straight-to-video" let alone theatrical release.
This was one of them, and I'm quite surprised that Steven Spielberg didn't sue for royalties when this E.T. rip-off was released to theaters in '88.Honestly, if you take Mac And Me as a kiddie film, it's not bad.
However, the fact that it's a rip-off of one the most popular films ever made, has a horrible script that not even Denzel Washington could improve on, and is filled with product placements galore just makes the film absolutely horrible.I certainly remember that dance scene at the McDonald's; at the time, shows like Kids Incorporated and Kid Videos, which were corny and cheesy kiddie shows with lip-synching rugrats with attitudes were quite popular then.
Also, Ronald McDonald earned a Razzie award as "Worst New Actor".Although the film did have one redeeming benefit (some of the money it made would be donated to Ronald McDonald House, a worthy cause), you somehow wonder if the idea of starring a non-acting paraplegic child thespian was a good idea.
This speed-course in half-assed, capitalist film-making includes, as noted, a plot lifted intact from a more successful movie (Why reinvent the wheel?), takes the form of a 90 minute McDonalds commercial (You want to lose 90 minutes of selling time?), interrupted by Coke commercials, has an alien that looks like a 4 dollar rubber fetus (because it is a 4 dollar rubber fetus), a (sym)pathetic hero in a wheelchair, and a script produced after sniffing the finest glue one could buy at the 99 cent store.
Awe man i love this movie, i remember going to my friends house just to watch it, when we were little.
This movie is so emotional, I feel so bad for both the kid, and the alien!
Nothing' worse than curling up with a six pack of coke, a Big Mac and a bag of Skittles and watching this movie with the ones you love..
Chaos ensues as Mac tries to find his family and the idiot F.B.I. agents try to find him.This movie has been criticized galore for it's constant references to products.
Mac is an ugly puppet, as his family are downright scary looking.Dozens of mistakes can be seen throughout the movie, but this is a small thing compared to the incompetence of the rest of the movie.
Yes, that's right, this great movie has lots of hidden messages.Like when little Mac's parents are calling to him from their desert planet (I think it's the same one as in Star Wars), if you play it backwards they are reading satanic messages!
For the life of me I cannot figure out why Steven Spielberg didn't sue the makers of "Mac and Me" for copying "E.T." (then again, maybe it's better that he didn't, since it would've given the ripoff undeserved publicity).It should come as no surprise that this litany of awfulness regularly shows up on lists of the worst movies ever made.
I have just encountered a movie so bad even as an ET rip-off, but I've also heard from Wikipedia.org that this was made to promote McDonalds to kids.
Not exactly his best score, but still pretty good.Overall, Mac and Me isn't exactly the worst movie I've seen, but it's still a horrible film that needs to be avoided.
the sponsors who invested in this movie would have been disappointed and if McDonalds were hoping to raise money for the McDonalds house charity were idiots in fact this movie cost the charity money I mean that money could have saved people from starving to death but they decided to waste it on this insult to entertainment it makes Garbage Pail Kids The Movie look like The Godfather, it makes Howard The Duck look like Indiana Jones it makes Slumdog millionaire look like the Shawshank Redemption and thats why Mac and Me is the worst Si-fi movie of all time, AVOID THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS!!.
The acting was bad and the ending was so stupid....Id like to see the people who invested in this movie..I have a bridge to sell them in Brooklyn..
This is one of those "little boy meets alien" type of movie that was common in the 80s, and it gives you a fun, warm nostalgic feeling when you watch it.
These "Mysterious Alien Creature"s , or "MAC"s, are an amazing bunch that can be literally sucked into a vacuum tube, conduct electricity with their hands and still be able to swim and take showers, and can be rescued from death by drinking Coca Cola.The main character in the movie is Eric, a wheelchair-bound boy who moves with his family from Illinois to California so his mom can work at Sears and somehow afford a 3 bedroom house.
What you get is Mac and Me. This movie is not a harmless family film.
awful flickit's so obviously an E.T. knockoff, and sponsored by McDonal's....i mean, there are so many scenes involving McDonald's, but not happy with that they even called the stupid-looking-ridiculously-poor-made alien MAC !it is so pathetic, when this garbage ends (alien family riding in a car), it is clearly stated that there would be a sequel (message written in the bubble gum balloon sticking out of one of the idiotic aliens)But, to our relief, the sequel never got produced (one of the rare instances in which Hollywood creative brains have seemed to show a bit of respect for the audience).
Unfortunately, I had the misfortune of glimpsing it one day on television and mistakenly figured I'd watch at little to see how bad it was.I can think of nothing good about this film.
In addition, the acting is utterly abysmal and what I saw of the story appeared to be a moronic rip off of already tired elements from E.T., itself not exactly a great cinematic achievement.Apparently, there is much more about this film that is awful, such as alleged Coke and McDonald's plugs and dance routines, etc., but I couldn't stand the film long enough for those elements to lodge themselves in my brain and I cannot personally comment on them.
If you haven't seen it rush to your nearest video rental place and try to find it and if they don't have it buy it online a.s.a.p.I don't know why people criticize this movie the way they do its good family fun!.
And older viewers are likely to appreciate it on yet another level for its genuine good nature and surprisingly heartfelt sentiments about issues such as friendship, family, and disability.The alien in the film is funny but not scary looking and little kids will enjoy watching him get into mischief, make friends with humans, and try to get back to his family.That said, there are also many, many scenes in this film that are of the "so bad they're good" variety.
He's shown as a completely normal kid (except for the fact that he has an alien friend, of course).Surprisingly, despite all the ways in which this film is bad, one way it isn't is in its underlying sweetness.
I looked at the child actors and none of them have been in anything much since Mac and Me. The wheelchair kid has not even had a little background role in a TV series or anything.
Moments like this are what makes movies as strong as they are today.The first time I saw "Mac & Me", I expected a sappy over-sentimental film (ala The Right Stuff), but instead, I saw a blazing masterpiece of American cinema.
How about the part where they suck the alien in a vacuum cleaner as a first impression and the girl wearing the vacuum cleaner on her back starts scaling the wall and slides around wheelchair-kid's house (that was the most memorable part).The soundtrack - now I don't criticise soundtracks often but the soundtrack to this movie is over the top when doing things right.
In comparison to the driver movies they look like independent films without sponsors compared to this - you have Aliens that can't live without Coca-Cola, McDonalds or Skittles - you read that right.Now unlike other films on Wikipedia's List Of Films Considered The Worst (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_considered_the_worst) that I have seen (I deliberately look so people won't say that I need to see a bad movie) I can actually see some kid liking this movie - but it is not for the whole family - unless you want a laugh."We'll be back" - not really..
Isn't it odd to think back on a movie you watched hundreds of times as a kid and you can only recall odd bits of it?
But thinking about it now all that comes to mind is a kid in a wheel chair, aliens in a cave, a van, little cups with handles (which as a 3 year old I swore pretzels) and McDonalds.
I don't know; it was bad, leave me alone.Interestingly, the young lady who works at McDonald's (The neighbor?) was marginally attractive, yet her other film roles are nonexistent.Oh, and did I ask why no one lost their mind when they realized that THERE IS AN ALIEN BEING IN THE MINIVAN?!?Finally, I know it's a McDonald's movie, but it was a little too weird P.C. for me--one of the kids was Wheels from the BK Kids Club sans the wig and bad glasses.
It's so pervasive Mac and Me should be considered one long commercial and it should have been free to watch when the film was released!
Mac and Me truly fits the bill as one of the best bad movies of all time.
Poor Mac is like the Wiley Coyote of cute aliens.The only other difference is that this time Elliot is in a wheelchair.
This way McDonald's which produced the film can boast about how the Ronald McDonald House helps the families of crippled kids.In conclusion I can think of no reason to watch this film other than the fact that 'E.T.'s Blue Ray release has been totally bastardized by new shoddy CGI FX and reedited to be more friendly.
A Mysterious Alien Creature (MAC) trying to escape from NASA is befriended by a young boy in a wheel chair (Jade Calegory).This is basically the same story as "E.T.", except instead of Reese's Pieces we have Skittles, and instead of a bike we have a wheelchair.
(even flight of the navigator is better than this one), this thing rips off E.T. and gets away with it, I Saw this on cable when I Was a kid and I Hated it, it is a piece of trash, there is nothing good about it, you know the boy and it's alien, this is more like a McDonald's commercial than a movie, even the special effects are a train wreck, the acting is horrible, the screenplay is a disaster on every scene and the writing is a train wreck, believe me, this movie deserves to be one of the worst movies of all time and it shows.
I have watched this movie many times, and have enjoyed the dance scene in McDonalds.
I loved the fact they used a little boy in a wheel-chair, not many fun films did that in the 1980's, well one's that were aimed at kids that is.
- The Extra Terrestrial ' and the much derided product placement of McDonald's and Coke, there is still much to recommend of this quirky and at times quite touching sci-fi adventure.The plot has an alien family sucked aboard a NASA space probe on Mars and accidentally brought back to Earth.
Mac looks so much like E.T. that I thought it was a sequel to the Speilberg flick, well, up to when the "movie" started to get really bad.Why rip-off E.T. anyway?
Everyone knows your ripping it off, because E.T. is the only 'good' (I use that term loosely) 'Alien-and-boy-form-unlikely-friendship' movie.
This movie features an alien known as Mac that befriends a boy named um, Eric.
Mac and Me maybe similar like E.T. but I really like the movie.It has many good moments and and is some times funny.The acting is good and the story is fine.
If you want to sit on down to a fun-loving, excellent, beautiful, nerdy, happy, nice type of family film from that period of time known as the 80s, then watch this movie.
I remember when I saw that movie in elementary school & I thought Mac is so adorable & It's a good family film about a boy in a wheelchair helping the little alien to find his family.Even though it got very bad reviews & It's a rip-off of E.T.,I don't care & I love Mac & me,it's a gr8 cult classic that got Mac in a bear costume doing a dance number @ a party @ McDonald's,Mac driving a toy car while being chased by the neighborhood dogs & it was very touching that Mac reunited with his family.I would be watching that movie when it's on YouTube or that I'll be getting the DVD over & over again when I feel like it & The ending have really touched my heart when Mac and his family use their powers to bring the boy back from the dead & they became citizens in the U.S.,when mac blew a bubble from the gum that said "we'll be back",I don't think there's a sequel coming but,I wish they'll be 1 so I can see it.
And we can't forget the grossly obvious product placement (apparently the aliens drink Coke on their planet), the insanely ugly main character MAC (a name which is never actually used in the film I think), and a very 1980's dance contest in the middle of McDonald's.
I'm talking about grade-A quality garbage, here.Mac and Me was a film I frequently watched an embarrassing, agonizing, shameless marketing scheme fueled by McDonalds featuring a plot ripped off of E.T. And I ate it all up I used to love this movie.Watching it now is like a slap in the face.
Or perhaps I'm discrediting myself I wasn't that stupid, but I was naïve enough to believe, at least, that it was a fun movie, and unlike anything I had ever seen before.Well, at least one opinion remains -- it is unlike anything I've ever seen before a rip-off so bad beyond words that it's almost as unbelievably awful as another shameless E.T. knock-off, Pod People, my choice for the worst film of all-time and another 'so-bad-it's-good' gem that is actually so bad it becomes good, then bad again, where it continues in this cycle until it becomes downright petrifying.The film's protagonist is wheelchair-bound Michael (Jonathan Ward), an adolescent who moves to a new city and finds himself meeting up with a strange puppet err, alien named 'Mac' (I guess?), who waddles around like E.T. and is searching for his parents, who were picked up by a NASA space probe and are now out in California doing who-knows-what.
Some of that applies to Mac and Me since it is such a commercial, buy-this-product-after-you're-done-watching-the-movie sort of experience unfortunately there is the odd moment where the movie doesn't focus on its bizarre alien creatures or Coca-Cola or Ronald McDonald or brand wheelchairs or space exploration companies and demands its so-called 'actors' speak their lines.
The alien did nothing but raise hell for the kids and their families, there were even a few cringeworthy dance numbers (in a McDonald's parking lot no less) and an ending that looked and felt cornier then any field in Iowa.
In fact, most people that do remember this film remember most vividly the McDonald's break-dance scene. |
tt0064933 | El mundo del los muertos | Years after a zombie apocalypse, survivors have set up outposts across the United States. One outpost in the city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, contains a feudal-like government. Bordered on two sides by rivers and on the third by an electric fence, the city has become a sanctuary. The rich and powerful live in a luxury high-rise called Fiddler's Green, while the rest of the population subsists in squalor. Paul Kaufman (Dennis Hopper), the city's ruthless ruler, has sponsored Dead Reckoning, an armored personnel vehicle that can travel through the zombie-infested areas with ease.
Riley Denbo (Simon Baker) is the designer and commander of Dead Reckoning. Unlike Kaufman, Riley is respected for his work in protecting the citizens, as well as providing them with food and medical supplies that the citizens can no longer safely acquire themselves. Using Dead Reckoning, Riley and his crew ventured into areas overrun with zombies to scavenge for supplies. On this mission, they notice many zombies exhibiting intelligent behavior. One such zombie is "Big Daddy" (Eugene Clark), formerly a gas station owner.
After the mission, Riley retires from commanding Dead Reckoning. Back to the city, he gets to Chihuahua (Phil Fondacaro)'s bar. There, he sees a hooker named Slack (Asia Argento) being forced in a cage with some zombies to entertain guests. Riley and Charlie (Robert Joy) save Slack; Charlie kills Chihuahua in the ensuing chaos. Riley, Charlie and Slack are arrested. Slack reveals that Kaufman ordered her execution, for helping Mulligan (Bruce McFee) to instigate rebellion among the poor.
Meanwhile, Cholo DeMora (John Leguizamo), Dead Reckoning's second in command, is denied an apartment in Fiddler's Green despite his service to Kaufman. In retaliation, Cholo takes over Dead Reckoning and threatens to destroy Fiddler's Green with it. Kaufman approaches Riley and tasks him, as well as Charlie and Slack, to retrieve Dead Reckoning. They are supervised by Manolete (Sasha Roiz), Motown (Krista Bridges), and Pillsbury (Pedro Miguel Arce).
On the way, Manolete is bitten and then killed by Slack. After catching up with Dead Reckoning, Riley approaches the vehicle alone. Charlie, Slack, and Pillsbury follow him after subduing Motown and leaving her behind. Realising Riley is working for Kaufman, Cholo holds both Riley and Charlie at gunpoint. As he prepares to fire Dead Reckoning's missiles at Fiddler's Green, Riley uses a small device and deactivates Dead Reckoning's weapons systems; he then destroys the device. Motown, who had regained consciousness, opens fire and nearly kills both Riley and Cholo (who is maimed by one of the gunshots). She is bitten by a zombie and killed by Slack. Riley convinces Cholo to allow him escape North and to join him, but the latter decides to head back to Fiddler's Green to deal with Kaufman; his partner, Foxy (Tony Nappo) accompanies him. While en route, Cholo is bitten by a zombie and leaves to kill Kaufman by himself. Riley takes over Dead Reckoning once again and returns to Fiddler's Green.
Elsewhere, Big Daddy (who had gathered a large group of zombies) learns that they can walk safely underwater. He leads the zombies to cross the river to the human city. They take the guards by surprise and begin massacring the people. As a result of the zombies making it into the city, the electric fences that once kept the zombies out have now become a wall to trap them and the humans inside. Seeing the city overrun, Kaufman runs with his money, and encounters a zombified Cholo in the parking garage. As the two struggle, Big Daddy kills both with a propane tank.
Riley's group arrives at the city only to come upon a drawbridge having already been drawn. Riley leaves to bring the bridge down, but a small group of zombies begin to attack Dead Reckoning. Riley and the others manage to dispose and evade the zombies. After crossing the bridge, they helplessly witness people being killed by the zombies. Realizing it is too late to save them, they mercy kill them with missiles. It is then revealed that most of the poor people were led to safety by Mulligan, thus surviving the assault. Riley and Mulligan share a well-meaning goodbye as they split up with their groups. As they see Big Daddy and the zombies, who are, curiously, not attacking the surviving humans, leaving the city, Riley decides to leave them alone, citing that they are just looking for a place to go to. While lighting up the rest of the fireworks (which were earlier used to distract the zombies but are now useless since they don't distract the horde anymore), Riley's group set off for Canada on Dead Reckoning. | revenge, murder | train | wikipedia | Solid Santo.... Making very good use of a creepy score and some genuinely atmospheric cinematography (not to mention enough action to keep things interesting), THE WORLD OF THE DEAD turns out to be one of the better Santo movies. Our hero gets the lion's share of time on screen (which always helps in a Santo movie), and is, in fact, aided and abetted by longtime friendly rival Blue Demon. Blue, it turns out, has been resurrected by a witch to help dispense her own particular brand of justice to the Santo of today, whose ancestor (Santo in a 16th century get-up) brought about her untimely demise (she was burned at the stake). Blue Demon fans, please take note: our hero is under a spell cast by the aforementioned witch and is not bad for the sake of being Bad; in fact, by film's end... Well, you'll see. At one point, Santo enters The World of the Dead in a VERY effective sequence that includes stock clips from HERCULES AT THE CENTER OF THE EARTH. One more thing I feel inclined to mention here is a VERY graphic sequence (following Santo's stabbing) of open heart surgery: the operation is shown in various stages, and it's the real thing. For my money, it lasts much too long. That quibble aside, SANTO Y BLUE DEMON EN EL MUNDO DE LOS MUERTOS is a VERY entertaining movie, and, as stated, one of the better Santo movies. |
tt3409392 | Timbuktu | The city of Timbuktu is under the occupation of extremist Islamists bearing a jihadist black flag. Kidane is a cattle herder who lives outside of the city. One day, one of his cows accidentally damages the net of a fisherman. The enraged fisherman kills the cow. Kidane confronts the fisherman and accidentally shoots him dead. The jihadists arrest Kidane and, per sharia law, demand a blood money payment of 40 cattle to the fisherman's family. As Kidane has only seven cattle, he is sentenced to death. His wife shows up at his execution with a pistol, and as they run to each other the husband attempts to stop her. The executioners gun them both down.
Throughout the film there are subsidiary scenes showing the reaction of the population to the jihadists' rule, which are portrayed as absurd. A female fishmonger must wear gloves even when selling fish. Music is banned; a woman is sentenced to 40 lashes for singing, and 40 lashes for being in the same room as a man not of her family. A couple are buried up to their necks in sand and stoned to death for adultery. Young men play football with an imaginary ball as sports are banned. A local imam tries to curb the jihadists' excesses with sermons.
The failure of the occupiers to live up to their own rules is hinted at, for instance when one of them is seen smoking a cigarette. Another group of jihadists from France spend their days talking about their favorite football teams.
Characters speak in Tamasheq, Bambara, Arabic, French, and on a few occasions English. The mobile phone is an important means of communication. | murder | train | wikipedia | Unsure, also, whether people can tell when different actors use different languages (Arabic, Tuareg, Bambara etc.).The soccer game scene is one of the best I saw this year on the big screen, and the one with the killing of astounding beauty.Definitely a great director at work here, despite obvious limited resources..
Bottom line: there is a good reason why this film is nominated for the Best Foreign Language Oscar, as it is a deeply moving film that will stay with you long after you have seen it.The movie finally opened this weekend at my local art-house theater here in Cincinnati, and I went to see it right away.
One of the movies that's still in the running for a "Best Foreign Language Film" Oscar nomination, is Timbuktu.
I was expecting brutal large scale massacres along the lines of ISIS in Syria or Iraq, but most of the jihadists' violent actions are selective: a woman receives lashes for singing and a couple is stoned to death for committing adultery.Sissako doesn't focus a great deal of time in fleshing out his victims, although a couple of his characters hit the mark: the odd but interesting Haitian female shaman who isn't afraid to thumb her nose as her oppressors as well as a local Iman who attempts to reason with the jihadists over one of their soldiers taking a young girl as his bride against her wishes.Sissako's main character who constitutes the main part of the narrative, is Kidane, a local herder who lives out in the countryside with his wife and daughter.
Filmed in neighbouring Mauritania, the movie is full of beautiful landscapes, nice buildings and good-looking people.
And at its heart lie the sacred principles of tolerance and dialogue." King Hussein I A popular cliché is to refer to "Timbuktu" as the farthest, out-of-it-all place on earth, like "You can go to Timbuktu for all I care." However, in writer/ director Abderrahmane Sissako's remarkable film, Timbuktu, the world rests in miniature in the sand dunes of gorgeous Mali, where a Bedouin family can languish in the shade of their tent while a small boy herds their cattle and nearby fishmongers ply their trade by a welcoming pond.
The Long-distance wide-angle shot of the two men in a death struggle is remarkably beautiful and ominous, like David Lean's memorable Lawrence of Arabia scenes.The local jihadist authority follows God's law in this case while it takes a woman into custody for not wearing gloves and carries out murderous punishment on musicians.
Nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Film, Abderrahmane Sissako's ("Bamako") Timbuktu is a series of vignettes depicting the reactions of the people to the harsh laws of the Islamists seeking to impose Sharia law across Mali.
The men are doing "jihad," periodically shooting at the animal with assault weapons as one of the hunters explains the strategy: "Don't kill it, tire it," he says, "That is how we win." The film centers on Kidane (Ibrahim Ahmed), a peaceful Tuareg herdsman who lives with his wife, Satima (Toulou Kiki), their 13-year-old daughter, Toya (Layle Walet Mohamed), and adopted son, Issan (Mehdi A.G. Mohamed) in a tent close to town which is now run by the Islamic police.The family, like others, is forced to live under rules that prohibit smoking, video games, Malian and Western music, and football, though the Jihadists are hypocritical in flouting these same laws themselves.
While the film does not poeticizing injustice, many visual moments are nonetheless works of art: Kidane walking across the water like a Christ figure after killing Amadou and Jihadists shooting into a bush that resembles a female organ.Despite their slogans and bravura, however, Sissako depicts the terrorists as insecure in their beliefs.
Though Sissako does not raise any false hopes about the future, it should be noted that the Jihadists were driven out by French forces after one year in power, and, if the film is correct, much of their success may have been due to the resilience and inner strength of the women of the village who never tired and refused to run..
The fact that this film and director Abderrahmane Sissako has been readily accepted by the western world is not only evidence that audiences are willing to see films depicting extremism, but are willing to accept a more nuanced version than the caricatures we've conjured in out own minds.There are many stories covering the breadth of Timbuktu, though the main and most powerful tale concerns Kidane (Ahmed) and his family.
Another almost absurd aside includes a group of school children playing soccer without a ball since the sport itself is forbidden.The Jihadists themselves are portrayed as foolish hypocrites; sneaking smoldering puffs of cigarettes smoke and conversing about their favorite soccer teams when no one is watching.
"Timbuktu" is a brave film from Mauritania that shows what it's like in a small African town after it's been taken over by Jihadists determined to enforce Sharia Law. However, I should warn you--the film is far from enjoyable and seems rather hopeless and it also lacks the usual resolution you'd expect in a movie.
I said the movie is about nothing less than man's soul and his right to live the life it dictates, whether in religious study and worship to a deity or simply to herd cattle, treasure your family, and strum your guitar.
In Timbuktu, we are exposed to the depths of radicalism and jihadists taking control of a small village where men are suddenly banned from listening music, and women are forced to wear gloves while out on the street.
Despite the regime of terror imposed by the Jihadists, people stay strong, they resist, they still sing, laugh, play music or football.The message is that oppression cannot kill joy, dignity, faith, hope.The movie also shows the difference between Islam and the ideology the rulers are trying to impose.
The blindness and naive tolerance/justification they show towards this threat is not very different from the tolerance/justification many leftish "intellectuals" used in the past to approve of other blatant attacks against freedom and human dignity, as sadly happened for instance with the so-called "cultural" revolution of Mao. The story narrated in Timbuktu is simple, but reflects and involves a complex puzzle of tradition, religion, Western cultural influence on remote areas, the struggling for life in a harsh land with methods of centuries ago while at the same time using modern technological devices...
There is not much positive or enjoyable about watching this movie, but assuming it accurately portrays how a rural African desert town is taken over and administered by conservative, armed Islamists applying strict Sharia law, it is a worthy eye-opener.
(Actually the women in the movie stand strong against the subjugation.) Thus the evil of the "jihadists" (ISIS is never named but a black flag is flown) is contrasted with the normal lives of Muslim people.Sissako, who also wrote the script, is careful to make this distinction—a distinction that a good part of the world is currently working on.
TIMBUKTU 11/29/15 I saw TIMBUKTU directed by ABDERRAHMANE SISSAKO - the film was both poetic in its depiction of a sense of place and the relationship of an isolated cattle herder living peacefully and contentedly with his family in a tent under the stars in a sea of sand, herding cows, gently and playfully interacting with his wife and adored 12 year old daughter (who often reaches to the sky to attempt getting a signal for her cell phone - technology has permeated all our lives,) and devastating in its description of what people have to endure living under (AQIM) Al Queda in the Islamic Maghreb in 2012 Mali, particularly when they find themselves in direct conflict with this government.TIMBUKTU shows the brutal rule of Jihadists (as they called themselves) - the hypocrisy, the legal capriciousness in the administration of "justice" and the total disregard for fellow Muslims under their authority - who are equally devout, but in contrast to those now in power, humane in the interpretation of their beliefs.
My God is Better Than Your God. Orthodox fundamentalism, whether its Judaism, Christianity or Islam, comes down to a self selected few using the arrogance of power (usually with guns) to destroy, humiliate, plunder, rape and all with justification from, again, self-selected, ambiguous translations of what someone, thousands of years ago, said was conveyed by their God. In the film they are described as: "Fundamentalists are ordinary people who have lost their humanity."In Timbuktu, Mali we have such a group, Ansar Dine, destroying a culture and history that goes back a thousand years and more.
Football/soccer along with music are banned, yet in a defiance-of-spirit the youth play imaginary soccer (no ball) and a woman sings while being beaten.In the end we see the future; frightened children running, lost, across a desert landscape being chased by extremists, just as these same extremists earlier chased down a frightened gazelle.A similar film on fundamentalism, "God Loves Uganda", had these quotes: "When the righteous rule the people rejoice." and "The reward of sin is death, the Bible says.".
Sometimes it has kind of documentary character, when you see as well the daily problems of the Jihadists, and sometimes the movie slides into a tale when there is a witch appearing, or as we follow up on the story of the herder family, or just beautifully shots of landscapes and light music come into play.
Overall, I'd say it's a mixed bag, even if I do admire what it's trying to do.The film follows the people of Timbuktu who are powerless against Jihadists who want to control their fate.
Although the film has some other minor stories, it's essentially about a family led by a cattle herder named Kidane, his wife, Satima, their daughter Toya, and a twelve-year old shepherd named Issan.What I liked about Timbuktu was the relationship between the father, his wife, and their daughter.
Another sequence I liked that included a musical score, involved a group of African people playing soccer, until they are caught by some of the members of the Jihadists.
Whippings, rocks being thrown at people's heads and other violent acts are shown in the film, making it more realistic.However, for as much as I might praise the movie, there were a number of things there were other sequences that did not work for me, for example, when the African is getting interrogated for illegal playing soccer in the city, it just didn't seem to go anywhere afterwards, and the character is quickly dropped.
Timbuktu is a well-made movie, but some people might find the film hard to sit through, given that there are a few disturbing scenes.
Numerous incidents arise as fundamentalist Islam is forced onto an African society.The slow pace of the film matches the rhythm of Timbuktu and gives us time to contemplate what was and what has become of an ancient city synonymous to Westerners as a foreign land far away.
We also observe jihadists as humans with their weaknesses, for example smoking cigarettes when they think nobody is watching.I saw this film twice.
Sissako enlightens us with his direct film, through use of shallow focuses and a balance between close ups (an extreme one on the dying cow) and long shots (an amazing one on the river at the end of the struggle between the shepherd and the fisherman).
It gives you the understanding of the things we take for granted, like not living under a military rule that outlaws singing, certain social gatherings in which the outcome of punishment is far too great.Otherwise, to be honesty the movie is gets over my head a lot.
I get that it's hard to think only within the limits of the film commission, but in so many years there is time to hone and refine the silly project story into an excellent movie..
Timbuktu - a devastating yet often beautiful film about life (and death) in Mali amongst the chaos of 'jihadi' rule and Sharia law.
The story is told by using a farmer called Kidane (Ibrahim Ahmed) he lives in the dunes with his wife, daughter and their young herdsman.The Jihadists (we are never told what group they are) rule the town with an iron fist.
They have a Sharia court that pass down sentences that seem arbitrary beyond cruel and it is not long before Kidane and his family come under their thrall.Now this is one of those films that seems at times to be bland in the mundanity of recording everyday life; however, the fact that life can be this hard, unfair and downright miserable is the story and to say it is powerful is a massive understatement.
Powerful, evocative & thoroughly engrossing, Timbuktu is a riveting portrait of life under regime of terror that brilliantly illustrates the absurdity of extremist mentality in a sardonic manner while also showcasing the hypocrisy of the Jihadists who themselves are unable to live up to the rules they so blatantly like to impose on the general population.Timbuktu covers everyday life in the titular city of Mali which is under the occupation of Islamists & covers the harsh life its residents are forced to live for all leisurely activities are forbidden.
Sissako's direction exhibits terrific restraint but the script is unable to fill all the voids that exist in between.The desolate locations & deserted set pieces evoke a grim environment with nearly no signs of life, camera is effectively utilised to capture all the unfolding drama in a clear, concise manner, Editing however is a mixed bag for the subsidiary scenes are more engaging than the basic plot, its 96 minutes of runtime feels overly stretched, and music makes its presence felt only when it is required.Coming to the performances, the entire cast does really well in bringing their characters to life with utmost sincerity & what further helps their act is that the people they play aren't mere caricatures, thanks to some sensible writing.
The film is a very interesting look at that way of life; but it spends a little too much time introducing lots of different characters.
A shepherd living in the desert with his wife and 12 year- old daughter are confronted by radical Muslims who terrorize them and the nearby villagers with laws forbidding music, smoking and soccer, among other things.
Timbuktu is of course the most famous city in the west African state of Mali and this film is set in 2012 when jihadist forces overran the northern part of the country, but the whole work was shot in neighbouring Mauritania with Oualata standing in for the eponymous city.
At different times, no less than five languages are used, so every viewer will need subtitles.Sissako's fine film shows the impact of the Islamic extremists on the local population and, while there are some scenes of great cruelty, the silliness of the fundamentalists is brought out in gently comedic encounters.
And they are just a few of the dismaying plot points that make up "Timbuktu," a pertinent and topical French-Mauritanian film that offers a glimpse into what life is like for a group of ordinary people being forced to live under the iron-fisted rule of an Islamic caliphate.In style and form, "Timbuktu" is about as far from a Hollywood production as any movie on this subject could possibly be.
It's about a village that is taken over by jihadi extremists who impose strict rules (e.g. music and women wearing gloves) the villagers struggle to obey, as do some of the jihadists (one smokes despite it being forbidden).
The story lacks any focus, it keeps jumping to random scenes within the village.The main plot is advertised as a cow herder and his family struggling to live within this regime but the fact is only about a third of the film is devoted to this.
Since this movie is short not much time is used to develop any of the characters (in fact I think there isn't any at all).The film is slow paced.
It draws you in with the beautiful cinematography and keeps you there with the story.Set in historically famous Timbuktu, Mali; we see that the territory has been taken over by Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) as the black standard flag of the jihadist group flys.Their rule of law is strict and adheres to their own interpretation of Shariah.
The tensions between the imam and the jihadist leadership are another interesting thread in the story.Give this film a look, you won't be disappointed and it provides key insight to the challenges terrorist groups put on local communities..
But I think that the producers of this film were able to show what a real extremist group would be like, always having guns, enforcing every little thing to the way they see it best.
This movie presents a very accurate amount of detail on the treatment of women in Mali, but that's also happening in other countries as well.In this film, many women and men were not able to do activities that are common in the daily lives of others living in America and Europe, like singing, or playing soccer.
My favorite scene like many others who have seen this film would be when the young boys were pretending to play soccer without an actual ball, because it was forbidden by the extremist laws.
Another poetic scene happens during the film when a man is sentenced to 20 lashes for knowing that football is forbidden and still choosing to play.
At the opening of the film it seems like it will be a movie with good commentary on jihadists enforcing their law on their territory.
This is the second time I have watched the film Timbuktu.
The beautiful and troubling film 'Timbuktu', set during the Islamist take-over of Northern Mali, reframes this story.From the opening scenes, when the local Imam orders the Jihadists out of the mosque, it is clear these men have neither spiritual nor moral authority. |
tt0258223 | Stranger Inside | Treasure Lee (Yolonda Ross) learns that her biological mother Brownie (Davenia McFadden) is incarcerated in an adult prison, so she purposely gets into trouble in order to be transferred from a juvenile facility to an adult women's facility in order to meet her. In the new prison, she reunites with an old friend Shadow (LaTanya Hagans). She meets new inmates, such as Leisha (Medusa), an aspiring rapper, and Doodle (Ella Joyce), a religious, homophobic woman who is involved with a male correctional officer.
When Treasure asks about Brownie, Leisha responds, "I'm about getting up out of here. I ain't about no Brownie." Later, Shadow points Brownie out to her on the basketball court. Brownie knocks a player down, injuring her, and demands that another person take her place. Treasure volunteers for the position. Back in the cells, Treasure approaches Brownie around her "prison family." She pulls out a photo of a woman and says to Brownie that she is her mother and her reason for being in prison. Brownie's "daughters" protest that the photograph is not of Brownie. Brownie asks the daughters to leave and yells at Treasure, stating it is her own fault she is in jail.
Treasure is playing cards with Leisha and Shadow when she begins flirting with an inmate named Sugar (Patrice Fisher). Kit (Rain Phoenix), Brownie's main daughter, chides the woman for not meeting her in the chapel for their usual sexual relations. A fight breaks out between Treasure and Kit that results in both being placed in solitary confinement. While confined, Brownie speaks through a wall telling Treasure that they should meet once she is released. Once back in the general population, Brownie meets with Treasure alone and states that she did not know about her because she was taken away at birth. She admits, "I failed you." Treasure cries on her shoulder.
As Treasure becomes a part of Brownie's prison family, Kit informs her that Brownie taught her how to survive in prison and demands that she sells drugs. Later, Brownie shoves a fork into Kit's thigh when Kit fails to bring in a certain amount of money from selling drugs. Meanwhile, Leisha is released from prison and Shadow admits that she wished she had never told Treasure about Brownie. Brownie tattoos the same ankh she has on Treasure's arm. Treasure suggested that she should be reassigned cells to be closer to the family and Brownie does nothing to make that happen. However, when Brownie eats food made by Treasure's new Asian cellmate (Emily Kuroda), she proposes that the new inmate should live near her.
Brownie mocks Kit when she sees Kit reading Nazi literature. Kit responds, "I am not jealous of you and Treasure because I know Brownie just cares about Brownie." Brownie then kicks her out of the prison family. In a later scene, a ranting Brownie grabs Treasure and comes close to maiming her with broken glass. Brownie approaches Treasure in the kitchen area where Treasure shows her obvious irritation with Brownie. Brownie tries to persuade Treasure that she needs to kill Kit, who now associates with a female neo-Nazi gang.
On the basketball court, Brownie slides a shank to Treasure. Treasure demands to play one-on-one basketball with Kit. Instead of playing, they immediately begin fighting. Treasure beats Kit badly but does not use the shank on her. Brownie pulls her to the side and demands that she kill Kit. As the two women leave their huddle, Kit approaches Brownie and puts a shank deep in her neck. All the inmates fall to the ground as correctional officers run out onto the court.
In a medical waiting area, Treasure sees Leisha, who is now in a wheelchair. Leisha, in a drowsy voice, states that the police caught her with drug paraphernalia again. When a medical worker calls Treasure's name, she dismisses her for not having matching blood. Treasure grabs the woman by the arm and demands to donate blood. A female correctional officer approaches the two and demands to read the file. The file reveals that Brownie is not Treasure's mother, but instead the woman who killed Treasure's mother.
The warden (Lee Garlington) has a meeting with Treasure in her office, and says that she sympathizes with her. She offers to transfer Treasure if she will admit that Brownie and a male correctional officer have been working together to bring drugs to inmates. | violence | train | wikipedia | Lights Out, Girls!!.
A warts-and-all depiction of life on the inside for women in the United States, so don't expect to see any tellies in cells or parties for inmates here.
These girls are tougher than the skin of a burnt jacket potato, with violence and drug taking seen as an everyday occurrence.
It's a place where the weak don't last for a day, and the wardens are almost as corrupt as the jailbirds.
Into this hellhole arrives Treasure Lee, who has intentionally got herself sent down so she can meet her mum, who is a long term resident of this particular facility.
As usual in the world of film though, things aren't as clear-cut as they appear...Credit to the director, this feels like a real-life, breathing prison, from the raucous games of basketball in the exercise yard, to the torture of being stuck in solitary confinement.
I would LOVE our jails here in ol' soft touch UK to resemble this, but alas the yuman rights people would have a coronary.
The 'ladies' may be both brutish and distinctly unfeminine, but they have their own unique personalities and this makes them fascinating to observe.
Treasure's growing relationship with her mother is also movingly handled, and there are surprises ahead too...
To sum up then: A more than passable TV movie which should serve as a suitable deterrent for any potential American laddettes out there...
It's the ending that makes it..
There are quite a few things wrong with this film.
Let's see:We don't like any character too much.
The main character's quiet, yet aggressive, manner hinders the character development.
The duality of love among prison "families" and prison violence is not totally believable.
At times, the movie actually seems slow moving.This movie is very similar to some other prison movie in every aspect except the ending.I sure didn't expect the ending yet now it makes perfect sense.
All by itself the ending makes the movie worth watching..
a very good TV movie.
This movie caught my attention one late night on HBO and I could not stop watching it.
The movie felt so real.
The acting by Yolonda Ross and Davenia McFadden dominates the movie and gives it life.
The supporting cast, lead by Rain Phoenix, each fill out their role.
The various characters are memorable, even though much of the story is standard prison-life material, this movie is able to rise above lesser fare by presenting the personal side of prison life.
The struggles of the main characters keeps the viewer engrossed.
With a twist at the end, the movie is enjoyable from beginning to end.
I give it an overall 7 out of of 10..
Poor and predictable..
Nothing to sing about here in a very mundane TV movie prison drama.
It seems like it is confused about if it should shock its audience or to tug on the heart strings, it does neither and remains a curiosity piece only for fans of the acting family Phoenix, as here we get Rain Phoenix doing OK whilst looking exactly like Joaquin.
Some initial promise with the characters is never fully realised, and when the violence does come it seems almost as if they felt they needed to up the anti to keep the viewer interested.
Not a total waste of time but not one to reccie with confidence to fans of prison dramas.4/10.
What would probably be referred to as a "gritty slice of life drama" on the movie box (I saw it on TV) is interesting insofar as it presents another perspective -- it's the female equivalent of the "Oz" TV show (produced by HBO films), without the smarmy sexuality (the women are appropriately mannish, but the film doesn't feel the need to make their sex aggressive and off-putting).
There are a few brief moments of tenderness between the women, but it's mostly the same thing you get with the majority of prison life movies -- fights, friendships, back-stabbings, immoral guards -- just with female machismo.
It sets up the inner life of the prison, these people who inhabit it, but it doesn't show us human beings in prison (despite the old-timers' advice in group therapy sessions), it shows us prisoners.
I liked the ending, so it gets an extra point for that, simply as a story; but if you're looking for "cinema," look elsewhere.
Director = A film professor of mine; Film = Good!.
The director of this film was my professor for a beginning film class at Temple University this past semester.
She is a very intelligent and funny woman, and at the end of the semester, we watched this film.
Grades are in already, so don't think I'm posting this to brownnose, but I really enjoyed seeing Ms. Dunye's film.
The "women-in-prison" plot is not an area covered very often in film, and when it is touched on, there are too many stereotypes to keep count of.
Although there is some predictability in this film, the subject matter and themes were looked at from a very fresh angle.
Ms. Dunye often talked to our class about incorporating reality and fiction together so that the two would blend and the line separating them would be blurry.
This is exactly what she's accomplished in this film.
The storyline is believable and the viewer becomes sympathetic to the characters; even though they are convicted prisoners, we look past the bars and into the minds of these women.
We may not understand their motives, but we appreciate their actions.
I'd recommend this film to anyone, especially those who've never seen a movie covering this subject area before.4/5.
If you like prison movies of quality & depth, you'll like this one..
This film takes you on a roller coaster ride through a treacherous and dismal glimpse in the life of a street-hardened incarcerated woman named Treasure, a gang-banging "G" girl,searching for her imprisoned mother who abandoned her in her youth.
Often times, prison movies rely heavily on violent content to carry the movie over the top.
This movie is intriguing because it delves into the relationships and encounters Treasure has in her quest to find her mother, showing not only her vulnerability and humanness, but also her ruthlessness and desperation...a great character study.
This film could have been outstanding had more attention been paid to other main characters in depth as was Treasure's character.
The film's ending was quite surprising and not what you would expect from your average prison movie.I would recommend this film for your collection..
Raw, intelligent & emotional..
Unlike the one user who thinks the movie is about lesbianism (and obviously immoral to their Christian sensibilities), it's actually about humanity, family legacies and the consequences of personal choices.
It stopped me in my channel changing tracks and brought to a few tears by the end of it.
That's a good flick.
Excellent acting, real dialogue for the most part, and effective music and slo-mo.
If you catch it on TV, stay for the treat..
no ordinary women need apply!.
Compelling watching and some terrific performances.
A storyline that kept up the interest and camera work that knew how to caress its subjects.
So what's my gripe?
After several days' thinking about it, I have to conclude it was lesbian fantasy more than the realistic drama it claims to be.
Treasure had beauty and impact and I LOVED Shadow's mobile face - but we might as well have been watching two teenage boys - theirs was a lean male beauty.
And as for Brownie!!
Great performance but why did she also have to have the physique of a man -- a squat brutal one in this case?
There wasn't any sense that we were watching ordinary women in a terrible predicament.
And had none of them men or children on the outside?
Where was their history?
That older woman in group session was almost stuck in to compensate for the lack of all that.
Secondly I agree that Treasure's brooding impassive personality prevented us from knowing her thoughts and really feeling for her and in the end robbed the film of emotional impact..
It Exposes What Really Goes On. The movie "Stranger Inside" was an astonishing movie.
Although it had some unclean scenes and scenes that you really didn't feel that was necessary, the writer is exposing what's really going on out in the real world.
Scenes from this movie was not fictional, but nonfictional.
A lot of us don't like to face the fact that there are lesbians, homosexuals, or however they are labeled out there doing these things and not only in correctional facilities.
The writer also exposes why the character "Treasure" came out the way she did.
It was because of the absence of her mother and that's some of the problems also, there are absent mothers and fathers that are not with their children and it gives them the idea to do the things they do.
I can't go into details, but I honestly think that is an award winning movie that should be exposed to society and let them know what's really going on..
Very Heart Wrenching.
Well, sometimes life itself doesn't make perfect sense.
This movie was so awesome.
I was on the edge of my seat the whole time.
The love scenes were like, so in tune.They weren't explicit, they used just enough for the imagination.
But the ending, my heart almost skipped a beat.
I guessed a lot of what was going to happen but never in a million years, did I expect all of that.
You are in for a real treat.
I felt the pain.
Boy did I.
That's all I am going to say for I will probably let it blurt out the ending if I don't stop now.
Please watch.
I watched with my mother.
Mother and Daughter.
And it was very heart touching..
And it was very heart touching..
Searching for Someone to Call Family.
Cheryl Dunye's gritty jail drama STRANGER INSIDE tells the story of Treasure, a young girl who's gone on the wrong side of the tracks of life and who gets reunited with her birth mother, Brownie, in jail.
Instead of finding love and reassurance, though, she learns Brownie is a very dangerous and violent person who may even be using her for her interests while in jail, but Treasure is so determined to win Brownie over that all logic flies out the window, and even when in one chilling scene Brownie threatens to slice her, she still continues to come back.
Social displacement and broken families are at the center of this very honest indie film which I caught on HBO recently, and there are never any moments of exploitation so common in women's prison pictures.
In fact, this is an unsentimental study of the nature of violent people who even in their violence are still trying to make some sense out of their lives, and it takes actors not yet tainted by vanity and glamour to accept these roles.
Yolonda Ross, Davenia McFadden, and Rain Phoenix all play their parts with verve, and even if the ending is somewhat downbeat and ambivalent, you won't forget Treasure.
Highly recommended..
It gives you a chance to see what a woman's life in prison is......
I have to admit, this film was rough as hell.
Like seriously the actresses did pretty well for playing rough criminals.
I would hate to see myself in this situation if being in prison as it's the least place I would go to or stay.It was sad, hurtful and heartbreaking that the woman who posed as Treasures mum wasn't honest to who she really was, she was the actual murderer who killed her mother.
I would've loved to have given Treasure a hug because she had been through so much crap in her life.
I really hope she finds a partner of whom she really loves and will always be there for her 24/7.
This movie really tells the tale of what life is like in prison and I really applaud for HBO for showing this TV movie, it's very good! |
tt0105121 | The People Under the Stairs | Poindexter "Fool" Williams is a resident of a Los Angeles ghetto. He and his family are being evicted from their apartment by their landlords, the Robesons. The Robesons, who are believed to be a married couple, call themselves Mommy and Daddy. They have a daughter named Alice.
Leroy, his associate Spencer, and Fool break into the Robeson's household by using Spencer to pose as a municipal worker. The Robesons leave the home shortly but Spencer doesn't return. Fool and Leroy break into the house to look for Spencer, and they find his dead body and a large group of strange, pale children in a locked pen in a dungeon-like basement.
The Robesons return and Fool flees while Leroy is shot to death by Daddy. Fool runs into another section of the house, where he meets Alice. She tells him that the people under the stairs were children who broke the "see/hear/speak no evil" rules of the Robeson household. The children have degenerated into cannibalism to survive and Alice has avoided this fate by obeying the rules without question. A boy named Roach whose tongue was removed also evades the Robesons by hiding in the walls.
Fool is discovered by Daddy and is thrown to the cannibalistic children to die. However, Roach helps Fool escape, but is critically wounded. As he dies, he gives Fool a small bag of gold coins and a written plea to save Alice. Fool reunites with Alice and the two escape into the passageways between the walls. Daddy releases his dog Prince into the walls to kill them. Fool tricks Daddy into stabbing Prince and he and Alice reach the attic where they find an open window above a pond. Unfortunately, Alice is too afraid to jump and Fool is forced to go without her. He promises to return for Alice.
Fool finds out the gold he has is enough to pay his rent and for his mother's surgery. He also finds out that Mommy and Daddy are a brother and sister coming from a long line of crazy inbred family members. They started out as a family that ran a funeral home selling cheap coffins for expensive prices, then they got into real estate. After they made a lot of money, the family got greedy, and the greedier they got the crazier they got. Fool vows to help right the wrong. He reports the Robesons to child welfare and as the police are investigating the house, Fool sneaks back in and reveals to Alice that she is not their daughter; she was stolen from her birth parents, as were all the other children in the basement.
Mommy finds out that Alice knows the truth and believes that Fool has turned her against them, so she attempts to kill Alice. However, the cannibal children charge at Mommy. Daddy finds Fool at the vault, where Fool sets off explosives, which demolishes the house and causes the money to blow up through the crematorium chimney and into the crowd of people outside. Daddy is killed in the explosion and Alice and Fool reunite in the basement. Meanwhile, the people outside claim the money distributed by the blast, and the freed children venture into the night. | comedy, grindhouse film, gothic, murder, cult, horror, violence, insanity, satire, sadist | train | wikipedia | The boy quickly learns the true nature of the house's homicidal inhabitants and the secret creatures hidden deep within the house.I love the story, the idea from richer vs poor, you have a lead that it is a kid Brandon Adams is the star and the hero of the film.
Now Wes Craven, creator of "A Nightmare on Elm Street" takes you inside.I love this movie to death: It is different than Home Alone.
A young boy breaks in to a house by the landlords to steal the golden coins to support his poor family including his dying sick mom with his partner/ sister boyfriend Leroy (Ving Rhames) unaware the house is full of booby traps and no one get's out, no one ever has.
- Wes Craven (1939 - 2015) I really miss you and thank you for all the Freddy movies, thank you for all horror franchise and movies like are: A Nightmare on Elm Street, New Nightmare, Scream, The Serpent and the Rainbow, Shocker and The People Under the Stairs.
The People Under the Stairs is a 1991 American horror film written and directed by Wes Craven and starring Brandon Adams, Everett McGill, Wendy Robie, A.
"The People Under The Stairs" is a delightfully oddball horror flick that centers on a young boy nicknamed Fool, who lives in a dilapidating apartment in the inner-city ghetto with his family and dying mother.
In fact, at times this movie seems like more of a seriously twisted black comedy, but I'd say it's a cross between both of these genres.Brandon Adams leads the cast as a thirteen year old boy who is caught up in the battle with the psychotic landlords and is surprisingly good, especially considering his age.
It isn't perfect and it is a little out there, but if you can suspend your disbelief for a couple of hours and enjoy a twisted, almost fairytale-like horror movie, this can be a fun experience.
fast paced fun and very stylish little horror flick is very well acted and is kinda creepy in spots i really liked the settings in this one and the dialog is intelligent and it is always interesting and quite stunning at times oh and ya get to see Ving Rhames that is always a pleasure there is lots of blood and a creepy looking basement with lots of weird images and other great delights the direction is awesome tons of stylish shots and it has a great happy ending the movie is at times horrifying and with Wes Craven directing that makes it even better so all in all a great little film that i highly highly recommend i give this movie a ***1/2 out of 5.
3 burglars (2 gangsters and a kid) from the slums break into the house of the landlords of a big apartment building, and become trapped inside and face the horrors that await them.The best performance was definitely Brandon Quintin Adams as Fool, the 13 year old boy who breaks into the house with the 2 other criminals, Leroy (an early but great performance by Ving Rhames) and Spenser (Jeremy Roberts).
And Sean Whalen was really good as Roach, the main child from the basement who lives in the walls.With a good mix of comedy, horror, and great characters, traps, atmosphere, People Under the Stairs should be part of any Horro lover's collection.9/10..
Directed by Wes Craven, "The People Under the Stairs" is a fun and energetic, if a bit dated, horror flick that stars Brandon Quintin Adams (of "The Mighty Ducks" fame) as a Fool, a street-smart and spunky 13 year-old kid living in the ghetto.
Unfortunately, Fool finds himself trapped in the house which turns out to be a fortress and uncovers a disturbing discovery about the inhabitants lurking in the basement.Full of stunning visuals, slapstick humor and colorful performances by its cast, "The People Under the Stairs" is perhaps the best 80's movie made in the 90's.
It helps, though, that Craven is in top form with delivering some truly nightmarish visuals, aided by one great big set-piece in the house that the film spends ninety-five percent of its run-time within.Adams is a rarity in that he is a kid in a horror movie that isn't annoying.
I honestly have no idea what Wes Craven was trying to achieve here, but it fails as a horror film (it isn't frightening or disturbing), black comedy (it isn't funny or clever) or as social comment (it is trite, and ultimately has nothing much to say).
Storywise, the film focuses too much on the homeowners and Fool's attempts to rescue their supposed daughter and not enough on the zombie-like title characters, who held enormous potential.Though it gets full marks for originality, "The People Under the Stairs" doesn't work as well as it could have.
The son attempts to steal a valuable coin collection from the landlord to pay the rent, but upon entering the house finds the inner workings to be beyond weird.While the film is usually advertised with the presence of Ving Rhames, who does a fine job a a burglar, the real character to watch here is Alice (A.J. Langer).
Her low-key part may go unnoticed, but she has within her a lot of potential, and anyone who is familiar with Langer's work knows she went on to bigger and better things.Mike Mayo sums up the film by saying, "Wes Craven addresses capitalism and the nuclear family in a subversive Grand Guignol horror." Mayo is spot on here -- the film obviously relies on race and class to make a point.
Fool will do anything to get out before he gets kill himself.Written and Directed by Wes Craven (Deadly Friend, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Red Eye) made an enjoyable horror/thriller with plenty of fun black comedy.
It's unusual in having a black kid as hero (with the film playing almost like a demented version of HOME ALONE [1990]!); Ving Rhames also makes an impression as a smart-alec 'brother'.The script has things to say about poverty and parenthood but it all kind of gets sidetracked by the action and thrills.
There's even a touch of surrealism when McGill emerges dressed in leather and studs from head to toe and starts blowing holes in the house's walls with a shotgun because one of the 'creatures' has escaped from the cellar - and there are also a couple of good lines: "If you thought he was white, you should see the sucker now!" (in reference to a pal of Rhames who, apparently, has died of fright) and the boy telling A.J. Langer (the manic couple's cloistered teenage 'daughter') "Your father is one sick mother...actually, your mother is one sick mother, too!"Ultimately, the film can be seen perhaps as Craven's take on 'old dark house' chillers; incidentally, this viewing was preceded by THE CURSE OF THE CAT PEOPLE (1944) - which also revolves, in part, around this same theme!.
People Under the Stairs, The (1991) Brandon Adams, Everett McGill, Wendy Robie, A.J. Langer, Ving Rhames, Sean Whalen, Bill Cobbs, Kelly Jo Minter, Jeremy Roberts, D: Wes Craven.
In desperate need of money to pay the rent, a teenager breaks into his landlord's home, only to discover it booby-trapped and full of 'prisoners' who live within the walls and under the floorboards in this darkly comic horror movie from the mind of Wes Craven.
I love around Halloween time when you turn on the TV and you have a movie like People Under the Stairs on and you say to yourself: 'it's been years since I seen this'.
The People Under The Stairs is an excellent and entertaining Horror-Comedy that combines great direction,a wonderful cast,scary thrills,Black Comedy,a creepy,memorable score and fantastic special make-up effects making The People Under The Stairs one Wes Craven's best and most Underrated films.Set in Los Angeles,California,The People Under The Stairs tells the story of a young teen from the ghetto named Fool(Brandon Adams)who finds out that him,his sister and sick Mother are being evicted from their apartment building by their landlords(Everett McGill and Wendy Robie)who want to tear the apartment building down.
But when Fool break into the house he discovers that the landlords have a dark and disturbing secret and in the landlords house there is no way out and no escape.In Between the excellent A Nightmare On Elm Street(1984)and the Brilliant Scream(1996),Wes Craven did a few great Horror films that are often Underrated and overlooked,Horror films such as The Serpent And The Rainbow,Shocker,New Nightmare and the fantastic and very entertaining Horror Comedy The People Under The Stairs which is one of the best Horror films of the 1990s and over the years since it's 1991 release developed a Cult following.
The People Under The Stairs is a great Horror film that right from the opening pulls into a demented nightmare that is twisted and is a Horror movie that scares you with moments and scenes that are unpredictable and very surprising and you as the viewer never know what's going to happen next and you're on the edge of your seat.
What I also love about TPUTS is the dark Comedy and Humor that the film has where there is moments where you are laughing because the characters and some things like booby traps,the dialog or the use of S&M clothing(you'll see)in the movie that is so over the top you will feel uncomfortable laughing and at the same time you won't.
If the character Fool represents good then the landlords Man and Woman(whose names are never revealed and who call themselves Daddy and Mommy)represents evil in the sickest and most depraved way whether it's living off the Money of poor with vicious greed or abusing kids or with their house being a death trap where you can't get in or get out.
Fantastic job,K.N.B.In final word,if you love Wes Craven or Horror Films,I highly suggest you see The People Under The Stairs,an excellent,underrated,scary and funny Horror Comedy that is Wes Craven at his best.
After breaking into a strange house in the neighborhood, a young boy finds the couple who live there keep stolen children chained inside and tries to free them without being captured by the psychotic duo.This here turned out to be quite decent overall with some good stuff here and there.
the plot goes something like this - a boy along with a grown up burglar-duo break into a strange residence having heard of a fortune within, only to find themselves in the company of a ruthless and savage human/child abducting brother-sister couple who usually confine their abductees to a dark cellar if they misbehaved, which leaves our friends with no choice but escape.the film on the whole is a really worthy experience, although the direction and the plot could have used minor tweaks here and there.still, you'll be craving for more Wes Craven after you seen this one.
The house, which is a character itself, serves as a fantastic setting and it's one of the reasons why I like this movie so much.I like most of Wes Craven's work and while I think he did better direction in the Scream trilogy, this one might be my favorite film of his.
Not because I think it's a better film than Scream or A Nightmare On Elm Street quality-wise, but as far as the entertainment factor goes, this one wins.So, I don't know if I'd call this movie "great", but I love it for the reasons I said above.
The three of them set off for the mansion· Once they have finagled their way into the mansion, the plot gets very bizarre, as the rumors about the landlord turn out to be true· The trio must battle a guard dog named Prince, the shot gun wielding landlord, his violent sister, and the people under the stairs if they are going to come away with the one piece of the gold coin treasure · Wes Craven truly is a master of horror.
Altered states of consciousness are not necessary, but certainly won't get in the way of your enjoyment.Mind you, this is NOT "classic cinema," and those who like Wes Craven films for their shock value are likely to be disappointed -- but as "B" movies go, this one is a gem..
The main character is young, which adds more to the story, I wouldn't say the film is a horror movie, more like a thriller or something.The film has a few, very few jump scenes, but still, they are pretty good.
That night, most of the horror movies were all checked out, except for this one, which judging by the cover looked kind of stupid, but since it was a Wes Craven flick, I decided to check it out.While watching the first 30 minutes or so, with a black kid named 'Fool' helping two local thugs (one played by Ving Rhames) rob the strange, quiet people who live in the weird mansion down the street, there was a lot of groans from us all, it seemed like this was a pathetic made for tv movie, with a bratty little kid as the star.
Craven wanted a horror movie with a social comment (the ghetto) and maybe an attempt at a fairy tale (the little black boy is some kind of Tom Thumb with the ogre and the witch).He fails everywhere:his film is a Punch and Judy show:a repetitive screenplay,laughable special effects,mediocre performances by a weak cast -the worst being the wicked couple and the boy-and couldn't-care-less directing.In "the serpent and the rainbow" Craven had tried to blend voodoo horror with politics (Duvallier's fall in Haiti):it was a failure too.All in all ,Craven is at his best when he does pure horror without any pretension ("scream",particularly the first one).
The best horror movie from Wes Craven - Million times better than "Home Alone", The People Under the Stairs is Home Alone for adults.
I am wondering if youths today teenagers know who Wes Craven is or watching his movies he directed?The story is about a poor Afro-American family who lives in an abandon building and they have 1 day till they go evacuated from landlords because they couldn't pay the rent.
2 men's Leroy (Ving Rhames), Spencer (Jeremy Roberts) and a boy name Fool (Brandon Adams) decide to break in to Landlords house to find the golden coins and sold them so that they could get the money and Fool's family would be set for life.
The movie is very creative you have monsters in the house and you try to find out what lives under the house.Wes Craven set fantastic the story, he create the film very interesting, inventive it does have a little humor.
Leroy (Ving Rhames) who is a family friend wants to help Fool break into the wealthy greedy landlords (Everett McGille and Wendy Robie) where a fortune of gold coins is rumored to be inside the house.
Fool must find a way to get out of the house with the help of the adopted daughter of the couple named Alice (AJ Linder).Very entertaining, unsual and well made horror comedy thriller from Wes Craven is one of his finest films.
Once inside, they find themselves facing angry dogs and a bunch of cannibalistic freaks in the basement.Although packaged and labelled as a horror and helmed by genre legend Wes Craven, The People Under the Stairs feels more akin to a boy's adventure movie, specifically those that emerged in the 1980's with children as their protagonists.
A young boy nicknamed Fool (Brandon Adams) attempts to rob the house of two creepy landlords (Everett McGill, Wendy Robie).
Wes Craven's career as a director has experienced more highs and lows than a bipolar roller-coaster fan; The People Under The Stairs sees him on a particularly unpredictable part of the ride, travelling up a slight incline towards New Nightmare after the rapid drop that was Shocker.The film is something like a fairground attraction in itself, taking place as it does inside a warped 'funhouse'—a labyrinthine, booby-trapped mansion owned by a pair of rich, perverted, sibling landlords who are gradually turning their ghetto tenants onto the streets in order to redevelop the land.
With the boy going through the house like a maze with trap doors and walkways in the walls while the crazy couple is trying to hunt him down and kill him for the most part of the movie.
Take Fool, for example, a 13-year-old black ghetto kid in Wes Craven's 1991 effort "The People Under the Stairs." To prevent his family's imminent eviction and to raise money for his mom's cancer operation, Fool accompanies two local toughs in a robbery attempt on their landlord-from-hell's house.
Filled with oddball characters, a house full of booby traps, and a delicious black sense of humor, the film plays more like a comedy, which does help get across the point Craven is making - a flat out social commentary about child abuse and slum lords and the wealthy in general.
But Wes Craven has once again pulled yet another great horror movie.
i'm not usually a person that watches horror films, but i like this one!very unusual idea, well scripted, but not at all good on special effects when you could have a field coming up with fantastic effects on the 'people'.
The overly cheap score doesn't really help either.If you're looking to get into horror films, stay hell the away from Wes Craven and stick to someone who knows what they're doing, like George A.
The People Under the Stairs isn't even one of those Wes Craven films that's weak because it was a popular or critical disaster, like some of his best films were (such as The Last House on the Left and The Hills Have Eyes), this movie was just goofy camp.
This movie felt pretty much like Craven wasn't sure if he wanted to make a horror-movie or a comedy.The result is a film that's neither scary nor funny. |
tt0282695 | Lone Hero | John Gray (Sean Patrick Flanery) is an actor in a Far West time touristic attraction village, named Profit, near a small town. He lives an eventless life, with his on-and-off girlfriend Sharon (Tanya Allen) his friends and co-workers Tim (Tyler Labine and Pablo (Alonso Oyarzun), and his mentor Gus (Robert Forster).
Until one night, when two bikers rob the town's bar and severely beat the barman down. After they left, John decides to call the police, against the advice of the thugs' leader, Bart (Lou Diamond Phillips). No one else present in the bar volunteers to help the police for fear of revenge. The next day at the village, John sees the two goons walking down the street and makes a citizen's arrest. They are then taken by the Sheriff who locks them in a cell. He allows Bart to make a phone call, allowing him to call upon the rest of the gang. The other bikers arrive to the town and kills the sheriff and his deputy, in order to free Bart from his cell.
As the night comes, John comes back to his place after dropping Sharon at her house when the gang starts shooting him in his car. He escapes and goes to Gus' isolated trailer and asks for help. A shooting occurs between the two and the bikers. All but two of the thugs are shot : one of them escapes and warns the others, and Bart is captures and put in the trunk of John's pick-up truck. They then go to the police station only to find the two bodies. Understanding the situation they are in, they split. Gus goes to town to phone the police, only to find that all the lines are dead. Meanwhile, John takes Bart inside a mine, ties him up to a shaft and waits for the authorities. While trying to drive out of town to get access to a working telephone, Gus gets trapped by the gang. They take him to the police station and starts torturing him to know where John and Bart are.
Silent at first, he starts to talk when the new leader, King (Hugh Dillon) threaten to harm Sharon. Gus leads a group of four thugs on the way to the mine, when they are taken in an ambush by John. All of the goons die while Gus is shot in the leg. At the same time, the other inhabitants of Profit are rounded up in a large cell in the fake police station of the Far West village. John comes back to the Far West village to negotiate with King an exchange between Bart and Sharon. While the deal takes place, and John and Sharon escape in the pick-up truck, Gus kills the few bikers who kept an eye on the villagers and frees everybody. When he asks for volunteers to fight when the others come back, only Tim and Pablo reluctantly agree. The rest of the gang comes back and a shootout occurs, culminating with a duel between John and Bart, during which John shoots Bart in the arm, disabling him.
Some time after that, the Far West village still runs with some new additions : John's story is loosely adapted as an Old West tale and acted out for tourists. | suspenseful, murder | train | wikipedia | The "High Noon" story has been told so many ways on the screen that its hard to think that another retelling could be anything but tedious.
Surprisingly, however, "Lone Hero" is an entertaining, low-budget variant on the tale, thanks to a terrific performance by Lou Diamond Phillips as the vicious, but sardonically perceptive biker villain with most of the good lines.
Sean Patrick Flanery, as the title hero, and Robert Forster, his ally with a unspoken past, provide more than able support.The plot is by the book (or is it by the screenplay?), but there is enough nicely mounted action to keep fans of the genre happy, and enough good dialog to keep most others from getting bored.This film has what so many direct-to-video action films lack--good acting with a script whose iconic characters rise well enough above the trite to make the scenes between the fights worth watching..
Lou Diamond Phillips steals the show..
Like most here, I stumbled across this movie by accident and am glad I did.Robert Forester is great, and Sean Patrick Flannery does a good job as the "Lone Hero," but for me Lou Diamond Phillips stole the show.His portrayal of a bad guy was anything but routine.
His character is complex as a truly bad "bad guy" bordering almost on the unbelievable.
A real cold-blooded killer with no compunction at all in killing people-cops or anyone else he chooses, he also possesses a genuine sardonic sense of the world he lives in.
He bring an edge of humor into what could have been a run-of-the-mill murderer.The humorous overtones carry through his every action and are reflected in his continued attempt to gain empathy from Flannery's character.
He enjoys his evil life style and tries over and over again to corrupt Flannery.I suspect Lou Diamond Phillips enjoyed this roll and was allowed by the director to shape the character himself.His evil is an attractive evil and yet you know that if Flannery let's up or goes along with Phllips, Phillips' character would kill him in a second.I really enjoyed this movie.Oh yeah, and the gun play/Western style shoot-em-up tone of the movie makes this one a keeper.
I saw parts of this movie on HBO while flipping between channels looking for something worthwhile to watch.
I thought this made for HBO movie was far from what I was looking for.
After seeing parts of it probably half a dozen times and being drawn in, I finally sat down and watched it from beginning to end.This movie has a straightforward simple plot.
At a glance it looks like "Hollywood stock" and the average back cover synopsis at the movie store wouldn't lead you to believe different.
It is a light, benevolent, and heroic movie, with action as its backdrop.Unfortunately I haven't seen anything else written or directed by Ken Sanzel that was worth the time to watch it..
Survivalists across the nation will love Lone Hero who takes on a gang of murderous bikers who threaten their peaceful western theme village.
Our Lone Hero in this case is Sean Patrick Flannery with a little help from iconoclastic Robert Forster and others.The film is The Wild One meets 3:10 To Yuma.
Lou Diamond Phillips heads a biker gang only these dudes carry weapons that Marlon Brando and Lee Marvin never had.
He gets into town and robs a local bar and one of actors in a western reenactment show for the tourists actually arrests Phillips and hands him over to the law.But like in 3:10 to Yuma, the gang comes in and then it's a battle between Flannery forced to become a real western hero and Phillips and the gang.
The film really does belong to Lou Diamond Phillips however.
He's far more colorful than pallid Sean Patrick Flannery as the hero.Lone Hero is not a great film, but definitely easy to take and a film the National Rifle Association ought to be buying the rights to and disseminating as it perfectly puts their case against gun control..
Diverting "drive in" type action film with a good plot.
The twist to this film involves one of the participants in a local town's wild west show given to tourist.
A criminalistic motorcycle gang invades the town.
It is that participant mentioned above who cleverly fights off this gang, one with the help of a friend who apparently is well versed in weapondry and by getting a few of the towns participants to assist him when the gang makes its final assault to seize the town with their ultimate goal of perhaps killing innocents and pillaging the town for whatever they can use on their travels.
Lou Diamond Phillips is ideal as the head of the biker gang with a mean wise guy attitude.
Sean Patrick Flannery is perfect as the mild mannered participant that wards off the gang.
Robert Forster is good support as the friend of Flannery and the weapons expert.There is a style to this action film that although makes it a sort of "B" film that makes it a cut above similar type films.
I would say that the plot-story line is the key that is carried out very well..
I put this movie in the same catagory as "Roadhouse" and "Maximum Overdrive" cheap and forgettable, but for some reason, I own all 3....Lone Hero is not for everyone's taste, but like the commercials for India Pale Ale up here in Canada say, "Those who like it, like it a lot."Possibly the greatest B-lister working today, Sean Patrick Flannery, stars as a bad guy in a wild west show who turns into a real hero by roughing up some criminal bikers.The cowardly townsfolk turn against him, and soon he only has a whacked out war veteran on his side.
yes.This is just a modern western, and by the time the credits role, the film will be forgotten, but it is fun escapism for the 90 minutes that it lasts.
This is a thoroughly acceptable retelling of the 'outlaws run amok in a good old-western town' scenario set in modern times.
This film, which is technically an action/adventure, can almost be seen as an homage to the shoot-'em-up cowboy films of a bygone era.
It pits a lackluster actor doing hourly shows as a badguy in an old-west theme town against a vicious, win-at-all-costs leader of a motorcycle gang and his thugs.
The characters are strong, and if you allow the usual 'willing suspension of disbelief' (and like a little meat to your movies) you will probably have a fun time watching this flick..
Cheesy, but good fun.
For the rest of us who remember that movies are ENTERTAINMENT before ART, this movie certainly has the capacity to be entertaining.It's a modern western: A small town in the west, a gang of bandits, and a nobody who has to save the day thanks to an older, tougher mentor.
The action is fast-paced, yet refreshingly simple, and the movie deserves bonus points for not taking itself too seriously...in fact, the general pace of the movie switches fluidly between action and comic relief.
Sean Patrick Flanery acts like he's about to fall asleep, and most of the rest of the cast is completely forgettable.
Two exceptions however, are Robert Forster (who is for the post part solid) and Lou Diamond Phillips, who actually overplays to the point of being likable (it's an over-the-top character, thus requiring an over-the-top performance).Anyone looking for a meaningful cinematic experience will surely be disappointed, but if you're looking for an entertaining shoot 'em up, you can do a lot worse.7/10.
if your waiting for the next john carpenter movie to come out and you stumble across this almost exact remake of ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, you might want to give it a go...
Lou Diamond Phillips is pretty okay here, better than he was in ROUTE 666 (which was god awful) and about the same as he was in BATS.
you might also want to catch RAISING ARIZONA if you like the deranged motorcycle part as well...
all in all, a movie to watch on tv, but dont pay to see it.
B-Movie all the way!!!.
Solid, original story with plenty of guns and action while still having depth and a plot.
I couldn't say I like this movie more.
The characters are very like-able and the story is really good yet simple.
Bart(Lou Diamond Phillips) is head of a lawless biker gang that has a strong dislike for cops as you'll see in the beginning.
While Bart and one of his biker brothers are on an excursion of violence and mayhem, they encounter John(Sean Patric Flanery), a simple guy from a very small town that works in a wild west show locally.
After Bart and Dog, his biker gang companion, rob and beat down smoky their local bartender,Bart makes it clear what will happen to anyone who is witness from his biker brothers.
The following day Bart and Dog show up in the mock wild west town John and his fellow bar companions work at.
John without really thinking gets the drop on them with his stage gun, a real gun but loaded with blanks.
From here on it's John versus the bikers with some help from another West show worker Gus(Robert Forster).Flanery's is very like-able as the character John.
John's not too sure of himself in the beginning and just in general but finds his inner courage when he is confronted with the harsh realities that a small town such as his never see.
Phillips I think has made a great accomplishment with his portrayal of Bart.
John couldn't do more to show Bart he is connected to him in no way and is determined to make sure Bart doesn't find an untimely death and serves out his life in prison.
Forster as Gus is somewhat of a rougher good guy and is very cool.
An excellent supporting role to Flanery and the theme of the movie.
I would have payed to see it and infact bought the DVD.This film shows a solid script with some imagination can produce a very good movie on a low budget.
I wish more movie exec's would catch on to this and stop showing the brainless, tasteless garbage in the theatre's that caters to mindless teenagers and young adults that simply have no taste or understanding about what makes a film good.
You'd be amazed what you can learn about film making from lower brow movies such as Lone Hero.
My final statement is this: Story and acting REALLY CAN carry a movie without being all flashy and in a pretty package to get your attention and dollars.
This movie is really worth seeing and when you do you may find yourself watching it repeatedly as myself and many others have..
When I heard Sean Patrick Flanery was going to star as a cowboy in a western with Lou Diamond Phillips, I was thrilled.
You get Lone Hero.
With the recent homages to the horror and teen genre, it is good to see that somebody remembered to throw the old western into the fold.
The dynamic between Flanery and Phillips works well.
Lou Diamond Phillips is great.
A fun little film in which Lou Diamond Phillips runs amok.
The movie never takes itself too seriously, but is probably not for the kids.
The rest of the cast is there to serve up situations for Phillips to play off of, which works out great.
The plot is pretty simple and easy to follow.
There is a bit of a romance angle, but it is really only there to set up the action and doesn't get in the way of the gun play.
This is a gloriously complete popcorn, take your brain out and set it to the side, just watch and be entertained.
Entertaining action movie.
A guy in a wild west show who is a slacker and was just dumped by his girlfriend is forced to take action when some bad dudes cruise into town and start messing things up.
There are some good shoot-outs and fights and some funny lines.
The best actor in it is Robert Forster.
He plays a cranky old tough guy who is good with a gun..
This movie was shot on the same set as "The Wild One" 1953 Marlon Brando, yeah?
It really looks like it.
Motorcycles, small town set, someone help me here.
Most folks these days have not seen that movie, but it is a classic.
Black and white movies at their best.
Although I was initially nervous about this film, expecting an unoriginal re-hash of vigilante movies with a similar storyline, I was very pleasantly surprised.
I am a fan of LDP and he does not disappoint in this movie..
Lou Diamond Phillips (Bart) plays the bad buy, but he is not very good at it.
After he and his motorcycle buddies rob the local establishment, Sean Patrick Flanery (John) a local citizen, takes him into custody.
Bart calls on the rest of his motorcycle gang to get him out of jail and terrorizes the town.
This story was very predictable and the acting was bad.
The only thing that was positive about this movie was Robert Forster.
Fun, quirky action movie - great dialogue.
Lone hero succeeds in being more than just a fun, hard hitting action movie in two ways:Firstly, the basic plot achieves a campy send up to the classic western, here with the action transported to a contemporary wild western town.Secondly, Mr. Sanzel has jeweled well formed characters with exceptional dialogue.
The intelligence, and humor of the character's lines really heightened the effect of the pounding action scenes, as well as electrifying the dramatic scenes.
The overall effect was dynamic, energized and palpable characters in extraordinary circumstances.Many great performances by lead and minor actors.
Of particular noteworthiness is Robert Forster.This movie is a hard hitting, pulsating treat for the eye and the brain..
Fun to Watch.
This movie provides a lot of unexpected fun.
Lou Diamond Phillips is great as the leader of a renegade biker gang terrorizing a small town.
This has all the classic western themes, transposed to present day.
The title character is an actor in a cheesy wild west theme park who is forced to become a hero when all his friends and neighbors show their spineless true colors in the face of real-life danger.
Phillips has a great time playing a murderous badass with a devil-may-care attitude and total disregard for, well, pretty much everything.
While the premise of total lawlessness and murder in present day America could all seem completely unrealistic (Bart keeps the badges of all the cops he has killed as souvenirs), the remote location and utter insignificance of the pissant town where it takes place make it believable.
With the incomparable Robert Forster playing Gus, our hero's only ally, and a bit of a badass himself, the stage is set for the big showdown.
Good writing, and well staged action scenes make this a lot of fun to watch.
"Lone Hero" is one of those pathetic films which is not good enough to buy into and not bad enough to be funny and, consequently, leaves you feeling it was a complete waste of time and wondering how some decent B-movie talent (Phillips, Forster, Flanery) could climb aboard such an ill conceived project.
Unless you're somewhere in the boonies where you're stuck with one channel and "Lone Hero" is the only thing on, pass on this loser..
When you want a showdown, this movie is it!
I enjoyed this movie very well.
When you play a hero in the Wild West, it's about time you start being in real life.
When a biker gang comes a rolling in your town, you gotta do what you gotta do.
Lou Diamond Phillips really played it down fast as the menacing Bart.
He really went to far when he caught the hero's girlfriend who he broke up a while back and ripped open her shirt showing her blue bra.
The show down was the best, when the hero and Bart do a ordinary showdown gun duel.
He didn't kill Bart, because he knows he was being a true hero to himself.
This is one of the finest western like action movie I've ever seen.
That what's makes the movie very interesting.
This movie doesn't say anything new or surprising.
This movie won't make you think too much.
You see all the characters you expect to see - The hero's friends, the (ex) girlfriend who wants to move on, the idiot that you want to kill.
So what?This movie is fun, in the sense of "I saw a bunch of guys fight, I saw the good guy winning and going away with his girlfriend, and I don't regret spending the time for it".
You don't have to buy this movie on DVD, or even rent it, but if you come across it on TV and want to see a decent action movie, this is a good option.
After all, who really has high hopes from an action movie?.
Definite B movie material.
This is a pretty silly movie, but it is viewable.
It's unusual and a bit out of character for the tough guy front man, but he is what makes the film OK.
I like the idea of a small town that makes its living putting on old-fashioned Wild West shows, that is suddenly faced with a gang of renegades not unlike the old Clanton gang of the real Wild West.
How far would you go to take back your town?
And, as this film cleverly suggested, is the town *worth* saving?
To me, "Lone Hero" follows the tradition of "High Noon" and brings to mind the work of Kurosawa.
"Lone Hero" is an updated Western (a forgotten genre) and it has the kind of black-and-white good-vs-evil morality that harks back to the days of John Wayne. |
tt0362269 | Kinsey | Professor Alfred Kinsey is being interviewed about his sexual history. Interspersed with the interview, are flashbacks from his childhood and young-adulthood. The young child years show his father, a lay minister, denouncing modern inventions as leading to sexual sin, then in early adolescence, humiliating him in a store by denouncing its keeper for showing him cigarettes, while his adolescence shows his experiences as a Boy Scout and a late teenage scene shows Kinsey disappointing his father by his chosen vocational intentions. It then shows adult Kinsey teaching at Indiana University as a professor of biology lecturing on gall wasps.
Kinsey falls in love with a student in his class, whom he calls Mac, and marries her. Consummation of their marriage is difficult at first, because of a medical problem Mac has that is fixed easily with minor surgery, after which it is shown that she has an equally intense sexual appetite as her husband. Meanwhile, at the University, Professor Kinsey, who is affectionately called "Prok" by his graduate students, meets with students after hours to offer individual sexual advice.
Later, in a fictional scene where his mother has just died and Alfred is back at his parents' home with grieving friends and relatives - including his sister, who is overweight and thus considered too unattractive to get a husband, and his brother, who is possibly an early boomerang generation man who moved back home after losing his business - Kinsey shocks his father by telling him his "big secret": that he's doing a sex survey and wants his father to contribute his own sexual history to it.
At a book party celebrating Kinsey's latest publication on gall wasps, Kinsey approaches the dean of students about an open-forum sex education course as opposed to the anti-sex propaganda taught in a general health class. Eventually, it is approved, but on the grounds that it is open only to teachers, graduate or senior students, and married students. Nevertheless, Kinsey begins, teaching the sex course to a packed auditorium.
Kinsey continues to answer students' questions in personal meetings but finds his answers to be severely limited by the complete paucity of scientific data about human sexual behavior. This leads Kinsey to pass out questionnaires in his sexual education class from which he learns of the enormous disparity between what society had assumed people do and what their actual practices are. After securing financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation, Kinsey and his research assistants, including his closest assistant, Clyde Martin, travel the country, interviewing subjects about their sexual histories.
As time progresses Kinsey begins realizing that sexuality within humans, including himself, is a lot more varied than was originally thought. The range of expression he creates later becomes known as the Kinsey scale, which ranks overall sexuality from completely heterosexual to completely homosexual and everything in-between.
The first sexological book Kinsey publishes, which is on the sexual habits of the male, is a large-scale success and a best seller. Kinsey's research turns to women, which is met with more controversy. With the release of the female volume, support for Kinsey declines. McCarthyist pressures lead the Rockefeller Foundation to withdraw its financial support, lest it be labeled "Communist" for backing the subversion of traditional American values.
Kinsey feels that he has failed everyone who has ever been a victim of sexual ignorance. A customs officer is tipped off to an importation of some of Kinsey's research material, which only exacerbates the financial situation of Kinsey's research organization. Kinsey suffers a heart attack, and is found to have developed an addiction to barbiturates. Meeting with other philanthropists fails to garner the support needed. Still, Kinsey continues his taking of sex histories.
The story returns to the initial interview with Kinsey, and he is asked about love and if he will ever attempt to conduct research on it. His response is that love is impossible to measure and impossible to quantify (and without measuring, he reminds us, there can be no science), but that it is important. The final scene is of Kinsey and his wife, pulling over to the side of the road for a nature walk. She remarks about a tree that has been there for a thousand years. Kinsey replies that the tree seems to display a strong love in the way its roots grip the earth. Afterwards, the two walk off together, Kinsey remarking "there's a lot of work to do". | psychological, queer | train | wikipedia | Bill Condon, working with his own material has come out with a movie that serves to illustrate how the work of Dr. Kinsey awoke the American public to a better understanding of their sexuality in ways no one, up to that point, had ever dared to show.
He was a man ahead of his times when he decided to gather information about the sex lives of Americans and to publish the results in a best selling book.As Dr. Kinsey, Liam Neeson, showing an uncanny resemblance to the man, himself, does a wonderful job.
And, logically enough, numerous scenes do happen at the dining table: sex researcher Alfred Kinsey, as played by Liam Neeson, chatters about sexual statistics over family backyard cookouts with his teenaged children, regales guests with graphic details of sexual minutiae at elegant affairs and ultimately ends up becoming a crashing bore at dinner parties as his compulsion to ramble on about all things sexual dominates his every conversation and waking thought.
At one point, Kinsey interviews a creepy subject played by William Sadler who has maintained a detailed record of all of the thousands of people he has had sex with (including children) and the implication is clear that he and Kinsey are two sides of the same coin -- both justifying their amoral pursuits in the name of intellectual enrichment.Throughout the movie all things sexual are treated comically and seriously, trivially and ponderously, casually and obsessively.
Even the few sexual scenes involving Kinsey and his wife (Laura Linney) seem designed to illustrate an academic point, coming off as being more like classroom visual aids rather than moments of passion.
What would on surface seem unfilmable is done with great sensitivity and honesty.Condon knows how to tell stories about real people (Gods and Monsters), and here is a life filled with curiosity and far reaching accomplishment.Raised in a repressed family dominated by a stern father, Kinsey is portrayed as an isolated teen who rebels against not only his father, but against sexual convention.
One also gets the feeling that someone either read the script or saw a working print of the film and had to gently point out to Condon that women simply get short shrift, so suddenly an extremely poignant coda is added, with Lynn Redgrave as a very moving interviewee on how Kinsey's work affected her life directly.
A rather well researched, interesting and involving biography of an important man to science, the film not only provides an insight into Kinsey's life and the attitudes of the time, but it also digs deep into the characters.
Back from a much-too-long hiatus after 1998's masterful character study of James Whale, Gods and Monsters, writer/director Bill Condon gives us a slightly more conventional biopic of important and (sadly) controversial scientist Alfred Kinsey.
Condon starts the film with a clever, exquisitely realized montage that alternates Kinsey training his team of assistants at the beginning of his sex research days in the late 1940s with flashbacks of Kinsey's childhood up until the time when he was a young adult.
We also see a couple other events emphasizing a general paucity of accurate sex education/information in the culture.It takes awhile to get through all of the above, and some viewers might feel a twinge of impatience ("when are we going to get to the sex stuff?"--a cry also frequently heard whenever there is mixed company), but Condon, through selective biography, has tied all of Kinsey's background together, with no superfluous details, in what functionally becomes a clever argument suggesting that the only thing that Kinsey could have done in his later years was to study sex in the way that he did.Condon and Neeson easily paint a complex picture of Kinsey as a sex researcher.
A long sequence of Kinney traveling across the country and interviewing all different kinds of people is refreshingly different and effective, especially as floating heads recede in the frame like passing highway dividing lines before quickly morphing into each other.The make-up, which has to age the principals 30 years or so, is masterfully done--at beginning of the film, you'll find yourself saying, "Geez, Liam Neeson, John Lithgow et al look young for their age", and at the end, "Geez, they look old for their age".
But, most especially, it is a fine film that aptly portrays both the research & intimate passions of the world famous US sexologist, Kinsey.It's not necessarily an adults-only film; depending upon how well prepared & educated teens are in studies of human sexual behavior.
Kinsey indeed did the nation a favor when he published his studies of the sex habits of the American male and female and the nation finally got a chance to see what was actually being done sexually versus the repressive conventions of the times that had many people believing that they were sexually abnormal.
By the late 1920's in America, Freud's elementary findings on sexual behavior motivated Alfred Kinsey to initiate research that purported the yearnings of many people nationwide about exposing their intimate desires concerning sex!!
This film depicts Kinsey's determination to attain knowledge about the historical importance of research and development germane to human sexual behavior which altered the lifestyle patterns of American living!!
I think Neeson has a strong chance at winning an Oscar this year; as does Laura Linney, playing Kinsey's wife, a terrifically kind, warm woman trying to keep up with Kinsey's life, which moves along pretty fast.
Neeson shows him as a strong man, but one with as many flaws as the gall wasps he collected, all buried deep beneath his drive and focus.Kinsey's studies proved some things, and let a lot of homosexuality and other deviances from the norm at the time out into the open.
Other things I do not agree with, like Kinsey's studies on the time it takes really young children to reach orgasm
and Kinsey's way of thinking that sex on its basic level should have no emotional attachment; I think I can say that these things are ethically wrong without feeling ignorant.But I won't be biased against the quality of the film because of this.
It doesn't show both sides of Kinsey's argument, it merely dismisses Lithgow and those like him as a laughing stock, instead of considering any validity in points that they're making.This problem is carried throughout the movie, and Lithgow is seen as such a monster that we feel no sympathy for his character in a later scene showing his inner weakness and tragic past, the scene feels thrown in and very foreign to the rest of the movie.I think the opening scenes, with Kinsey and Clara first falling for each other, and his proposal and collection of gall wasps, are the movie's best, I believe.
But, it is a known fact that he regularly filmed the volunteered sex acts of his co-workers in the attic of his own home.Throughout the mid-1940s - Out of the thousands of people (of all ages, all across the USA) who were interviewed by Kinsey and his colleagues it was surprisingly revealed (through these extensive studies) just how commonplace oral sex, homosexuality, adultery, and masturbation (which, back then, was believed to cause serious mental illness) were amongst the American population, in general.One of this film's major downfalls was that it tried, far too earnestly, to cover too much ground in its 2-hour running time.
And, with that, it seriously lost its way by the time that its last half-hour rolled around.All-in-all - This film, which talk-talk-talks about sex like no other film around, was, for the most part, well-worth a view regardless of its flukes, its flaws and its somewhat uneven editing.P.S.Actor Liam Neeson was 52 (and he looked it) when he played the title character in this film.
Today, as a result of free sex and a drug culture that resulted from the sexual revolution, the number of venereal diseases had more than doubled and they are either ultimately fatal or difficult to treat because they have become resistant to antibiotics.If Kinsey had dwelt on how to improve sexual relations in marriage, he would have accomplished much but by reducing the human race down to a basic sexual animal he helped destroy thousands of years of accumulated wisdom and unfortunately, the movie fails to bring out the evil he caused..
But when Martin wants to go back to some straight sex and, in the name of the research, suggests to sleep with Mac, she jovially responses "I think I might like that", right in the presence of Kinsey!I like the way the movie ends, in a spiritually intimate moment of the Kinseys in the natural beauty of the red wood forest.
It was impossible to like the main character, and hence the entire movie was painful to watch.In a particularly annoying series of scenes, Dr. Kinsey has trouble getting funding for his research on human sexuality.
The film follows the development of this great man's research into human sexuality in a completely unflinching and uncompromising manner, one quite in keeping with the approach used by Kinsey himself.
It became a running joke for me to shout out, "worst family dinner scene ever", "worst wedding scene ever", "worst funeral scene ever" (et cetera) simply because, no kidding, Kinsey couldn't restrain himself from a creepily frank discussion of sex in each of these contexts.Of course, this is all in the good old tradition (read: "hackneyed movie cliché") of the Dedicated Scientist Character Who Can't Behave Like A Normal Person In Society (henceforth referred to as "DSCWCBLANPIS").
I don't claim to know much about the life of the real Kinsey, so I can't vouch for the truth behind any number of things that occur - but if certain events in the film were, in fact, legitimate, the filmmakers have utterly failed because they can't even make reality believable.On the other hand, if they made this {garbage} up, they have no imagination and a b-movie sense of drama.Jesus, what else can I say about this fetid piece of {garbage}?
Director Bill Condon has done so much better than this, in fact Gods & Monsters still remains a favorite film of mine, but with Kinsey he was working with a larger budget, bigger actors that cannot necessarily act well, and a time constraint that ultimately forces bad decisions in the editing room.
Who knows, I just felt a bit overburden with the issue when I think it could have been said that Kinsey explored all issues, gay or straight, he tried to open the door to this already taboo subject of sex.Overall, I just didn't like it.Grade: * out of *****.
Then they want the government to find out and regulate what consenting adults do in their bedrooms and what books we take out of our public libraries.What does all this have to do with Bill Condon's film, "Kinsey?" Well, we may be in the 21st century, but this nation's attitudes about sexual issues apparently haven't changed much since Dr. Alfred Kinsey began his work.
It's just that we know more about sex now and one of the biggest reasons for that is because of Kinsey's work.Condon's film, which he also wrote, captures the essence of the man exceedingly well, thanks to a commanding performance by Irishman Liam Neeson.
She wasn't annoying enough to ruin the film for us, and it's good to know that, nearly 60 years years later, this film is continuing Kinsey's dream of waking up the general public to the realities of human sexuality.Definitely a maximum star movie on every level..
This is a movie about a man who tries to combat this often touchy subject the only way he knows how: through strict, hard science & biology."Kinsey", then, tells the story of Alfred Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a researcher who in the 1940s conducts the largest study of human sexuality up until that point.
Battles with wife Clara (Laura Linney) and partners Wardell Pomeroy (Chris O'Donnell) & Clyde Martin (Peter Sarsgaard) certainly portray a man who's quest may have turned into a unhealthy obsession.In terms of themes, "Kinsey" is a fascinating film about a very interesting subject.
The products of his labours, known as the Kinsey Reports ("Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" (1948) and "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" (1953)) were immediate popular sensations, arousing admiration and condemnation in equal volume.An ensemble cast (including Neeson, Laura Linney, Peter Sarsgaard, Timothy Hutton, John Lithgow, and Tim Curry) do very well with what they're given, and it's a fascinating story being told, but the screenplay itself is all over the place.
Directed by Bill Condon ("Gods & Monsters"), "Kinsey" is one of the year's most interesting biographical pictures for its honesty and dignity that it brings to the subject of human sexuality.
The director shows how Kinsey painstakingly teaches his research team how to get their hundreds of interview subjects to open up and speak freely about their sexual histories and as a result, revolutionized the way we think about sex.
They play out their first sexual experience with honesty and conviction, though truthfully, both are way too long in the tooth to be credible as college students early in the story.Peter Sarsgaard gives a subtle, often incisive portrayal of Clyde Martin, the bisexual researcher who successfully seduces both Kinsey and his wife but ultimately falters when he marries and finds his wife cheating on him.
He meets and marries Laura Linney's character, and come across a particular problem sexually, which leads to Kinsey to start researching into the truthful, un-biased facts about people and sex.
Note the wonderful small Shavian scene when Linney challenges Neeson on whether there truly might be social benefits to traditional limits on sexual behavior, limits they both break in the course of this drama of ideas, and with the same "other man." (Peter Sarsgaard, perfect as the right-hand research assistant/Boy Friday/marital aid).
I was amazed at how ignorant people were less than 100 yrs ago when it comes to human sexuality.Inspired by the VD epidemic of the time, Kinsey brought forth much needed information to the public.The film was very well done.
Let's skip sex." Publication of Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953) may have shortened Kinsey's life with its bold disclosures to a still Puritanical society.
And PETER SARSGAARD is wonderful as the bisexual who shares a torrid kissing scene with Neeson.Summing up: Uneven film has many moments of truth leading up to publication of "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male"--and later, an equally well read study of the female--which became huge best-sellers and delivered a lot of folks from a life of ignorance about a topic dearest to their hearts..
So he sets out on a scientific review of sexual activity, polling thousands to inform his study.I am not too proud to admit that I had never heard of Kinsey or his (in)famous research and so this film was an interesting summary of his work and his impact to me.
But the film is also very much about a man and the people around him, and societies reluctance to truly explore different points of understanding from what we feel is true.Kinsey the movie starts with an exploration of Kinsey's (Liam Nelson) obsessive scientific exploration of the gull wasps.
Playing Kinsey's wife, Clara McMillen, is Laura Linney who also puts in a good supporting performance as a woman both troubled and intrigued by her husband's research and its effect on him.The rest of the supporting actors also pull off strong performances, especially Peter Sarsgaard as Clyde Martin, a man struggling with his own sexuality and emotions as he works alongside Dr. Kinsey.
Now, having seen it, KINSEY provides an interesting look at a man who devoted his life's work to probing the depths of human sexuality.
I thought Liam Neeson was excellent, as was the entire cast (Peter Sarsgaard, Chris O'Donnell, John Lithgow, Oliver Platt, Timothy Hutton) which also includes an Oscar nomination for Laura Linney as Kinsey's freethinking wife.The movie is provocative and intelligent, scientific not sexy and will make you laugh but also squirm at times and wonder how Alfred Kinsey ever managed to get his book "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" published at a time (1948) when sex was generally misunderstood and very taboo.
An enthusiast of biology and always fascinated by the human body and mind when it came to sexual organs and forms of pleasure, Kinsey devoted his life to researching the concept of sex and informing a public that didn't want to openly talk about it.Liam Neeson embodies the role of such a prodigy and Laura Linney plays Clara (nicknamed "Mac" by her husband) as a couple that was on the quest for answers and embracing sharp criticism.
The film is based on the the biography of Alfred Kinsey, the father of modern sexual research and revolution.
As someone on the autistic spectrum interested in how it motivates study and interest in topics, after reading speculations that Kinsey might have been on the spectrum, I wanted to check this movie out.I was not disappointed: it's a fine portrayal of a great scientist's life work; Neeson and Linney act the role of the couple and the ups and downs of their lifes' relationship and sharing in the research in an extremely empathy-raising way.
I find it's the human story of Kinsey and Mac that's the movie's strong point because the film making as other reviewers before said, is fairly pedestrian.A well watched DVD in my collection and a good film for anyone interested in science and the nature of research.
This movie, in its biographical aspect, tells us in astonishingly good way the work of Alfred Kinsey and his struggle to reach the aimed goal of a purely scientific nature, of revealing what actually happens in the human sexual activity and behavior disregarding of moral patterns and also of the common wrong knowledge about it. |
tt1084972 | Wanted | Radhe (Salman Khan), a gangster with a mysterious past, kills others for money. He meets Jhanvi (Ayesha Takia) while she's doing fitness training and instantly falls in love with her. Even though their first meeting leads Jhanvi to think negatively about Radhe, she later begins to reciprocate his feelings. However, Talpade (Mahesh Manjrekar), a selfish and perverted Inspector, lusts after Jhanvi and tells her to marry him with the threat that he would rape Jhanvi's mother (Prateeksha Lonkar) if she decides to go against his decision. Talpade is tipped off about Radhe's existence by Jhanvi's landlord. Talpades tries to threaten Radhe but ends up getting frightened of Radhe after getting outsmarted by Radhe .
Gani Bhai (Prakash Raj), an international don, arrives in India for an assassination and hires Radhe. Two gangs, Datta Pawle's (Raju Mavani) and Gani Bhai's, fight for the biggest part of Mumbai. Due to this, Commissioner Ashraf Khan (Govind Namdeo) decides to make Mumbai free of crime. He arrests Gani Bhai, who makes various attempts to contact Radhe, however, in vain. Ashraf Khan is blackmailed to release Gani Bhai, after his men release an explicit video of his daughter online after kidnapping her. Under the influence of drugs, his daughter reveals a mission that involves an IPS officer, Rajveer Singh Shekhawat, murdering Gani Bhai. Since Rajveer Shekhawat's identity is difficult to decipher, Gani Bhai holds his father, Shrikant Shekhawat (Vinod Khanna), captive. Shrikant proudly tells him about his son, without revealing his true identity. Gani Bhai mistakes Ajay (Inder Kumar), Radhe's adopted brother, for Rajveer Shekhawat and kills him. Gani Bhai realises his mistake and pressures Shrikant to reveal Rajveer's identity. Shrikant is murdered by Gani Bhai after he refuses to tell him. His son, Rajveer Shekhawat, who is revealed to be Radhe, arrives at the place of his father's death. Radhe is infuriated and decides to avenge the deaths of his father and brother. Through threatening Talpade, he locates Gani Bhai. After an intense combat, Radhe finally manages to kill Gani Bhai and his co-conspirator Talpade. | revenge, neo noir, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | When i watched the movie i expected a lot as i am a big fan of Salman Khan.
Aisha Takia looks sexy as always, in my opinion she is very under rated in the business.is a story that will not be new to most regular bollywood movie watchers the twist is very good.Salman Khan looks very big in the movie and they show him as a Herculean man who can beat up any1.
this look suits salman very well.Overall it is a movie which i would recommend it has some good action sequences and the story is also quite entertaining..
The action sequences are superb.Performance wise-Salman Khan is revelation.Ayesha Takia is cute.The chemistry between Salman and Ayesha is good.Mahesh Manjrekar is first-rate.Prakash Raj is excellent.Overall Wanted is high on entertainment but lacks story..
(as I haven't seen the original) There are some really funny scenes in first half as well =DThe movie has almost no story, but the screenplay was nice.The only thing that was quite annoying was the amount of unnecessary songs.
Style of the movie is excellent.Last 30 minutes of the movie will make you go wild.Salman khan excels in this role.Apart from him, look out for Prakash Raj. He has done 200% justice to the villain's role.The critic's reviews and the audience's reactions proves the success of this movie..
Overall I would give Wanted a 10/10 as it has everything that a Bollywood movie buff and hardcore Salman fan would expect.Some people think that they are too far above the so called "Masses".
Still these over the moon film critics go to see - "Ayesha Takia's big, big goodies" which for them - "are a treat to watch."Finally, Ghajini (with due respect to it) looks so 2008 now ;).
After watching the first show, I expect most will like it and hopefully Salman's wanted will turn out to be a super-hit.
Wanted is Salman Khan's most definitive statement to the film world.
Yes, Salman Khan tops other Khans in this South Indian film inspired - action packed explosion that is directed by Prabhudeva, the accomplished choreographer.
Prabhudeva has strong roots in South Indian cinema where action is fast paced with jerky camera motions that send everyone flying high but to incorporate all this into an entertaining movie deserves some pat on his back.
He may not be a renowned film maker but he knows exactly what it takes to deliver an explosive action movie and boy does he do it in style!Radhe (Salman Khan) is a tapori who can commit himself to any task for the money involved to the extent that he wouldn't even listen to himself and he means it.
Where the heroine of a film can easily distract the plot and hero, Prabhudeva manages to keep her role restricted to songs and light hearted relief after a heavy doze of action.
Just like his character, Salman Khan is a one man army in the movie.
Just go watch it with this notion in mind that it is a Rajnikant style action film but made in Bollywood with Salman Khan taking on whatever comes in his way and you shall then be entertained.Prabhudeva leaves no chapter out from the book of 'how to make a masala movie' with a non-stop delivery of excitement with occasional humour, romance, songs, drama, reality, action and unbelievable heroics.
The film may be a bit too long and the random songs on international hotspots maybe unwarranted but when we see Salman as an unstoppable force, we know it's clobbering time!
This was a surprise in waiting – good action movie that will keep you seated in your seat and make you enjoy watching it.
At the same time he has enemies.Starring Salman Khan, Ayesha Takia, Mahesh Manrekar, Vinod Khanna, Om Puri and Sayaji Shinde, this is directed by Prabhudeva and is produced by Boney Kapoor.
Salman Khan has suited the role very well and it makes it a change to see him in action after a long time, though he does remove his shirt, while Ayesha Takia, has improved once again.
The other actors also make a good contribution to this movie as does Vinod Khanna in a supporting role and whose character really pushes the story to its climax.
Some songs are memorable and are worth listening to and the cinematography is also worth watching.Director Prabhudeva has done a good job in directing this romantic, action movie with added small dose of comedy.Some may find this too violent but it is a movie that can be watched with your family and is worth watching..
Great style, action, acting, comedy, love story....this film seems to have got everything.The movie is paced properly and hats off to Prabhudeva for his direction.
The songs and dance sequences are superb.Salman has really worked hard on this film...and its paid off well.
Man the ways hes danced, moved, acted, done the action part...marvellous....superb...extra-ordinaire...Ayesha looks cute and cool...(have liked her so much for the 1st time, how come i did not notice her earlier).
Mahesh Manjrekar has put on a role up there....what a class bad act....way to go...Shivaji Raje...All in all one grand entertainer....this is the one that swept away the floor beneath me after Ghajini.Salman..infinite cheers!!!
In my household we have Akshay Kumar and Shahrukh fans - no matter how bad the film, reviewed it must be watched at cinema.I think this film will bring Salman closer to success as he will regain confidence in his acting and will make more an effort to deliver.This type of movie differs from conventional Indian movies and thus creates a new market which salman possibly akshay could exploit further and enhance their acting to what it once was.I would love to give this film 10/10 but there were moments were it could have been enhanced even further for the action fans of bollywood..
; Marvelous acting, awesome comic timing, fantastic dance moves, good performed action!All done by the one and only Salman Khan!Let me start off telling about the story, though it's not the best ever story around, the story is good.
Prabhudeva, the dancing guru, starting his career as a director with a bang.It's all about this hardcore gangster Radhe (Salman Khan), who can just about kill anyone who gets in his way.
Then, the film takes an unpredictable turn of events, to the climax, which is absolutely amazing.Salman Khan, in his second best performance to date (first being Andaaz Apna Apna), really carries the film on his shoulders with the gangster image.
This is an all out action packed film.This should be the best movie of 2009, but will be tough, as there are other really good films like Kaminey and Love aaj kal..
Nobody could have played the leading role played by mahesh babu in 'pokiri' better than Salman Khan, who the only action hero in bollywood at present.
A remake of Tamil hit Pokhiri, which Producer Boney Kapoor mounted on a large canvass and débutant director (for Hindi films) ace-choreographer cum dancer Prabhu dheva handled deftly, crafted neatly with lot of panache.Salman Khan is in top form and his whole persona is used to the hilt by his trademark mannerisms.
In Prakash raj, Hindi film audience has found a new menacing Villain who finally wins everybody's hatred and you want him to get bashed up in the end.
The good thing about Prabhudeva holding the directorial reigns is that he put special effort on Salman Khan's dancing skills.
Salman Khan brings back to them their good old action cinema with the same punches and enthusiasm which got lost in the new age glossy kind of movies in the recent years.
And it was indeed a lot of fun and relief to see a true Bollywood kind of movie after a long time stuffed with our own trademark action, fights, love, dance and songs.Remake of "Pokiri" already made in Telugu and Tamil, "Wanted" starts off normally with a mention of Mumbai underworld nexus and a newly appointed honest Police Commissioner in the town.
Salman Khan makes a routine entry as the usual filmy action hero who works for the underworld dons and is known for his killer instincts and attitude.
Especially the confronting scene at the basket ball court between Salman and Mahesh Manjrekar sets the mood in and you start enjoying the movie from there on.The explosive second half is a real treat for the action lovers where Salman beats and kills uncountable men left and right with a great confidence.
Thinking about his amazing action scenes in the movie, you just cannot imagine anyone else doing more justice to the role other than Salman himself.
Here, I would also like to mention, one highly appreciable scene in the movie where Salman Khan strongly criticizes his close friend for eating "Gutka".
Mahek Chahal is there as the vamp and Manoj Pahwa tries to make you laugh with his not so entertaining getup.Sajid Wajid come up with a couple of good numbers enjoyable on the screen (with a special appearance of Govinda & Anil Kapoor), otherwise the movie could easily do without so many songs.
Story wise, "Wanted" has nothing new to offer, but after a long time, Indian Common Man gets a pure MASALA Movie to enjoy on the lines of highly successful action movies released a few decades back.
I would even like to rate "Wanted" better than "Ghajini" since it does not take help of any additional (memory) gimmicks added deliberately in the script.Surprisingly, this hardcore action movie comes from the director "Prabhu Deva" who is more famous in Hindi Cinema for his amazing dance movements.
At least, it is not a usual inspired movie from the west for a change.In a nutshell, if you loved watching Amitabh in "Deewar" & Sunny Deol in "Ghayal", then here is another equally entertaining act by the still young & angry Salman Khan.
"Wanted" is undoubtedly among his most hard hitting and enjoyable movies till date with a different Salman altogether as never seen before.
The film is simply the best one of Salman,who is the show stealer throughout the entire movie.
Really,this is one of the best action entertainers of all time.On the whole, Wanted is the best film of Salman Khan and also is a perfect masala entertainer.
Wanted directed by Prabhu Deva is an entertaining movie which presents Salman Khan,never-like before.Wanted is very high on entertainment but unfortunately low on providing a good story.Story: Mumbai-based middle-classed Jhanvi (Ayesha Takia), who lives with her widowed mother and younger brother, has three suitors.
The third is a male named Radhey (Salman Khan) - who often comes to her rescue - but breaks her heart when she finds out who is really is - a cold-blooded killer who works for a gangster named Gani Don (Prakash Raj).
The later is a ruthless gangster who challenges Police Commissioner Ashraf Taufeeq Khan (Govind Namdeo) with impunity, and even abducts his daughter to ensure his personal safety.The story is basic so even the twists and turns will not be a shocker to you.But still apart from story,WANTED works for its high-octane action,unlimited entertainment and Salman Khan.The direction is fine.Performances: Salman Khan is excellent.Ayesha Takia is cute.Mahesh Manjrekar is first-rate.Prakash Raj is superb.Manoj Pahwa fails to provide any laughs.All in all,WANTED must be watched only for Salman Khan and for nothing else.I am giving it a six on ten.Strictly recommended for fans of Salman Khan..
I gave this film 2, because of the actress Ayesha Takia and Mahesh Manjrekar as a corrupt cop, they are the 2 constant in this appalling movie.
This movie was so entertaining but it's really enjoyable as well good storyline good editing good music of background Salman khan was brilliant Ayesha was brilliant inder Kumar is brilliant Vinod khanna is brilliant Prakash raj shines in his villainous role Songs are way better like I love listening to them very often Action scenes are the best highlights of the movie Overall 7/10.
I think the film is only made for Salman Khan fans!!!
Salman Khan has shown good body language and personality but that's not enough to carry the film.
Some dialogues are good and let us enjoy the film and it suits to Salman Khan.
they taught that every action movie is a masterpiece, i think in the BOLLYWOOD history there are some good action movies like GHAYAL DON AWARAPAN KHILADI 420 , but with wanted i can't say that's a good movie.SALMAN KHAN is not a bad actor, he has some good movies , but in this , i can't see any good things,just a waste of time of regular business movies: a hero with a beautiful girl, when he becomes angry everyone has to run away because he can kill all the world.for action scenes they are not well done, you can See how lies they are, a man can fight 30 gangsters himself just because he is the hero, even he can kill anyone in any place even a doctor in a hospital.that'as not a movie which you can enjoy, if you look for good action movie just forget this movie, because its so far to be a nice movie..
Films like Udaan, Tere Bin Laden, and LSD are films that are well made and deserve a larger audience but the world of stars, foreign locations, etc is ruining everything.Salman Khan stars in wanted.
Ours stars Salman Khan and Wanted is destined to be a hit for sure.
Wanted is strictly for 2 king of audience: Hardcore action lovers and Hardcore Salman fan.
If you were waiting for a good film from Salman Khan, your wait is certain to continue as Wanted turns out to be a below average watch.
Adapted from the original telugu flick Pokiri, Wanted is an out and out action film.
The script of Wanted seems more like its made for the audience down south and implementing it with Salman Khan makes it all more interesting.
Radhe takes no time eliminating people and is seen doing the same in every second scene and here's when he falls for the innocent-pretty girl Jhanvi(Ayesha Takia) who works in a call center.
The abrupt unpredictable climax is for you to watch it yourself.Wanted has hardly anything that you might want to look back at except for Salman Khan.
Salman Khan has delivered a decent performance with some great action sequences which you are sure to enjoy.
The movie lastly had no plot just about two gangs and then salman khan has to save them Ayesha Takia from the gang.The other villain role was okay to whose with Prakash Raj hes kind of slick and smart criminal but I liked Prakash Raj better because he was just to awesome.
Lastly songs were good but i think Salman khan is getting to old to be dancing like that.
So I thought the movie was okay because of the Prakash Raj, the action, and I guess the songs but NOT because of Salman khan.
First one was was too stale for me though it was the biggest hit of telugu industry ever and wanted was too passive for me as i always feel that Salman really deserves a good night's sleep and need to work more on his screen presence.
Watch it only if you are a die-hard Salman Khan fan.
Salman Khan-starrer Wanted is a film that makes no bones, no pretences about the fact that it'll do anything to get a reaction out of you.
Directed by ace choreographer Prabhu Deva, Wanted is a remake of his Tamil film, Pokiri, which was itself adapted from a Telugu original.
wanted is an out and out action flick and i think its one of the best action films ever made in bollywood.movie showcases salman as never before as stylish hit-man who kills for money only .and believe me he does it tonear perfection .in fact its one of his best performances tilldate...ayesha takia is cute.
Good chemistry between the leads and Salman Khan looks like a cross between Raul Julia and Javier Bardem.
Although not the masterpiece Salman Khan fans proclaim it to be, Wanted is definitely one of the better masala films to come out in ages.
Not only should Salman fans watch this, but so should everyone else to get a real sense of a masala film done right.
Salman Khan after a disappointing 2008 starts 2009 on a good note.
There is a huge twist and watch the film to find out who the officer is and how Gani Bhai and his people end up dead in the climax.The story is not novel but the movie is not bad for a Masala entertainer.
The movie shifts well from the violent action scenes to the light hearted scenes which is a good thing.
Masses went crazy for this film and Salman's career got a good 2009 start with this film.Direction by Prabhu Deva is good, he handles many scenes well and he has also danced well in the Jalwa song.
Ayesha Takia does good as the heroine, she has more to do than any other heroine in these kind of movies.
The rest provide good support.On the whole, Wanted is another Salman Khan action film which broke many records and ruled at the box office.
It is good to see Salman do these kind of films but what would've been better is the actions scenes were less violent..
The storyline was ridiculous, Salman Khan (the lead actor) and Ayesha Takia (the lead actress) were a horrible mismatched couple and the action sequences were more laughable rather than spectacular. |
tt0181262 | Thundarr the Barbarian | Thundarr the Barbarian is set in a future (c. 3994) post-apocalyptic wasteland divided into kingdoms or territories — the majority of which are ruled by wizards – and whose ruins typically feature recognizable geographical features from the United States, starting in New York City and working itself to Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Mount Rushmore, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.. Other episodes with recognizable settings are located in Mexico, while one is in London. Another notable feature of this future Earth is that the Moon was broken in two pieces. The shattered moon and the ruins of the former human civilization were caused by the passage of a runaway planet between the Earth and the Moon in 1994, which, from scenes shown in the opening sequence, caused radical changes in the Earth's climate and geography. However, by the time period in which the series is set, the Earth and Moon seem to have settled into a new balance. Earth is reborn in a world of "savagery, super-science, and sorcery".
The hero Thundarr (voiced by Robert Ridgely), a muscular warrior, whose companions include Princess Ariel, a formidable young sorceress, and Ookla the Mok traveled the world on horseback, battling mostly evil wizards who combine magical spells with reanimating technologies from the pre-catastrophe world. Some of these malevolent wizards enlist the service of certain mutant species in doing their bidding.
Other enemies include The Brotherhood of Night (a group of werewolves who could transform others into werewolves by their touch), the cosmic Stalker from The Stars (a predatory, malevolent cosmic vampire), and various mutants. Intelligent humanoid-animal races include the rat-like Groundlings, the crocodile-like Carocs, and talking hawk and pig-like mutants. New animals that existed include fire-shooting whales, a giant green snake with a grizzly bear head, and mutated dragonflies and rabbits.
Thundarr's weapon of choice, the Sunsword, projects a blade-like beam of energy when activated, and can be deactivated so that it is only a hilt. The Sunsword's energy blade can deflect other energy attacks as well as magical ones, can cut through nearly anything, and can disrupt magical spells and effects. The Sunsword is magically linked to Thundarr and as such, only he can use it; however, this link can be disrupted.
Comic book writer-artist Jack Kirby worked on the production design for the show. The main characters were designed by fellow comic book writer-artist Alex Toth. Toth, however, was unavailable to continue working on the show, so most of the wizards and other villains and secondary characters that appear on the show were designed by Kirby. He was brought onto the show at the recommendation of comic writer Steve Gerber and Mark Evanier.
The series was the creation of Steve Gerber. Gerber and friend Martin Pasko were having dinner in the Westwood area one night during the time Gerber was developing the series. Gerber commented to Pasko that he had not yet decided upon a name for the Wookiee-like character the network insisted be added to the series, over Gerber's objections. As the two walked past the gate to the UCLA campus, Pasko quipped, "Why not call him Oo-clah?" Pasko later became one of several screenwriters also known for their work in comics, such as Roy Thomas and Gerry Conway, to contribute to the show. After writing several scripts, singly and in collaboration with Gerber, Pasko became a story editor on the second season. Other writers included Buzz Dixon and Mark Jones. | good versus evil, psychedelic | train | wikipedia | 'Thundarr the Barbarian' has been one of my favorite cartoons for years, holding a place beside 'Dungeons and Dragons', 'Heavy Metal' and 'Pirates of Dark Water'.
I started watching it when I was about 8 years old, and it was the coolest cartoon out there.
You had a post-apocalyptic world full of mutated creatures and awesome sorcery.
Ookla the Mok was like a cross between Chewbacca and a lion, and had one of the weirdest horses I ever saw!
A grown up cartoon for its time..
I'll never forget the first time I saw Thundarr.
My mom actually watched it with me out of fear it my be some new wave of cartoon that would prove too mature for my still immature sensibilities.
I will say this though I remember very few of the actual episode story lines I remember a sense of sadness for the characters after the show ends.
The idea that these rag tag warriors would be forever traversing the Earth, fighting for their lives and the lives of others and with the possibility of never knowing peace or true joy seemed very likely.
I guess I was still too much the idealistic scifi dreamer to realize this was the only world Thundarr knew and would live in until society advanced beyond the means they existed in..
Great Saturday Morning Show.
This had to be one of the best animated shows of the early 1980's.
The plot was pretty simple; a barbarian, a witch and a mutant creature known as a mock travel across the United States a thousand years after a disaster destroys most of the world.
They go around fighting wizards and other assorted creatures in hopes of bringing order back to the world.
This main thing I loved about this show was the fact that it wasn't like most of the animated shows at the time that felt they had to give a weekly ethics lesson.
I think this show will always stand the test of time and will always be recognized as a great action/adventure series..
The year 1980, from out of the void of Saturday morning tv comes a runaway show, hurtling between the Superfriends and the latest Scooby Doo revamp.
With his companions Ookla the Mok and Princess Ariel, he pits his strength, his courage and his fabulous Sun Sword against the forces of boring cartoons.
He is Thundarr the Barbarian!Thundarr was the greatest adventure cartoon of its day.
Combining great characters with an imaginative setting and incorporating designs from such masters as Alex Toth and Jack Kirby, it transcended the usual Saturday morning fare.
The only strike against it was the strict guidelines from network censors tended to hamstring the action; but, the creators found interesting ways to deal with the handicap.Thundarr is the big dumb barbarian who punches first and asks questions later.
Ariel is the Asian sorceress with a knowledge of the lost past and is the voice of wisdom and reason.The world is a post-cataclysmic Earth, with long dead cities and devastated lands.
What's not to like?The late 70's/early 80's cartoon adventure shows were a pretty tame lot.
The Superfriends had moments, particularly Challenge of the Superfriends, and Filmation's Tarzan and Batman shows were pretty entertaining; but nothing could hold a candle to Thundarr.
Sure it borrowed/stole from every sci-fi idea under the sun, but so did Star Wars and other works of print and celluloid sci-fi.
Yes, the Sun Sword looked like a lightsabre and many of the villains conjured up Darth Vader, but Flash Gordon had flaming swords in the 30's and Vader bore close resemblance to the Lightning, from the serial Fighting Devil Dogs.One of my great pleasures is watching the episodes on tape, along with Jonny Quest and Batman, the Animated series.
Too bad all cartoons, and even live shows, don't reach this level of quality.
This series was a post-apocalyptic sword-and-sorcery epic, and it was treated exactly as such.
There was some great animation and the post-apocalyptic backgrounds were just amazing.
And then there was Ookla the Mok, one of the most awesome sidekicks ever to fight for the cause of good.
All of that was about to change when the team produced there own production company....Ruby-Spears Productions.The company would produced shows like "Fangface","Plasticman","The Heathcliff and Markaduke Show",and the best ever made,"Thundarr The Barbarian"."Thundarr The Barbarian",was without a doubt their greatest achievement ever conceived and it was a winner with the kids on Saturday Mornings and a big hit in the ratings as well during the three years that it had kids in total amazement as part of ABC-TV's Super Saturday Morning Line-Up during the 1980's.
However,Thundarr would come out two years before Arnold Schwarzenegger came out with "Conan",but this show just by itself was one action-packed a minute Saturday Morning cartoon show with surprises and unexpected twists at ever turn,in other words the greatest adventure cartoon of its day.
"Thundarr" was part science fiction,part superhero,and it got most of its material from the Star Wars films.
Combinating great characters with an imaginative setting and incorporate designs from such great animation masters as Alex Toth and Jack Kirby(whom were also behind the designs for several Hanna-Barbera cartoons including "Jonny Quest","Space Ghost" and others),it was totally different from the usual Saturday Morning fare.It also boasted some brilliant writing from comic book greats Steve Gerber and Martin Pesko,and some breathtaking direction from director/animated artist Doug Wildey,the creator of the "Jonny Quest" television series and one hellvua musical score from composer Dean Elliott,whom was behind a lot of theme-oriented Saturday Morning animated series and specials,and still is to this day.
As for the story line,well Thundarr is the big dumb barbarian who punches first and asks questions later plus takes out the villains and supercreatures with his sunsword.
Ookla is sort of the Chewbacca character here and is the leonine biped who growls and smashes things in his path.
And Ariel is the Asian sorceress,who was the smartest in the group,could levitiate things at will and had a knowledge of wisdom and reason.The world is a post-cataclysmic Earth where man's own civilization is cast in ruines with long dead cities and total devastation across the land.
It is populated by humans,mutants, and evil sorcerers/scientists and villains with powers far beyond the imagination.
This show had it all...What's not to like about giants,savage beasts and monstrous war machines and gigantic spaceships from other worlds?
This was a kid's show.During the decade of the late 70's/early 80's cartoon adventure shows were pretty tame with the excess amount of violence added,which some of them were not to be seen especially with the strict guidelines from the censors whom made sure that these shows follow them.
With some of the shows that were out back then.....The Superfriends had their moments until the producers changed the formula with the course of the show with The Challenge Of The Superfriends which was particularly good; Godzilla was a good show,but it was very tame with the giant lizard doing good and fighting the forces of evil,and the one where they had this knockout blonde whom the censors says it was too explicit,but it was tame too with a female Tarzan character...Remember Jana Of The Jungle?
Even Filmation's Tarzan and Batman,not to mention here as well the He-Man shows were pretty entertaining as well;but when it came to delivering the goods,nothing could hold a candle to Thundarr.
It Rocked!Thanks to Cartoon Network's sister station,Boomerrang,you can watch these classic episodes everyday!!!
It's too bad that nowadays they have The Superfriends shows out of DVD,but where is Thundarr The Barbarian???
This show was the standard of shows that came out during the late 70's/early 80's but Ruby-Spears Productions,whom would give us shows like "Turbo Teen","Goldie Gold and Action Jack","Mister T","Alvin And The Chipmunks",and the animated shows featuring Hulk Hogan,Chuck Norris, and even Sylvester Stallone's character "Rambo".
Thundarr was one of best cartoons that has ever been made.
I had to clean up my room every Saturday morning before I could watch it but it was worth it.
And they love them.Thank you for the memories and please bring them back.Is there any way these cartoons like Thundarr and the Herculoids be brought back to TV?
The love I have for this cartoon is extreme.
Thanks for listening.I thought this cartoon was lost to the hands of time.Sometimes I look at the things that is on today and wonder where in the world do they get this stuff.
....even if it did borrow a lot of concepts from the popular Star Wars movies.
Thundarr with his Sun Sword (lightsaber), wise cracking Princess Ariel (Princess Leia) and a large hairy, growling companion, Ookla the Mok (Chewbacca).All these aside, it was still a great series.
I liked how the items that are so common in our world, become totally new things in the Devastated Future World.
It was also kind of interesting to see the new landscapes and realize that they were actually standing in ruined Los Angeles, Washington D.C., etc.It was somewhat hampered by the cheap animation common to Cartoon Series of the day.
I would love to see the series re-made with today's animation techniques.
Honestly, one of my favorite saturday morning cartoon shows from the early 80's.
perhaps because of the fact that Thundarr often referred to his ally the sorcereress Ariel as simply "woman"...
Basically when you are 11 years old and a post-apocalyptic barbarian with a lightsaber (read as "Sun Sword") and a cool Chewbacca substitute named "Ookla the Mok" show up on a Saturday morning world of Smurfs and Superfriends you think this is really cool!.
Post Apocalyptic Barbarian.
When combined together the possibilities are just endless.This is one of my favorite animated shows of all time, and it's another childhood relic since I was a kid from the 80's; when I saw this show it just blew my mind and still does to this day.The combination of the post apocalyptic sub genre and fantasy I think is a beautiful combination and it's one I honestly don't see much.
The only other ones I can think of are the movie Ralph Bashi's "Wizards" and the pulp comic book series "Mighty Sampson" which may have been a partial influence to this cartoon due to the uncanny similarity.The characters their not deep their simply there to serve their functions.
But lets face it were all in this for the adventure and action and this show delivers well on both.I really love the animation, sure it old but sometimes old fashioned can still be the best way to go and it has a retro charm for me.
The character animation is good but it's really the background animation that impresses me the most.It's a bit unnerving seeing how much of our world is in ruin because it also means a lot of culture that we thought would survive forever hasn't.
For example, in one episode Thundarr sees a movie poster of "Star Wars" and Thundarr has no idea what the heck it is, let alone what a movie even is.
It was a little disturbing but that little moment just shows how the things we take for granted once their gone their gone forever, which made me treasure things I love like "Star Wars" all the more.However at the same time despite the ruin it also means new possibilities have opened up like with the film Ralph Bachi's "Wizards" we see there is magic back in our world along with some advanced technology which is scarce but still around all the same.
These things just created a sense of broadness and made me wonder what more this world holds.And the action is great and choreographed solid.
I really like seeing the team just go on adventures and kick some asses that deserved to be kicked.
Of course the highlight of the action is that Sun Sword which is obvious a rip on the light saber but all the same awesome, just seeing Thundarr using it to cut all things like butter and even block lazer bolts, you were almost indestructible with that sword.
Along with seeing both Thundarr and even the Chewbaca like character Oo Loc both use their brute strength and force and Arial with her mystic powers which is also cool.I would love to see a revival, where may'be we can have a little more depth on the characters as well as a developing plot line concerning on of the villains.
As well as may'be even more depth into the ruined world, where it could take place further in the future and we would see what kind of technological advancements were made which could advance the plight of the villains but also question whether we were already on a way to ruin.
Let alone an explanation where Thundarr got his sun sword, may'be he stumbled onto some ancient ruins and this was a mystical object from their society, I don't know something along those lines, but all the same the idea should be considered.Overall, if you have a knack for retro toons then this show is one to check out, this series has plenty of thunder.Rating: 4 stars.
I was six years old when this series first aired in 1980.
As I was already an avid fan of Star Wars, and had recently been introduced to the works of JRR Tolkien by my sisters (who took me to see the Ralph Bakshi animated film "Lord Of The Rings", which I also loved), Thundarr The Barbarian was the greatest thing I think I had ever seen on television at that time.The stories were interesting, the action was compelling, and the characters were very well written.
Thundarr was your stereotypical "Sword & Sorcery" barbarian, who was big on muscles and courage, but lacked patience and an education.
Princess Ariel was the brains of the outfit, and unlike most female characters in these types of shows was far from the typical "Damsel In Distress".
Her knowledge of Pre-disaster Earth often comes in very handy, and her vast repertoire of magic spells makes her a match for nearly any evil wizard they may face.
As I live in Canada, the official Thundarr DVDs are not available for purchase here.
They can only be purchased through Warner Brothers' website, and they only ship orders to locations within the United States (so glad they think so highly of their other fans from around the world).
However, I was able to purchase some very high end bootleg DVDs of the show back before the series was available through Made- To-Order sales, so I am able to enjoy the series on a regular basis, despite WB's stupid shipping policies.
The whole world will be better for it.I have also been doing my best to introduce this great series to a whole new generation of fans.
I have also written a screenplay for a live action film adaptation, which I plan on trying to get produced..
Classic 80's Saturday Morning TV.
For those that call it a Conan knockoff, note that this came out several years -before- the Conan movie.It was essentially a mash-up of Conan-esque characters from Robert E.
Howard's books in a post-apocalyptic setting.
The most hilarious part has to be Thundarr's pathological hatred of wizards and his 'Princess' Ariel (Sorceress) companion.Like a lot of these morning adventure gems (I'd include the late 1970's Filmation Rotoscoping efforts like Tarzan and Buck Rogers) this one never made it to DVD, so your only legitimate source is to catch it on something like the Boomerang network.
OK what do you get if you cross Conan the Barbarian with Star Wars with the end of the world?
Thundarr the Barbarian, that's what.
This show was like the most awesome concept of it's time if not of the last thirty years.
So what if it had to be sold as Saturday morning tripe for eight year olds...
I was only like three or four years old when I saw this show for the first time and I remember watching it religiously.
My Saturday mornings were not complete if I did not get to see Thundarr kick some butt.
Thundarr will be just as good in near-apocalyptic 2005 as it was in near-apocalyptic 1980.
Well, they might have to change the cataclysm from 1994 to like a later date...
but I'm sure they they can figure it out in another time traveling episode or something.
every comic book and lame super hero is being turned into a live action film these days....
Mind you....that isn't a bad thing.Spice it up with more sci-fi and give him regular companions and we have Thundarr.
Which is a cool name by the way.The apocalyptic intro seems more frightening as a 10-14 year old.
(Which I was at the time.) But it sets a great stage.
However, it also suggests a lack of faith in the project.This was on a little later in the morning on Saturdays so it was probably aimed at older kids.
Princess Ariel seems like an American anime at times.
Only smart.Thank you Cartoon Network/Boomerang for bringing it back..
Conan...I mean Thundarr!!!!
So he wore fur and he was Conan but named differently and he rode around on strange looking horses long after a comet destroyed earth and left us in a new Hyborian Era...But, he also had a best friend who was like Chewie from Star Wars, but had a face kind of like that angry Timi thing from Space Ghost and they hung out this princess who was all legs.While they were fighting mutants who also cohabitant the earth and occasionally their adventures take them underground where they find the ruins of subways and realize that there once was a more advanced civilization.And if that doesn't convince you to watch it, then the fact that Thundarr has a lightsaber shaped like a hand-and-a-half should.And the little kid in me is drooling.
bring me my supper!The flippant, sneering "cheers" comment is unexpected because Morak seems to be poking fun at the Saturday morning cartoon convention of evil leaders and their mindless followers! |
tt0424437 | ShellShock: Nam '67 | The game starts in January 1967 in Saigon, South Vietnam. A CH-47 Chinook containing Caleb "Cal" Walker ,the game's protagonist, and other G.I.s, lands at Tan Son Nhut Air Base in southern Saigon. Walker, along with his squad mate, Private "Psycho" Kowalski, are chosen by Colonel Salter ,The CO to participate in an air assault on a Viet Cong encampment within Kon Tum province. The Walker and Kowalski are put under the command of Lieutenant O'Brien along with another G.I. nicknamed "Short Timer". As Caleb and his squad proceed through the area, a friendly fire incident, involving flawed mortar coordinates, forces another G.I. named Tomkins, to join the squad. Along with the help of a special operations squad made up of Sergeant Ramirez, "Tick Tock" and "Eyeball", they help the Waler and the others clear out the VC encampment. The encampment is soon after converted to a firebase which serves as a headquarters for Walker and his unit.
Soon after, the Walkers's squad is tasked with investigating VC activity in a nearby village. The squad is also charged with finding a journalist who had recently gone missing in the village. After learning about the dangers of booby traps, the squad then proceeds to the village. However, it becomes very clear that the villagers are aiding the VC when the squad is ambushed in the rice paddies just outside the village. After clearing out the VC, Walker begins the task of searching for weapon caches within the village. After finding numerous hidden weapons and supplies, the squad begins searching for the missing journalist, and shortly thereafter find him being held hostage by several VC. They jumped to the next task of seizing an old French fort being used as prisoner of war camp, after fighting through the valley entrance, clearing out multiple bunkers after an ineffective napalm strike failed to do, they assault the fort, Walker explores the basement and finds the P.O.Ws, after freeing them from their cells, he discovered one tied to chair with obvious signs of torture, he tells Walker that the N.V.A has planted explosives in the basement in an attempt to demolish the fort, he escapes with seconds to spare. The squad is then given orders to defend the fort from the N.V.A and Viet Cong. The enemy attacks later that night, Tompkins is sniped at the start of the attack, O'Brien is hacked to death with machetes in full view of Walker's squad, the attackers are repelled after Special Forces arrive. The next morning Walker is told to report to Sergeant Ramirez and joins special forces. They take on subversive, rescue, and assault missions. Walkers's final mission is to defeat General Diem, the game's main antagonist. He succeeded and delivered the General Diem's severed head to the base. Afterwards, Walker's chopper is shot down en route to China Lake, Walker escapes from NVA captivity and helps fend off a massive attack on base camp by both NVA and VC forces, an air strike is called in, leaving Walker and Monty, a friendly South Vietnamse soldier, as the only survivors. | violence | train | wikipedia | excellent war game. Shellshock is a very good and very violent war game set in the Vietnam war in 1967 Shellshock lets you play as a silent but tough soldier who must survive the harsh reality that is war.this game feels like a movie it has smart dialogue and realistic graphics. albeit it is over the top but it is realistic at the same time. i am English so i don't know much about the Vietnam war all i know is it was bloody and the American soldiers where brave.i learnt other things from this games to like the different weapons the soldiers used different ways to dispatch the enemies i also liked the ending as well but i wont spoil that to anyone. i give Shellshock 9 out of 10. The most realistic Vietnam game ever made *May contain little spoilers*. When I first played it, I though its just another shooting game. But after few levels, I was so amazed I didn't know what to do. Everything is just perfect. Plot is nice (although I hated those special force missions) graphics are OK, sounds are unbelievable, there is a whole jungle in your house and Vietnamese soldiers shouting "Americans, go home". You can buy drugs, boom boom Vietnamese ladies and kill civilians, everything that happened there. Only thing I didn't like was Vietnamese soldiers that came from nowhere in ultimate killing missions, scripting was poor.Forget Men of Valors and Conflict Vietnams, this is everything that Vietnam war game can offer you. Its like watching art movie, you don't know should you scream or shut down the TV.I recommend for every war game/movie freak. |
tt0021750 | City Streets | Nan Cooley (Sylvia Sidney), the daughter of racketeer Pop Cooley (Guy Kibbee), is in love with The Kid (Gary Cooper), a shooting gallery showman. Cooley tries to urge him to join the gang, in order to earn enough money to support her in the lifestyle she is accustomed to, but The Kid refuses. Soon her father kills bootlegging chief Blackie (Stanley Fields), at the urging of Big Fella Maskal (Paul Lukas), because Blackie was against Maskal's involvement with Blackie's gun moll Aggie (Wynne Gibson).
After Pop shoots Blackie, he passes the gun to Nan, thus implicating her in the murder. She naïvely takes the rap, believing the mob will arrange for her acquittal, but is sent to prison. Pop Cooley tries to convince The Kid to join the gang to free Nan, and he does so out of love for her. However, her attitude had changed since she was railroaded to prison. When The Kid visits Nan in prison in a fur coat, she becomes terrified of his involvement with Pop's gang after witnessing a fellow inmate's mobster boyfriend being gunned down outside the prison gate. When Nan is released, having served her term, she wants nothing more to do with the mob. She tries to persuade The Kid to quit the gang, but he refuses. Things go downhill from there. She finds that her father is unrepentant and involved with a loose, gold-digging woman named Pansy (Betty Sinclair). Maskal soon takes a strong liking to Nan and throws her a homecoming party, forcing her to dance with him all evening. When The Kid finally asserts his claim over Nan, Maskal threatens him, then later sends his thugs to kill him, but The Kid successfully disarms them, then goes after Maskal.
Terrified her lover will be killed, Nan goes to Maskal to warn him and offers herself to him in exchange for The Kid's life. Aggie, now Maskal's mistress, shoots him with Nan's gun after he leaves her for Nan, and Nan is accused of murder. The Kid then names himself mob chief and escapes with Nan in a car with three of Maskal's men, who aim to kill him. Thus events culminate in The Kid and Nan being taken "for a ride" by rival thugs. By racing a train and maintaining high speeds, The Kid keeps himself alive until Nan pulls a gun on the men and disarms them. Dropping the thugs off with "no hard feelings", The Kid tells them he has quit the beer business, and he and Nan drive off. | melodrama | train | wikipedia | I saw this film last night at a "pre-Code" film festival, and I have to tell you that when Gary Cooper turned his head for his introductory close-up, the entire audience gasped.
He was just that beautiful.Cooper's looks aside, this film displays Rouben Mamoulian's directorial artistry to perfection.
Wonderful scene-fades, creative camera angles, symbolic allusions--Mamoulian just keeps exploring the directorial medium and coming up with innovation.This was Sylvia Sidney's first role in Hollywood, after her success on the New York stage, and she is just as lovely as a Gary Cooper leading lady ought to be.
It's nice to see her in a role with a harder edge than many she was given--so often she looks like she's afraid she's about to be hit by someone.There are lots of familiar faces in this film, including the wonderful Wynne Gibson.
Most striking is Guy Kibbee, best known for playing fatuous rich men, as a grinning and mendacious hit-man.There aren't nearly enough of these pre-Code films available on VHS or DVD, so if you can't find a pre-Code festival near you, try campaigning Turner Classic Movies for a broadcast!
As for the reviewer who believes Gary Cooper was too stupid to have dialogue more complex than "Yep" or "Nope," he should perhaps consider Coop's performance in films such as "Mr Deeds Goes to Town" or "Meet John Doe." Although heaven knows anyone who looked that good shouldn't have to be smart as well..
Although not quite in the same league as the previous mentioned classics, it has a powerful performance by young Sylvia Sidney.She's magnificent and delivers her lines more natural than perhaps anyone did at the time.Gary Cooper is better than usual at this stage in his career and shows signs of what would follow the next few years when he rose to the top.
The movie has some fascinating villains in Paul Lukas (never seen him this detestable) and Guy Kibbee (what a shock to see him act the hoodlum).The direction of Rouben Mamoulian is very inventive,probably the first voice-over to show a persons thoughts appear in this movie.
I thought I'd witnessed every wrinkle the crime/gangster flick had to offer, but the Garrett-Marcin-Hammett combination pull off some genuine thrills and surprises here, thanks to the inventively forceful direction by Mamoulian, the atmospheric photography by Lee Garmes, plus remarkably sharp film editing and flawless special effects.
Only two years after the introduction of sound, "City Streets" combined innovation and expressionism into one of the most riveting gangster movies of the era.
Fortunately, Turner Classic Movies has a pristine print which showcases the ingenuity of Rouben Mamoulian's direction (and his brilliant establishing shots,) the genius of Lee Garmes' shadowy camera-work and the suspense of the screenplay based on a Dasheill Hamlett story.
Heading the cast are two relative newcomers (at the time,) Gary Cooper as an ambitious sharpshooter known only as "The Kid" and Sylvia Sydney as his gullible young girl friend who swears that the mob will protect her -- until she winds up in the prison sweat shop.
If you're a movie buff or simply want to see just how good (and ahead of its time) a movie from 1931 can be, catch "City Streets.".
Great actors: Gary Cooper, Sylvia Sidney and the this time not so lovable Guy Kibbee.
Of course his western persona is not one you would think would fit into the gangster film, but his character of a rodeo cowboy who was stranded in the big city and was now making a living at a shooting gallery, presumably in Coney Island rings true enough.Coop's skill as a marksman is noticed by his girlfriend Sylvia Sydney who tries to interest him in going into the beer racket.
In the meantime while Sylvia ponders the error of her ways in the joint, Cooper who was reluctant when she was out has now joined with Kibbee and is now a confidante of the big boss Paul Lukas.Lukas is a suave and menacing gangster in one of his earliest sound roles.
Guy Kibbee who usually played buffoons in later films at Warner Brothers and MGM will be quite the revelation as a really slimy character.
Mamoulian had great help from Dashiell Hammett who wrote his only original screenplay for City Streets.
And special phrase must also go to Wynne Gibson who plays Lukas's moll and when she's scorned, she takes a terrible vengeance.Paramount was not a studio known for gangster films, later on they did get their own gangster star in George Raft and Gary Cooper was not known for this genre.
I've only seen a couple of Sylvia Sidney's early films, but they all seem to feature at least one closeup of her face that reveals what's really going on in the picture.
And here, in "City Streets," the director dollies in and lingers on her face for a full minute while Hollywood cinema's first "voiceover" tells us what's going on in her thoughts.
Dashiell Hammett, who wrote "City Streets," said she was the best part of the movie.
Visually striking pre-code gangster picture starring Gary Cooper as a carnival sharpshooter who wants nothing to do with girlfriend Sylvia Sidney's father's bootlegging business until she is sent to prison and he needs money to help get her out.
Based on a story by Dashiell Hammett, with characters who have names like The Kid and Big Fella.
I watch a lot of pretty bad contemporary movies, partly because I want to be there when something new happens.
Its one of the biggest thrills in life to be there when a new way to dream appears.This would have been such an experience for someone watching this movie seventy or so years ago.
The sound effects of everything going on in the movie would have been relatively new technology at the time of filming, increasing the overall quality of the production.
All around the movie was excellent, especially knowing that many of the issues faced by the characters can be easily compared and likened to current gang and crime families..
City Streets is a wonderful film, beautiful to watch and surprisingly "modern" for a film of its era.It's a film that transcends its genre: I pretty much never watch gangster movies as I dislike the theme/violence, but this was very enjoyable.
Unlike modern gangster movies where protagonists tend to be all male with a token female, this is very much the story of Nan, more so than the Kid. Watching it I was struck how gendered many movies are these days in terms of being solely targeted to women or men.
I watched it online and didn't find this a problem.I would highly recommend this to others who aren't major movie buffs but are interested in vintage cinema.
I thought the movie City Street was a very well put together film, especially considering the time period it was made in.
In this 1931 film by Rouben Mamoulian and Gary Cooper as "The Kid", this gangster picture by Paramount Studios which won NBR Award for Top Ten Films.
The story is cliched and a bit vague (good guy and good girl get corrupted and sucked into the criminal world around them), but director Rouben Mamoulian isn't very interested in the story; this is really an art movie that follows the surface guidelines of a gangster movie.
This film was slower and calmer than I expected from a gangster flick, especially one that was pre-Code, but it was very good nonetheless.
I found myself noticing creative usage of angles, one that especially comes to mind is when you see characters talking to someone out of the shot (which I had not seen in a movie from this era before).
City Streets 1931 Pre Code Film That's Worth the Watch.
"City Streets" (1931), Directed by Rouben Mamoulian was an interesting film, and very advanced for its time.
The two main characters Sylvia Sidney and Gary Cooper were very strong actors and portrayed their lines and scenes with great truthfulness.
Gary Cooper and Sylvia Sydney play magnificent roles in this gangster/romantic film.
"City Streets," shows a different side of Gary Cooper.
Every time I think I've seen my favorite of Gary Coopers' performances, I find yet another movie where he plays a stand-out character.
Maybe the earliest of his films I've seen thus far; there's a cockiness and confidence in his performance that is a bit grittier than one might expect coming from watching a handful of his newer movies.
The actress who plays his love interest, Sylvia Sidney or "Nan," also gives a very strong performance as a young woman who must save face and have nerves of steel to deal with the Gangster world she's been dragged into.
After spending time in jail and seeing all of the crime and what it can do to you, Nan has changed her mind about wanting "kid" to work with her father, but she may be too late.Once it gets going this film definitely keeps you on your feet.
Good Gary Cooper film.
In this movie the woman gets accused of murder and gets mad at the kid for not being racketeer like her step dad to make some money whos involved with the mob because he was just working in the circus but was really good with a gun.
And it was pretty good but not what I expected from a Gary Cooper film..
Rouben Mamoulian brought together my personal favorite genre a great film with City Streets.
Yet for me City Streets is a solid great movie all around.
Although this film is not by any means my favorite, I think that it does a fine job of showing where movies were at the time and brings to light the advances we have made throughout history..
It's this type of creative camera work that makes City Streets a highlight of the early 1930's.This is one of Slyvia Sidney's earliest roles, and it's also the only role I've seen of hers where she could be described as standoffish.
While she is in love with The Kid (Cooper), her attitude to everyone else is far colder than I have come to know her in her other films.
However this good guy seems out of place in the gangster world.City Streets is more than worth the watch.
The unconventional camera work and overall dark tone to this pre-code Hollywood crime film is what sets it apart..
"City streets" (1931) directed by Rouben Mamoulian introduced in the transition from silent movies to the era of talkies on the soundtrack the figure of style that was named as the so-called intern monologue, when a character thinks out of the frame composition of the shot, but supposedly inside the universe of the fiction, which we saw on the screen.
Gary Cooper is woefully miscast as The Kid in this 30s gangster flick directed by Rouben Mamoulian.
Festooned in natty threads and wearing what looks like the same eye shadow as love interest Silvia Sidney Cooper cuts a striking figure but is less than convincing as he makes his way up the pecking order past more established metro mugs and thugs.Working the shooting gallery concession at a carnival The Kid meets and falls for Nan (Sidney), daughter of mob connected Pop Cooley (Guy Kibbee in another example of poor casting).
I like watching movies about gang fighting and Mafia.
But this movie I feel like director wants to tell us a story about love among gang fighting.
These big wheels view and night time street together give us a heavy starting for this movie.
Gangster Rap. During Prohibition, bootlegging hit-man Guy Kibbee (as "Pop" Cooley) involves attractive step-daughter Sylvia Sidney (as Nan) as accomplice.
"City Streets" is notable for Rouben Mamoulian's showy direction, Dashiell Hammett's script, and Cooper's great eye make-up.***** City Streets (4/18/31) Rouben Mamoulian ~ Gary Cooper, Sylvia Sidney, Paul Lukas, Guy Kibbee.
Gary Cooper stars as a carny turned wise guy in this forgotten, unavailable on home video should-be-classic directed by the great Rouben Mamoulian.
Gal pal Nan (Sylvia Sidney) urges him to join the mob so he can earn some easy money, but The Kid isn't interested — even though Nan's father (Guy Kibbee, playing against type brilliantly) is a big-time hood who could make life easy for him.
I think the plot was way too basic, especially because most love story/gang movies all consist of a good person turning bad for someone they love.
The beginning of the movie set a good platform for Nan and The Kid's relationship and showed their true love, which in my opinion helped develop and explain some of the choices made throughout the movie.
The character development in this movie is also impressive, given that The Kid was able to change his ways so quickly, while still displaying his true character behind the violence of the mob.
All the characters really played a role in making this movie what it was, and I feel as though the scenes, and what was said was very thought out, rather than places to fill space.
In stead of overtly dramatizing, the film cut those short while still maintaining a romantic storyline characterized by how Nan and Kid's love remained despite the events leading to the drastic character development and transformation of the two.
Audiences are eventually surprised by the "no hard feelings" line that pierce the film from beginning to the end, but not without viewing a rather confusing car scene.
Overall a solid crime film classic, especially so if you like to see the face and acting of Gary Cooper..
I honestly saw mostly as a romantic film as it focused mostly on a woman whom was already involved in mob activity due to her father, then turns into a love story between her and the "Kid" (not involved in the mob).
The way in which it was written shows the "Kid's" true side throughout the film even though his non-involvement is short lived.
The use of lighting was interesting, several times throughout the film I noticed many visual clues in the form of showing or lighting that set up the movie more.
I was most impressed by the jail-cell scene where Nan's conversation with Kid would not stop playing over and over in her head.
Overall, I really enjoyed the story and the love that Nan and Kid shared for each other.
Throughout the entire movie, I found myself rooting for Kid because in the end all he wanted was to be with Nan. I believe it was a classic mob movie with problems surfacing inside the gang itself in their competition and betrayal of one another.
What the director did do in this film was the interesting show of time with the clocks and going back and forth with different angles when shooting the scenes.
Another scene I liked for the camera work was when Nan and Big Fella were dancing and the camera would follow them around the room so you could see the faces of Kid and the other women and how they were upset.
It was a mob movie and a had some quirky characters but their really wasn't much development of characters besides the Kid. I would recommend this movie to better appreciate the advancement of film in general.
City Streets(1931) is an excellent Gangster film..
City Streets(1931)is not your typical gangster film.
I thought this movie was well done and the acting was great, especially Nan (Sylvia Sidney) and The Kid (Gary Cooper).
I didn't expect the love story aspect between Nan and The Kid to play such role in the story.
At the end of the movie there is a close up on The Kids face as he is driving and it really expresses how he has become a more powerful and respected person from joining the mob..
I also really liked the chemistry between the Kid (Gary Cooper) and Nan Cooley (Sylvia Sidney).
Love plays a role in this film with Gary and Sylvia.
Overall this movie was very thoughtfully filmed and acted and was a perfect example of a crime/gangster movie.
The use of lighting in this film plays a key role in movie's overall tone and atmosphere.
The characters were very interesting and well acted, Gary Cooper's performance was very impressive and was a perfect fit for the character and the movie.
In this film, Guy Kibbee of all people plays a cold-hearted gangster.
Well, after becoming a big-wig in the mob and a cold-hearted galoot, Gary Cooper just announces that he's quitting and the film ends!!
The two redeeming qualities I found in this movie were the use of the character's shadows in filming, and the way Big Fellow dies.
The shadows created this mood that kept me more interested than I would have been if they didn't film the movie the way they did.
Sylvia did say that Mamoulian always felt that Clara Bow would have been wonderful in it."City Streets" was a re-working of Clara's very successful "Ladies of the Mob" and Sylvia played Nan, daughter of a gangland underling (Guy Kibbee).
In reality he is the murderer and will do nothing to help her - Guy Kibbee plays a real low life, streets away from his bumbling, eccentric comedy characters.So when "The Kid", now all prosperous and pleased with himself, visits Nan, he finds her changed and wanting no part of the beer racket now.
Things look bad for Nan and "The Kid" volunteers to "take her for a ride" but it is not the ride the others think - the ride of a lifetime for the thugs in the back seat maybe!!!In his first Hollywood made film Mamoulian's love of symbolism abounded with cats, eagles and doves plus innovations such as overlapping sound.
But you might have written a more interesting and compelling plot, or at least one without a lame, copout ending.Granted, it wasn't your fault that several people were miscast - Gary Cooper is not a gangster type, nor is Guy Kibbee. |
tt2190152 | Watch Dogs | === Setting and characters ===
In the backstory of Watch Dogs, a computer hacker is discovered to have been behind the Northeast blackout of 2003, which led to eleven deaths. This event prompted the Blume Corporation to develop ctOS (Central Operating System) a supercomputer that connects everyone and everything — including personal information, security cameras, and traffic lights, after being implemented in Chicago, Illinois (the setting of the game), it becomes the most technologically advanced city in the world.
In Watch Dogs, players take control of Aiden Pearce (Noam Jenkins), a grey hat hacker and vigilante. After a hacking job gone wrong, a hit is sent out on Aiden. While intending to kill him, hitmen accidentally killed his niece Lena, and Aiden seeks to bring his own kind of justice to the people responsible, all while protecting his sister Nicole (Anne Hopkins) and nephew Jackson (Nicholas Bode). Aiden meets a host of allies over the course of the game: Jordi Chin (Aaron Douglas), a "fixer" and Aiden's hired partner; Clara Lille (Isabelle Blais), a tattoo artist and member of the "DedSec" hacker group (under the alias 'BadBoy17'); and Raymond "T-Bone" Kenney (John Tench), a former ctOS engineer, and the hacker responsible for the northeast blackout in 2003. Aiden also encounters many enemies, including Delford "Iraq" Wade (Jerod Hayes), a gang leader with a military background; and Dermot "Lucky" Quinn (Myron Natwick), owner of the Merlaut Hotel and crime boss of Chicago's crime underground. Other characters include Damien Brenks (Daniel Kash), Aiden's former mentor and partner-in-crime; and Maurice Vega (Christopher Jacot), the trigger man who caused the accident that claimed Lena's life.
=== Plot ===
In October 2012, hacker Aiden Pearce and his mentor and partner Damien Brenks launch an electronic bank heist at the high-end Merlaut Hotel in Chicago, with Aiden transferring the funds through his smartphone. When they come across a strange file and alert another hacker, Damien tries to find the hacker, giving them both away. Unable to talk Damien out of it, Aiden stops him by leaving. Fearing for the safety of his family—sister Nicole, and her children Lena and Jackson—Aiden decides to drive them to safety under the guise of a surprise trip. However, on the way, two hitmen are hired to intercept the car and take Aiden out. One of the hitmen, Maurice Vega, fires the shot that crashes the car and puts Lena in a coma. She dies two months later.
A year later, Aiden, now a vigilante known as "The Fox" or simply "The Vigilante", tracks down Maurice, the hitman, at a baseball stadium in the Parker Square district of Chicago. After a fruitless interrogation about Maurice's contractor, Aiden leaves Maurice in the hands of his friend, a fellow criminal named Jordi Chin. Aiden then hacks the ctOS to help them escape unnoticed. As Aiden investigates further, Damien (whom he cut ties with since the Merlaut robbery) approaches him, requesting to find the other hacker from the Merlaut job. Upon Aiden's refusal, Damien kidnaps Nicole, forcing Aiden to comply with Damien's demands in order to ensure her safety, though he manages to prevent Jackson from being kidnapped and leaves him under the care of his psychiatrist.
With the help of Clara Lille, a member of hacking syndicate DedSec, Aiden is able to defeat a small hacker group named the Intraceptors, who pose a threat to him. Aiden is then able to track down the second hacker in the Merlaut: a former soldier and current gang leader, Delford "Iraq" Wade. Aiden obtains the electronic key to Iraq's server room and obtains a sample of the data from his servers. He and Clara find that Iraq has secrets on almost every citizen of Chicago, effectively protecting his gang from the authorities. When they come across encrypted data beyond Clara's ability, she directs Aiden to seek out Raymond "T-Bone" Kenney, whose hacking caused the 2003 blackout that led to the implementation of ctOS. After Aiden completes some tasks for him, T-Bone agrees to help decrypt the data.
Aiden mounts an assault on Iraq's compound, making it to his server room. After Aiden downloads the server data, Iraq confronts him; Aiden kills him and leaves the compound. While browsing the server information, another hacker, JB "Defalt" Markowicz, infiltrates their system, stealing the information before deleting it from their servers. Defalt also leaves a recording that reveals Clara helped locate Aiden and Damien eleven months prior, which ultimately led to his niece's death. Furious, Aiden demands that Clara leave. Later, when Aiden confronts Damien about the loss of the server data, Damien publicizes Aiden's vigilantism, alerting the authorities of his identity.
Eventually, Aiden and T-Bone locate and take down Defalt and retrieve the data again. Meanwhile, Aiden discovers where Nicole is being kept and frees her. Aiden drives Nicole and Jackson out of Chicago and into nearby Pawnee for their safety. Examining the server data, T-Bone discovers the contractor who ordered the hit that killed Aiden's niece: Dermot "Lucky" Quinn, leader of the Chicago South Club mob, notorious human trafficker, and owner of the Merlaut Hotel.
Aiden tracks down and confronts Quinn, shutting off his pacemaker. In his dying moments, Quinn reveals that he ordered the hit because he thought that Aiden was searching for blackmail video footage of Mayor Donovan Rushmore (whom Quinn is associated with), who accidentally killed his secretary when she threatened to expose his dealings with Quinn. After Quinn finally dies, Aiden races to Clara, who is ambushed and violently gunned down by Quinn's men. During Aiden's attempts to track down Damien, he discovers that Damien has unlocked ctOS, allowing him access to the entire city. In order to find him, Aiden uploads a virus into ctOS and shuts down the entire system, causing a citywide black out. By doing this, Aiden reaches Damien, who is hiding in a lighthouse. As he confronts Damien, Jordi arrives, revealing that he has switched allegiance. Nevertheless, Aiden manages to injure Jordi and kill Damien. As he watches Chicago come back to life, Aiden accepts his role of "the Vigilante", to protect and, if necessary, to punish. After the credits, Jordi calls Aiden one last time to tell him where Maurice is being held. Aiden heads to Maurice's location and chooses his fate. Aiden then uploads the video of Mayor Rushmore to the web, exposing his crimes and leading to his subsequent suicide. DedSec releases a video stating that they are tired of hiding in the shadows and declare war against the Blume Corporation and ctOS. The Blume Corporation then announces that the ctOS, which has been deemed a success, will be adopted in several other major cities across the country, using ctOS 2.0.
==== Bad Blood downloadable content ====
One year after the events of the single-player campaign, Aiden Pearce has gone into hiding while T-Bone erases all traces of himself leading to him from Blume's databases, and prepares to leave Chicago when he is contacted by his friend Tobias Frewer, asking for help after he had been kidnapped by Fixers. Upon rescuing Tobias, T-Bone realizes that both are being hunted by Blume and works with him to erase all their traces before fleeing the city, but their efforts are hindered by Defalt who, along with several other hackers, is working with Blume to track them down. T-Bone confronts Defalt and learns that he is after them in revenge for his brother, who was killed in the Northeast Blackout of 2003, which T-Bone himself caused eleven years ago. After joining forces to defeat and kill Defalt, who at this point has gone insane from his desire for revenge, T-Bone and Tobias decide to stay in Chicago to fight against Blume and consider asking Aiden to join their cause as they use the new ctOS against its creators. | revenge, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | 1. I want to begin with all the fuss that's on the web: This game got so popular before it even launched that people started already hating the game they haven't played.
If you are looking for a good story, like maybe: Max Payne - This game isn't for you.
I was amazed by the filling of hanging around outside by the bench, while I control cameras inside the building and knocking out my enemies that have no idea what hit them.Anyone, who enjoyed Splinter Cell - will probably enjoy this game.
In bonus, Watch dogs offers you a weaker character (Aiden Pearce), compared to Splinter Cells Sam Fisher, who can kill 3 guys in a momentum and take out forth with a bare hands.
But sometimes shooting is the only option and using your phone to hack nearby systems that act in your advantage - is the key for ultimate fun.As a open world game, Watch Dogs offers many side missions - finding murderers, suspects, potential criminals, codes hidden around Chicago and many more.
The driving mechanic is different - sure, but I'd say its more realistic than other games as each car has its own handling and stopping distances.
Ubisoft use nightmare sequences and flashbacks to really fill out his personality and how he feels about the circumstances surrounding the start of the game.He could have been filled out more - sure - and they could have talked about his past (before he started hacking) a bit more, but they did a really good job with his personality and this helps make sense of some of the gameplay (e.g. why he helps save other people).The other gameplay mechanics - such as stealth - are interesting and in a way, similar to splinter cell - although this works out well in the context of the open world.
Interestingly, some reviews have really played down Aiden/the player's hacking skill in the game.
It truly is the most realistic open world ever created.The supporting cast are also shaping up to be really interesting characters themselves, adding another level to how good the game is.On the negative side, the PS3 version occasionally gets shaky graphics and the occasional pop in when travelling in cars, although this is unnoticeable unless it is being specifically looked for.
The only downside are the high speed car chases that were infuriating and are exactly the reason I stay clear of GTA games.
Because I like Chicago, and I was tired to play games that are all set in New York or San Francisco.
It would be interesting to see some Polish characters, also replacing some of the pizza restaurants that can be found on almost every corner in Watch Dogs with some polish shops or restaurants wouldn't harm this game.
Watch Dogs is a perfect combination of hacking, driving and shooting.
It's like combining all the previous games published by Ubisoft such as Assassin Creed, Splinter Cell and Driver.
Cockpit view is something very unusual in games of this type, but developers decided to put this feature in Watch Dogs.
People are criticising driving model in this game, but for me it's perfect I found it more realistic then driving model from GTA V or Sleeping Dogs.
You will play this game to see how other players are panicking while you try to hack them.
Some people say that graphic in this game look worse than in GTA IV but I would suggest them to play GTA IV again because it's not true.
I give this game strong 9/10 because I had allot of fun with it, and I will definitely come back to explore the city even more and do some online hacking..
Here's what I like about the video game.1)Nice graphics.
Sure, the ones from the E3 demo were better but the real graphics are great.2)In my opinion, the story wasn't so bad.3)Plenty of vehicles to drive.4)I like the Car on Demand app in the game on Aiden's smartphone.
You can purchase a car pretty much everywhere you are.5)Good voice acting.6)A sign of a great open-world video game is you to be not able to progress throughout the story in your first hours of playing it because you are distracted by the open world.
Yes, I liked Aiden - he is still depressed over his niece's death.8)Everyone's profiles are different.9)Many people don't like the music selection but I like it.10)The open world has plenty of activities.11)I like that you can have a reputation of a menace or an anarchist, a citizen or a protector or a true vigilante.12)The most fun from the side activities I got from the Gang Hideouts.
13)The mission design is clever, even if most of the missions are pretty much the same.14)Both stealth and guns-and-blazing are rewarded.15)Collecting audio logs makes you more interested in the story.16)Collecting and listening to Maurice's audio logs made me like him a lot more.17)There are plenty of guns.18)Nice minigames.19)The open world is fun to explore.20)The different places in Chicago are different by themselves.21)Plenty of skills to unlock.22)Nice puzzles.23)The Q&R Codes are nice addition.24)The drinking game is enjoyable.25)There is chess, added in the game.26)When you die you don't get the weapons removed from you.Yes, there are lots of good things in this game, but there are same witch I don't enjoy.1)The gang hideouts or the mission where you can be stealthy or guns-and-blazing can't be replayed after you've finished them.
I want to be vigilante, which means I don't want to kill cops.2)Usually in games like this it is more fun to ride a motorcycle.
In this game motorcycle aren't that fun to use.3)The Missing Persons investigations concluded disappointing.4)The Human Traffic investigation were kinda boring except in the end.5)You can't fire a gun from your vehicle.6)After you've finished the cool stuff the game can sometimes get boring.7)(Minor con) The police's AI.8)(Minor con) Some bugs required me to exit the game and start it over.
There was also a loading screen that couldn't load.9)(Minor con) The handling of the cars is strange in the beginning.Overall Watch Dogs is a video game, that should not have been so over-hyped.
The gameplay is excellent, the story is solid, the open world is great and this can be the start of a great new franchise like Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed.
He thinks also it's better than GTA :)I think Ubisoft have succeeded great with this game!.
Also, it even has more cars than GTA V, so I personally think this game is far more better!
Ubisoft never fails to make a good game!
Even for that standard it feel bad like, The controls feel crooked the whole combat mechanics were not up to any mark and the technology in the game felt bit of a push over and forced on you to support the story.
I played this on a PC so experience on a console might be better with a dual controller but from a PC perspective i could not even get engaged in the game when am killing 20 people on the road and knocking 2 bus-stop while just trying to do one mission..
The graphics, story line, open world, and diversity of life in the bustling beautiful Chicago are a perfect score for me, but unfortunately..
the people would scream and shout dumb things you're way as if you'd shot towards them like a speeding bullet.
Sure, I may get flamed by basement dwellers who have nothing better to do than enjoy the virtual world of Watch Dogs and have taken the time to figure out the 54,678 controller combinations required to hide behind a box.
I'm just the middle-aged gamer who likes to play video games.
but honestly shame on me should have know better...people that like gta(like me) would have fun white it but its far from it an that said it doesn't stand apart from it what is a shame it is just mindless going true missions till the end with very weak cut scenes .
Well, after all that time, I finally decided to play it as it had been sitting in my HDD for ages.What I liked: Straight from the bat, the game looked beautiful, even if it is a downgrade from the initial reveal.
The best looking open world game taking place in a modern setting.The hacking mechanics were fun to use.
I especially loved how we could move around just using hacking cameras.In Ubisoft fashion, the game focuses a lot on stealth.
The hacking really enhances the stealth and makes you experiment with different ways to remain in stealth.IF stealth is not your thing, then the game does give you tons of firepower to go in guns blazing and third person shooting mechanics feel good.Variety in story missions kept the game from getting too repetitive.Ability to profile every single NPC in the game, hack phones of many of them to earn cash or learn something about them etc makes the world feel more alive.Running from the police gets fun, ONCE you unlock more hacking abilities.Some of the secondary characters were pretty good.Some parts of the story were interesting.What I didn't liked: The main protagonist was just OK.
Once you get used to it and unlock abilities, it becomes more tolerable.Due to the driving, the chase sequences in missions were not fun.Stealth only missions became annoying.Not many ways to utilize all the cash you can easily get by hacking.Tons of side missions yet I didn't had the motivation to actually do them as they were repetitive.Random crimes were also repetitive.Reputation system was mostly pointless.All in all, it is a fun sandbox/open-world game.
Let's start of with the good things in the game.
The hacking at times can be fun, but it can be annoying at times and that's my big problem with the game.
The main character of the game isn't really all that interesting to be honest.
His lifeless, dull and could have been a lot better then he was, and the other character's in the game are more interesting than him.
this is a very good game i liked the story it was an average revenge story the voice acting was average and the story's length was somewhere around 40 hours the graphics are definitely better then they were suppose to be and the city feels very alive which helps you lose yourself in the game the side missions are fun at first but then become repetitive which is somewhat disappointing...
This is one of the best games I have ever played.Chicago looks great (playing on ps4) and is good fun to explore.
Without giving anything away the villains are pretty hideous too so you want Aiden to bring them down.I think maybe this game would not suit gamers who ignore side missions and just run from one main mission to the next, as the side missions provide a lot of character information in the form of Audiologs.
Anyone used to third person shooters should have no problem.The online stuff is really good fun, especially hacking people from a good hiding place and watching them run around trying to find you.
but I prefer it to Rockstar's Euphoria engine driving (GTA.) I really think a lot of the bellyaching is coming from folks who aren't very GOOD at the driving.Mechanically, the engine is good, the stealth works, the driving is good, the game engine does everything asked.
The graphics aren't the greatest (looking like the E3 display settings are still on disc, but were nerfed for PC to drag it back down to console level) but they are plenty good enough.
Watch_Dogs...What to say...ohh what to say...Well The game is beautiful I must say.
I was informed that THAT was the only fun playing the game and the storyline sucked...I disagree.
The open world feature was pointless because you did nothing but: 1: Hack for money (GTM's) 2: Hack for information about money drops(Parcels with money lying around) 3: Hack for items used to build stuff like distractions etc 4: Hack to find out about people committing crimes( Which is where you run up to them, press the F- key.
Hell...they might just hack you guys Ubisoft just to get more fun out of this experience!About the clothing...
The graphics are stunning (though they are probably much better on the ps4 as i played it on the ps3).The controls was good and it was very easy to progress through the storyline.
The whole game is fun but if you just do the storyline with no other walking around the city it gets quite repetitive.
A good open world game that unfortunately did not live up to all the hype.
Watch dogs was one of my most anticipated games of this year, I am a huge fan of open world games and am also a fan of Ubisoft's Assassin Creed and Far Cry series, I was really hyped up for this game.Watch dogs does have unique elements, you can hack everything use that to your advantage which makes for innovative game-play.
The missions are fun, specially the ones which allow you to play the game anyway you want, MSG style by silent head shooting enemies or taking them them down.
Driving in this game is not good, it is hard to make turns and control the car specially at high speed and off-road.The side missions are even more repetitive.
The mini-games like Poker and Chess are fun.
Poorly handled.There are also annoying restrictions like why cant you punch anyone in the game but the A.I can, that is just another mind boggling decision along with with No drive-by.Chicago is a good looking city although some landmarks have been missed but many many hot-spots are highlighted telling you about the history of that place which is actually interesting.
The characters are all actually good apart from Aiden Pearce, he has a cool look for a protagonist, thats about it, he is a hard guy to like, he just does what he wants, never listens to anyone, hardly showed a lot of emotion, plus I am confused about the moral high ground he stands on, in one mission he knocked out and killed several enemies to save someone he cared about after that he showed remorse, WHAT ABOUT ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE HE KILLED?
The voice acting is actually good, although I think Aiden's Voice actor just sounds robotic in many scenes.The OST is good specially during missions, off mission OST is OK but the cop chase music is excellent, but the songs are poorly implemented they are not divided into radio stations like in most open world games and they are a very few of them some are flat out bad, some are repetitive, I only liked around 3-4 songs.
Apparently this game hates it owns songs because they wont let you play them during any main or side missions only during free roam, another confusing decision.Watch dogs overall is a fun open world game but was falsely advertised the the game-play in the E3 trailer is not even there plus the game has been downgraded in some ways and it feels apparent, but the game has many unique aspects going for it and does have a lot of lasting appeal and tons of things to do, even if those things will get repetitive after a while.
But it is still a pretty good open world game but it just did not live up to all it's hype.Rating: 7.5/10.
But, anyways...When Ubisoft announced Watch Dogs, I had a lot of hopes for this game.
But like other players, I was disappointed after playing the game.
Sure they do downgrade the graphics but that's not why a lot of players hate this game!
They expected so much more from this game!Hope they make it right this time at Watch Dogs 2..
It is an open-world game where the player can hack almost anything electronic.
The driving was very acceptable with respect to other open-world games.
Traveling through open world cities is nothing new, but with a hacking element Watch_Dogs carves itself a nice little niche..
For between going into a building and doing a one man war against a local gang; taking down drug caravans; sprinting to drop off cars, or driving around as a decoy; and the million and one hacking mini-games, amongst other mini-games; Watch_Dogs does a lot which GTA didn't.
Thing is, compared to other open-world, city based, games, the question is whether Watch_Dogs doesn't have much more than its hacking gimmick?Characters & StoryAiden Pearce (Noam Jenkins) is a hacker located within a futuristic Chicago.
Speaking on some of my favorite side-missions/ mini- games leads me to first speak on the "Gang Hideout" missions, in which you infiltrate places like a parking lot and try to take down, not kill, one single member, while dealing with their associates.
Having the ability to play in such a non-linear way was so exciting, even though going guns blazing was the only one I could do with any sort of success.Then when it comes to convoy missions, basically it is you versus a few cars filled with people who have guns, and due to Watch_Dogs not letting you shoot while in a car, between ramming and hacking your environment, that is your only option unless you want to get out the car, shoot, and hope to not be ran over or overwhelmed.
Which when you consider games like Grand Theft Auto and Sleeping Dogs exist, it makes not having any grandeur missions seem like Ubisoft is not even trying to compete.
And perhaps when it comes to this game, all of its damning features come from thinking between Ubisoft and what other open-world action/adventures offer, this should be better than it is.Overall: RentalQuite honestly, I am disappointed.
Watch_Dogs main thing worth praising are the side-missions, which was one of the few things GTA V lacked so really that is the only way it competes and stands out. |
tt0165798 | Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai | Ghost Dog (Forest Whitaker) sees himself as a retainer of Louie (John Tormey), a local mobster, who saved Ghost Dog's life years ago. While living as a hired hitman for the American Mafia, he adheres to the code of the samurai, and interprets and applies the wisdom of the Hagakure in his contracts for the mob.
Louie tells Ghost Dog to kill a gangster, Handsome Frank, who is sleeping with the daughter (Tricia Vessey) of local mafia don Vargo (Henry Silva). Ghost Dog arrives and kills the gangster, before seeing that the girl is also in the room at the time; she lends him a book; he leaves her alive, and exits. In order to avoid being implicated in the murder of a made man, Vargo and his associate Sonny Valerio decide to get rid of Ghost Dog. Louie knows practically nothing about Ghost Dog, and the hitman communicates only by homing pigeon. The mobsters start by tracing all the pigeon coops in town. They find Ghost Dog's cabin atop a building and kill his pigeons. Ghost Dog realizes he must kill the entire mafia or otherwise they will kill him and his master.
During the day, Ghost Dog frequently visits the park to see his best friend, a Haitian ice cream salesman named Raymond (Isaach De Bankolé) who speaks only French. Ghost Dog does not understand French and Raymond does not understand English, but the two seem to understand each other. Ghost Dog also makes friends with a little girl named Pearline (Camille Winbush), to whom he lends the book —Rashōmon and Other Stories— he received from Vargo's daughter. Paralleling a major theme of Rashōmon, Louie and Ghost Dog have different accounts of the circumstances of their meeting: in Louie's flashback he shoots Ghost Dog's attacker in self-defense, while in Ghost Dog's flashback, Louie shoots the attacker just as the attacker is about to kill Ghost Dog.
Eventually, Ghost Dog attacks Vargo's mansion single-handedly and kills almost everyone he encounters, sparing only Louie and Vargo's daughter. At night, Ghost Dog kills Sonny Valerio in his house, shooting a bullet through Valerio´s bathroom pipe. Ghost Dog is later expecting that Louie attacks him (as he feels that, according to the mob code, Louie must avenge the murder of his boss Vargo). He goes to the park and gives Raymond all his money, helping him to stay in the country and build a boat. Pearline appears and gives back Rashōmon to Ghost Dog, expressing that she liked it. Ghost Dog then gives Pearline his copy of Hagakure and encourages her to read it.
Though Louie feels some loyalty to Ghost Dog, he finally confronts Ghost Dog at Raymond's ice cream stand with Raymond and Pearline watching. Ghost Dog is unwilling to attack his master and allows Louie to kill him. His last act is to give Louie the copy of Rashōmon and encourage him to read it. It is then revealed that Vargo's daughter ordered Louie to murder Ghost Dog. Pearline takes Ghost Dog's gun and shoots at Louie, but the gun is empty. Ghost Dog dies peacefully with Raymond and Pearline at his side. Later, Pearline reads passionately the Hagakure, indicating that she may follow Ghost Dog's way in the future. | violence, psychedelic, philosophical, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai * * * * Stars Forest Whitaker stars in this amazingly good character driven film.
Whitaker is Ghost Dog, a New York hitman who lives by the code of the ancient samurai.
However both aspects work exceptionally well, the effect taken as a whole make this one of the best films of the past few years.Besides Whitaker and his friends, one other great performance is given by Tricia Vessey as Louise Vargo, the young girl that sets all that happens in motion.
Like the changing of the wind the changing of time and circumstance is neither good nor bad when weighed against his code.While Whitaker deserves infinite praise for his performance, almost just as much praise must be given to director Jim Jarmush.
A performance from Forrest Whitaker, as the dedicated, un-hinged-from reality 'samurai' known as Ghost Dog, which ranks among his best and shows in plain sight that he can carry an action film with patience and cool.
And the film also carries a fine sense of humor to many scenes - the fact that these gangsters (one of which Dog's boss) watch more cartoons than take care of business is as funny as the way they interact sometimes.
It's a gangster movie, but every five minutes or so there's philosophical notes on the way of the samurai that seems more in place in a (good, thematically engaging) art film than a (good, shoot-em-up) Hollywood actioner.
It's a movie about urban-life, yet the only signs of Urbana are shown from a distance, where the only two who will talk to Ghost Dog are a Haitian ice cream guy (who provides a wonderfully weird scene on the roof with Ghost Dog), and a little girl who likes to read.
One of the Mafia wiseguys must be killed as he is having an affair with the daughter of the Mafia Don.The person they get to do it is an African American who lives by the code of the Samurai and goes by the name of Ghost Dog. To be honest, I have met many Japanafiles so this is not so unbelievable.
But the code of the Mafia means that if you kill a wiseguy then you must be killed or the Mafia person who hired him must be killed.Jim Jarmusch makes movies where the characters close relations based on only very small things.
If you saw Dead man and like it, then you will love Ghost Dog. It is funny, serious, dark, tragic and beautiful all at the same time.
The funniest guy, at least to me, was the mobster who sang and danced to rap music!The byplay between "Ghost Dog," the hero of the movie played wonderfully by Forest Whitaker, and the ice cream man, who only spoke French, also was fun and entertaining.Almost every character in here was a strange, led by Whitaker who plays a modern-day hit-man who lives by the code of the ancient Samurai warriors.
Hey, I said this was a bizarre movie!The violence was no-nonsense, however, nothing played for laughs and unlike Rambo-mentality, people who were shot at were hit and usually killed right away.Along the way on this strange tale was a lesson or two on loyalty, racism, philosophies, kindness, communication, etc.
It tells the story of an African-American mafia hit-man in New York who lives by the rules of the Samurai, in simplicity and alone with his pigeons, who calls himself Ghost Dog and who is always faithful to his master, a local mobster who has saved his life several years ago.
And while his life is in constant danger, the only people he ever has contact with are a little girl, with whom he discusses books, and a Haitian ice cream man who only speaks French and doesn't understand a word of what Ghost Dog tells him.I guess the best way to categorize this movie is to call it a mix of the movie "Léon", the Samurai code and hip-hop culture.
Add to this some nice acting, a cool and well-written story, some funny moments (like for instance a rapping mobster) and what you'll get is a movie that is fun and interesting to watch.
Both groups live and die by the code, and this is probably the most important thing in the movie, and it's shown with respect with both Samurai and mafia; I'm not entirely sure that it's correct all the way through, but that's not what's most important, anyway.
"Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" is one of those movies that might have seemed like a really god idea on script and in concept idea, but translated to the screen not so much.
With all due respect for Forest Whitaker and his great acting talent, then he was just the wrong physical choice for the role of Ghost Dog.I will say that Forest Whitaker does play well in "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai", despite being wrongly cast for the role, but he ended up looking like a fish out of water.Once the movie ended, I sat with a very bored feeling and thinking 'what was the purpose of this movie?' "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai" wasn't innovative or spectacular in any way.
Basically, Jim Jarmush's best (and most accessible) film; Forrest Whitaker's best performance (and the best performances by a host of little recognized but worthy character actors), the best sound track, best music from the RZA; - I mean, '90's film-making just couldn't get better than this, and if you're having trouble understanding this, then read some books and see some movies, because this is a film that does not talk "down" to its audience, but expects us to live up to it.This is a film about the clash - and potential interweaving - of very different cultures.
This new film, written and directed by the Dean of Independent film makers ("Down by Law," "Night on Earth," and "Dead Man," just to name a few of his masterpieces), is a WONDERFUL, entertaining, and powerful work about a New York City inner city young man, played marvellously by Forest Whitaker, who studies and lives the way of the ancient Samurai warriors.
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is a film that showed much promise, but delivered none.
Instead of a slow-paced comedic drama, Ghost Dog is a slow-paced bloody crime film.The plot deals with Ghost Dog (Whitaker), an expert mafia assassin living in present-day New York City who lives his life according to the ancient code of the Samurai.Jarmusch somewhat reverses what Akira Kurosawa did in Throne of Blood by bringing Eastern culture to a Western setting.
It's a rather fascinating idea, but I can't help but feel that Jarmusch kind of falls into a trap he teeters on almost constantly in his films: while he's so busy creating a slow, brooding atmosphere and interweaving subtle underlying themes, he occasionally forgets that this is still a movie.
Forest Whitaker is absolutely perfect as Ghost Dog - detached, subtle, nuanced, and, most importantly, human.Still, I hesitate to recommend this film.
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is much more down to earth than most of Jarmusch's earlier films, but it still has that coolness in it's essence, and although it isn't vintage Jarmusch; it's still a very good movie.
All in all, what it lacks in coolness; Ghost Dog makes up for in originality.This movie is very much what film fans would class as an "indie".
The director has made best use of the casting, and Forest Whitaker, despite not being an actor with an impressive list of lead roles to his credit, pulls out an excellent performance that brilliantly fits the tone of the movie.
Jarmusch has written lots of great and absurdly funny scenes for the movie, the best of which is the one in which Ghost Dog's employer explains the arrangement to a baffled group of colleagues - it's comedy genius!
We've seen enough of pseudointellectual musings on oriental ways and culture from Americans who understand nothing of it, and we could have done without this slow and boring film, full of cliches and uninvolving non-action scenes..
The movie is supposed to be about some guy who took up the Samurai way, but if there is ever a movie that belittles violence and glamorizes it, this is the one.(Discussion of the plot follows here.) Just because someone saved his life, this main character goes around and kills people for him, and gets paid for the gangland murders.
Surrilistic movie about ancient ethics in the modern world with Forest Whitaker as the Man as hard and tough as Samurai Steel the mystical Ghost Dog. John Tormey is Louie his savior and master Louie who in the end has to shoot it out, like in an old western movie, with Ghost Dog to make amends for both theirs mistakes and wrong doings in life.
A bit deep in some places but still interesting movie with Ghost Dog using his brains brawn's and belief in the Code of the Samurai to do in the entire Vergo Mob. These two-bit hoodlum foolishly thought that he was an easy mark and that they would have no trouble at all to put him away, how wrong they were..
When Forest Whitaker's Ghost Dog practices his 'way of the Samurai', it sometimes seems like he's taking himself way too seriously.
One comment claimed that with Ghost Dog Jarmusch had surpassed Terentino but the bad guys in Pulp Fiction were cetrtainly ten times more credible and certainly just as funny.I could go on with many more things that bothered me, but I am sure that by now, you get the general idea.
Add a highly stylish soundtrack, total urban decay and an afroamerican hit-man who lives amongst pigeons and you get a masterpiece.Please do hire this movie, but don't expect a "Menace II Society" (which, by the way, is an excellent flick in its genre!).
I rented Ghost Dog on a Saturday night because I heard good reviews and I've liked other Jim Jarmusch films (Mystery Train, Dead Man) and I convinced my friends that we should get it over the usual action films or lame comedies.
All the samurai stuff makes the film feel deeper than it is and the code of honour is Ghost Dog's live is something we all admire in hitmen.
In the Coffee in Cigarettes films he is short and sweet but the two hours sniper rigmarole the Ghost Dog is is way too long even with the Samurai sub-text.In Dead Man and Ghost Dog it's much more about the values of Jarmusch's than about his true vitaly as a filmmaker.
If you enjoy films that require some thought, and are patient enough to appreciate a slow pace, then you'll probably love Ghost Dog. Well written and direction - a nice juxtaposition of several different mythos at once.
Conflating the samurai tenet within a tailing-off gangster underworld in an unnamed USA city, Jim Jarmusch's version of LE SAMOURAI is profoundly branded with his idiosyncrasies: a nocturnal cityscape tinged with retro-flair (mostly seen behind the wheels), a vibrating, mind-bending, killer soundtrack (courtesy to RZA), a perversity and absurdity presiding over the turn of events (cartoon hooked mobsters, a lethal shot fired from a drain pipe, the cameo of Gary Farmer's Nobody from DEAD MAN 1995, etc.), a tangy timbre of acedia inhabits in some of his dramatis personae (the boss's daughter portrayed with crashing nonchalance by a sylph-like Tricia Vessey) and a total abandon of anhedonia (twice, the dog's gaze is the self-reflexive bellwether of a preordained corollary).Ghost Dog (Whitaker), a self-claimed retainer of the world-weary mobster Louie (Tormey), who has saved his life eight years ago, is a proficient hit-man abiding by the codes of HAGAKURE: THE BOOK OF THE SAMAURAI, written by Yamamoto Tsunetomo in the early 18th century, living alone in the top of a building with a bevy of messenger pigeons, his disciplined life and allegiance is challenged when the local mafia boss Ray Vargo (a deadpan Silva) and his right-hand man Sonny Valerio (Gorman), both superiors of Louie, decide to do away with Ghost Dog as a scapegoat for a mission he has adroitly accomplished, a fatuous move because they have no inking of Ghost Dog's credentials, who will become their imminent nemesis, save the wobbling Louie, who is inadvertently submitted to the receiving end of Ghost Dog's undivided loyalty, chiming in with the RASHOMON (a book which undergoes a ritualistic full circle in the end) motif, even their recollections of their first encounter are different (with clear visual aid here), which shrewdly explains the discrepancy of their attitudes, for Louie it may be merely a self-defense, yet for Ghost Dog, he roundly leaves his own life to the mercy of Louie.
Forest Whitaker superbly channels a less laconic Alain Delon in the titular role, but is far more superior in transmitting a loner's variegated inscape, hewing to his codes of honor and living by liquidation of mortals, but it doesn't necessarily negate that he can have a warm soul underneath, and truly, the warmth quotient increases whenever there is a scene between him and Isaach De Bankolé's motormouth Raymond, the latter is the bees knee for a sore eye, amusingly and edifyingly, Jarmusch points up that human beings can build a communicative bond in spite of a seemingly insurmountable language barrier, and it is this humanistic perspective gives the film an edge over its built-in romanticism of indiscriminately adhering to something exotic and gnomic, so at large, GHOST DOG is worth cherry-picking by both Jarmusch newbies and diehards..
The eponymous protagonist of Jim Jarmusch's 1999 film GHOST DOG is an African-American hit-man (Forest Whitaker) working for an Italian mafia in New Jersey and living according to the Hagakure, Japan's samurai code.
The film follows Ghost Dog's revenge and depicts a clash between two ancient tribes that both seem out of date in this modern world: Ghost Dog's samurai code and Italian mafia ideas of loyalty.Jarmusch has always been open about the fact that he soaks up a huge number of inspirations from earlier films, books, and music and then lets them reflect in his own work.
Forest Whitaker quotes from Hagakure throughout the film, and there are also references to the work of Akira Kurosawa.But GHOST DOG is not a remake, and Jarmusch takes the basic premise in a very individual direction.
Ghost Dog (Forest Whitaker) dutifully follows Hagakure, The Way of the Samurai.
He was, however, the best thing about this movie with Camille Winbush as Pearline coming in a close second.The character of Ghost Dog is one that develops over the course of this film.
Whitaker does a fine job in delivering a complex and developing character as Ghost Dog is always looking to improve himself and help those around him based on the code he lives by.
So I revisited one of my favorite movies "Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai", well is it an indy classic, well i say hai (that's yes gaijin)!
The odd characters that pop up throughout the film are one of the things Jarmusch does brilliantly and this movie is no exception, and the ending is perfect.
Jarmusch Mixes It Up. Based loosely on Le Samurai, by French New Wave director, Jean-Pierre Melville, Ghost Dog tells the story of a hit-man who lives by the code laid out for him in the book, The Way of the Samurai.
Ghost Dog is an excellent ode to Hip-Hop and samurai movies, molded into a framework of European film making.
Sometimes the movie is funny, especially when there are those cumbersome aging mafia men on the scene and sometimes it's sorrowful (e.g. when Ghost Dog's pigeons are killed or when he is sitting in the park alone).
Along the way we meet the weird character of Ghost Dog,played skillfully by Forest Whittaker, and the mafia family, who watch cartoons and listen to hip hop and rap music.
Also the character of Ghost Dogs best friend, the French ice cream man, who is played really well.
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is much to that same effect, but instead of seeing it, it just wants you to watch.
This is helped by one of Forest Whittaker's finest performances (and there have been some good ones over the years) and an overall feel to the film which is almost like a play, set as it is in several acts (works brilliantly on DVD, by the way).
Jim Jarmusch, who's done some pretty cool stuff (Dead Man with Johnny Depp) made one cool film when he wrote Ghost Dog: way of the samurai.
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai is a great quirky film!!!.
Forest Whitaker, gives a magnificent acting performance as the main character of the film playing, The Ghost Dog, a hitman who lives by the code of the Samurai.
The Ghost Dog performs a hit on a man they want dead.
You won't find "Ghost Dog" to be a very good film, but at least you can say you saw something interesting.What it is, ultimately, is some good B-movie entertainment.
Ghost Dog (Forest Whitaker) is a reclusive samurai warrior who everyone in his neighborhood knows and respects.
"Ghost Dog" is a film I knew I would like the first time I heard about it and its premise and that Forest Whitaker (a personal favourite, I must say) was in it.
I liked 'Ghost Dog', It had the feel of a movie that had been edited on a kitchen table...a true 'indie' film from begining to end...great cinematography, a cool story, and acting fairly tongue in cheek.(But slow...so very slow...)A liesurly paced film with lots of haunting shots of urban squallar...at the center of it, is the haunting prescence of Ghostdog, a young black man lost in the ideas of the ancient text of the samurai. |
tt0113729 | Mad Love | Tordesillas, 1554. Seventy four years old, Queen Joanna of Castile, called Juana La Loca (Joanna the Madwoman), is still mourning the loss of her husband who died a half century before. Joanna remembers with emotion the man she loved passionately, but who brought her ruin. She does not fear death, she says, because death would allow her to be reunited with her husband. Their story goes back almost 60 years.
In 1496, Joanna, the third child of the Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile, is leaving Spain through the port of Laredo. She is headed to Flanders to marry the Archduke of Austria, Philip, nicknamed the Handsome, a man she has never laid eyes on. The marriage has been arranged for political purposes. Joanna's siblings and her mother, Queen Isabella, bid her farewell.
Once in Flanders, Joanna, young and inexperienced, is immediately smitten by her handsome fiancé. He is equally pleased with his beautiful bride and orders the marriage to take place at that very moment so they can consummate their marriage without any delay. Their union is initially a great success. The political alliance between their two countries has been consolidated and Joanna and Philip are very attracted to each other. With his good looks and bed manners, Philip completely captivates his wife. Their passionate love making soon produces results. Joanna has a daughter, followed shortly after by a son. She gives birth to her son in an emergency bathroom delivery without any assistance, cutting the umbilical cord afterwards with her teeth.
A combination of love, lust and emotional dependency make the passionate Joanna deeply attached to her husband. Her love becomes consuming, but the intensity of her passion turns Philip away. He is a restless man who finds entertainment in going hunting and in the arms of other women. The deaths of Joanna's brother, the stillbirth of her brother's daughter, her older sister's death and her sister's son's death unexpectedly make her heir of the Castilian and Aragones crowns. However, she is not interested in government. Obsessed with her husband, Joanna surprises him in bed with a lover, who Joanna later successfully identifies as Ines de Brabante, one of the court ladies. In a fit of jealousy, Joanna cuts the long red hair of her rival. While Joanna despairs at her husband’s unfaithfulness, she receives further bad news. Her mother has died. Joanna thus becomes Queen of Castile and has to return to her kingdom. Her tantrums over her husband’s infidelities have made her start to become known as Joanna the Mad.
At the Castilian court in Burgos, the Queen is happily greeted by her subjects, but her marital life is still in turmoil. Philip is soon bewitched by the charms and spells of Aixa, a Moorish prostitute who uses her sexual attraction and black magic to secure Philip's favor. With this new lover, the King becomes noticeably indifferent toward his wife, which adds to her increasingly insane jealousy.
Against the background of this troubled marriage, there are two opposed political parties at court, one Flemish, the other Castilian. The conspiring Flemish usurpers are headed by Señor de Veyre, Philip's right-hand man. Their objective is to have Joanna declared insane and for Philip to take power away from her. Joanna has her own set of supporters, the loyal Castilian royalists, headed by the Admiral of Castile. The Admiral and the Queen's friend and confidant, Elvira, try unsuccessfully to rescue Juana from her marital obsessions.
However, it is not the government that is on the Queen's mind; she is fixated on retaining her husband’s love. To avoid any temptations at court, she hires only ugly-looking maids of honor to serve her, but in fact Aixa has been brought to court by Philip, passing as one of the court ladies under the name of Beatriz de Bobadilla. Unaware of this, the Queen relies on Beatriz to find a spell to help her retain her husband's love. Joanna is equally misguided in her attempt to regain Philip's attention by simulating a love affair with Captain Álvaro de Estúñiga, a close friend from her childhood. The Queen’s lack of control permits the manipulation of her enemies to have her declared incompetent to rule. The King, encouraged by Señor de Veyre, resolves to take the rule of the kingdom for himself and shove Joanna out of the way. He finds an unlikely ally in Joanna's own father, king Fernando, who has remarried and has no further interest in either the fate of his daughter or in the kingdom of Castile.
While her fate is decided at a court assembly, Joanna is able to successfully make her case, counting on the unquestionable support of her subjects. However, her powerful speech coincides with Philip falling gravely ill. Although she devotedly takes care of her husband, the doctors are unable to do anything for him. On his death bed, Philip apologizes to his wife for his past excesses. After the death of her husband Joanna, heavily pregnant, takes on a long journey to the south of the country to bury her husband. She does not go far. Forced to stop to give birth to a daughter, Joanna never reaches her destination. Although she retains her title as queen, at the age of 28 she is locked as a madwoman in the castle of Tordesillas for the rest of her long life.
Philip's body was laid to rest in a nearby monastery, which Joanna was allowed to visit from time to time. | insanity, romantic | train | wikipedia | Not to minimize the life-changing effects of clinical or chemical depression, because I'm not.) Drew generates a stellar performance here, and fully sells the range of emotions her character experiences.
The only solid thing here are the performances by Drew and Chris, and the profound sadness and sense of loss experienced by its viewers via the execution of the story line.I actually enjoyed this, though the ending IS unsettling and fails to satisfy.It rates an 8.4/10 from...the Fiend :..
The high-school student Matt Leland (Chris O'Donnell) lives with his twin brother and sister and his father in a house by the lake.
When the teenager Casey Roberts (Drew Barrymore) moves to the house on the other side of the lake, Matt snoops into her room with his telescope.
"Mad Love" is a road movie with a tale of madness and sort of teen version of "The Girl from Trieste".
Matt Leland is a good student and son that changes his behavior when he falls in love with the maniac depressive Casey that has arrived from Chicago.
"So it's about a coupla teenagers, let's say they're 'in love', and one of them has mental problems, let's call her crazy..." The film itself though, I think, resists cliches, especially the fact that the four letter word (love) was avoided, which has a tendency to suck dry any useful plot content that might be found in a movie, opting for some different ways of illustrating their relationship.
I think Barrymore and O'Donnell hold together something that may not have great elements like soundtrack, plot originality etc, because despite the fact that Drew's eyebrows really annoyed me, they both did a good job..
Chris O'Donnell heats up the screen and Drew Barrymore is at her sensual best in this motion picture about two teens who take an adventure together against parental wishes.
When I watched it a second time, however, I payed a lot more attention to the movie itself and saw that it did have delight, great acting talent and other positive notes.
As well as this, the directing was fine and there were some really good shots through the characters' road trip in the movie.
I love that this film showed that those of us with mental illness are people too.
Like many other reviewers, I feel this is a poor movie (screenplay), but Drew really captures the feeling of mental illness.
I've known some people who are manic depressive (and a few schizophrenics) and I have to say that Drew must have some personal knowledge of severe depression to be able to pull off a performance like this.
She really elevates the movie from a 2-bit teen romance and makes it worth watching.
"Mad Love" isn't one of the all time great films, however it is my favorite bad movie.
I think that Drew Barrymore is charming and this movie allows her to be a little crazy and very beautiful.
In "Mad Love", Chris is a good boy who goes on the lam with Drew.
Chris O'Donnell's performance was pretty bland, but Drew spiced it up a bit.
It started to get better towards the end when we finally got to see the extent of Drew's depression, but the first 3/4 of the movie was such a paint by numbers approach to a romance that I'm not sure that it was worth the wait.
Bad girl, Casey (Drew Barrymore) good guy (Chris ODonnell) fall MADLY in love with one another.
All is going well & good until Casey completely loses it.....But the END of the movie is what satisfies.
Although this might not be everyone's favorite Chris O' Donnell movie, I believe that this is one of his bests.
It is a story when a High School Senior, (Chris O' Donnell) falls in love with another Senior, (Drew Barrymore) who is a little crazy.
This is a movie you should see if you are a Chris O' Donnell fan..
This quirky, reckless romantic movie starring Drew Barrymore and Chris O'Donnell is one giant teen-fest.
Parents are strict and don't understand anyone else's problems, safety isn't an issue, and true love can be proved by raging hormones.Now, since I am a proud '90s kid, I did see this movie when I was in high school.
Then again, since Drew Barrymore's character is crazy, maybe it's not fine and you need to figure out why you like this movie if it does remind you of your first relationship.
If you didn't grow up in the decade where standing up in a moving car was a good idea and falling in love with a lunatic was just considered "young and reckless" then there's no way you can take this movie seriously.
Just realize that Chris O'Donnell is going to be enormously stupid and Drew Barrymore is going to be enormously crazy, and let it go at that..
Mad Love (1995) *** (out of 4)Good boy Matt (Chris O'Donnell) has Casey (Drew Barrymore) move into the house across from his.
Matt uses a telescope to check her out and they finally meet but before too long he realizes that she is suffering from some mental problems.MAD LOVE pretty much came and went from theaters without making too much of a splash.
By today's standards, it was probably a big disappointment as you had two hot young stars and the film just didn't catch on them and it really hasn't gained any sort of following in the years since, which is too bad and especially if you're fans of O'Donnell and Barrymore.Look, this film is rather stupid in its simple view of mental illness but at the same time there's no question that the two leads are quite good together and both of them deliver fine performances, which makes this film much more watchable than it would have been otherwise.
If you're a fan of the two stars then the film is worth checking out as long as your expectations aren't too high.The biggest problem with the movie is that the O'Donnell character is a bit blind and does a few too many stupid things.
Matt is taken with new girl Casey Roberts (Drew Barrymore).
However, her manic depressive state gets more volatile and beyond his ability to help.I never bought Chris O'Donnell as a romantic lead.
Shirtless in Seattle, handsome blue-eyed Chris O'Donnell (as Matt Leland) has his telescope trained on jiggling blonde Drew Barrymore (as Casey Roberts).
Besides, it looks like car theft is legal in the southwest.***** Mad Love (5/26/95) Antonia Bird ~ Chris O'Donnell, Drew Barrymore, Kevin Dunn, Liev Schreiber.
Mad Love success is formally down to the leads Drew Barrymore and Chris O' Donnell.
Their chemistry together, their development, twists and turns make you genuinely care about the characters.If that's the only reason you see the film then go right ahead.The subject of Bi-Polar is sensitively approached under the direction of Antonia Bird and I can honestly say that this is one of my favourite coming - of age dramas and made me fall in love with both Barrymore and O'Donnell and follow along on their incredible journey together.Some may guffaw at the cinematography, it is a fairly old film but the most important thing is the story and the acting which remain strong throughout..
This film feels like an indie set-up but the mainstream stars (Chris O'Donnel and Drew Barrymore) give it a false sense of Hollywood glamour.
Donnel's character is as bland as a blancmange, leaving Barrymore to seize centre stage in an even yet watchable performance as a depressed young woman.
Drew Barrymore character Casey is beautifully troubled.....beautiful and troubled.
Drew Barrymore's performance in this movie is amazing.
Bottom line....A must see for Drew Barrymore fans, a good one to pass on if you're not.
As a Drew Barrymore fan, I rented this movie.
If anyone ever has doubt that Drew Barrymore is anything short than an amazing actress, you haven't seen this movie..
good movie,loved it.Drew and chris give good performances.But I wonder,they ran away together with hardly any money, so how the hell they get all those damn candles??Well besides that,its good i give it a 9/10.You may like it or not,but its one of those were weather or not u like it,You gotta see it..
Story of a high school senior (Chris O'Donnell) who takes to the road with new-found love Drew Barrymore when they are faced with permanent separation.
O'Donnell eventually realizes Barrymore's maniac-depressive and is faced with an ultimate decision in the film's ending.
'Mad Love' doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up: a teen romance or a tale of mental disorder.
The star-duo makes the film worth viewing but nothing else does.Rating System***** Excellent **** Good *** Fair ** Poor * Bad. Drew shines in her performance.
Drew shines in her performance as Casey, and her portrayal of this type of mental illness is brilliant (coming from someone who suffers from it) , she is particularly moving in the restaurant scene.
Chris o' Donnell's role in the movie is more like the audiences - trying to understand Drew (Casey) and what she's going through while being madly in love with her.
As with mental illness not a lot of people "got" this movie - and thats a shame, because this is one of Drews better films.
A high school couple run away from home after her parents put her into the mental hospital for clinical depression and trying to commit suicide.Sorry to say but the movie suck big time.
Story about a high-school senior, Matt Leland (Chris O'Donnell), who draws like a moth to a flame to maniac-depressive Casey Roberts (Drew Barrymore).
Together they go on a road trip against parental wishes after Matt heard Casey was brought to a psychiatric hospital due to her problems and helped her escape - him not seeing what was wrong with her at the time.
I was initially drawn to this movie for two reasons - Drew Barrymore & seeing her play a kind, but mentally disturbed woman.
I thought that Drew gave a very heartfelt performance, but it wasn't enough to carry the movie.
The movie had little impact on me, & I would only recommend to die-hard Drew fans..
Ever since Chris O'Donnell appeared in `Scent of a Woman' with Al Pacino in one of his best rôles, I have been looking forward to seeing this young actor in more good parts.
Am still waiting
An old saying of mine says that where a lot of noise comes out, not much goes in; this would seem to be the case with most 18-20 year-olds today, if what we see (and hear) in this film and many others of like ilk are anything to go by.`Mad Love' is obviously aimed at noisy 18-20 year-olds who do not have much stuffing inside their craniums, and so are easily worked up into all kinds of fathomless feelings, usually caused by lack of any emotional stability, either within or without their families.The fact that Drew Barrymore leaves me as cold as a haddock on the fishmonger's counter is a good point to start from: she has not done anything to draw my attention (on the screen) and off it she has shown herself to be rather subject to some rather stupid behaviour; I presume this `whacks' with uncountable teenagers in innumerable towns and cities across the wide continent of North America, as well as in places dotted all over Europe.
She can almost transmit her desperation.I think the best part of the movie, is Casey's character, and Barrymore's performance.
If you love Drew Barrymore or Chris O'Donnell you have gotta watch this movie..
Anyway, I love this movie and I wish I were as handsome as Chris O'Donnell....
Casting Drew Barrymore in this role as Casey Roberts is perhaps at least half the reason that this story turned out so successfully in my eyes.
The impulsiveness of true love in this film on the part of both Casey/Drew and Matt/Chris has to be the most wonderfully portrayed and supported side of romance.
But Casey, played by Drew Barrymore, really turns his life around.
drew barrymore is a brilliant actress and i think without her this film wouldnt have been so successfull.
but of course the main storyline is the romance between matt and casey which is the only thing we really did see to any full extent which is fine i think chris and drew worked well together.
i think drews manic depressive act was pretty impressive and i am one, the ending was a complete let down with drews voice saying how shes nicely recovering in chicago, however i do love the film after all that and im trying to find it in a shop to buy and i give it a 10 probably because drew got the manic depression thing so right and i found it so moving.
Chris O'Donnell is in love with Drew, and Drew has issues.
But I will also say now that I hate her movie 'Mad Love'.
Drew Barrymore and Chris O'Donnell light up the screen in this romantic comedy about teenage love.
Barrymore and O'Donnell act amazingly together in this film.
Nice acting by both Chris O'Donnell and Drew Barrymore, and the music in it was great!.
Drew Barrymore and Chris O'Donnell Make A Great Team,In This Romantic Comedy!.
Drew Barrymore is one of my favourite actress' and she never fails to disappoint me in her films,this one was no exception.The same goes for Chris O'Donnell,who was a great co-star and both of them,were brilliant playing the troubled couple.This film,has a couple of good laughs and a very sweet story-line,which i enjoyed alot.Go see it now!.
A movie about passion, parental problems, and mostly love.
Drew Barrymore's acting is just incredible, perhaps her best performance ever.
The film makes the view wonder what it would be like to fall in love so deeply that you don't feel guilty about leaving your family, or jeopardize your future..
Mad Love is a complex and intriguing story about teenage love and crisis.Barrymore is a convincing Casey Roberts, a girl with a wild streak a mile wide, a problem, and an overbearing father that does nothing to help the problem.
O'Donnell plays Matt Leland, the classic clean-cut guy that falls for a less-than-perfect girl - Casey.It's truly a moving storyline paired with an awesome soundtrack.
Drew Barrymore stars as a free-spirited young teen with a deep dark secret.
Mad Love is a movie that promises not to disappoint.
Drew Barrymore's Casey, a butterfly-loving free spirit given to cutting class in favor of joyrides in her Volkswagen Beetle, turns the head of good boy Matt (Chris O'Donnell) so quickly he nearly gets whiplash.
It told a great story about love, relationships, and most of all teenage parental problems.
The beautifully talented Drew Barrymore gave off a heavenly light when she was happy, a sympathetic feeling when she was sad that made you want to help her.
It stars Drew Barrymore as Casey and Chris O'Donnell as Matt.
It's the best performance I've seen from her.How was this largely ignored - yet the very boring The Fault in Our Stars (which is also an American romantic drama film which deals with ill teens in a new relationship) was massively successful?.
I love Drew Barrymore and I've never seen her look more desirable than in this movie.
She soon meets Chris O'Donnell, who decides it would be a good idea to shirk all responsibility to his family in favor of kidnapping Drew and hitting the road as a fugitive.
Chris really shines in this movie because he plays the perfect responsible and care-giving individual that would be attracted to and give care to Drew.
Chris is often walking on eggshells to avoid offending or hurting her.What makes this movie so good is the perfect example of a mental illness.
It's about mental illness and how it affects the person and those around them.It felt like the ending as intended was when the doors closed behind Drew's character as she entered the hospital.
She's doing better with the help of doctors, not magically cured.As for Chris O'Donnell's performance, I thought it was fine.
This was obvious from the scenes leading up to him talking to Drew's character.As a disclaimer I like Drew Barrymore in everything I've seen her in, not necessarily the movie, but her performance at least.
Drew Barrymore is committed temporarily to a mental ward and everything is fine for awhile until her idiot boyfriend Chris O'Donnell gets the bright idea to 'rescue' her and take her on the lam with him.The two fugitives begin their journey in Seattle and decide to head for Mexico.
A great love story about two emotionally different teens..
Drew Barrymore plays the role that she does best, the wild and crazy free spirit.
Chris and Drew have great chemistry together in this film.
Mad Love probably generated as much of a viewer ship as it did because of the likability of the two principal, Drew Barrymore and Chris O'Donnell.
I never thought of the movie as anything special, and figured that this would probably survive obscurity by fans of the cast or those who appreciate a decent dreamy romantic drama every now again, for which it is quite abundant.O'Donnell, though never a spectacular lead, carries well himself well as the good-natured, soft-spoken high school teen, Matt Leland.
Upon meeting flamboyant, rule-breaker Casey Roberts (Drew Barrymore, working with the type of characters that always seem to suit her), Leland falls in love with the rather tragic character and goes through one of those earmarked defiances and coming-of-age experiences.
At least they had effectively done that much.Not an impressive or all to memorable movie, though, as I said before, you should be pleased if you generally enjoy O'Donnell and Barrymore, or, if you're just a sucker for dreamy romantic dramas.. |
tt0115484 | Agni Sakshi | Suraj Kapoor is a single, wealthy young man. One day he meets Shubangi, and they fall in love. Shortly thereafter they marry and settle down to enjoy a harmonious married life. During their stay at a hotel, the couple are approached by a man who claims that Shubangi is his wife and her real name is Madhu. Suraj and Shubangi are shocked and ask him to leave, which he does. Then the guy rings up Suraj one night and asks him to come to his room. When Suraj comes the guy tells him that his name is Vishwanath. He shows Suraj a video of his and Madhu's wedding. Shockingly, Madhu resembles Shubangi to the core. Even after watching the video, Suraj disbelieves him. On Shubangi's birthday while everyone is celebrating the party flashbacks of the time when Vishwanath used to abuse and torture his wife Madhu prove that indeed Shubangi was married to Vishwanath. After showing the flashback, Vishwanath kidnaps Shubangi and tries to see a mark in her body that'll prove that she's indeed Madhu. But Suraj comes just in time and accidentally pushes Vishwanath off a cliff. Suraj then leaves the city and returns home along with Shubangi. One day Shubangi goes shopping and meets Vishwanath. He brings her father with him, who denies the fact that Shubangi is in fact Madhu. Frustrated Shubangi runs home and tells Suraj that Vishwanath is alive. Suraj leaves with his brother Ravi to tell the commissioner. While Shubangi is home alone she sees Vishwanath out the window, and gets a call from him. Suraj returns and then traces Vishwanath's call. Vishwanath surrenders himself because he wants to talk to Suraj. The police lets Vishwanath go. The following night Suraj overhears Shubangi talking on the phone with Vishwanath. After she's done talking, she admits that she's in fact Madhu. Madhu was fed up of Vishwanath's constant abuses and uphandedness. One day, Vishwanath and Madhu go for a trip. But their jeep meets with an accident and falls down a river. Vishwanath seemingly drowns and Madhu thinks he's dead. She goes to her father and tells him what happened. Madhu's father tells her that she's still young and has a life ahead of her. She should start living her life afresh with a new identity in a new place. That she does. She moves to India and changes her name to Shubangi so that no one can recognize her over there. After Shubangi finishes her story, Suraj tells her that he still loves her even after knowing who she really is. He hatches a plan to send Vishwanath to prison for the rest of his life. Suraj tells Shubangi to go to Vishwanath pretending to be Madhu. She does so and she tries to shoot Vishwanath, however, Vishwanath shoots Shubangi. It is revealed that the cartridges in the gun were actually fake. In the climax, Vishwanath reveals that he knew the cartridges were fake as he was being taken to the court. He overpowers the constables, grabbing one of their guns. Then he goes to Shubangi and tells her that he knew what she did. Saying so, he shoots himself. | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0055767 | Baat Ek Raat Ki | Neela (Waheeda Rehman) is in police custody for committing a murder. Believing that she did it, she confesses. When renowned lawyer Rajeshwar (Dev Anand) decides to represent her, he accepts her guilt, but as he goes deep into the details of her story and the circumstances, he is not sure whether or not she is guilty. What could have placed Neela at the scene of this heinous crime?
Eventually it is revealed that Neela's employer Beni Prasad is the mastermind behind Neela's imprisonment. He is after her property and devises a plan in which Ranjan, Neela's co-actor, is to act as if he is in love with her and get her will signed. But on the night Ranjan has taken the papers to Neela and is just getting them signed, he changes his mind. He was about to surrender and tell the whole truth when Neela held him at gunpoint — just before he could tell the name of his employer he was shot. Neela believes it's she who had killed him whereas it was Beni Prasad who was hiding and listening had shot Ranjan dead.
Rajesh disguises himself and appears at the court on the final day and accuses Beni Prasad and tells the whole story. In the whole story CID (Johnny Walker) aids him as well as Kalu a street beggar who pretends to be blind acts as a witness. The final scene shows Rajesh driving his car and telling "what do i get?? ...money, fame and nothing else!!" when he images Neela talking to him...answering his questions. At last Neela appears from the back of the car and the happy couple are reunited and are said to be really in love. The movie ends with Rajesh and Neela driving the car to the song "Jo Ijaazat Ho To Ek Baat". | romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt6481008 | Dil Boley Oberoi | This show focuses on the love lives of the Oberoi brothers, Omkara and Rudra.
=== Omkara-Gauri's love story ===
Omkara's character is ruthless, rude and strict, whereas Omkara's love interest, Gauri has a playful, free-spirited and happy character. They are very much opposites of each other. The first few episodes shows Om-Gauri as enemies like Shivaay an Annika's love story but this hatred will soon blossom into love. Kali Pratap Thakur tries to marry Gauri forcefully and when Jhanvi, his wife, learns about that, she sets herself on fire. Om sees this and rushes to save her and takes her to the hospital. There he hears some women saying that Jhanvi tried to commit suicide because Kali Thakur was going to divorce her to marry another girl who is much younger than him. Angry, Omkara gets to know that it is none other than Gauri and he calls her characterless and a cheap girl while Gauri tries to tell him that she is being forcefully brought there and has been chained as well. Omkara refuses to listen to her. Finally, she drops her daga and tries to tell Om but he doesn't see the marriage chain. After Om leaves, she finally escapes from there and asks for help from Nahar, Gauri's friend. She tried to break the chain which was put on her feet with an axe. Kali comes there and tries to catch her but Nahar puts the Dandiya/stick in front of him and he falls down. He tries to hurt Nahar but Gauri hits him with the axes. A policeman comes and tells Kali Thakur that he has to come to the police station because his wife Jhanvi died and held him responsible; he lies to him saying that Gauri was forcing him to marry her and then she escaped from there. He says that he won't leave her alone. Gauri comes to the station and tries to leave but Thakur ji's guards come and she hides behind some sacks and when the train is about to leave she runs and boards the train. Omkara also boards the train.
Gauri meets Om again. He tells her that she is so characterless that she left her own marriage and came here. Om taunts Gauri. Gauri tells that she did this out because she was helpless. She tells him that somebody must have hurt him a lot that he has lots of anger in him. She tells him that she doesn't want to see his face again. He also tells her the same and they part ways. Guards see Gauri and run behind her. She sees Om and screams. She looses her balance and falls onto Om. They both fall out from the train and into the river. Om says that if he sees that girl/Gauri then Gauri tells that it is not only her fault. He screams at her saying "who pushes anyone in a moving train". Gauri tells that she didn't push him he was the one who came in between when she was running. She was telling him to come into a side but he didn't listen. She says "the way she screamed even God would have moved from his place but no, you were in the same place" and she asks him who stands near a door when the train is moving. He tells that "who pushes anyone in the moving train". Gauri tells that guards were behind her so she had to do it. Om asks her why does she even do all those things. Gauri tells that if she gives one slap then Om points his finger. She tells him that he doesn't know why those guards were behind him. Om says that he doesn't even want to know why. He tells, that "I only know that I should be in Delhi but no. I am trapped inside a jungle and I don't even no where I am". Gauri keeps talking and goes behind. She tells that go with Gauri Sarma everything will be fine. Om tells Gauri that it is not Sarma but Sharma. She tells that's what I told Sarma. He asks her weather she doesn't know the difference between Sarma and Sharma. He tells that he would stay in the jungle rather than staying with her. She tells then go but there are lots of pits. Om falls into a pit. He gets up. Gauri tells him to move and Om gets hit with an arrow, causing him to fall down. Gauri tries to save Om. She tries to find a herb which can save him and runs to find it, but the guards surround her. She runs and manages to save herself. She takes Om to the masjid/Mosque where she can find the herb when guards come there. Gauri feeds the herb to Om. Om gets saved but Gauri is taken by the guards. He goes.
Kali Thakur tells the villagers to throw stones at Gauri or else what will become of there daughters and daughter-in -law's. They start to throw stones but Gauri's mother and Gauri's friends come and safeguard her from the villagers. When the villagers arrive, Gauri's mother tells Gauri to run. Gauri runs away. She knocks over Om and asks him to save her but he goes away. The guards come and try to kill her but Om saves her. Villager tells him that she is a cheat. Gauri tries to tell them that it's not her who did all this but Kali Thakur. Om tells them not to come forward. They ask him why he is doing this, she doesn't mean anything to him. Om put sindoor/Vermilion on Gauri and tells them that now that he is married to her, no one can do anything to her. The villagers says without the 7 pheres/vows the marriage is incomplete. Om lights some branches, lifts Gauri and goes around the branches and says that Gauri is married to him. Gauri's mother gets happy. Gauri follows Om. He asks her why is she following him, to which she replies that both of them will go in the same direction. He tells he never got married to her, it was just a drama to save her. Om leaves. She tells that whatever happens he is her Pati parmeshwar. At night, Gauri's mother asks her to go to Mumbai, to which she agrees. Om goes to the railway station and sits on the bench. Kali Thakur and his guards come. He tells Kali that he pities him. Kali Thakur says that he doesn't trust Om and starts to beat him up. Om says if he didn't pity him he wouldn't be alive. Guards hit him with a bottle and beats him. Kali Thakur tries to stab him with a sword but Shivaay comes and rescues him and, together, they thrash all the guards. Kali Thakur comes and again tries to stab Om but Om gets away, which leads to Kali Thakur's brother getting stabbed. He gets angry and tries to kill both Shivaay and Om, but they get away. They both leave from there. Kali Thakur is seen dead.
Gauri comes to Mumbai, where a man tricks her and takes her phone and her bags. She then meets Dandy a small time actor. He helps her telling that she is like his sister. Om and Jhanvi have a talk. Om tells that he will be Jhanvi's strength and not her weakness. She replies that she trusts Om so he can do anything he likes. Svethlana is frustrated because no one is doing what she is telling them to do. She tells Om that her food will come upstairs. Om says that it is a tradition that everyone sits in the dining room and eats there. Svetlana says she doesn't understand all these stupid things and will eat in the room. She tells her that they're marrying on Saturday so start preparing to be the groom.
Svethlana comes in her car. Om shouts at her and asks her how can she take the decision of there marriage, to which she tells him not to shout because it can only take a minute to go back to Tej and if she goes back to Tej, Jhanvi's life will be ruined. Gauri prays in the temple. She asks Shankar ji to give her a job. Svethlana's car passes the temple and Mata's chunri falls on her car, due to which the car hits a tree. Gauri goes and gets Svethlana out. She asks someone to call a doctor. Someone calls Svethlana but Gauri takes that call. She gets to know that. Svethlana is looking for a servant. Svethlana regains consciousness and scolds all the people because when she was unconscious, those people were going to loot her. They all get angry and tell her to apologise. She doesn't listen. Gauri takes her and runs away from there. Gauri apologies to Svethlana saying she got the call which was supposed to be hers. Svethlana thanks her. Gauri tells her to give her the servant's job but Svethlana refuses because she wanted to give the job to a man. Svethlana goes away from there. Shivaay convinces Om to marry Svethlana and get close to her so they can find out the hidden past of Svethlana's. Om agrees.
Svethlana comes home and was going to put the lights on when someone comes and puts something on her neck. She calls out "Tej" and turns around to see it was Om. She gets surprised. Om gives her a diamond necklace. Tej sees this and gets jealous seeing, this Jhanvi gets shocked. Om leaves Svethlana seeing Jhanvi. Tej and Jhanvi leave from there. Gauri comes to the Oberoi mansion dressed as a man. She tells the security that Sultana/Svethlana has called she was taken inside Svethlana asks Om. Whether he really wanted to marry her. He says yes. They both hug each other. Om thinks that, "he won't leave her". From the other side Svethlana thinks, "oh Om i'm really cunning what do you think that I will think that you will change your mind so easily?". Svethlana asks Gauri's name. Gauri tells it is Chulbul. Svethlana said that he was not good for this work. Chulbul asks for a chance but Svethlana didn't want to give the job to Chulbul. When Gauri was going out there was an explosion from the kitchen. Svethlana, Gauri, Om and Rudra all rush to the kitchen Jhanvi was in the kitchen she was going to make tea and the fire came from the gas because it was newly installed. Jhanvi's hand was burning Gauri checked from the internet when the hand is burned what to do she was trying to tell them to put some water but Svethlana told her to go Gauri sees the water jug and throws water onto Jhanvi's hand Svethlana's dress gets wet she screams at Gauri and tells her to go,she goes After some time Svethlana goes in to Jhanvi's room. Om asks, "who was that person who threw water on Jhanvi's hand?" Svethlana says it is the new servant which she wanted but she won't take him. Om tells her to take him because of him Jhanvi's hand is not burned so much. Gauri comes out, Richa/her friend calls and tells her that her mother is in hospital Gauri worries she disconnects her phone Svethlana comes and tells her that she will get the job she thanks her but you need to keep an eye on my would-be-husband for 24 hrs she will get three month salary; she refuses, Svethlana scolds her Gauri agrees but she doesn't like to do it.She comes inside the mansion. Omkara comes and she gets shocked. He thanks her for saving Jhanvi's hand or else the infection would have become serious he goes she worries she tells Svethlana that she can't do it Svethlana screams at him saying, that" he can't do anything" she finally agrees. Svetlana talks with Mrs.kapoor Mrs.Kapoor asks how will that servant keep an eye on Om she tells she has a plan for that. At night Gauri comes to sleep she hears some noise she gets up and sees mice she screams and runs to the hall Om comes out Gauri runs and hugs Om Jhanvi,Rudra and Svethlana comes out Rudra sees Gauri hugging Om and says "ma ka ladla bigad gaya/mother's child has been spoiled" Jhanvi stops him. Svethlana asks what happened, she tells there are mice inside her room. Svethlana says impossible how can there be mice in Oberoi mansion.Om tells Rudra to go and see he goes Svethlana there isn't a single room now this room is also gone and tells him to go. Rudra comes and tells "it is not just a mouse it's a mouse army " Om says that Chulbul/Gauri can stay in his room Gauri gets surprised. Tej tells the servant to keep the bed here. Rudra asks what's happening Tej tells, because Jhanvi does not mean anything to him she can sleep somewhere else Om gets angry he tells Chulbul to go Tej stops him and tells him to wait and asks Om why would this servant go Om tells because he doesn't have to watch all the tamasha going inside the house Chulbul sees the problem of that house and thinks what is happening here. Om tells mom will sleep where she should sleep he breaks the bed Tej gets angry and leaves.om's buama enters the show. Om gets some clue about Shwetlana's past. He and chulbul heads together to panchgani to get some information about shwetlana. Shwetlana also follows them as she thinks they got some clue about her. After this, it is revealed that Svetlana is not Svetlana but another girl who has killed real Svetlana. She hires a girl called Maya whom Om meets in a chemical factory where his private detective who was appointed to keep an eye on Svetlana and seek her past's information, but unfortunately was killed before he can give any information. After this the factory catches fire, where according to Om, Maya is killed. After returning home, at night Om sees Maya's spirit roaming around the house. Chulbul doesn't believe it to be a spirit but a game of Svetlana, to haunt Om. After this, with Buama's help Jhanvi overcomes her fear for Tej and demands 2000 crore rupees from him and 50% share of Oberoi Empire which shocks Tej since she never abuses him. Svetlana tries to seek the family's Pushteni necklace and claims to the media being Omkara's going-to-be wife. After this, Om sees Maya's spirit in the balcony where after following her, he fell down but saved by Chulbul/Gauri. Then Chulbul gets to know that Svetlana uses a hologram casting machine to trick Om. He/she gathers some marbles and places them in front of Om's room since he knew that since the machine is broken, Svetlana would order Maya to haunt Om. The duo got the truth of the human-ghost trick but failed to catch Maya as she escaped with Svetlana's help. Chulbul tells Omkara to act like a mad man so that Svetlana thinks him being catched up in her plan which Omkara does. Svetlana was astonished to see Om being caught in her plan, so to keep an eye on Chulbul and Om she places a camera in her handbag and keeps it in Om's room. She finds out that Om has bought a fake knife to play like a mad infront of Svetlana and Maya. Chulbul explains the family that Om has gone mad and is proved when he misbehaves in the family dining table. Svetlana takes the fake knife and replaces it with a real knife. Chulbul comes to know about this and quickly goes to Omkara to say about this dangerous replacement. But before he can tell this to Om, he opens a door which throws Maya and accidentally Om stabs Chulbul. Being in a guilt he tries to kill Svetlana but stopped by the family. After this, Om calls the family doctor Dr.Dang who was taking care of Chulbul. When the doctor sees Svetlana, he was terribly scared seeing her which gives Om a hint that doctor knows Svetlana well. It is revealed that Svetlana and one of her friend once took help from the doctor. Then it is shown that Svetlana went to the hospital once where the doctor worked in the excuse of an accident, here she tries to kill the doctor. In present, it is shown that she hires a King Cobra to kill the doctor so that Om doesn't come to know about her past.Omkara ang Gauri/Chulbul went inside the doctor's house and notice the cobras.While trying to escape they see the doctor and he saves their lives but run away.After reaching home Gauri/Chulbul thanks Shankar/Shiva ji for saving their life and tells him that she will reveal the truth to Omkara that she is not Chulbul but Gauri. She turns into herself and goes into Omkara's room to tell the truth.But he is not there.While searching for him,Gauri meets Jhanvi and asks for her blessings/aashirvaad.She then receives a call from Omkara and talks to him as Chulbul. He tells that Swetlana is going to doctor's cabinet to kill him and tells Chulbul to come soon.She tells that she will come in 5 minutes and promises Shivji that she will reveal the truth to him and tells him that she is going to doctor's cabinet. But while going to the doctor's cabinet, the fuel gets over and they ask lift where they have a romantic moment. After reaching the cabinet, Svetlana tries to kill the doctor but only makes him unconscious. She disguises as a doctor and meets Omkara and Chulbul. They ask where doctor is but she tells she doesn't know.She digs in the doctor alive in the soil after putting him in a box. On the other side Omkara gets angry and tells Svetlana that he will not leave her alone.
=== Rudra-Saumya's/Rudra-Bhavya's love story ===
Rudra-Saumya are married. Saumya loves Rudra but unaware of that she actually loves Rudra. Same with Rudra. As seen in ishqbaaaz Rudra scolds Saumya and tells her that she is the root cause to his problems Saumya gets hurt and leaves from Oberoi mansion in Dil boley Oberoi.
Nandini Rudra's friends engagement was going to be held in a flight. Rudra asks Chubby weather he invited Saumya and Chubby says he didn't invite her after Rudra disconnects his call Chubby calls Saumya. Saumya tells Chubby that she can't attend the engagement and Chuby says that Rudra is also not coming and now you're also not coming. Saumya agrees to come. A girl comes and sees the board which says Nandini Weds Adithya and she tells to her self that she will destroy Adithya Veer. Chubby sees Saumya passing near Rudra so while he was thinking what to do to stop each other from meeting he pushes the baggage carousel. That girl who said that she will kill Adithya veer went to the washroom and shoots a air hostess. Rudra and everyone board the plane Rudra sees a girl and flirts with her and asks her name she tells that her name is Paaki Nandini takes Rudra away. Mohini also boards the plane (the girl who killed the air hostess )she disguised her self as an air hostess. Saumya also comes whe she came inside one of the bottle rolls and hits her foot she screams saying its a chua/mouse.
Rudra sees her and gets shocked but doesn't react much Saumya tells him to move towards the window seat he refuses she said,that she feels like vomiting still Rudra refuses she sits in the other seat. After sometime she felt like vomiting she went to the washroom. After she came out she sees Mohini and his friend killing the pilot she gets scared and locks herself up in the washroom air hostess come and points the gun towards Adithya and Nandini but Rudra comes in front and tells her to shoot him and not them (Adithya and Nandini) Mohini tells that she doesn't care if she wastes another bullet Saumya sees this and gets scared of losing Rudra she comes and stands in front of Rudra. Mohini tells her to move or else she will shoot. She tries to shoot but Saumya fights with her and the bullets get fired. Mohini's friend also gets hurt and at last Mohini tries to shoot Saumya but bullets got over Saumya ties Mohini in to the seat. Mohini screams and asks Saumya why didn't she let Rudra die Saumya gets angry and tells, "because his my husband"Nandini's cousin Paaki gets shocked and screams at Rudra that he got married to this fatty. Nandini tells that is real love of a wife Rudra nods his head and goes towards Saumya he tells Saumya that she was just a mistake he did Saumya gets hurt she goes to the washroom and shuts her self and cries. The controls in the plane fails, everyone falls down. Mohini's friend tells that the plane is going down so somebody has to pull the lever. Rudra tries to pull the lever but he couldn't. Mohini's friend tells some fat man or women can do it Rudra tells that only Chubby can do it but Nandini says, that he is unconscious. Nandini tells that Saumya can do it she tells Rudra to convince her he goes near the washroom and tells Saumya to come out or they'll all die Nandini tell him says not they'll it is us all. Saumya comes and says that she will do it but not for him but for the others she goes and tries to pull the lever but couldn't Rudra also comes and helps her they both pull the lever and the plane goes up everyone falls down Saumya was about to fall but Rudra pull her they have an eye lock everybody claps.
Mohini is been taken by the police she sees Saumya and stops she tells Saumya that she will not spare her if she meets her again. Saumya sits in the chair and drinks water Nandini again tells Rudra that he is doing a bad thing by hurting Saumya she says that if destiny didn't want you both to meet again then she wouldn't have come today Nandini goes. Rudra goes towards Saumya and tells her whatever Nandini said is wrong. If destiny wants this, then I will change the destiny. They go in different directions. | romantic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0044013 | The Second Woman | This psychological thriller tells the story of Jeff Cohalan (Young). He is a successful architect who is tormented because his fiancée, Vivian Sheppard, was killed in a mysterious car accident on the night before their wedding. Blaming himself for her death, Cohalan spends his time alone, lamenting in the state-of-the-art cliff-top home he had designed for his bride-to-be.
Cohalan also notices that ever since the accident, he seems to be followed by bad luck. His horse and dog turn up dead without explanation, leading him to wonder if he has been cursed.
He meets a woman named Ellen (Drake), and they are immediately attracted to each other. She soon learns about Jeff's past and begins to suspect that Jeff may be much more in danger than he himself realizes.
Turns out his would have been father-in-law and partner in architecture, Ben Sheppard, was trying to destroy him. He held Jeff responsible for the death of his daughter. But the driver of the car was a married man, with whom Vivian was having an affair. Ben himself had a wife run away from him, and has a psychotic break when confronted with the truth behind why his daughter was in a car crash. Thinking Ellen is Vivian, and angry at his wife's running off, Ben shoots at Vivian/Ellen. Jeff gets hit in the shoulder protecting Ellen. It all ends well, with Jeff and Ellen getting together. | insanity, revenge, psychological, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0261265 | Rupert and the Frog Song | Rupert Bear decides to head off for a walk on the hills. With his Mother's blessing he sets off for a jolly trip, encountering his friends Edward Elephant and Bill Badger along the way, who are too busy to join him. As Rupert reaches a hill he props himself up against the trunk of an oak tree and enjoys the glory of the countryside. Suddenly he finds himself enveloped by a rainbow cloud of butterflies previously masquerading as leaves on the oak tree, and all of them swarm away from the leafless tree towards a rocky outcrop; Rupert cannot resist following them. As he leaves, a large white barn owl and two black cats decide to follow him.
Upon the rocks, Rupert finds a large number of multicolored frogs. He walks into a cave behind a waterfall and sees three signs: "Frogs only beyond this point", "Everything except frogs must be kept on a lead", and "Guard frogs operating". He sneaks into the palace, trying to avoid getting caught by the frog guards. There, he witnesses the Frog Song, an event that occurs only once in a few hundred years in which various frogs of all shapes and sizes come together and sing "We All Stand Together". Around the end, the frog King and Queen rise out of the water before the crowd to finish off the song. After a thunderous applause from the frogs, the owl, who had followed Rupert in order to find out where the frogs were hiding, launches itself for an attack on the royals, but Rupert manages to warn the frogs in time and they all quickly retreat, leaving the owl and the cats empty-handed and the palace completely empty. After hearing his mother call him, Rupert excitedly rushes home to tell his family about what he saw. | psychedelic | train | wikipedia | null |
tt2027178 | O Homem do Futuro | In 2011, João "Zero", a bitter but brilliant physicist, spends his days brooding over a fateful night 20 years before when he was publicly betrayed and humiliated at a college party by his then-girlfriend, Helena. He now heads one of the largest scientific projects in Brazil, but his eccentricities and tantrums have brought him to the verge of being fired by his former college roommate and current sponsor, Sandra, although she still believes in his project, and tries to defend him.
Aided by his best friend and fellow scientist, Otávio, João turns on the unfinished machine he has developed that was supposed to ensure his wealth as well as a new source of sustainable energy. Entering the machine, he thinks of the night when Helena humiliated him. To his surprise, the reaction caused by the machine opens a bridge to the past, leading him to the year 1991.
In 1991, a confused João wakes up and tries to go to his apartment, but finds that the key does not match. Upon asking the date to a stranger, the realizes that he has traveled through time. He goes to the party, where he sees his younger self having sex with Helena, after of which she tells him that she loves him. After she leaves to sing on stage, the future João tells his younger self that he will invent a time machine, and he has come back to fix things. They find the young Otávio, and the future João tells them future technical and political events, so they will have money for the rest of their lives. After this, João tells his younger self that Helena's ex-boyfriend, Ricardo, will bring her champagne with a drug, and due to the effects, she will humiliate him on stage, by putting honey and feathers on him. After this, Helena will go with Ricardo to Spain, becoming a model and never seeing João again. The young João meets up with Helena, and tells her not to drink Ricardo's champagne. She doesn't, and an excited João tells her that he's going to be rich, and they will be together for the rest of their lives. The future João, watching the scene, disappears.
João wakes up in an alternate 2011 in which he is rich, but is not married to Helena. He learns that with his knowledge of the future, he founded the "Man From The Future" company; however, he has betrayed Otávio, divorced four times, and put Helena in jail after she was discovered holding a bag of his cocaine. He explains to Otávio that he is the João from the original timeline in the body of his new-timeline-self. After this, he has Helena released, and he donates to her all of his belongings. He reinstalls the time machine, dresses up as a spaceman, and then travels back to 1991.
In 1991, the João in the spaceman suit finds the original-future João and the young João in their meeting; this last one faints of the impression. The spaceman-João tries to convince the original-future João that he must live his life normally, but the original-future João refuses. The spaceman-João holds him at gunpoint, and makes him leave and let the original events of the night unfold. However, they are both encountered by the alternate-future Otávio, who traveled back in time after João left the alternate 2011. Meanwhile, the young Otávio meets with Helena, disregarding his meeting with his other selves as a dream, and Ricardo approaches them with the champagne. João, however, is the one who drinks it, and he becomes drugged. The original-future João and alternate-future Otávio, wanting to change events, tie the spaceman-João in a separate location, in where he meets the young Sandra, to whom he proves he is from the future by showing her his iPhone and having her record a video. She unties him. The original-future João and alternate-future Otávio find the Helena and the drugged João, and hold them at gunpoint. They bring them where the spaceman-João is, and since he has been untied, he knocks out Otávio, and ties the original-future João. The spaceman-João then tells Helena to leave the young João, become a model, and meet him again 20 years in the future. They bring the young João on stage, in which he is put honey and feathers, humiliated, and given the nickname "Zero". The alternate-future Otávio disappears, as well as the original-future João and spaceman-João.
In 2011, after João enters the time machine and disappears, the spaceman João emerges, and destroys the source code of the time machine. He explains to a shocked Otávio that he has traveled through time, but the machine is too dangerous. He then shows him the video of the young Sandra, to prove his words. He leaves, and via Twitter he communicates with Helena, and they happily meet in an airport, where she fires Ricardo after 20 years of working with him.
A year later, João is found not guilty of destroying a science project. After exiting the courthouse, they meet with Sandra. At this point, it is revealed that before Sandra untied him in 1991, he told her to invest in Google and sponsor in João's projects, meaning that this timeline was the original one all along. Knowing that they have money for the rest of their lives, Helena and João look ahead to a better life, although Helena tells João that he "cheated". | romantic | train | wikipedia | Absolutely Great !.
I will simply tell you that the scenario, the plot, the characters, the direction, the production values, the soundtrack are absolutely fantastic.
The casting and the acting are brilliant.
The main lead in particular is outstanding.
I am extremely happy to have had the curiosity to watch this film.
It is quite rare nowadays to find such a little gem that manages to be clever and funny, without being cheap, gimmicky or silly.
Great entertainment, the way it's meant to be.
I would give it 8.5/10 if possible.
As a side note, this was the 2nd Brazilian movie I saw this month (after "Moebius", and maybe the 3rd within the last 12 months (After Elite Squad II), and I will definitely keep my eyes peeled for any movie coming out of Brazil due to quality productions and originality.
Do not change anything Brazilian studios!.
A Date Twenty Years Later.
In 2011, in Rio de Janeiro, the brilliant scientist and physics professor João "Zero" Henrique (Wagner Moura) is researching an alternative source of power through the use of a particle accelerator device that he has designed.
His wealthy friend Sandra (Maria Luísa Mendonça) has sponsored his research and his best friend Otávio (Fernando Ceylão) has helped him with the engineering.
However, Zero has been a bitter and frustrated man for twenty years since he was humiliated in public by his sweetheart Helena (Alinne Moraes), who has become a famous top-model managed by her former boyfriend Ricardo (Gabriel Braga Nunes).
One day, Zero decides to test his particle accelerator and he accidentally travels to the past, more precisely to 22 November 1991, the day that changed his life with the embarrassment in public.
However, Zero decides to fix his past and he tells to the teenager João Henrique what Helena would do with him.
Further, he gives economical tips to João Henrique and Otávio to make them earn lots of money.
When Zero returns to 2011, he finds the present totally changed in an alternative reality and he does not like what he sees.
He decides to travel to 1991 again, to put the past back on trail, but now the situation is more complicated."O Homem do Futuro" is one of the best Brazilian films that I have recently seen and I have really loved this film.
The story is a romantic comedy combined with sci-fi that uses the storyline of "The Butterfly Effect", with a man traveling to the past expecting to fix the future, but making things worse instead.Wagner Moura proves that is a versatile actor, performing three different roles.
Alinne Moraes is very beautiful and shows a great chemistry with Wagner Moura."O Homem do Futuro" follows the style of American movies, with top-notch special effects, but the delightful story will certainly be a wonderful entertainment for the family and friends.
My vote is nine.Title (Brazil): "O Homem do Futuro" ("The Man from the Future")Note: I saw this movie again on 06 Sep 2013..
a national of the best films I've ever seen!.
I'd seen the trailer for this movie in theaters and thought it would be like most other films, which has no plot, and calls for sex scenes to give audience, apparently, I was wrong, big time.The film is spectacular, considering that this is not a those films that usually stand out when talking about the violence in Brazil, such as Elite Squad, City of God, between more ...this is the first national film I watch, and I can say that I really liked, and at any time to distract me, worth watching every second of this great national production, a comedy and history novel, very well done, with a bit of fiction too, haha Recommend and much, congratulations by the Director, continue producing more films of this genre and that is not appealing to most movies are national.Watch, you will not regret it!.
Bring it on...
What if you could go back and change those awkward moments?
Those defining moments that caused hurt and pain?
In the movie The Man From the Future, Zero (Wagner Moura) is such a man, one who has taken an unexpected path, but it did not live up to his dreams.
After fate has him discover a quirk in the universe where he can travel time, he goes back to 1991 to see if he could shift his life's destiny.
This movie is really Back to the Future without the Delorean, it has some quirky funny scenes, this movie makes for a fun tale that makes you think, "would I want to change things even if it results in unexpected consequences?" Check it out.
I saw this movie as part of the Atlanta Film Festival..
One of Brazil's finest films!.
When I say that this is one of Brazil's finest films, that is not to say that Hollywood makes great movies, because I think that Hollywood makes about 1/15 films that are worth watching.That being said, this film is fantastic.
It is a perfect balance of comedy and drama.
A little heavier on the drama I would say.The acting in it is amazing.
Obviously who stands out in the film is the main actor Wagner Moura.
He is amazing in just about everything he does.
This character was great for him because it is very different than what I am used to seeing him in.
Excellent acting!The film takes you on a journey of many emotions.
You will laugh and would have to be near heartless not to cry.
The character is someone who a lot of people can relate to.The story is fantastic.
If you are like me, who has seen as lot of movies, than you will be skeptical to see another "time-travel" movie.
I can tell you that this one is very different.
It has a great moral to the story.On another note, this film also has some pretty good special effects.Go watch this movie!.
great movie.
this movie is subtitled, but so what, reading isn't that difficult and this movie was so very refreshing from Hollywood movies written by robots, an actual story and get this, characters !
brilliant soundtrack, great story, what's not to like about this film, the soundtrack is great, have i said great too many times regarding this film ?
sorry but it just a great film, watch it..
Good movie and great music.
This was first Brazilian movie I ever watched, thanks to HBO.Movie is quite interesting, showing us another perception of time traveling but thing that i like the most in this movie is the music.
Especially main song that became one of my most favorite songs in all (btw, originally, song is called "Tempo Perdido" by Legião Urbana.After this movie I started to watch more movies and series from Brazil.
I have to admit that i like almost all of them.Advice to all, try watching also Argentinian movies as well as Spanish.Of course, Emir Kusturica's movies, too.
Maybe people that used to watch Hollywood movies will not be able to see their quality from first watching but it worth to try.
And I almost forgot one thing, Alinne Moraes is so pretty..
A masterpiece.
This film is just one of the 5 best films i have watched.
Thanks Diogo for recommending this to me.The acting, story and emotions catch you to non experimented sensations.
I called it a masterpiece in summary because it simply link all movies elements in a perfect artistic way.
I have been passed a long time not crying in movies, but tonight i fell.I got very sad when i saw Renato Russo, the movie writer, died in 1996.
Anyway.It totally worth watching, the other reviews say it all.So...Go watch it!.
Refreshing title about time travels.
In this film you will face a different and passionate story about time traveling, with an unexpected ending.
The music is brilliantly joined and the actors are good enough to empathize with them and enjoy the story.
Although sometimes you don't have time to read subtitles, it is very well made Brazilian film, I recommend it to see with your loving mate (and available in Netflix by the way)..
Excellent film!.
The film "The Man from the Future" (or "O Homem do Futuro" in original) has made very vivid and bright impression on me.
I am proudly giving this film rare 10 points of 10 !
The reasons are described below.First of all, the film is about love.
About loud, bright and sometimes even furious love.
The film does not show snot, it does not show vulgarity or nudity, no violence.
The film shows just real emotions.Secondly and thirdly, the plot, the scenario is very great and here you will see not only the complicated and tricky story line, but also realistic effects of time travel.
Just like in the classic "Back to The Future" trilogy, where characters disappear in future when their past has been changed.
I would say that this film is a good example of classic "Science Fiction" genre.The play of the actors is very good and realistic.The soundtrack is great.The film has a happy end, leaving only the positive associations in the memory in the head.
It is very important for qualitative films.If you like time travel and bright emotions, then this film is for you.The only strange moment is the "popularity" of the film in the modern world.
I wonder, why it has not yet been officially released in many countries.
I hope, this mistake will be corrected in the future..
Enjoyed this.
I'm unsure whether I give non-English language movies more credit than if they were in my own language.
But I can say that I enjoyed this movie and would recommend it to fans of time travel movies and light hearted sci fi..
Very sad.
I never write reviews on IMDb, but this time I felt like it really needed to be done, since all the reviews on this Title are very positive, and actually that is what made me see the movie in the first place.
If I had the ability to build a time machine like the one on this film, I would definitely use it just to go back in time and advise myself not to watch this movie.
So, this is basically an unnecessary Brazilian version of Back to the Future, but taking away all the good things about that classic, and leaving an embarrassing result.
They try to cover different genres in here: Sci-Fi, Comedy and Drama, failing catastrophically in each of them.
The Sci-Fi aspect is an exact imitation of Back to the Future (they even copy the fact that a graduation party with a live band performing is the most defining moment in the entire main character's life...
come on!
are you kidding me?).
The Comedy aspect doesn't work at all, and the Drama aspect is 100% cliché after cliché.
It amazes me that such a great actor as Wagner Moura has agreed to be part of this.
And let me say that his performance doesn't help either.
In the movie, he plays many different versions of himself, none of which we get to empathize with, or simply understand his drastic and nonsensical decisions, and it all looks really silly and embarrassing.
So, please, consider myself as a future version of yourself coming from the future and suggesting you not to see this movie.
It's not a simple waste of 1hr 45m of your time (that wouldn't be so bad, unless you're spending your days trying to find the cure for cancer or something), but it is also that after watching this you get somehow depressed, very sad about the fact that films like this can still be made, pushing cinema backwards..
One of the excellent Time Travel Movies.
An excellent treat of a time travel movie!
The protagonist not only defines the time travel hypothesis but also underlines the impact.
I don't want to say anything more, so that I don't spoil the movie for anybody.
Must watch movie if you like and understand time travel paradoxes!.
A differently amazing time travel movie.
Just finished watching and I had to get in here to give a 10 (sadly I can't give 10.000).
I must to say that in general way, I'm not a big fan of Brazilian movies...but there are expectations and this one is a major.This movie changed my concept of Brazilian movies!
The soundtrack is a splendor!
(I just love almost every Brazilian music from 1985 to 1998)This movie does not have violence scenes, as well as it doesn't have any nudity in a vulgar way.
Actually...
I didn't see any nudity (don't get me wrong...
nudity and sex are great if it complements the history or is part of something in the history...
but in this movie it wouldn't fit well)During the movie, you probably get yourself laughing a lot...
and then, perhaps, a bit sheepish (or even starting to cry)...
and all over again till the end.
Watch it without fear...It is a fine and nice family movie...
I'm sure you will love it!.
Nice to see brazilian nerds, but still too happy.
Sometimes you would think that all brazilians are happy and extrovert and go to the beach every chance they get.
Here we actually get to meet brazilian nerds and outcasts.
That is a relief!
There are some nice effects and an interesting plot about going back in time to try to correct your miserable life.
I also liked the twists and the message that "hey, you must be quite self absorbed to not see that life is painful, it is not only you who struggle!"
But for me it is a disappointment that the real message of this movie is that you must get rich and get the prettiest woman and go to parties to be truly happy.
Maybe this is the identity of the brazilian dream, but I liked the brazilian introvert who is happy still, knowing that life has its ups and downs..
Fantastic review of the best pelican out there.
Hello, what movie I've seen with my good friend.
Nailbites managed to reword the main character in pelican "zero" y Helena Did not know at all about the future before we saw this moving image.
Very interesting info about this film that is about a little new world in front of us.
Good music throughout the soundtrack.
Be a bit touched by this moving picture got only 7 plus inches up.
Despite such beautiful hot scenes.Want more information about this.
Thanks Feel free to accompany me in Paraguay, where the sun always shines.
Miss you Helena and "zero" ä |
tt0175447 | Antony and Cleopatra | Mark Antony – one of the triumvirs of the Roman Republic, along with Octavius and Lepidus – has neglected his soldierly duties after being beguiled by Egypt's Queen, Cleopatra. He ignores Rome's domestic problems, including the fact that his third wife Fulvia rebelled against Octavius and then died.
Octavius calls Antony back to Rome from Alexandria to help him fight against Sextus Pompey, Menecrates, and Menas, three notorious pirates of the Mediterranean. At Alexandria, Cleopatra begs Antony not to go, and though he repeatedly affirms his deep passionate love for her, he eventually leaves.
The triumvirs meet in Rome, where Antony and Octavius put to rest, for now, their disagreements. Octavius' general, Agrippa, suggests that Antony should marry Octavius's sister, Octavia, in order to cement the friendly bond between the two men. Antony accepts. Antony's lieutenant Enobarbus, though, knows that Octavia can never satisfy him after Cleopatra. In a famous passage, he describes Cleopatra's charms: "Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale / Her infinite variety: other women cloy / The appetites they feed, but she makes hungry / Where most she satisfies."
A soothsayer warns Antony that he is sure to lose if he ever tries to fight Octavius.
In Egypt, Cleopatra learns of Antony's marriage to Octavia and takes furious revenge upon the messenger that brings her the news. She grows content only when her courtiers assure her that Octavia is homely: short, low-browed, round-faced and with bad hair.
Before battle, the triumvirs parley with Sextus Pompey, and offer him a truce. He can retain Sicily and Sardinia, but he must help them "rid the sea of pirates" and send them tributes. After some hesitation Sextus agrees. They engage in a drunken celebration on Sextus' galley, though the austere Octavius leaves early and sober from the party. Menas suggests to Sextus that he kill the three triumvirs and make himself ruler of the Roman Republic, but he refuses, finding it dishonourable. After Antony departs Rome for Athens, Octavius and Lepidus break their truce with Sextus and war against him. This is unapproved by Antony, and he is furious.
Antony returns to Alexandria and crowns Cleopatra and himself as rulers of Egypt and the eastern third of the Roman Republic (which was Antony's share as one of the triumvirs). He accuses Octavius of not giving him his fair share of Sextus' lands, and is angry that Lepidus, whom Octavius has imprisoned, is out of the triumvirate. Octavius agrees to the former demand, but otherwise is very displeased with what Antony has done.
Antony prepares to battle Octavius. Enobarbus urges Antony to fight on land, where he has the advantage, instead of by sea, where the navy of Octavius is lighter, more mobile and better manned. Antony refuses, since Octavius has dared him to fight at sea. Cleopatra pledges her fleet to aid Antony. However, during the Battle of Actium off the western coast of Greece, Cleopatra flees with her sixty ships, and Antony follows her, leaving his forces to ruin. Ashamed of what he has done for the love of Cleopatra, Antony reproaches her for making him a coward, but also sets this true and deep love above all else, saying "Give me a kiss; even this repays me."
Octavius sends a messenger to ask Cleopatra to give up Antony and come over to his side. She hesitates, and flirts with the messenger, when Antony walks in and angrily denounces her behavior. He sends the messenger to be whipped. Eventually, he forgives Cleopatra and pledges to fight another battle for her, this time on land.
On the eve of the battle, Antony's soldiers hear strange portents, which they interpret as the god Hercules abandoning his protection of Antony. Furthermore, Enobarbus, Antony's long-serving lieutenant, deserts him and goes over to Octavius' side. Rather than confiscating Enobarbus' goods, which Enobarbus did not take with him when he fled, Antony orders them to be sent to Enobarbus. Enobarbus is so overwhelmed by Antony's generosity, and so ashamed of his own disloyalty, that he dies from a broken heart.
Antony loses the battle as his troops desert en masse and he denounces Cleopatra: "This foul Egyptian hath betrayed me." He resolves to kill her for the treachery. Cleopatra decides that the only way to win back Antony's love is to send him word that she killed herself, dying with his name on her lips. She locks herself in her monument, and awaits Antony's return.
Her plan fails: rather than rushing back in remorse to see the "dead" Cleopatra, Antony decides that his own life is no longer worth living. He begs one of his aides, Eros, to run him through with a sword, but Eros cannot bear to do it and kills himself. Antony admires Eros' courage and attempts to do the same, but only succeeds in wounding himself. In great pain, he learns that Cleopatra is indeed alive. He is hoisted up to her in her monument and dies in her arms.
Octavius goes to Cleopatra trying to persuade her to surrender. She angrily refuses since she can imagine nothing worse than being led in chains through the streets of Rome, proclaimed a villain for the ages. She imagines that "the quick comedians / Extemporally will stage us, and present / Our Alexandrian revels: Antony / Shall be brought drunken forth, and I shall see / Some squeaking Cleopatra boy my greatness / I' th' posture of a whore." This speech is full of dramatic irony, because in Shakespeare's time Cleopatra really was played by a "squeaking boy" and Shakespeare's play does depict Antony's drunken revels.
Cleopatra is betrayed and taken into custody by the Romans. She gives Octavius what she claims is a complete account of her wealth but is betrayed by her treasurer, who claims she is holding treasure back. Octavius reassures her that he is not interested in her wealth, but Dolabella warns her that he intends to parade her at his triumph.
Cleopatra kills herself using the poison of an asp. She dies calmly and ecstatically, imagining how she will meet Antony again in the afterlife. Her serving maids, Iras and Charmian, die also, with Iras dying from heartbreak and Charmian killing herself with another asp. Octavius discovers the dead bodies and experiences conflicting emotions. Antony's and Cleopatra's deaths leave him free to become the first Roman Emperor, but he also feels some kind of sympathy for them: "She shall be buried by her Antony. / No grave upon the earth shall clip in it / A pair so famous..." He orders a public military funeral. | tragedy | train | wikipedia | I was in high school when I saw this version of "Antony and Cleopatra" on the short-lived, occasional "ABC Theatre" on the US ABC television network.
I had read Shakespeare in English Literature class, of course, and had even attended some local productions of Shakespeare plays, but seeing this production totally changed my view of the Bard, even theatre in general.
This was the first time I ever watched a play and felt as if I was watching something real, viewing snippets of life in progress.
The actors weren't mouthing lines and feigning emotions - they were real and they believed, and that made me believe as well.Perhaps the intervening years have affected my memory, dimming the details, but I cannot forget the awe I felt watching Patrick Stewart's Enobarbus.
When I had read the play in school, Enobarbus was a minor character, and his speeches weren't important.
Stewart's performance changed that.
Cleopatra's knowing chuckle as she spoke of her "salad days" was a lament as well a whimsey.At that age, I may have been ripe for a change in my world view, but I cannot deny that it was "Antony and Cleopatra" that provided it.
Ever since I have compared my response to a performance to that I felt from this production.
Patrick Stewart has certainly gone on to "bigger and better" things in the last quarter century, but for me he'll always be Enobarbus, the man who defined Shakespeare for me..
Good acting in television version of the Shakespeare play.
Good acting in this version; however, as befits a lower-budget television version, the sets are awful.
This makes it harder for the actors to convince the viewers that they are indeed watching a story taking place in Rome or Egypt.
Thankfully the actors are able to overcome this obstacle in most scenes.
Patrick Stewart shines as Enobarbus.
I had to blink twice after seeing the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air butler Geoffrey (Joseph Marcell) in a small role.
Janet Suzman plays the role of Cleopatra well.
Suzman isn't as beautiful as one might expect for an actress portraying Cleopatra, but she exhibits the powerful sensuality that surrounds the character..
Though the acting from the Royal Shakespeare company is first rate, this version of Antony and Cleopatra is little more than a photographed stage play.
And a bit long for the cinema at that.The title roles are played well by Richard Johnson and Janet Suzman.
The story has been told three times in contemporary verse in the cinema by Theda Bara, Claudette Colbert, and Elizabeth Taylor as the seductive Queen of Egypt who tried to bend one too many conquerors to her will by use of her legendary charms.William Shakespeare's Mark Antony was a principal character in two of his plays, Julius Caesar where he skillfully picked up the leadership of his late patriarch Caesar and routed the conspirators who assassinated the legendary conqueror.To give legitimacy to his enterprise, Antony was forced into partnership with Octavian Caesar, Julius's grandnephew and a legion commander Lepidus made the triumvir of three.
This play is a story of the dissolution of that partnership caused in no small part by Cleopatra.Sex may have more a part in Antony and Cleopatra than in any other work of Shakespeare.
Historians might very well argue that Mark Antony was using Cleopatra as his entrée to gaining alliances with various Roman dependencies in a power play against Octavian.
But Shakespeare was no doubt titillating his 16th century audience with the tales of Cleopatra's erotic technique.
Ahenobarbus, Antony's good friend played here by Patrick Stewart, says that while Octavia's sister's a pretty thing, when you get entangled with Cleopatra, she's so good that men are never satisfied, they keep hungering for more.
So that's the reason why Antony instead of tending to business and keeping an eye on Octavian gradually loses support in Rome where it really counts.
The guy who was so shrewd in Julius Caesar in Antony and Cleopatra is just a love struck fool.
It's the basis for his tragedy.As for Cleopatra, three times wasn't the charm.
Julius Caesar and Mark Antony may have succumbed although there is debate about who was using who.
But in Octavian as played here by Corin Redgrave is all about business.I was interested in the difference between Ahenobarbus in Cecil B.
DeMille's Cleopatra which starred Claudette Colbert and the way Shakespeare writes him and Stewart plays him.
In the DeMille film, Ahenobarbus is played by C.
Aubrey Smith as a stout old soldier who finds it a matter of conscience to leave Antony and support his beloved Roman Empire which he sees embodied now in Octavian.
Patrick Stewart's Ahenobarbus is far more of an opportunist who makes a calculated move at the right time.The money here was spent on talent with the people mentioned and the others in the cast from the Royal Shakespeare Company.
Down the cast list you'll find Ben Kingsley in a minor role.
Look also for a very touching performance by Rosemary McHale as Charmian, Cleopatra's faithful handmaiden who makes the last journey with her.This version of Antony and Cleopatra is not a movie per se, it lacks the production values of one.
The Elizabeth Taylor Cleopatra had the spectacle to go with the acting.
First the good: this production is traditional: set in Ancient Rome, with appropriate costumes.
Almost none of the actors could deliver a Shakespeare line.
Almost none of the actors could deliver a Shakespeare line.
In Anthony and Cleopatra, some lines are rhymes, some are in blank pentameter, and some are in prose.
Here it hardly mattered, since the director and actors had no respect for words.
Cleopatra (Janet Suzman) was light-weight, shrill, cheap -- far from regal.
With lines blurted out, it was hard to understand what was happening, except that the actors were terribly emotional about something or other.
Whenever someone told a joke, and there is a lot of humor in A&P, the actors would laugh and laugh.
The famous description of Cleopatra by Enobarbus ("Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale Her infinite variety....") got lost in the noise.
Than again, it might have been distracting to see the lines the actors were supposed to be speaking, in contract to what they were actually yelling out or whispering..
None better for Shakespeare's play.
No, if you want spectacle, get the Taylor/Burton and forget about Shakespeare.
This DVD wins on the Royal Shakespeare Company's deep bench and Trevor Nunn's meticulous direction.
All do well with the verse, and there is none of the glaring miscasting that strangles the BBC version from 1981.Richard Johnson was briefly married to Kim Novak.
He also turned down the role of James Bond because he didn't want to be trapped in a long term contract.
Here he hides his good looks behind a thick beard, and if he is not as grand as Antony might be, he's certainly got most of it right.
Janet Suzman braves the considerable difficulties of Cleopatra without ever becoming unbearable, which you can't say of her competition.
Octavius is played by Corin Redgrave, who once again projects his father's perpetual air of irritable grievance minus the family charm.Patrick Stewart as Enobarbus pounds his competition to dust, and Ben Kingsley and Tim Pigott-Smith in minor roles are testimony to the strength of the company.
Philip Locke and Derek Godfrey also make strong impressions.This version is shot entirely in a TV studio, now a lost and unfamiliar art form.
This may confuse some viewers who need literal settings, but it frees the rest of us to concentrate on the people, the plot and the poetry.
Shakespeare is not about architecture; the movies do that better.Until the Caedmon audio recording with Anthony Quayle and Pamela Brown resurfaces, this DVD is the best way to absorb a packaged version of Shakespeare's play..
Good performances, average movie adaptation.
Antony and Cleopatra (1974) follows the relationship of Marc Anthony and Cleopatra.It dates from the time of the Parthian war to Cleopatra's suicide with a snake.William Shakespeare is the author of the play this movie is based on.He is believed to have written that around 1606-1607.I read the play a little while before I borrowed the VHS from the library.It's not the finest works by the Bard but good anyway.This TV movie is something very average.It works mainly because of the fine performances the actors give.There's some strength in the performance by Richard Johnson who plays Marc Antony.Janet Suzman is wonderful as the Queen of Eqypt.Patrick Stewart is really good as Enobarbus.The way he turns and talks straight to camera is just magnificent.It's also a real treat to see the young Ben Kingsley as Thidias.The drama works from time to time.There's a lot of that in the end.So this was worth seeing..
This movie altogether made me lose faith in humanity.
Most movies are set to stun you with good acting,or at least some acting.
This movie, however, was set to painfully vaporize the viewer!
Cleopatra terrified me in this film.
Not only was Octavia, the one who was supposed to be plain, more attractive than her, but is also a better actor for the simple reason that I didn't have to listen to her for very long.
Stands out among Shakespeare interpretations on film.
The Royal Shakespeare Company's 1974 production of William Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra, though a slightly truncated version, stands out among Shakespeare interpretations on film for the quality of the direction and the convincing nature of the performances that bring the main protagonists to life as three-dimensional human beings.
Produced by Trevor Nunn and directed by Jon Scofield, the film stars Richard Johnson as the full-bearded Roman statesman/warrior Mark Antony and Janet Suzman as the voluptuous Egyptian Queen Cleopatra whose seductive allure may have changed world history.
Though filmed entirely in a TV studio with extensive use of close-ups, the RSC interpretation is a riveting and involving experience, especially in contrast to the vastly inferior BBC performance of 1981 (I have not seen the Charlton Heston version recently reviewed here).There is no commonly accepted date of publication for Antony and Cleopatra, although most orthodox historians favor the date of 1607 since it was first entered with the Stationers' Register in 1608.
The play was not performed until at least 1607, perhaps because Cleopatra, the ruler of Egypt, bore striking resemblance to Queen Elizabeth I who died in 1603.
Cleopatra, according to Dr. Ren Draya of Blackburn College calls Cleopatra "larger than life", a woman who cannot be explained but can only be felt.
"She is a woman who stands for power but at the end gains lyricism and achieves nobility." Indeed, according to one reviewer, "Antony and Cleopatra is an unusual tragedy in that its protagonists start out flawed and gradually grow to heroic stature over the course of the play." According to Professor Michael Delahoyde of Washington State University, Cleopatra is suggestive of Queen Elizabeth 1, a "drama queen" who used her feminine wiles to gain political advantage.
Perhaps that is the reason why the play was not performed until after the Queen's death, if indeed it had been written prior to that event.
Shakespeare is mostly faithful to his source material, Plutarch's Lives, though he concentrates on the relationship between Anthony and Cleopatra and ignores some of the historical events reported by Plutarch.
Antony alone is a tragic hero in the Plutarch chronicles but, in Shakespeare, Cleopatra is invested with an equally tragic character and soul-searching introspection, delivering eloquent soliloquies that can be compared to those of the most powerful Shakespearean male protagonists.Shakespeare makes no moral judgment at all on either of the main characters and allows the audience the freedom to become emotionally invested in the drama without being spoon fed the prevalent Puritan morality as in the high moral tone of Mary Sidney Herbert's free translation of Garnier's Antoine, published in 1590.
The story revolves around Antony's decision to provide free rein to his impulses by courting the Queen of Egypt rather than carrying out his soldierly duties in Rome and the consequences of such.
Antony, who was one of the ruling triumvirates of Rome along with Octavius known as Augustus Ceasar (Corin Redgrave) and Lepidus (Raymond Westwell), is summoned back to Rome where he makes a deal with Ceasar to marry his widowed sister Octavia (Mary Rutherford) and return to fight Rome's battles against the aggressive Pompey.Not willing to give up his Egyptian connection, however, Antony unleashes a civil war against Ceasar but is defeated at Actium after many of his trusted men including his close friend Enobarbus (Patrick Stewart) desert him and his reputation begins to decline sharply.
Meanwhile, Cleopatra is torn between saving her life and protecting her children by supporting Caesar or remaining loyal to the defeated Antony.
Based on Trevor Nunn's acclaimed 1972 Royal Shakespeare Company production, this is an excellent adaptation of the Bard's tale of love, duty, war, honour and ambition.
The play nicely explores the contrasting values of Ptolemaic Egypt and the Roman Republic, both of which were approaching their final days during the events portrayed for different but related reasons.
While many of the references to him are retained as it would be difficult to move the plot along if he were not even mentioned, I felt that it was a mistake to excise Pompey's appearances entirely.
He is very conspicuous by his absence, not least because it adversely effects the film's structure in one instance: Mark Antony and Octavius go from being reluctant allies to being at war with each other very suddenly and it is a little jarring.
The production is very much a filmed stage play as the sets are minimalist to basically non- existent.
However, the director Jon Scoffield handles the material very well and I was surprised to discover that this was the only time that he ever directed Shakespeare for the screen.The film stars Richard Johnson in an excellent performance as Mark Antony, a member of the Second Triumvirate of the Roman Republic who spends most of his time in Alexandria with his beloved Cleopatra.
In the wake of Julius Caesar's assassination, she has allied herself with Mark Antony against Caesar's great-nephew and adoptive son Octavius.
While it began as a political arrangement, it has transformed into a passionate love affair by the beginning of the play.
Antony is so bewitched by Cleopatra that he has come to neglect his onerous duties in Rome and seems almost disinterested in the fact that his wife Fulvia and brother Lucius are waging a revolt against his "official" ally Octavius.
In a great moment of self- reflection early in the play, he fears that he is losing himself in dotage but seldom displays the same level of perception afterwards.
Antony is not always a sympathetic character but he is always a compelling one and Johnson does a fantastic job at conveying his deeply felt inner conflict between his love for Cleopatra and his responsibilities to Rome.
Throughout much of the play, Antony seems desperate to convince himself that he is a honourable man, especially when his often ill-advised actions suggest otherwise.
He dies with some degree of contentment, secure in the knowledge that he is "a Roman by a Roman valiantly vanquished."Janet Suzman is suitably theatrical as the Drama Queen of the Nile.
Her performance is generally very good but she does have a tendency to go pretty far over the top whenever she has to shout, with Antony's death scene being the best / worst example of this.
Cleopatra is a fascinating and complex character.
Conversely, she is a strong, powerful and fiercely intelligent woman who knows exactly what she wants and is not afraid to get it.
At one point, she compares ensnaring Antony to catching a fish.
However, she seems to view him not as a prize that she has won but as the love of her life, even if her actions occasionally indicate a lack of loyalty towards him.
In one of the play's most memorable moments, Enobarbus claims that "age cannot wither her nor custom stale her infinite variety," which is indicative of the fact that she is not afraid to use her beauty and sexuality to achieve her aims.
This leads Octavius to describe her as a "whore" and fuels his desire to lead her through Rome as his prisoner.In one of his first major television appearances, Patrick Stewart is wonderful as Enobarbus, Antony's oldest friend and brother-in-arms throughout many a campaign.
In many respects, Enobarbus is the most insightful character in the play as, for instance, he is the first to realise that Antony will return to Cleopatra's side in spite of the fact that he has agreed to marry Octavius' sister Octavia in order to solidify their alliance against the rebellious Pompey.
Over time, he loses his faith in Antony and with good reason as his obsession with Cleopatra has come to cloud his judgement, most notably at the crucial Battle of Actium when he makes the grave strategic error of following her when she and her sixty ships retreat.
Enobarbus defects to Octavius' forces but he is soon overcome with guilt and regret and dies of a broken heart at having betrayed the man whom he loved like a brother.
The always excellent Corin Redgrave is rather smarmy as the mostly unsympathetic antagonist Octavius.
I say "mostly" as many of his criticisms of Antony's neglect of his duties in the early part of the play were perfectly justified.
That said, he is a ruthless man full of vaulting ambition who proves to be a powerful enemy to the title characters.
The film also featured strong performances in roles of varying size from Rosemary McHale as Charmian, Philip Locke as Agrippa, Raymond Westwell as Lepidus, Tim Pigott-Smith as Proculeius, Ben Kingsley as Thidius, Joseph Marcell as Eros, W.
Morgan Sheppard as Scarus and Darien Angadi as Alexas, a role which he would reprise in the 1981 BBC version.Overall, this is an extremely effective adaptation of Shakespeare's tragedy. |
tt0149624 | All the Pretty Horses | In 1949, young cowboy John Grady Cole's maternal grandfather dies. John had grown up on his grandfather's ranch, but it was put up for sale when the old man died. His mother has no ties to it anymore, and would rather have the money. With no home, John asks his best friend Lacey Rawlins to leave his family ranch in San Angelo, Texas and join him to travel on horseback to cross the border 150 miles south, to seek work in Mexico. They encounter a peculiar 13-year-old boy named Jimmy Blevins on the trail to Mexico, whom they befriend but from whom they then separate. Later on they meet a young aristocrat's daughter, Alejandra Villarreal, with whom Cole falls in love.
Cole and Rawlins become hired hands for Alejandra's father, who likes their work, but Cole's romantic interest in Alejandra is not welcomed by her wealthy aunt. After Alejandra's father takes her away, Cole and Rawlins are arrested by Mexican police and taken to jail, where they again encounter Blevins, who has been accused of stealing a horse and of murder, and is killed by a corrupt police captain. Cole and Rawlins are sent to a Mexican prison for abetting Blevins' crimes, where they must defend themselves against dangerous inmates. The pair are both nearly killed.
Alejandra's aunt frees Cole and Rawlins, on the condition that she never sees them again. While Rawlins returns to his parents' ranch in Texas, Cole attempts to reunite with Alejandra over her family's objections. Her aunt is confident that Alejandra will keep her word and not get back together with Cole - so much so that she even gives Cole her niece's phone number. Cole urges Alejandra to come to Texas with him. She, however, decides she must keep her word and though she loves him, she will not go with him.
Cole then sets out to get revenge on the captain who took the Blevins boy's life, as well as to get back his, Lacey's and Blevins' horses. After making the captain his prisoner, he turns him over to Mexican men, including one with whom Cole had previously shared a cell when they were imprisoned by the captain. Cole is spared the decision to kill the captain, but it is implied the men whom the captain was turned over to will do that.
Reentering the USA and riding through a small town in Texas, towing two horses behind the one he is riding, he stops to inquire what day it is (it is Thanksgiving Day). He asks a couple of men if they would be interested in buying a rifle, as he needs the money. One is a sheriff's deputy and arrests him because all three horses have different brands, and they suspect Cole is a horse thief.
In court, Cole tells the judge his story from the beginning. The judge believes him and orders Cole freed and the horses returned to him. Later that evening, Cole shows up at the judge's home, troubled. The judge had said good things about him in court, but Cole feels guilty that Blevins was killed - and while there was nothing he could have done to prevent the killing, he never even spoke up at the time and is upset with himself for that. The judge tells him he is being too hard on himself and it could not have been helped; he must go on and live his life. Cole rides to Rawlins' family's ranch, where he asks his friend if he wants his horse back. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0343660 | 50 First Dates | Henry Roth is a veterinarian at Sea Life Park on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. He has a reputation of womanizing female tourists and does not display any interest in committing to a serious relationship. Henry's closest friends are Ula, a marijuana-smoking Islander; his assistant Alexa, whose gender is unclear; Willy, his pet African penguin; and Jocko, a walrus.
One day Henry’s boat breaks down while he is sailing around Oahu. He goes to the Hukilau Café to wait for the Coast Guard. There he sees a young woman named Lucy Whitmore, who makes architectural art with her waffles. Henry thinks she is a local, which prevents him from introducing himself, but the next day he comes back. Lucy and he hit it off instantly and she asks him to meet her again tomorrow morning.
When Henry goes back to the café, Lucy does not have any recollection of ever meeting him. The restaurant owner Sue (Amy Hill) explains to Henry that one year ago, Lucy and her father Marlin went up to the North Shore to pick a pineapple for his birthday. On the way back, they had a serious car accident that left Lucy with anterograde amnesia and she wakes up every morning thinking it is October 13, 2002. To save her the heartbreak of reliving the accident every day, Marlin and Doug, Lucy's lisping steroid-addicted brother, re-enact Marlin's birthday by following a script, including putting out October 13's Sunday newspaper, rewatching the same Minnesota Vikings game, and refilling Lucy's shampoo bottles.
Despite Sue's warning, Henry invites Lucy to have breakfast with him. Eventually she does, but it ends poorly when Henry unintentionally hurts Lucy’s feelings. He follows her home to apologize where Marlin and Doug instruct Henry to leave Lucy alone. Henry begins concocting ways to run into Lucy on the following days, such as pretending to have car trouble, creating a fake road block, or by having Ula beat him up. Eventually, Marlin and Doug figure this out due to Lucy singing The Beach Boys' "Wouldn't It Be Nice" on the days when she meets Henry.
One day, as Henry is about to sit with Lucy at breakfast, she notices a police officer writing her a ticket for her expired plates. Lucy attempts to argue that they are not yet expired, and takes a newspaper to prove herself, but sees that the date on all the newspapers is not October as she thought. When she rushes home, Marlin and Doug are forced to admit their ruse (and presumably not for the first time; when Marlin sees Lucy's frantic behavior as her truck pulls up to the house, he immediately realizes what happened and loudly announces to Doug that Lucy "had a bad day").
Henry comes up with an idea to make a video explaining to Lucy her accident and their relationship. Although Lucy is upset over understanding about her accident and memory loss, Henry believes that she is more upset realizing her life is a lie every day. Because of this, Henry, Marlin and Doug show Lucy the tape every morning and help her spend her days by picking up where the tape says she left off. She spends more time with Henry and goes to see some of her old friends. Lucy decides to erase Henry completely from her life after learning of his decision not to take a sailing trip to Bristol Bay to study walruses, something he has been planning for the past 10 years. Although Henry would rather spend that year making Lucy fall in love with him everyday rather than go on the sailing trip, Lucy is convinced she is a burden on him and is preventing Henry from really living his life. Henry reluctantly helps Lucy destroy her journal entries of their relationship.
A few weeks later, Henry is preparing to leave for his sailing trip. Before he departs, Marlin tells him that Lucy is now living at the brain institute and teaching an art class. He also tells him that she sings. Then he gives Henry a Beach Boys CD. Listening to the CD, Henry becomes emotional and curses Marlin for giving him the CD and causing him to miss Lucy. He then remembers that Marlin once told him that Lucy only sings after she meets him. Concluding that Lucy remembers him, he returns home. Henry rushes to the brain institute where Lucy now resides and asks if she knows who he is. Lucy says she does not know him but shows him the pictures she has painted of him, saying she dreams about him every night.
Some time later, Lucy wakes up and plays a video tape marked "Good Morning Lucy." It again informs her of her accident, but ends with her and Henry’s wedding. On the tape, Henry says to put a jacket on and come have breakfast when she is ready. Lucy then sees that she is on Henry’s boat, which finally made it to Alaska. She goes up on deck and meets Marlin, Henry and their daughter, Nicole. | comedy, prank, entertaining, romantic, flashback | train | wikipedia | This movie, no matter all the overdone/overacted characters and the fact that Adam Sandler is probably the worst person in the world the act crying, is simply the best description of love ever.
Basically this is a romantic comedy about a man (Henry) and a woman (Lucy) who meet and fall in love, there is just one problem: Lucy won't remember, tomorrow.It is easy to pick holes in films and yes there are things wrong with this film:- The first 5 to 10 minutes do seem a little out of place: I understand the need to set the scene, but couldn't help feeling that the pace and characterisations didn't quite fit with what was to come.Some of the characters take away from the story: Doug (Sean Astin) is a little over done and comes across as more damaged than his sister.
Lets face it, when Adam Sandler needs a hit movie, who is he going to call, Drew Barrymore of course, and indeed why not, after the sentimental success of The Wedding Singer, anything these two bright young things appeared in together would be nothing short of pure gold.A perfect case in point is 50 First Dates.
Now as a rule i would never break out in a fever to go see anything with Adam Sandler's name attached to it, however i broke the rule when i first went to see The Wedding Singer, which contained many charming and heartfelt moments, as well as the comedic, aside from that one the only other film of note on Sandler's resume for me anyway has been Billy Madison.Like all good things that come to pass, in between the misses more than hits, along comes the last to date pairing of Sandler and Barrymore.
Into his life comes Lucy played rather charmingly by Drew Barrymore.Of course loves young dream could never run smoothly, remember we have 95 minutes running time on this movie, So as soon as they have met and broke bread, the dawning of a new day arrives, but not without it's hitch.
I personally never tire of watching it, not to the extent of reaching fifty times but i do regard it as a breath of fresh air, even if Adam Sandler parlays his usual bag of comedic tricks, but hey the late great Chris Farley did the same and it worked.Truly a movie for all seasons, and a must if you are in a relationship.
What makes this movie work is the chemistry between Drew Barrymore and Adam Sandler since they work so great together and make the film fun and also this film is better then Sandler's last effort Anger Management.
Honolulu veterinarian Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) falls for Lucy Whitmore (Drew Barrymore), only to find out that, due to an accident, her memory only lasts one day, so she won't remember him the next day!
The movie gravitates between goofy and sensitive, but never gets mind-numbing; Adam Sandler always has something up his sleeve, and he and Barrymore have a great time with the material.
As is often the case in Adam Sandler's movies, one of the characters is an embarrassment to everyone else (in this case, it's Rob Schneider as Henry's whacked-out friend Ula).
Let's face it - it's not often you get a movie about a woman (Drew Barrymore) who is involved in an accident which leaves her with a 24-hour memory span so that her would-be boyfriend has to make up ways to 'meet' and make her fall in love with him every day.
The exceptions to this include the slightly more classy turns from Dan Ayckroyd as the doctor, Blake Clark as the girl's father, and the show-stealing walrus who is the star attraction at the zoo where Sandler's character works as a vet.So overall, 50 First Dates is not great, but it doesn't pretend to be.
There's also a twist that kind of mixes 'Memento' into this whole story making it one of the most original romantic comedies recently.Adam Sandler is not different than other of his roles, while Drew Barymore is just great.
There is some laugh-out-loud jokes and a cute romantic story plus an original twist.Overall it's an easy and nice watch, that you should enjoy in many ways!50 First Dates is a very pleasant surprise in the genre..
Nice to see Adam Sandler back on form after Punch Drunk Love (what was THAT about!!?) even though it's not his best and felt kinda muted to me - a bit more gross out humour would have done it, but if you have a mental character in a film I suppose there's only so far you can go.
I had little problem with the performances; Adam Sandler gives of his more likable performances, and Drew Barrymore is the persona of sweetness as his love interest.
Sandler and Barrymore delivered a wonderful romantic comedy with The Wedding Singer, the vast success of which made me more than a little skeptical about whether or not they could successfully play different characters than they played in that movie and still be convincing as they fall in love again.
The point is that her 'condition' (a great homage could have been made if it had been described that way in the movie at some point, by the way) provides a constantly re-booting stream of possibilities for Adam Sandler to act cute and make us all grin ('Sorry I'm not better looking
') as he tries to stop being the gigolo that he is at the beginning of the movie and tries desperately to find a way to make Lucy fall in love with him permanently.If you can get past the requirement that you have to believe that any character played by Adam Sandler is a womanizer, then you're well on your way to enjoying the movie.
And while there is plenty of gross out in the movie (consider a scene, for example, where Sandler's co-worker, Jennifer, who is a gross-out ploy him/herself, is covered from head to toe in the flying vomit of a gleeful walrus), Sandler's character pretty much sticks to his determination to win Lucy's heart for more than one day at a time.
This is exactly why Bad Santa didn't work, we were supposed to root for a guy who literally had not a single solitary redeeming value.The movie starts off by showing what Henry Roth's (Sandler) daily life is like, living on a tropical island and routinely bedding sexy tourist women looking for some horizontal accompaniment during their vacation.
Sure, the piece worked pretty well by itself in the theatrical trailer, but when it's attached to the rest of the movie it presents Henry not only as an un-trustable womanizer, but it also makes him out to be a complete moron to think that any girl with a thought in her head would buy such a nutty story.
Character change is important, but it doesn't have to be from one extreme to the other.The result of combining this character with the much more interesting story of Lucy's memory disorder is a romantic comedy that's not as funny as a more deliberate, low-brow Sandler movie, and barely romantic at all.
This is a clever premise, set most curiously in Hawaii (perhaps the director felt a tropical setting was appropriate for the "sweet and temperate" plot): a man named Henry (Sandler) falls in love with a woman named Lucy (Barrymore), and despite their peculiarities and differences, they manage to really hit it off on the romantic course.
Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) throws a wrinkle in her life when he tries to woo her in spite of knowing of her memory problem.The story made for some very funny situations, and the Sandler/Barrymore duo is a good combination (definitely a whole lot better than the Sandler/Ryder combo).
Throughout the film, Sandler's character is presented as decent and well-meaning but what he does at the end is selfish and cruel.Of the four stars I awarded, three are for Barrymore who tried hard to hold this mess together with sweetness and charm.
It has a lot of potential as a romantic comedy and there's a lot of fun in it, but for all the good points about this movie, it has a lot of weak points as well, that can be summed up as follows: Adam Sandler!
Lucy (Drew Barrymore) suffers a brain injury in an accident and suffers short-term memory loss, which means that she remembers nothing since the accident, and she wakes up every day thinking it's October 13.
This is an Adam Sandler movie, and it has to fall into typical Sandler-style juvenile thinking, which is displayed largely around a couple of characters.Why does Lucy's brother Doug (Sean Astin) have to be a lisping steroid-abuser?
'50 First Dates' tells the story of Henry Roth (Sandler) who falls in love with Lucy Whitmore (Barrymore) but there is just one problem.
Lucy relives the same day again and again so Henry must find a way to make her fall in love with him every single day.Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore are perfect for the roles and they have a lot of chemistry between each other.
Schneider's character Ula however, is absolutely hilarious and the real star of the movie.'50 First Dates' seems like a brilliant film idea on paper and it does work pretty well on screen.
"50 First Dates" is one of the more enjoyable romantic comedies made in recent years, relying a lot on Drew Barrymore and Adam Sandler's chemistry to carry off the out-there but original plot.
What puts this movie above a lot of other Adam Sandler comedies is that, unlike many of his other love interests that might as well be named "Love Interest" for all they have to do with the plots, Lucy is an actual character who has a journey to go on too.
In '50 First dates' - which might well be subtitled 'When 'Memento' Met 'Groundhog Day'' - Drew Barrymore plays a young woman whose short term memory has been destroyed in a car accident a few months prior to the time of the story.
50 First Dates is a love story of a beautiful couple,this movie shows a essence of true love.The lead male character Henry is shown pervert but when he falls in love with Lucy, he decides to be with her for rest of his life.
This happens to Henry (Adam Sandler), who is completely confused until the café owner pulls him aside and lets him know that Lucy (Drew Barrymore), the girl in question, has brain damage from an auto accident which causes her short term memory to be erased every time she goes to sleep for the night.
Henry is discouraged to realize that, if he wants to get to know Lucy, he has to hook up with her fresh every day, and on a bet with one of the cooks in the café, he does this until he realizes something extraordinary is happening--he is falling in love.Enter a premise for a romantic comedy that seems a little weak on the surface, but actually turns out to have a lot behind it.
They hit it off and Henry think he's finally found the girl of his dreams, until he discovers she has short-term memory loss and forgets him the very next day.At first, I just liked some of the usual humor: the use of spam to make me believe we were really in Hawaii.
The woman is Lucy, played by Drew Barrymore, and the Biologist is Henry, played by Adam Sandler.
Despite her current state, Henry is head over heels in love with her, and desperately tries to make things work between them by constructing a scrapbook for her to read every morning, a tape to watch, and by having her father, Blake Clark, and brother, played by Sean Astin, who drops the funniest lines in the film, try to tell her everything about him again and again.If a condition like this really existed, in the film it's a merge between short term memory loss and amnesia, the question is who would it be harder on?
50 First Dates isn't perfect, but it shows that Sandler is capable of doing a mostly serious role, and doesn't need to incorporate his two famous alter egos; the BIG, strong tough guy or the little, weak baby.Starring: Adam Sandler, Drew Barrymore, Rob Schneider, Blake Clark, and Sean Astin.
And although it isn't the greatest on-screen pairing (not even close), it still creates enough believable buzz to work as a romantic comedy with a slight twist.That all being said, the jokes are hit and miss, like with many Adam Sandler movies.
However, it's also a film that also has a plot that is completely ridiculous and unbelievable, so you really need to be able to put aside your critical side and just sit back and take the movie for what it is--a nice romantic-comedy.Adam Sandler is a tough actor to pigeonhole.
However, never do you feel the need to own this movie, or watch it every week.Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore, star in their second romantic comedy together, as two people who are attracted to one another from the first day they meet.
She has short term memory loss, and it's up to Henry (Sandler) to convince her each and every day that he is the love of her life, and she of his.Picture 'Groundhog Day' only not as funny, cute or sweet.
Drew Barrymore also gave her usual accomplished performance.The central premise of the film - that Henry (Sandler) has to woo Lucy (Barrymore) anew every day due to her short-term memory loss - is an intriguing one, and handled extremely well by the two leads.However, the presence of Rob Schneider as a Hawaiian local and Sean Astin as a steroided-up fitness freak (complete with oh-so-funny comedy lithp) really dropped the quality of the film several notches.The ending (although Hollywood Happy Ending) was treated reasonably well, and helped prevent the film from being a complete waste of time.If only someone would realise that Schneider just isn't funny...(and neither is Walrus vomit).
The main problem is that a film about short-term memory loss is more heart-wrenching than amusing, and the fact that 50 First Dates is being marketed as a light-hearted romantic comedy is more than somewhat deceiving.Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) is a veterinarian at an aquarium in Hawaii with commitment phobia who manages to bed attractive and naive female tourists every night of the week.Then he meets cute and quirky Lucy (Drew Barrymore) at a local diner.
Apparently, short-term memory loss works like clockwork.Lucy wakes up every morning thinking it's her father's birthday and proceeds to start out every day the same way, even in the same outfit.
Sean Astin provides some pretty funny scenes as Lucy's little brother who has a steroid problem and lisp.However, the audience could mostly do without Henry's pot-head best friend, played by Rob Schneider, who has a terrible Hawaiian accent and wears impossibly short shorts.The way Henry uses the aquarium animals to woo Lucy (including dressing up some kind of penguin in a floral shirt to sit in the middle of a road as Lucy speeds by in her Jeep) would surely have his management calling PETA, but that's overlooked.While 50 First Dates has the feel of an ultimately serious movie, it still relies on juvenile humor such as walrus vomit and genitalia to appeal to Sandler's fans.
This matters because Adam Sandler actually did a really good thing in making this movie.
Henry Roth (Adam Sandler), who is afraid of commitment and constantly has one-night stands with beautiful tourists, suddenly falls in love at first sight with Lucy (Drew Barrymore).
Drew Barrymore is a little fat, but charming and sweet as usual, and Adam Sandler is in his usual role of a nice and supportive man, and their chemistry work perfectly in this romantic comedy.
I did enjoy this movie and it quite worth your money in renting so.The story of the guy fell in love with the girl of his dream, the only problem was, and she got short-term memories loss and couldn't remember who he is the next day.Even the non Adam Sandler fan will like the movie.
I really wanted to like this film, as the previous pairing of Sandler and Barrymore, The Wedding Singer, was a great comedy.
Drew Barrymore was wonderful and believable.The movie is a great love story about patience, caring, understanding and most of all...
I'm not afraid of a romantic comedy and like both Drew Barrymore and Adam Sandler (though I'm not a huge fan either), but this movie doesn't have five minutes of worth in it.
Adam Sandler stars as Henry Roth, the leading man whose womanizing ways change when he falls for a younger girl Lucy Whitmore (Drew Barrymore.
As a responsible adult, I feel like I should be obligated to take away a half star from "50 First Dates" for having a lame joke that involves spoiling the ending of "The Sixth Sense" but the movie also has a scene where Rob Schneider gets brutally beaten by an aluminum baseball bat-wielding Barrymore, so I think those two cancel each other out.In the end there is enough in the film that works to make it overall a pleasant experience, particularly because the further into the story you go, the less Adam Sandler's traditional humor is present.
"50 First Dates" is a romance movie in which a man meets the girl of his dreams but she has short-term memory loss and forgets him the very next day.
Drew Barrymore who played as Lucy Whitmore showed us a different point of his act and I have to say that I really liked it.Finally I believe that "50 First Dates" is a movie that everyone have to watch because it shows what the true and pure love do between two people.. |
tt0234853 | The Tao of Steve | Dex (Logue) is an unlikely Lothario - an overweight, thirtysomething part-time kindergarten teacher - who has developed an effective method for seducing women. "The Tao of Steve", Dex's own personal pseudophilosophy on seduction, combines a Taoist outlook with the qualities embodied by TV characters such as Steve Austin (The Six Million Dollar Man) and Steve McGarrett (Hawaii Five-O) and, above all, by the actor Steve McQueen. He meets up with Syd, an old college conquest whom he can't remember, but to whom he is instantly attracted. However, she never forgot him, and is hurt that he got over her so easily. Slowly, Dex subjects Syd to the "Tao of Steve", but Syd is immune to Dex's charms. Gradually, he develops genuine feelings for her.
During a camping trip with Syd, Dex suffers chest pains and has to be taken to the hospital. A doctor informs Dex that what he thought was a heart attack was merely heartburn, but cautions him that his lifestyle is endangering his health. Later, at school, the husband of one of his conquests punches him in the face in front of his students. Syd comes to Dex's house to console him, and they end up sleeping together. The next day, however, she finds out about his "philosophy", and leaves in disgust. Dex finally realizes that he needs to make changes in his life.
Sometime later, Syd is in New York City, working as a set designer. She leaves a message on Dex's answering machine asking him to call her and talk about their relationship - only to see Dex himself standing before her, ready to give her a chance. | romantic, philosophical | train | wikipedia | Whatever the moniker, everyone knows the type: a guy with stunning looks, a killer smile, lines that don't sound like come-ons, a silky smooth demeanor, an athletic build, whose only problem is deciding which women's numbers to cull from his rolodex.
His life creed is based upon the Steves: Austin, McGarret, McQueen
men who epitomized cool, weren't afraid to get roughed up, never pursued women and for whom things always worked out.
Unlike "High Fidelity", the recent pre-midlife crisis movie which only skimmed the surface of relationships (but was a brilliant movie nonetheless), or "Autumn in New York" the shameless Rogue-sees-the-light-tear-jerker, "The Tao of Steve" is the thinking man's "About Last Night" - the intangible mixed with the right amount of brashness.
Although it sounds ridiculous it actually works - I know two guys who could have been the model for Dex (I don't think there would be a strong reverse correlation however, as men generally don't understand signals- we're a bit thick that way
).
Psychology and writing aside, the actors definitely bring the story to life.Ottawa born Donal Logue, pulled a DeNiro, gaining 45-pounds for the role of Dex - now that's dedication to the craft.
Dex, the leading male character, has told Syd that he's falling in love with her, and she asks why he doesn't stop seeing other women.
So I can bask in the warmth of your annihilating contempt?" The story of this film meanders much like its good-for-nothing hero, Dex, as we follow him through a slacker routine that allows him to do virtually nothing but pick up women and play games with his male friends.He believes that he has the key to life in the "Tao of Steve," which is essentially a guide to fooling women into having sex with a fat loser--himself.
He exclaims, "Why does the American Slacker get so little respect?" The clever dialog and the sweetness of Dex's discovery that he actually loves Syd and doesn't really want to be a professional cad all his life makes the movie worth watching.
We watch him explain his philosophy, use it to manipulate women, and then have to violate it as he finally figures out that while the "Tao of Steve" may get him women, it won't get him the one woman he really wants..
Logue, who pulls a De Niro by gaining nearly a hundred pounds, stars as Dex, a self-deprecating part-time kindergarten teacher who attends his ten year college reunion in the dusty oasis of Santa Fe, New Mexico where he is told by stunned classmates at his jarringly gone-to-pot visage that he was like Elvis.
Dex has a certain acquired charm that he attributes to his own quasi-philosophy, the film's title, referring to the ultimate in guy coolness as being a Steve (as in McGarrett - the Jack Lord character of `Hawaii Five-O', Austin, `The Six Million Dollar Man' and McQueen, the coolest actor of all time, or any suave icon down the pike: James Bond, James Dean, et al.) - and the opposite being Stu - and the certain guidelines in wooing the opposite sex wrapping up with his ultimate kwon, `We persue that which retreats from us.'At the reunion he bumps into Syd (Goodman, the stunningly attractive sister of the filmmaker), a fellow alumni who turns out to be one of Dex's apparent number of sexual conquests in which he later learns he cannot recall her at all.
Here the plot sets into motion the inevitable formula of two people so right for each other yet both guarded, Syd for her share of heartbreaks and Dex for his chronic lying and seductive charisma like some sort of catnip for women including the wife of one of his pals, who he's engaged in a hot affair.Logue makes Dex sympathetic, funny, pathetic, infuriating, likable and ultimately an original character the likes haven't been seen since John Cusack's hey dey in the Eighties and the characters of the 90's indie comedy, `Kicking and Screaming' about arrested development and lifelong search for the perfect love.
Co-written by the sisters and Duncan North, the real-life model of Dex, the dialogue rings true in a brilliant string of set ups for Dex to pontificate before he deflates himself in recourse.One of the best films (and comedies) of this year (or any).
All of the participants in the commentary (including the director, writer, and both leads) were intelligent, amusing, and and very entertaining: I wanted to invite them all over for dinner and play poker and talk philosophy (and of course, the Tao of Steve) until dawn.
this thing has it all: guy talk, girl talk, echoes and resonance, love and respect for all its characters, wit, poignancy, politics, uplift, a tremendous depth and breath of literary allusion, and a substantial dose of digestible philosophy from some of the greatest minds of world thought.
Donal Logue give a brilliant performance as Dex, and Greer Goodman is enchanting as Syd. Greer is the sister of the movie's director, Jenniphr Goodman, and also shared in the writing credits.
"The Tao of Steve" tells of a fat slob of a guy who seems to have unusually good fortune in bedding chicks thanks to his Taoist philosophy.
Will she make him look again at his approach to life?The title should at least give you some idea of the type of film this is going to be because it manages to sound cool and interesting and a bit hip without really doing a lot which pretty much sums up the appeal of this as a film.
The story doesn't really go to any depth and, at the end of the day it does just what you expect it to do in terms of how it ends but it manages to get passed all this by having the same relaxed attitude of the characters.I'm sure it was not as easy to put together as it appeared but the film moves nicely along with a lot of pop culture references, slacker humour and a touch of genuine humanity in the romance.
The cast also help and, in particular, sterling work from Logue who manages to take a fat, sexist womaniser and make him into a character who has those characteristics but still managed to make me like him and care where his story went.
A clever premise -- overweight lothario with a formula for getting women meets his match -- is wasted when the screenplay falls back on typical gimmicks that it seemingly is trying to subvert.Part of the problem is we never get to see the lead character, Dex, ever utilize his Tao and see how it fits in his life.
And I could have done without the big pop culture scene where the guys hum TV themes around the poker table.But the flaw that sinks the movie is the central relationship between Dex and Sid.
If it had been a little campy and fun, the flaws wouldn't have mattered as much.Who should see this film:-- nobody, see "What Women Want" or "High Fidelity" instead.I am forced to give "The Tao of Steve" a 2 out of 10..
The kind of "normal guys" you see on "Friends" or some other bad vehicle, but never in real life (at least not in mine, thankfully).Having just seen "Swingers" again the night before, it was hard not to compare these two renditions of how the mating/dating game is played from the male side.
Donal Logue plays Dex (the guy who gets lots of chicks) who acts much more like a whiny, latte-sipping wuss than the Steve McQueen-type he is made out to be.
The talented Donal Logue is wasted in this umpteenth version of the self-styled Lothario with a hidden heart of gold who thinks he has all the answers to the art of seduction without commitment until he finds himself swooning over (hold onto your hats!) an attractive girl who forces him to reevaluate his empty life when she is somehow able to resist his dubious charms!
I think that the Dex character (played with maybe just a tad of credibility by Donal Logue) was actually a little dumb when it came to romance.
Neither exploring the world of male-bonding (ala Swingers), or that of it's fairly interesting premise (intellectual posturing as a way to avoid intimacy), this film has no life outside its frames-- all I kept seeing was camera setups, unimaginative and amateurish performances and writing, and an atrocious pop score.About 5 funny lines in the whole mess-- if I had chanced upon it without hearing the hoopla I would have easily dismissed it as another so-so indie..
I feel differently now about that movie as well.) I think a lot of guys like Donal's character use their intelligence and understanding of "coolness" in their social life when it really only functions in poker game banter and party small talk.
What I liked most was the character of Donal Logue (Dex).
I saw the preview a while back, and felt a special kinship with the lead character Dex. I thought, "This is going to be MY movie of the summer." The trailer made it seem like it was going to be a headier version of something like High Fidelity, by having the Cussack type character fill his void with philosophical classics instead of pop music.
After wasting 87 painful minutes watching this brilliantly marketed horror show, I wanted nothing more than to hunt down DEX, the writers (Duncan North and Greer Goodman), and the already hated Lemonheads (for providing the title song that has been haunting me for a full three days after) and taunt them, naked (them, not me
.oh what the hell, me too) in the worst way so that they never forget what they did to the unassuming film patron.
And then, last night, I was saved by the Tao of Steve.This is the film that won several awards at the Sundance Film Festival including a best actor award for leading man Donal League.
Here League is center stage as Dex, an overwieght, unmotivated womanizer who is fond of quoting Thomas Aquinas, Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Lao-Tse, Buddha, and pretty much anyone else that comes to mind.The title refers to Dex's belief that people like Steve McQueen, Steve McGarrett, and Steve Austin are the cool guys of the universe who have figured out how to make women want them.
Dex's philosophy seems to be working since he moves from one sexual conquest to another--and then he meets a woman named Syd. The heart of this film is best explained when Dex tries to explain the motives of Don Giovanni - "Don Giovanni slept with 1,000 women because he was afraid he couldn't be loved by one."From the opening scenes it would be easy to write this off as just another trite film about a womanizing party animal, but this is really a morality play about human relationships and personal integrity.
Commenting on gender roles and the war between the sexes, Betty Friedan once said "beneath our masks we are very much alone." This is the heart of Dex's dilemma.This is the directorial debut of Jenniphr Goodman (her spelling not mine), and Jenniphr also receives first-time writing credits with Duncan North and Greer Goodman (the director's sister who also makes her screen debut in a charming performance as Syd).
Dex (Donal Logue) is an underachieving guy who LIKES to be an underachiever.
But, oddly, his completely selfish view of life is challenged and he finds himself wanting to be more for a particularly woman.If you can look past how unlikable Dex can be or if you find him funny, you'll enjoy the film a lot more than others will find it.
I do wish that the movie has a bigger actress to play Syd. In the end, it is the performance of Donal Logue which wins me over like the countless women he sleeps with..
Goodman is spot on as the object of desire for Dex. It was a funny, romantic movie that will be worth watching again..
He makes a cameo during one of the poker scenes, and on the commentary he provides some interesting insight into the movie, the character Dex, and of course the "Tao of Steve".The plot is actually the only weak part of the movie, as a story, it's predictable, but I think that's okay because I found it more interesting to delve into unanswerable questions concerning the characters, and of course, as a hopelessly single young man who has never been able to get the ladies, I spent much time asking myself, "will this really work in real life,
..my life?" Well, according to Duncan North, the aforementioned inspiration for Dex, it does work, and he's living proof.
Donal Logue does a great job with the lead character of Dex, and hopefully we will be seeing more from him in the future.
This intergral lesson is what Dex must learn to achieve his goal, and it is conveyed perfectly throughout the film through the cinematography.In reading the credits one can see the interelatedness of the people who produced this movie and the personal story that the screenwriter told through his script.
But it is the familiarity of the characters which makes these truths and ideas easy to digest, and "The Tao of Steve" such a likeable, easy to watch, thought provoking film.This film reminded me of "Committed" starring Heather Graham in some ways, with similar settings, similar mystical themes and a feeling of redemption at the end.
I would say that "The Tao of Steve" is a better film though because it tells the story in a much more simple, straightforward manner.
This delightful little film proves that you do NOT have to spend a trillion-gazillion dollars to make good films.In a nutshell, Dex (Donal Logue) knows that: "Men and women both want to have sex, but women want to have sex 15 minutes after us, so if you hold out for 20, she'll be chasing you for five" and this is the premise for the movie, if you know Dex's secrets you'll be cool, like all the coolest guys ever; Steve McQueen, Steve ("The 6 Million Dollar Man") Austin and Steve ("Hawaii 5-0") McGarrett.So "Seduction for dummies" (or "The Tao of Steve") is as follows;1.- "Be desireless" ("Women can smell an agenda").
3.- "Be gone" (that's the power of the "20-minute-strategy").With this knowledge Dex keeps scoring with all sort of girls and women, despite being a beer-drinking, dope-smoking underachiever, that is until he meets Syd (Greer Goodman, sister of the director) and in the end HE falls for the girl and has to make a commitment, great film.Go see this one, you will NOT regret it.By the way the Antithesis of cool is being "Stu"..
The character Dex played by Donal Logue has a really tough job because he carries the whole movie.Dex is excellent in his interplay with Dave, James 'Kimo" Wills; his love interest Sid, played by Greer Goodman and the other cast members that make up the card game.On the second level, I liked the subject matter itself: the tension between our societies values and Taoism's requirements to strive to be an excellent man in all of one's actions.Dex is a really smart guy that bends Taoism into a guide to score with chicks.
But when he falls for Syd, Dex begins his search to find the real Tao.The movie may not be for everyone, but this film will make you laugh, and think about the Tao of Steve..
The whole theme of the movie, as it is revealed, is so complex yet simple - just like real life....Anyway - I give this film my own 2 thumbs up!
The plot revolves around two characters: the pot smoking, womanizing but likeable Dex (Donal Logue), and his Cameron Diaz-like love interest, Syd (Greer Goodman).
I hope it is released wide, because a) everyone needs to go see this movie and b) I want to see it again.The movie is about a guy named Dex who is incredibly successful with women.
His technique is a blend of Eastern philosophies and acting like Steve McQueen (hence the Tao of Steve.) Dex is flummoxed, however, when he meets Syd who is beautiful, intelligent, and impervious to his charms.This movie is intelligent and insightful and very very funny..
It was engaging enough to manage to keep me watching all the way through, even though we all pretty much knew what was going to ultimately happen the first time Syd and Dex met.Without question, however, the ONE aspect which saved this film from being a contrived, boring mess (see: "Bongwater"), was Daniel Logue's performance, which was surprisingly good and authentic.
The story is fairly predictable, somewhat unbelievable, and certain events and characters are never really explained (just what became of that charming philosophy student Dex slept with at the beginning?) The disarming appeal of the characters of Dex and Syd and the insight into how a one-time "party guy" slowly but surely matures are the best things about this movie.
Director Jenniphr Goodman (Greer's sister) uses a terrific cast and beautiful New Mexico locations to tell a funny, heartwarming story that works best because of Logue.
The Tao of Steve is a movie your going to want to see twice!
She decided to create 'The Tao of Steve' based on North's life, including how he utilized Taoist philosophy and combined it with American pop culture's embrace of a trinity of 'machismo' TV characters including Steve Austin (The Six Million Dollar Man), Steve McGarrett (Hawaii Five-O) and, above all, the ultimate 'bad boy' actor, Steve McQueen.Duncan North is dubbed 'Dex' in the film and is played by Donal Logue, an Irish actor who gained significant weight for the role.
Nonetheless, love conquers all after Dex realizes that a deeper relationship with a woman beats simply seducing them, ad infinitum.'The Tao of Steve' is a rare example of an 'indie' film that works!
The script was top-notch as well as the acting, especially Donal Logue.The Tao of Steve is a code that Dex(Logue) and his friends live by for attracting the opposite sex. |
tt1582604 | Simha | Srimannarayana (Nandamuri Balakrishna) is a lecturer in a University in Hyderabad and lives with his grandmother (K. R. Vijaya). He does not tolerate injustice anywhere and mercilessly beats up people who dare to break the law, a personality which makes him feared and respected among others. A female lecturer Mahima (Namitha) is attracted to him, though he doesn't reciprocate her feelings. While beating up a goon who threatened to acid attack|throw acid on a girl after she spurned his advances, he accidentally punches a comatose man on the head, waking him from his 28-year coma. This man's name is Veerakesavudu (Sai Kumar).
One day, a new student Janaki (Sneha Ullal) joins the college where Srimannarayana is teaching. She initially thinks that he is a rowdy after an earlier encounter with him in a share auto and seeing how everyone in the college fears him, but once she finds out about his true personality, she develops a crush on him. One day, after Srimannarayana rescues her from a group of thugs, she reveals her past. Her father, businessman Jagadish Prasad (Rahman), has a business rivalry with Gopi (Adithya Menon), a gangster, who happens to be Veerakesavudu's son. After Veerakesavudu woke up from his coma, he ordered Jagadish to give Janaki's hand in marriage to Gopi so that their mutual rivalry is finished, to which he agreed, fearing the wrath of Veerakesavudu. But Gopi killed Janaki's brother during the wedding after he insulted him, prompting Jagadish to send Janaki to Hyderabad to continue her studies. The thugs who tried to kidnap her were Gopi's henchmen. On hearing this, Srimannarayana vows to protect Janaki and accommodates her next to his house. He soon reciprocates her feelings for him, prompting Maheswari to drop her love for him.
Unfortunately for Janaki, Gopi finds out that she is with Srimannarayana and kidnaps her, only for Srimannarayana to rescue her after a dramatic car chase. When they reach home, they are confronted by Gopi's henchmen. Jagadish too arrives there at the same time that Srimannarayana is fighting the henchmen and in a bid to help, accidentally stabs Srimannarayana's grandmother. Srimannarayana is enraged and attempts to kill him, but his grandmother stops him. Jagadish immediately leaves with Janaki. Later, Srimannarayana confronts his grandmother and asks her why she didn't let him kill Jagadish. In reply, she reveals about their past.
30 years ago, in the town of Bobbili, Veerakesavudu and his family ran a ruthless self-government, tormenting the townsfolk and supported by the police. The only person who dared to fight them back was a doctor named Narasimha (Nandamuri Balakrishna), who belonged to the Bobbili royal family and was the father of Srimannarayana. He took the law into his own hands and killed many of Veerakesavudu's henchmen, including his brothers, when he caught them tormenting others. While not killing others, he ran a 24x7 hospital which provided treatment free of cost. His wife Gayatri (Nayantara) was an ideal wife who was always affectionate towards Narasimha and supported all his methods. Jagadish, who was Gayatri's brother and who wanted to start a business with Veerakesavudu's help, warned her about the dangerous behaviour of Narasimha, but she brushed the warnings aside, having full faith in her husband and his methods. Veerakesavudu and his father (Kota Srinivasa Rao) eventually decided to eliminate Narasimha and his family once and for all by attempting to poison them during a temple function. When the temple priest warned Narasimha about the threat to his life, Narasimha rushed to Veerakesavudu's house and killed all his men as well as his father. However, Veerakesavudu was ultimately successful in killing Narasimha and Gayatri. But just before he died, Narasimha hit Veerakesavudu on the head, sending him into a coma which he only woke up from after 28 years. Narasimha's mother, who happens to be Srimannarayana's grandmother, took the young and newly orphaned Srimannarayana away with her to Hyderabad so that he could be brought up away from the violence in Bobbili.
On hearing about his family's past, Srimannarayana immediately decides to take revenge on Veerakesavudu and heads for Bobbili to finish his father's mission. He single-handedly fights Veerakesavudu, Gopi and their henchmen and finally kills them all, fulfilling the wishes of the Bobbili townsfolk who wanted the Veerakesavudu family's reign of terror and horror to be ended for good. | good versus evil, revenge, cruelty, violence, flashback | train | wikipedia | Ballaya is the real Simha. When I first heard that SIMHA is creating new box office records, I thought about giving it a chance. I am a north Indian and haven't watched any of Ballaya's movie. Though I have watched more than 50 Telugu movies till now, a Ballaya movie has still eluded me. After watching the teasers of SIMHA on you tube, I finally booked tickets for it. When the movie started, it felt like a usual feast, especially because of Namitha mainly. Though Ballaya looked a little old for Sriman Narayana's role, but he seemed serious. The first half was overall average, the usual fights sequences, villains making grueling faces, heroins drooling over Ballaya and all. However post intermission movie turned out to be much better. The Narasimha role suited Ballaya very well. He looked every bit of that fiery tiger. Nayanthara looked royal and elegant. Sneha Ullal seemed lost, while Namitha looked ugly, she is too fat even for being a porn star now.. Feast for Fans. Bala Krishna is terrific as Simha in the flashback episode. His dialogue delivery is controlled and is extremely effective. His get-up as Simha is highly respectable and dignified. After a long gap, Bala Krishna fans are going to cherish the looks and performance of Bala Krishna as he plays it to the galleries. His other character of Srimannarayana is also good.Nayana Tara is very good in the flashback episode with jewellery and traditional wear belonging to lineage of kings. The voice given by Sunitha helps in some key episodes of the movie. Sneha Ullal is improving from film to film and she is good too. Namitha should watch her weight. Kota comes up with another fine performance.Story of the movie is not new, but follows a time-tested formula. Boyapati Seenu who mastered mass treatment to his movies like Bhadra and Tulasi made sure that there are ample commercial elements that satisfy the thrust of masses and fans. He projected Bala Krishna in the right way and extracted powerful mass performance. Screenplay of the movie is predictable. Direction is good in parts.First half of the movie is adequate. The flashback episode is established well. The climax should have been more effective. The plus points of the movie are Bala Krishna performance (and dialogues) and mass elements. On the flip side, there is excessive violence/fights in the movie. Simha movie generated tremendous pre-release positive buzz and it resulted in humongous openings.. soooooooper. This is the best movie for the hero. No doubt about it. Everyone should watch it at least once in their lifetime. Songs are very good. Punch dialogs are ultimate. I will watch this movie again. I will take my friends as well. Thanks to the director for giving such a hit movie. Thanks to the crew and many thanks to the hero. This movie should break all records in telugu film industry. The screenplay is good and cinematography is good.Background score is a little irrelevant in some places but not really noticeable.It would be called balayyawood and not tollywood any more.I wouldn't reveal the story or any more details. Just go watch and enjoy the movie.. Not bad. When compared to recent films of balayya this film is some what better and can be seen for one time.Bala Krishna flash back character in the movie is good and you can see the age of balayya in this movie.There is no comedy track in the movie at all.Brahman and jhonshi were wasted in the film.There is no much necessity of huge jewelery for nayana and the of sneha is good but namita as a lecturer is not at all good.there are so many fights in the film and the flashback episode was not convincing as 1980 village backdrop and there are also several flaws in the movie.Overall I can say that it is not an extraordinary film but a film which can be watched for one time |
tt0105399 | Seong lung wui | In 1965, a couple (Sylvia Chang and James Wong) are doting on their newborn twin boys. Meanwhile, a dangerous gang leader named Crazy Kung (Kirk Wong) is being transported as a captive in the same hospital. Crazy Kung escapes and attempts to take one of the twins hostage. In the ensuing chaos, the twins are permanently separated. One of them, named Ma Yau, is raised by his parents and grows up to be a concert pianist and conductor. The other, named Wan Ma, is raised by a woman named Tsui (Mabel Cheung), and grows up to be a street racer and martial artist. Neither of them has ever thought that he has a twin brother.
26 years later, the twins' (Jackie Chan) lives intersect in Hong Kong. Wan Ma and his best friend Tyson (Teddy Robin) get mixed up with a dangerous gang. Meanwhile, Ma Yau prepares to conduct a major concert. The twins accidentally switch places, causing confusion for both of them until they discover each other. The twins also have romantic interests named Barbara (Maggie Cheung) and Tong Sum (Nina Li Chi).
Eventually, the twins defeat the gang that has been threatening them, and marry their romantic interests. | cult, humor, violence, clever | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0427038 | Carlito's Way: Rise to Power | The story begins in the 1960s with three inmates in a New York prison — Earl (Van Peebles), Rocco (Kelly), and Carlito (Hernandez) — controlling their criminal empire within their cell. Upon their release, they all look to control the drug trade in Harlem, which is currently in a power dispute between the Italian Bottolota crime family and black gangsters led by Hollywood Nicky (Combs). Rocco takes them to Artie Bottolota (Young) who at first is reluctant to work with blacks and Puerto Ricans, but who eventually cuts a deal with them in heroin distribution. The friends also meet Artie's son, Artie Jr. Soon, Earl's troubled younger brother Reggie joins them. After Artie Jr. offers to shake hands with Reggie, when he sees he and Carlito at a strip joint, Reggie turns him down, saying "my brother was doing fine without you". Artie Jr. insults Reggie with a racial slur, spurring Reggie to curse him and spit in his face. Artie Jr. assaults Reggie, but the fight is broken up. Carlito urges Reggie to wait until Artie Jr. and his crew leave. The mobsters leave, only for Carlito and Reggie to be cornered by them outside.
Artie Jr. attempts to kill Reggie with a straight razor by cutting his tongue out, while Carlito is restrained. Rocco pulls up and tells Artie Jr. to let him go, reasoning they will "take care of him." Carlito also meets a young lady named Leticia and meets her brother Sigfredo. Carlito is then introduced to Leticia's entire family as a booker. Sigfredo knowing who and what Carlito really is and does, which leads to an immediate confrontation. After shooting Carlito, Sigfredo then has to leave and take his family as well to prevent himself any danger. Reggie, after being abandoned by Carlito, who Earl asked to take care of, attacks and kidnaps Artie Jr. outside of his house, with the help of two other thugs. After Reggie gets the ransom, he leaves Artie Jr. in the trunk of a car to die, but he is released by police and returns to his family.
The Bottolotta Family blames Carlito, Rocco, and Earl, who left with his girlfriend to get married, for assisting Reggie in the kidnapping. Artie Sr. puts out a contract on Carlito, Rocco and Earl until Reggie and his men are dead. The hitman contracted to kill them, Nacho Reyes (Luis Guzmán), and Hollywood Nicky's driver help them find the two hoodlums who were with Reggie. Nacho tortures the two men to death and they give their dismembered body parts to Artie Sr. Carlito and Nacho find Reggie in an apartment, along with Earl who flew back to New York due to the situation. The four men draw guns, Nacho holding two revolvers and Carlito holding a revolver and Reggie threatens Carlito, preparing to fire on him. Earl chooses Carlito over Reggie, and murders his brother, sobbing over his body afterwards. Nacho leaves and Carlito, Earl and Rocco work for the Bottolotta Family, dealing heroin. The Bottolottas have them deal heroin for them, and then dismiss the three.
Carlito and Earl pay off the N.Y.P.D., the team led by the most corrupt, feared cops in Harlem to raid and kill the entire Bottolotta Family. Carlito, Rocco and Earl fly to the islands with Earl for his wedding. Earl retires, and Carlito reunites with Leticia, retiring temporarily. | violence, murder | train | wikipedia | I am a huge fan of the original Carlito's Way and when I heard about this, I thought it would be just like almost all the other sequels that come out in Hollywood.
Now, if any of you reading this are a Carlito's Way fan, you know a lot of the story in the first one has to do with him going to jail.*VERY MINOR SPOILER* I wont ruin anything, because this may actually make you not want to waste 2 hours watching this trash.
The actor who played Carlito did not do too bad a job, but he could not have saved this film if he tried.
Big mistake on their part, why cast the same actor for a different character, it made the movie worse than it already was.Bottom line, I am a Carlito's Way fan, this new straight to DVD release is a disgrace.
In the 60's, the Puerto Rican Carlito Brigante (Jay Hernandez), the Afro-American Earl (Mario Van Peebles) and the Italian Rocco (Michael Kelly) become best friends while in prison.
When Earl decides to move to Barbados with his girlfriend and leave the heroin business, his stupid younger brother causes a situation with the Italian mobsters, and Carlito and Rocco have to resolve the mess to save their lives."Carlito's Way: Rise to Power" is not as bad as written in many reviews in IMDb. Actually it is a good story, with the beginning of the criminal life of Carlito, showing his ability to negotiate.
I do not dare to compare this movie with the excellent Brian De Palma's Carlito's Way, but I personally liked the explanations of the criminal life of Carlito and his friends.
Those who think "Scarface" was some kind of hero to be looked up to or saw "Goodfellas", "Menace II Society" or "Dead Presidents" and thought MMM "That's the life for me!" will like this movie.
Maybe the worst part of this film is the casting for the lead role Carlito Brigante, whichever way you look at it everybody expects a Pacino, but casting Jay Hernandez is a let down, even though he is a fine actor, he really had a lot to do to try and follow in Pacino's shoes, and i am afraid to say he failed dismally.
I would suggest you take a look at this movie, forget about the original Carlito's Way, and just enjoy it for what it is..
After I watched this S@*T FEST movie, I sat down and watched the original Carlitos way to get th bad taste out of my mouth.
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the appalling average rating here on IMDb for this movie, someone somewhere must have given this movie a real low rating based on the trailer or on someone else's word rather than watching the whole thing themselves.Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have seen this film what it is, an intelligent well acted prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge budget BUT it is still very well done and had me hooked for the full duration.
For those that have seen Carlito's Way but are unsure about watching the prequel all I can say is that you will be losing out if you give this movie a miss based on a lack-lustre trailer.
Carlito's Way: Rise to Power is a prequel to the film Carlito's Way. Without giving too much away though, the film's end doesn't fit to the beginning of the original, and thus is a bit of a disappointment.
So, taking Carlito's Way: Rise to Power as a film in it's own right, it does quite well.
American director Brian De Palma's best known work is probably the 1983 crime epic Scarface starring Al Pacino, but its thematic companion piece Carlito's Way (1993) has plenty of fans too.
Of course, eventually a prequel was produced for the latter, chronicling the eponymous Carlito's initial rise to the status he wishes to relinquish in the original film.At the beginning in the 1960s, Puerto Rican hoodlum Carlito Brigante (Jay Hernandez) is doing time for petty crimes when he meets two incarcerated criminal bosses in the prison.
Making the 1960s setting more evident could have added a nice touch to the whole though.Since we already know the conclusion of Carlito Brigante's story from the first movie, the prequel does not feel the need to examine his actions from a moral point of view very much.
Mario Van Peebles delivers one of the best performances in the movie, as does the always good Luis Guzmán as a hit-man Nacho Reyes, a role different from what he played in the first film.
Sean 'Diddy' Combs' role as Hollywood Nicky remains pretty forgettable though, partly due to the way the character has been written, partly to Combs' emotionless 'cool' appearance.For a straight-to-DVD movie Carlito's Way: Rise to Power succeeds far better than could be expected.
Having read some of the negative reviews, I approached this with low expectations, but straight away was surprised by the good cast and classy production values, which were much higher than the usual movies released straight to DVD.
Although not specifically a prequel, as it seems to be set in the same decade as the Pacino film, it stars the likable Hernandez playing the same charismatic character.
too bad for him I don't think he will be playing in film anymore and by the way after I watched this sh#$%ty movie, I sat down and watched the original Carlitos way to get the bad taste out of my mouth..
An insult to the original Carlito's Way. Soon after watching this film you will realize why it didn't even make it to the theaters!
Instead this is a common theme in Hollywood, rip off previously good movies with disastrous prequels, sequels, etc.This film's plot was bouncing all over the place like a ping pong ball, and the character development was non-existent.
I seriously felt like I was watching a comedy at some points in the movie because the acting was so bad.
P Diddy needs to stop tainting movies with his horrible acting, he actually made me laugh every time.The only good thing that comes out of this movie is Jaclyn DeSantis, who looks excellent in this movie and actually brought some enjoyment from watching this film.If you are a big Carlito's Way fan, I recommend you not watch this.
What makes Carlitos Way a truly amazing movie was the sheer fact of storytelling and characters that explain how he got to where he was.Shame on whoever greenlit this project.Prequel?
I actually like this movie, But the guy who played Carlito wasn't bad, but i think he didn't really hit the character so well.
If you watch this try not to think too much of the original movie, just like many other comments suggested...In my honest opinion my favorite character in this movie was Reggie, one really messed up dude, with a rotten and spoiled attitude.
I haven't read the book nor watched the original Carlito's Way...
The reason people would watch this DVD would be either they saw the original, saw Sean Combs' name on the box, or they love the movies in this genre.
Besides, consider how many "new" people might watch this and not feel alienated because they didn't see the original Carlito's Way. P.S. Thank you for not doing any of that "flashback" stuff that they did on the second Godfather.
Did any of you actually read the books that the Carlito's Way movies was based on.
One thing the others said I can confirm, the actor who is playing Carlito wasn't that good, but probably if you don't (have to) compare him to Pacino the nice story and the intelligent plot are are making up for that and the movie is worth watching it.Obviously did the Pacino Carlitos way start at another point as this one is ending, so a lot of people were confused.
So I think if they just would have called the movie another way and the main character wouldn't have the name Carlito but Karl Ernst von Halmacken-Reuter, or whatever, even those guys would have liked this movie, too.So, if you have a choice, first watch this one and enjoy it, and after that watch Pacino, and enjoy both..
Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
Jay H did a terrific job as Carlito.Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
Jay H did a terrific job as Carlito.Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
Jay H did a terrific job as Carlito.Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
Jay H did a terrific job as Carlito.Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
Jay H did a terrific job as Carlito.Seeing it before Carlito's Way was why I thought it was a good movie.
A prequel to the much-followed classic "Carlito's Way" endeavours to present a back-story to Carlito Brigante (played here underwhelmingly by Jay Hernandez).
Given the movie is supposedly a prequel, therefore essentially a homage to the original, the story tries too hard to detach itself from future occurrence and feels more like a stand-alone movie.
Meanwhile - despite his best intentions - Jay Hernandez in no way reminds you of Al Pacino's character, therefore increasing the disconnect.Acting is general well-rounded, if unremarkable, while the story and execution gives off a tiresome feel, as utterly repetitive and forgettable.
It is like watching 'L.A. Takedown' as opposed to 'Heat'.Luis Guzman is good (as always() in it, but shockingly playing a different character than he was playing in Brian DePalma's Carlito's Way. That I found very odd.Obviously a smaller budget than it's predecessor, don't be expecting massive wide location shots, and helicopter viewpoints of 70's Harlem, coz homie, you be getting 2 heads MAX in a shot at any given time.
but there needs to be a exciting action scene like the chase in the train station in carlito's way.........Anyway bottom line is that the film is worth watching when there;s nothing good on.........
(This is not an objective review but a personal rant about what might have been) The plot of this movie follows the early days of Carlito, as he rises to power and prestige in the drug world.
He's a perfect case of a bad director turning fillet Mignon in to sloppy joes.If you liked the first movie you may want to try this, but I'd either do something else while watching, or turn off the TV and just listen to the sound through the sound system since it plays better as a radio play.5 out of 10 for a good script and cast..
In other words; I absolutely love the original "Carlito's Way" and I'm sad to say that this prequel is nowhere in the same league as the first and original movie!
For the rest of the movie he actually comes across as a very nice guy, which probably is being another good indication how miscast Jay Hernandez is in his role.
Throughout his career he has always played friendly guys, so why even consider him casting in a tough gangster role, that first got immortalized by Al Pacino, in 1993.The movie also absolutely tells you nothing about the background or youth of Carlito.
It doesn't tells you anything new, at least nothing interesting and you are obviously way better off watching the original "Carlito's Way" instead and forget about this movie.But it's not just simply the casting or characters themselves that make this movie a poor and disappointing one.
This movie really doesn't get pleasantly told, which makes you feel glad when the movie is finally over.Bad as a genre flick and even worse as a prequel to "Carlito's Way"!4/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
So young television actor Jay Hernandez was given a shot at a prequel film, Carlito's Way: The Rise To Power.It was hoped that this film would make Jay Hernandez a major star.
He is a most charismatic young man and hopefully will get a second big break.What Pacino did in the first Carlito's Way was create a portrait of an aging Latino gangster who would just like to live without any more hassles.
Gant is inflamed by all the revolutionary rhetoric of the Sixties and Seventies, but in actuality just proves to be a punk.In the original Carlito's Way, Sean Penn had a major role as a criminal defense lawyer who decides to go in business for himself as a gangster.
To be quite honest, this movie would have been much better without the tag of Carlito's Way but it's a money making scheme and there's nothing wrong with that.The movie is just lighthearted mob-like fun and I thought it was nice to see Mario van Peebles in a different role for a change (not as a b-movie hero that kicks butt).
But if you're looking for a serious movie about the mob or a serious prequel to Carlito's Way, then don't pick this title up.
As a gangster film in itself, if we were to ignore the fact that it is a prequel to 'Carlito's way' (1992, Depalma version) is again extremely unsatisfactory.
Obviously the director decided to do something totally different compared to the first 'Carlito's way' but what a miserable failure it is.Finally, would i recommend this movie to anyone?
If you count watching boring movies a pleasure then you may do so however for those who have seen all the excellent gangster movies such as scar face, casino, goodfellas and Carlito's way, Rise to Power falls short of this genre..
They have just totally spat in the face of every Carlito's Way fan out there; adding insult to injury by casting Luis Guzman, who plays a crucial character in the original movie, in a different role.What's most disappointing is that now that this film has been made no other film will be made addressing the original, untouched material of the book Carlito's Way - something I really would have liked to have seen.
Now we will never get to see Carlito's real initial rise and fall.The three stars is because, looking at it purely as a stand-alone flick, it is not so appalling - there are some decent performances (Jay Hernandez is no Carlito but he could be good in other roles) and the story is not too bad.
It's a prequel because it comes before Carlito's Way, the sequel.It obviously didn't tell of his relationship with Gail, or what put him in jail.
Doesn't make Episode 3 a horrible prequel does it?If you want, make up your own "Carlito's Way: Downfall," I don't care, but don't say it was a horrible movie.
The only way you could even have a clue about what kind of person Carlito was, is to watch the original.
The movie and acting are not bad and Jay Hernandez does a good job playing Calito Brigante but the movie forgets it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit movie.
The makers of this prequel clearly did not watch the original Carlito's Way or at least did not care about continuity.
Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the original, is in the movie but he plays a completely different character.
Jay Hernandez captures the look and feel of Pacino's Carlito well, and Mario Van Peebles takes his "Baaaaadaaaaaaassss" role a step further and turns on the soul once again for this film.
HE PLAYS A DIFFERENT CHARACTER THAN HE DID IN THE ORIGINAL CARLITO'S WAY.
The whole point of the original film was that Carlito had loyalty to his friends and the people he was doing business with.
This movie has no relation to the story of Carlito Brigante in Carlito's Way. I mean, where's Pachanga?
The sex scene was weak but we got to see her..which was okay...But overall I expected it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the horrendous movie that is...Carlito's Way: Rise to Power...
While this was not quite as good as the first one, I really think that Jay Hernandez did a great job of portraying Carlito in the early years.
I think he was in the first book.I also like how Mr. Guzman plays a totally different character in this film.
the plot was OK , but they should have changed round some actors and some of the story line and the name of the film and it would have been a good film .i really expected it to end like the other one started.
None of the primary characters in the original film were in this movie.
We're supposed to believe that Carlito met all these people in the span of a few years.Rise to Power ends with Carlito walking down the beach talking about retiring in paradise which is what he wanted to do in the original film.
It's also hard to understand how Carlito could have the relationship with the Italians he has in the original film watching the events of Rise to Power.
The film had some good moments but I think they would have been better off leaving this movie to stand by itself instead of trying to make it a prequel to Carlito's Way.If you feel determined to see this movie, the only advice I can give is to not think of the movie as a linear pre-quel.
I absolutely loved the Original Carlito's Way; the movie was exceptional.
Finally, You see nothing of the guy in the wheelchair in the original, or the guy Carlito tells he is "retired".After watching this movie you will see that it seems that there should be another film between the two.
I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back.
Rise to Power is just a movie that has Carlito's name. |
tt1969062 | Infinitely Polar Bear | In the late 1970s, Cameron (Cam) Stuart (Mark Ruffalo) is a Boston man suffering from bipolar disorder. He has had a psychotic break, which has caused him to be fired from his job and hospitalized. To be able to afford to take care of their two young children, Cam's wife, Maggie (Zoe Saldana) moves herself and the children to a small rent-controlled apartment, where she struggles to find enough work to support the three of them.
As Cam is rehabilitated, he moves from a halfway house out on his own. Maggie begins to apply to business schools so the family will eventually become more financially secure, for the sake of the children who are attending a third-rate school in a bad part of town. Maggie manages to obtain a scholarship to attend Columbia University, and she asks Cam to take care of their daughters while she moves to New York for 18 months in order to get her M.B.A.. Cam reluctantly agrees.
The girls are embarrassed to live with Cam, who sometimes abandons them in the middle of the night, is aggressively friendly with their neighbors, and starts countless messy projects, making their apartment nearly unlivable. However, his daughters love Cam deeply and try to help him raise them. Cam takes them to visit his grandmother, a wealthy Boston Brahmin who controls the family trust, and who pays the cost of their rent-controlled apartment. After his grandmother tries to give Cam her Bentley, he asks her to instead pay for the girls to be privately educated, but the grandmother refuses.
Maggie begins to near graduation, which Cam hopes will enable them to live like a family once more. However, Cam reveals to Maggie that he has been off his lithium since she left, and Maggie is unable to find a suitable job in Boston. Maggie decides to take a job she has been offered at E. F. Hutton & Co. in New York City, leaving Cam behind in Boston, and taking the girls with her.
Seeing how unhappy the girls will be, and realizing that her new demanding job will force her to work upwards of twelve hours a day, Maggie decides that although she will accept the job, she will leave the children in Boston with Cam, sending money back so that the girls will be able to attend a good private school. A year later the girls are enrolled in private school and Cam continues to take care of them and watch them proudly. | storytelling, home movie | train | wikipedia | The scenes of his extended family are worth the price of admission alone.Zoe Saldana makes the move possible as she loves everything about Mark Ruffalo that anyone does.
Maya Forbes writes and directs a personal story of bittersweet childhood living in livid conditions with her sister, mother and eccentric bipolar father.
He masters the manic episodes, the frailty, the fears, the hopes, the joys and the underlying deep love for his wife and kids.The kids, one played by Maya Forbes's own daughter, are really adorable and act at a very high calibre.
The title comes from the youngest daughter misnaming her father's condition as "polar bear" - thematically relevant as the overall film is about the two girls learning to accept their father's behaviour beyond their own preconceptions, appreciating what he does do well.
There are a couple of moments in which the girls genuinely seem afraid of what their father might do, but the film never tugs at the full experience of living with someone with mental issues; as others have said, Mark Ruffalo comes off as more an everyday eccentric than a manic depressive.
That said, Ruffalo's performance is the film's best asset, frequently communicating a genuine interest to bond with his daughters and care for them in small, subtle ways.
"Infinitely Polar Bear" (2014 release; 90 min.) brings the story of Cam Stewart (played by Mark Ruffalo) and his family.
into the movie but to tell you more would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.Couple of comments: first, this movie is a labor of love from writer-director Maya Forbes (best known for her work on The Larry Sanders Show).
Third, the four leading acting performances (Ruffalo, Wolodarsky, Zoey Baldana as Maggie, and Ashley Aufderheide as Faith) are all enjoyable, and the interaction between them feels authentic.
'Infinitely Polar Bear' is a very charming Comedic Drama that focuses on Cameron, a manic-depressive father who (after his wife leaves to study in New York) is required to support his two daughters on his own.
Now this is a very small film that many people would not have heard of but with two big leads in Mark Ruffalo and Zoe Saldana, you know that if anything you are going to get really good performances.
This was overall a very dramatic, heartwarming, and at times emotional personal story that does delve into slightly darker tones here and there, as you would expect when it comes to the condition being explored in the film.
Ruffalo did such an incredible job at playing a difficult character with such a complex situation that if there weren't so many other great performances this year he might have snuck in a Best Actor Nom. He was incredibly convincing and portrayed all of the very contrasting elements of this very complex extremely well.
'INFINITELY POLAR BEAR': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)A comedy-drama flick, about a bipolar dad, struggling to raise his two young daughters; while his wife tries to support their family, in business school.
The film was written and directed by Maya Forbes; and it's based on her own life experiences (as a young girl, with a bipolar father).
The movie stars Mark Ruffalo, Zoe Saldana, Imogene Wolodarsky and Ashley Aufderheide.
Cameron agrees, and then struggles to maintain his sanity; while also trying to be a good father.The film is a great examination of bipolar disease; and how mental illness effects family.
In the late 70's, in Boston, the bipolar Cameron "Cam" Stuart (Mark Ruffalo) lives with his mulatto wife Maggie (Zoe Saldana) and their daughters Amelia (Imogene Wolodarsky) and Faith (Ashley Aufderheide) in an isolated house in the countryside.
Everybody does a decent job in 'Infinitely Polar Bear' except for the screenwriter, who never develops a genuine narrative arc for her film after its brief introduction which depicts the mental breakdown of an ex-Harvard student called Cameron.
This episode is followed by a couple of minutes glossing over the period he spends in institutional care, while his wife Maggie struggles to raise their two young daughters as a single mother.The story begins for real after Cameron is released and starts living in a halfway house in the Boston suburbs.
when is this guy going to get a very well-deserving Oscar?Mark Ruffalo plays a manic depressive husband asked to care for two daughters so that his wife (Zoe Saldana) can get her master's degree in business to support a better life for them.The film has heart, passion, spirit, warmth, and realism ....
This film tells the story of a man with bipolar disorder, who has to take care of two children while having unstable mental state.I find "Infinitely Polar Bear" a realistic and in depth look into the life of a bipolar man.
But there really wasn't much to like about this film.As a previous reviewer said, the way that manic depression is depicted in this movie is too glib.
For the numerous years he has been working in Hollywood, enabling him to live in a nice neighborhood and drive great cars, he is unrecognized by the average person until his stand-out roles are mentioned.In the film Infinitely Polar Bear, Ruffalo has shown his audience he is capable of strong leading roles that can warrant Best Actor nominations.
If you have not, this film portrays only a "glimpse" of what takes place in the life of someone with mental illness, well written by Maya Forbes and portrayed by Ruffalo.Ruffalo deserved an Oscar for this performance.
You hated him at times, felt sorry sometimes but loved him for the sweetness and struggles he had inside.I first really noticed him in Spotlite, but will not forget him watching his under-appreciated performance in Infinitely Polar Bear.
Mark Ruffalo did a great job acting as manic depression suffering father.
Novice Writer-Director Maya Forbes has made a touching film based on her family growing up; which features her bipolar-disorder diagnosed father.
Forbes' "Infinitely Polar Bear" stars Mark Ruffalo as Cam Stuart, a bipolar man from Boston who has two young daughters and is currently semi-separated from his wife Maggie played by Zoe Saldana.
After I saw it, I really admired all the family members' resilience, courage, patience and humor in sticking it out in real life and retelling the story with great encouragement.Director Maya Forbes's daughter Imogene Wolodarsky plays the role of Amelia Stuart, the director herself when she was a child of round 10, growing up with a sister two years of her junior when their parents were already separated.
But he should be very pleased now his loving daughter tell their family story and realistically portrays how we can live and grow with mental illness.
Aliens) creates an unstable movie about manic-depressive and bipolar disorder of a man taking care of two obnoxious kids, 11-year-old Amelia and nine-year-old Faith.
But they are still, a lot of times, nagging him, the movie also falls back into darkness and it was kind of all over the place.The girls nag their mother about getting a job, ask a lot of questions, talk like grown people, and are annoying in their own right, which does not make a likable relationship.I appreciate that Maya Forbes tried to create a good movie about her childhood in 1978 but the directing was weak.
Filmmakers can choose to take the issue very seriously, like co-writer-directors Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland did with Alzheimer's disease in 2014's "Still Alice" (with her performance in the title role winning Julianna Moore the Best Actress Oscar) or just play mental deficiencies for laughs, as the Farrelly brothers and their teams did with the "Dumb and Dumber" movies.
Rarely will a filmmaker attempt to have it both ways, as writer-director Maya Forbes does with her semi-autobiographical comedy-drama "Infinitely Polar Bear" (R, 1:30) – and it's rarer still to meet the challenge with such skill.Mark Ruffalo is Cameron and Zoe Saldana is Maggie, a married Rhode Island couple with two spunky daughters named Faith (Ashley Aufderheide) and Amelia (Imogene Wolodarsky – Forbes' real-life daughter).
(His daughter's mispronunciation of his condition is the basis for the movie's title.) Cameron is a loving husband and father, and most of the time, with the help of his devoted wife, his condition is manageable.
To be honest, there's plenty of anxiety to go around in this situation, but this plan seems to be the best option for the family long-term and Amelia and Faith are old enough to more-or-less take care of themselves, so they all give this plan the old college try."Infinitely Polar Bear" is a small, but entertaining movie with a big message.
Mark Ruffalo as Cameron, born into a wealthy family, living in squalor with his very attractive wife Zoe Saldana as Maggie in Boston is perfect.
The parental roles are reversed a bit when the daughters (played by talented young girls you will simply love) essentially have to babysit their own father a bit, after their mother (convincingly played by the lovely Zoe Saldana) trusted him to take care of them while she has no choice but leave home for a while to try to get a better job that would ensure the little girls a better future (than having to rely on a father who, due to his condition, cannot keep a job for too long).
This movie accurately portrays, with sensitivity, a fictional story about a man suffering from ones of the many forms of bipolar disorder.Mark Ruffalo was amazing for the part.
As a father who has some (mild) emotional illness, watching Infinitely Polar Bear was a moving, uncomfortable, hilarious and lovely experience for me.
Mark Ruffalo stars in "Infinitely Polar Bear" along with Zoe Saldana, Imogene Wolodarsky, and Ashley Aufderheide, from 2014, directed by first-time director Maya Forbes.
Forbes is a very talented woman I hope to be seeing more from as a director - she's already an established writer and producer.The story takes place in Boston in the late 1970s, where Cam Stuart (Ruffalo) lives with his wife Maggie (Saldana) and their children, Amelia and Faith.Cam is bipolar and job problems lead him to a nervous breakdown.
I didn't know what to expect, but I've loved Mark Ruffalo in almost every role, and have recently realized that Zoe Saldana is far more than the "It" girl I thought she was.
During another episode in 1978, his wife Maggie (Zoe Saldana) tries to leave with their daughters Amelia (Imogene Wolodarsky) and Faith (Ashley Aufderheide).
It's a struggle but the kids find minor joy within their father's mental issues.Mark Ruffalo is good and the girls are natural.
Mark Ruffalo, (Cam Stuart) plays a manic depressive father who loves his family very much but his wife Maggie Stuart (Zoe Saldana) finds it hard to deal with his various moods, which cause the family distress.
The chemistry between Saldana and Ruffalo is very realistic and the little girls, Amelia (Imogene Wolodarsky) and Faith (Ashley Aufderheide), are great.
Mark Ruffalo, 48, was brilliant as the doting father, alongside Zoe Saldana, 37, who has starred in huge movies like Avatar, Guardians of the Galaxy, Star Trek and Pirates of the Caribbean.
For her first project, she done a great job by getting some top actors in this well written drama and it'll be good to see what type of movie she will direct next.Budget: $6.7million Worldwide Gross: $1.8millionI recommend this movie to people who are into their drama/romance/comedies starring Mark Ruffalo, Zoe Saldana, Imogene Wolodarsky and Ashley Aufderheide.
We follow Mark Ruffalo (or Bi-polar guy #1 as I like to call him) as he lives his life with his wife and two kids.
There was a short piece in The New Yorker last year that made this one seem like a sureshot; it mentioned, among other things, that when Wes Anderson heard the story of writer/director Maya Forbes's childhood, he told her to forget about everything else and make this movie.
I can see why Forbes cast Mark Ruffalo as her father, Cam, a Boston trust funder who'd been diagnosed as bipolar years before (that's where "polar bear" comes in).
(Forbes got one of her cousins to play a partner in the family brokerage firm who talks with the authentic Back Bay honk; the city of Boston itself is played by Providence, RI, a little less convincingly.) Forbes's daughter Imogene, OTOH, gives a great performance as her mother's 12-year-old self, but Forbes's mother, played by Zoe Saldana, comes across as oddly generic.
Ruffalo is joined by strong performances of Zoe Saldana, Ashley Aufderheide and Imogene Wolodarsky as wife and daughters.
I expect her mother would still have a tough time getting the kind of job she wants: that kind of sexism is still very much with us, equal rights acts notwithstanding.The second reason to see the movie is Mark Ruffalo, who is amazing as the afflicted father, Cameron.
"Infinitely Polar Bear" is one different heart touching film that touches your emotions and it proves that life is a struggle, but made possible thru love and family no matter what kind of cards you've been dealt.
Mark Ruffalo is in top form as Cam a Lacoste polo wearing shirt a dad who's bi polar and he's recovering from a nervous manic breakdown and his wife the smart and sexy Maggie(Zoe Saldana)enters an out of state college to get her masters degree in hopes of building a better life for all involved.
Mark Ruffalo is supposed to play a manic-depressive father but to me he is just an eccentric person in this role.
Cam (Mark Ruffalo) loves his two daughters and his estranged wife, Maggie (Zoe Saldana), in 1978.
Writer/director Maya Forbes obviously feels quite passionately about the subject of manic depression, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the depiction of it in "Infinitely Polar Bear" is based on some personal experience.
Mark Ruffalo plays the parent struggling with mental illness, caring for his two daughters while his wife and their mother relocates temporarily from Boston to New York to go to school.
Mark Ruffalo and Zoe Saldana as her on screen father and mother respectively, while her character as a 12 year old girl was played by her own daughter.
I think it was a great team, the mother is the director, the daughter performing under her, the father producing it and it is their story.I was worried that this film's going to emotionally hurt me as I'm an easy target to strike with a theme like this as what the synopsis says and the trailer revealed.
But I was prepared for that, I wanted to have a tearjerker flick and in the end, I had a great time with it as the fulfillment was way beyond than what I was expected.It was the story of a small family, a father and a mother and their two little girls that set in the 1978 Bostan city.
Overall, it will surely transform your mood by the end of the movie, I mean in a good way.Inspiring, yes the film inspires to have our own little family with kids.
This has to be one of the best Mark Ruffalo's performances and the director Maya Forbes has done a great job.
With Ruffalo on winning form, his supported well by child actors Imogene Wolodarsky and Ashley Aufderheide who are more than up to the task of matching Ruffalo's antics while poor old Zoe Saldana doesn't get a whole lot to do as the trying hard mother of the trio Maggie.While there's absolutely nothing earth shattering about Infinitely Polar Bear, it's by the very definition of the word a feel good tale that would be impossible to watch without a smile on your face.
It's based in the late seventies when people were a lot more liberal.The father (Mark Ruffalo) suffers from depression but the wife (Zoe Saldana) tries to put up with him because his a good person.
"My father was diagnosed manic-depressive in 1967."Maya Forbes's debut film received a lot of praise when it was released at TIFF last year, especially for Mark Ruffalo's lead portrayal of a father undergoing a bipolar disorder.
INFINITELY POLAR BEAR 7/7/15Written and directed by Maya Forbes, INFINITELY POLAR BEAR is based on autobiographical reminiscences of family life in late 1970's Boston, where she and her sister were being raised by a manic-depressive father, while their mother studied for an MBA degree in NYC at Columbia University with the intent of returning in 18 months, equipped with credentials and the hope of myriad job opportunities in order to support the household.
Since this film is based on a "true" story, I accepted the notion that his wife Maggie, played by Zoe Saldana - a beautiful presence - after consulting Cameron's psychiatrist - allows her daughters to be in the care of someone who is so on the edge of falling off the thin, taut line of sanity.The children, Amelia ( a feisty performance by Director Forbes' daughter Imogene Wolodarsky) and Faith ( Ashley Aufderheide - I loved every scene she was in) become their father's keeper/caretaker and lifeline to the world; children who have the ability and sensitivity to decipher social cues, exhibiting a maturity and awareness of reality that their Dad rebuffs and repudiates.
(Flash Review)Ruffalo plays a bi-polar man who has two young kids with a mother and they battle trying to live as a single family unit.
She leaves them in Boston as she goes to New York on an 18-month program to get her MBA.Most of the movie is about the trials Cam and the girls have, living together in a small, often messy place, with Cam doing the best he could to be a good father and mother.
It's more about a good man, who is trying to cope, live and take responsibility for his family with his manic depression the best way he knows how. |
tt0050105 | An Affair to Remember | Nickie Ferrante (Cary Grant), a well-known playboy and dilettante in the arts, meets Terry McKay (Deborah Kerr) aboard the Transatlantic ocean liner SS Constitution en route from Europe to New York. Each is involved with someone else. After a series of chance meetings aboard the ship, they establish a friendship. When Terry joins Nickie on a brief visit to his grandmother when the ship anchors near her home at Villefranche-sur-Mer on the Mediterranean coast, she sees Nickie with new eyes and their feelings blossom into love. During their visit, it is revealed that Nickie has had a talent for painting, but has dropped said trait due to his critical attitude towards his own art. As the ship returns to New York City, they agree to reunite at the top of the Empire State Building in six months' time, if they have succeeded in ending their relationships and starting new careers.
On the day of their rendezvous, Terry, in her haste to reach the Empire State Building, is struck down by a car while crossing a street. Gravely injured, she is rushed to the hospital. Meanwhile, Nickie, waiting for her at the observation deck at the top of the building, is unaware of the accident and, after many hours, finally concedes at midnight that she will not arrive, believing that she has rejected him.
After the accident Terry, now unable to walk, refuses to contact Nickie, wanting to conceal her disability. Instead, she finds work as a music teacher. Nickie has pursued his talent as a painter and has his work displayed by an old friend, an art shop owner. Six months after the accident, she sees Nickie with his former fiancée at the ballet, which she herself is attending with her former boyfriend. Nickie does not notice her condition because she is seated and only says hello as he passes her.
Nickie finally learns Terry's address and, on Christmas Eve, makes a surprise visit to her. Although he steers the conversation to make her explain her actions, Terry merely dodges the subject, never leaving the couch on which she sits. He gives her a shawl that his grandmother left for Terry after she died. As he is leaving, Nickie mentions a painting that he had been working on when they originally met, and that it was just given away at the art shop to a woman who liked it but had no money. He is about to say that the woman was in a wheelchair when he pauses, suddenly suspecting why Terry has been sitting unmoving on the couch. He walks into her bedroom and sees his painting hanging on the wall, and a wheelchair concealed there. He now knows why she did not keep their appointment. The film ends with the two in a tight embrace, each realizing that the other's love endures. In closing, Terry says, "If you can paint, I can walk; anything can happen, don't you think?" | cult, romantic | train | wikipedia | Cary Grant is so debonair and suave and Deborah Kerr is so ravishing and stunningly beautiful, that it always demands repeated viewing from me (at least three times a year).
-- Grant's suavity, and the south of France settings are not just there to pose for the camera.All of the beauty of this film is there to do very hard work -- to tell a less than beautiful story.And, no, this is not a movie where nothing happens.
Something is happening in every scene -- you just have to be paying attention, and you just have to be mature enough, or have your antenna up high enough, to catch the subtle messages the film is sending, and to feel in your own solar plexus, the resonances of loves, dreams, and selves risked and gained, or lost.Nicki and Terry are both gambling much here.
It demands that they face their own fears, and become their best selves.I'm one of those cynical people who doesn't believe in love, never mind soul mates, but this movie carries it all off so well, it makes me believe.Grant and Kerr begin with the lightest, and subtlest, of exchanges.
Catholicism is associated with the romance languages -- French, Italian -- and it also is friendly to this kind of romance -- a romance where fallen beauties are blindsided by the kind of tortuous, redemptive, overwhelming, fated love that demands, and gets, everything, after which, you are never the same.If you haven't seen the movie, or "Sleepless in Seattle," I won't reveal the ending to you.
This movie is for all the romantics out there who are looking for a film to fall in love with!.
It is still relevant and it is still wonderful to watch the chemistry between the charismatic Cary Grant and the beautiful Deborah Kerr.
Grant's charming philanderer Nicky Ferrante, a renowned bachelor, and Kerr's American nightclub singer Terry McKay meet aboard a transatlantic luxury liner steaming back to New York via Naples and surrenderin the midst of good humorto their undeniable chemistry
Unfortunately, both are hampered with others lovers
At the end of the voyage, they make a promise
In six months, if both are free they will reunite at the top of the Empire State Building, "the nearest thing they have to heaven in New York." In the day of the meeting, the reformed Grant put his paintbrushes away and luckily paces the skyscraper's roof, but Kerr, looking up to heaven to see him, is involved in a serious accident
What fallows is almost unbelievable as Grant yields to pompous cynicism, unaware Kerr is too proud to let him know the truth
With four Oscar nominations, and with attractive settings as the French Riviera, and two appealing beautiful people sharing pink champagne, Leo McCarey's pretty good romantic film gives off flashes of gaiety and sways with longing hearts to be filled with love and life.
If you think you cannot stand another headline about people trying to blow up airplanes with shoe bombs, when you are on the verge of depression because the world is so hard and immoral and unkind, when you want to return to the Good Old Days of the 1950's, then plop this video into your player and watch two film STARS give lovely sweet performances in a GROWN UP, sensitive film called "An Affair To Remember".
Ok, ok, so the Catholic touches go a bit overboard (Kerr in the chapel praying to the Virgin like a good Catholic, while she is a kept woman and playing around on her fiance with Grant, the little kids singing about hell and the devil, etc.) but other than that this film is romantic and enjoyable, nostalgic and fun.
Cary Grant is so debonair and suave and Deborah Kerr is so ravishing and stunningly beautiful, that it always demands repeated viewings from me (at least twice a year).Seeing this film always makes me wonder if something like the kind of relationship describes within this film would actually BE possible in real life.
It allows our fantasies to take wing so that we may think we are actually the one meeting our beloved atop the Empire State Building in a thunderstorm.Watch this film with a box of industrial-strength kleenex nearby.My rating: 4 stars.
Deborah Kerr and Cary Grant meet on a cruise ship, and even though Cary's a notorious playboy and Deborah's practically engaged to another man, they fall in love.
They try to hide their romance from prying eyes by eating at separate tables and walking in opposite directions when they're seen together, even when they have to stop talking mid-sentence!While the ship scenes are very cute, the rest of the movie is a drama, so be prepared when you rent it for a light-hearted afternoon.
This iconic, tearjerker ending has been included in many a romance montage.Parts of the movie feel a little boring, namely when Cary takes Deborah to meet his grandmother, Cathleen Nesbitt.
When one thinks about the very popular romance "An Affair to Remember", the story needs to be viewed as a feature film idea, and as a completed entity in its own right.
Lewis as himself and skilled character veteran Fortunio Bonanova and the choir children and shipboard guests is always above-average; also, Deborah Kerr (singing dubbed by Marn Nixon) is at her best in her multi-layered role, which is very good indeed; frankly, her charisma and skill had to help Grant's underwritten part if the film were to succeed.
The attractive (for once) over thirty-five importance of both characters, and the difficulties they face in earning the right to become such a romantic union--in the objectivist sense of romance just defined--are aided in the plot and retarded in personal terms by the problems they face: the difficulty of Grant's becoming a working artist in whatever marketplace exists, Kerr's conflicting schedule, the death of his grandmother, a lengthy enforced absence and her later accident all work against them.
They make a date to meet at the Empire State Building in 6 months but tragedy strikes...Pretty lousy--I love Grant and Kerr but they're at their worst here.
As for males, what happened to Cary Grant's "charisma?" He certainly lost it in this film, looking almost mechanical at times although he was far more interesting than Kerr's character, who made one stupid decision after another to the point where it got really annoying.
That was hilarious in and of itself, but the same scene with Deborah Kerr flouncing and singing her way to the Empire State Building and thus being mowed down by a taxi, was a close second.The movie was not logical, if she loves a man why did she not let him know what happened?
I don't mind chick flicks,being a chick myself or at least an old hen; I don't mind sentimental movies, & I certainly don't mind Cary Grant, but I do mind scenes, characters and dialogue crafted to manipulate the audience.
Reworking of Leo McCarey's "Love Affair" from 1939, again directed by McCarey who also co-adapted the script with Delmer Daves to better suit the talents of Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr.
An Affair to Remember starts off fine, with Cary Grant and Kerr, both engaged to be married, meeting on a voyage across the Atlantic.
While in a cruise from Europe to New York, the disputed playboy Nicky Ferrante (Cary Grant) meets the gorgeous former night-club singer Terry McKay (Deborah Kerr) and they have a romance.
They schedule a meeting on the 102nd floor of the Empire State Building six months later to decide whether they should marry each other, but Terry has an accident and she is not able to reunite with him."An Affair to Remember" is one of my favorite romances ever, certainly one of the most beautiful love stories of the cinema industry.
Beginning with the amazing chemistry between Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr, the nostalgic and unforgettable story has romance, drama, funny situations, being witty and very delightful.
Cary Grant was ok, but the leading lady was a bad combination of annoying personality and below average appearance.I've read all the comments about this movie making people cry and "the scene" that gets you every time.
All of this fuss over a middling soap opera with two unbelievable characters played--unfortunately-- by two of my favorite stars--Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr.
Charles Boyer and Irene Dunne simply did a better job than Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr in this unnecessary remake.
Well sadly then the movie falls apart.Grant and Kerr have an easy, appealing chemistry as their characters fall in love aboard the ship.
I'd just like to know what kind of bucks the studio held out to Grant to get him to speak some of these lines, which are mainly the lines every woman wants to hear from a man who looks and moves like Cary Grant.The idea behind this film is that two people on the threshold of middle age - at least in the 1950's - meet on a long cruise and fall in love.
What plot there is (which isn't much) doesn't make any real sense if you think about it, and it's sluggishly dragged out over a 119 minute running time.The thing that kept me watching was Deborah Kerr, who is the epitome of feminine elegance and grace.
Guaranteed to put you in the mood for romance and tears.This version with Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr sticks pretty close to the original with Charles Boyer and Irene Dunne.
Those words are memorable, as is the film, a remake of the classic 1939 "Love Affair," with Irene Dunne and Charles Boyer.Our lovers meet quite by accident while on board a ship.
In spite of Grant's spoken admiration of the original film as " better" ("Love Affair," with Irene Dunne and Charles Boyer), alas, this one will remain the better known and most beloved version for the ages.
It's a though Kerr and Grant watched the movie together and said, "How can we make it better?," then actually did.
though i do recognize that this movie is a sacred cow to most movie critics and lovers, i found it's shortcomings to far outweigh anything redeeming (which is not true of the 'love affair' remake)....first, the script and therefore the dialog comes across as silly, sophomoric, and terribly contrived..i just don't buy it, hard as i might try.....second, every scene looks like it is being shot on the back lot of a movie studio...on a few of the scenes that are supposed to take place outdoors, there are indoor shadows....third, Cary grant comes across as very mechanical - almost as if he were reprising the a compilation of all his past romantic leads...i get the feeling that the director thought they could put Cary in an expensive suit, rely on his upper crest accent, and he would deliver all that the role requires...Deborah Kerr is tiresome and annoying as she plays cat and mouse...the scene of her in the chapel is pathetic...and she looks hard with the fire red hair and very brazen makeup..because i cannot bring myself to watch the movie a second time, i give this an 'unworthy of viewing' rating.
Terry McKay (Deborah Kerr) falls for International playboy Nickie Ferrante (Cary Grant) while on a cruise.
Cary Grant plays the love bachelor in his own special and unique way, and who could ask for a better counterpart than Deborah Kerr.
In the earlier 1939 Charles Boyer/Irene Dunne version, the first part was also the weaker part of the movie, but for whatever reason, it seems even slower in this remake.The scene when the two leads visit Grant's grandmother (Cathleen Nesbitt) injects life and interest into the story, and it becomes not only watchable but worthwhile.
Sure, it's a little long in playing time, a little hokey, so don't watch this movie unless you're a complete romantic like I am, because this is the greatest tear jerkers of them all.
Niagra Falls in my living room, so if you're going to watch this movie and have never seen it before, if you're a romantic, you'd better have a box of Kleenex by your side, because you know something is about to happen when Vic Damone starts singing the title song for the movie when the credits are being shown!Everyone knows the story line, so we won't go into it, but here's a few facts that some people don't know.
So, get out the Kleenex, because I've seen this movie many, many times, and everytime I see it, I say to myself, "I know what these lunatics that produced this movie are up to, and THIS TIME I'm not going to get caught up in this ending as before and I won't need any Kleenex", and then that last scene comes up; Cary Grant knows somethings wrong because Debbie Girl hasn't made one move off that couch; he goes into the bedroom and sees the painting and the wheelchair, walks back into the living room and sees Deborah Kerr still on the couch but this time crying:KERR: Please don't look at me like that!
You think?And he wipes her tears off her face, they embrace and the last lines of An Affair to Remember are sung romantically by the studio chorus as the camera looks out the window with the snow falling, and I feel like a damn fool because:THEY DID IT TO ME AGAIN!And if you think this movie puts you on a crying jag, try watching "Imitation of Life" with Lana Turner, and a little known movie "The Gift of Love" with Lauren Bacall.
Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr make this movie work.
He arrives at her apartment with a Xmas gift realises the truth and really you have to watch the ending just to feel all the emotions you never thought you had.Deborah Kerr and Cary Grant are on top form, perfect!
I really enjoyed the scene where Deborah Kerr met Cary Grant's grandmother and was promised the shawl.
Ms Kerr is always lovely to look at and of course Cary Grant is forever a great charmer.
i really enjoyed this old fashioned love story starring Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr.unlike like a lot of movies today,you really get to know the two main characters.i also liked the fact that the movie isn't overly maudlin or sappy.or at least i didn't get that impression.Grant and Kerr have great chemistry together.you really believe that these two people could fall for each other.i liked the ending too.it's not a cop out but an honest ending,one which i kind of expected,but it's the way it got to that point that i wasn't totally expecting.and it's not quite your typical Hollywood ending.for me,An Affair to Remember is an 8/10.
Save for Deborah Kerr and Cary Grant as romantic leads in certain key scenes of this rather farcical flick, there isn't a great deal to remember here.
Yet, Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr and the true chemistry between them make for a really remarkable love affair depiction.
Two people (Cary Grant, Deborah Kerr) meet and fall in love on a cruise, despite both being involved with other people.
Leo McCarey's color remake of his own classic Love Affair doesn't quite match up to that film but is still very good on its own.
An Affair to Remember (1957)Romance doesn't get any higher than this, and you don't get better than Cary Grant, here matched well with Deborah Kerr.
Finding themselves bent out of shape with their situation, they decide to cool down for six months and agree to meet up at the top of the Empire State Building to then see if the burning flame of love still burns bright.Even before watching this film for a first viewing i felt like i had seen it a hundred times, such is the legendary status it has gained thru numerous imitations and word of mouth romanticism.
Cary Grant and Debra Kerr do a charming film about love, obligation, and expectations.
Sit back and enjoy Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr meeting and falling in love.
An Affair to Remember Directed by : Leo McCarey Starring : Cary Grant, Deborah KerrAppears to have two sides to it; front end is loaded with charm and good old Hollywood appeal.
I would still recommend this movie to Grant or Kerr or romance fans, because I seem to be in a minority in not liking it.
It even has some of its stars from those days in it; Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr.The movie itself is also a remake from a movie from that era; "Love Affair", from 1939, that got directed by the same director; Leo McCarey.The style and just overall way of story-telling and film-making seemed very outdated, even at its time already.
Grant's and Kerr's performances make this already sweet and charming movie even better..
(They just HAVE to!) As many times as I've seen this film, I still cry at the end--the look on Cary Grant's face when he sees--for once--what had been right in front of him, all along.
Cary Grant dazzles again, and Deborah Kerr is a sweetheart in this movie.
An Affair to Remember (1957)*** (out of 4)Nickie Ferrante (Cary Grant) and Terry McKay (Deborah Kerr) are both about to be married to very successful people but the two meet on a cruise and soon realize that they have fallen in love.
To be sure, they decide to give their romance a six month break after which time they will meet on top of the Empire State Building but things take a wrong turn.AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER has, for some reason, become one of the most loved romance movies ever made.
I'm not saying this is a bad movie because it certainly isn't but at the same time I've always felt that the 1939 version, LOVE AFFAIR, was much better.With that said,t his one here still has plenty of things going for it that makes it worth watching. |
tt0120844 | Star Trek: Insurrection | Lieutenant Commander Data (Brent Spiner) is temporarily transferred to an undercover mission observing the peaceful Ba'ku people. While on their planet, he malfunctions and reveals the presence of the joint Federation–Son'a task force observing the Ba'ku. Admiral Matthew Dougherty (Anthony Zerbe) contacts the USS Enterprise-E to obtain Data's schematics but adamantly states the presence of the Enterprise is not needed. Captain Picard decides to ignore these orders and takes the Enterprise to capture Data. After stopping Data, Captain Jean-Luc Picard (Patrick Stewart) becomes suspicious of Dougherty's insistence that the Enterprise is no longer needed. His crew investigates the cause of Data's malfunction. They discover that the Ba'ku have advanced technology, but have rejected its use to live simpler lives. Due to unique radiation or "metaphasic particles" emanating from their planet's rings, they are effectively immortal. Dougherty's allies, the Son'a, are a decrepit race who use medical techniques to prevent death; their excessive use of cosmetic surgery gives them a mummified appearance. The Enterprise crew also begin to experience the rejuvenation effects of the planet: Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge (LeVar Burton) finds his eyes have regenerated and he no longer requires ocular implants; Commander William Riker (Jonathan Frakes) and Counselor Deanna Troi (Marina Sirtis) rekindle their long-abandoned relationship; and Picard develops a romantic relationship with the Ba'ku woman Anij (Donna Murphy).
Data and Picard discover a submerged and cloaked Federation ship containing a gigantic holodeck set up to recreate the Ba'ku village. Data's malfunction stems from a Son'a attack, received when he discovered the vessel. Picard confronts Dougherty and learns that top Federation officers and the Son'a secretly planned to deceptively move the Ba'ku to the ship and forcibly relocate them to another planet, allowing the Son'a to collect the rejuvenating radiation (but poisoning the planet in the process). Dougherty orders the Enterprise to leave. Picard states the rejuvenation benefit of the radiation does not justify Dougherty's plans for the Ba'ku and violates the Prime Directive. He plans to alert the Federation of the forced relocation.
Picard is joined by some of his crew to help the Ba'ku escape from being abducted while Riker takes the Enterprise to a transmission range and communicate the violation to Star Fleet. The Son'a send robotic probes to locate and capture the fleeing Ba'ku. The Son'a leader, Ahdar Ru'afo (F. Murray Abraham), convinces Dougherty to allow two Son'a ships to attack the Enterprise. Riker defeats the attacking ships and the Enterprise escapes. Their plan exposed, Ru'afo insists upon harvesting the radiation source immediately. Picard, Anij, and several Ba'ku are transported as prisoners onto the Son'a ship. Picard reveals to Dougherty that the Son'a and the Ba'ku are the same race and involving the Federation in a blood feud. The Son'a are a splinter faction of Ba'ku who gave up their bucolic existence a century earlier to embrace the use of technology. They attempted to seize power but failed, and the Ba'ku elders exiled them from the planet, denying them the rejuvenating effects of the rings. The Son'a developed an artificial and imperfect means to extend their lives at the cost of disfigurement. Ru'afo kills Admiral Dougherty when he backs out of the plan and Ru'afo proceeds with his plan.
While Picard is escorted to be executed, he convinces the Son'a Gallatin (Gregg Henry) to help him stop Ru'afo. Picard masterminds a ruse to transport Ru'afo and his bridge crew to the holoship and shutdown the harvester. Ru'afo discovers the deception and transports to the radiation harvester ship to manually restart the process. Picard follows and sets the harvester to self-destruct, which kills Ru'afo while Picard is rescued by the Enterprise. The remaining Son'a are forgiven and welcomed back by the Ba'ku. Picard arranges a meeting between Gallatin and his Ba'ku mother. The Enterprise crew take a moment to enjoy their rejuvenated selves before returning to their previous mission. | revenge, cult, murder, violence | train | wikipedia | In my personal opinion, and as an avid Next Generation fan, without a doubt "Insurrection" is one of the best Star Trek films, and the third outing for Picard, Riker, Deanna and the rest of the Next Generation crew stays most true to their esteemed television series.
Action, drama, comedy and romance follow in true Star Trek spectacular.As always Patrick Stewart is in top form as Captain Picard who leads the Star Trek resistance to save the innocents from one of his own corrupt superiors Vice Admiral Dougherty (played terrifically by Anthony Zerbe) who are involved with some aliens (including F.
Along the way Picard finds a new friend in Anij (played by the lovely Donna Murphy), one of the Ba'ku, and a little romance follows.Jonathan Frakes once again directs and does an outstanding job, though it does mean his character Commander Riker gets a bit less screen time, though he is always a pleasure to watch.
As usual Gates McFadden (Dr. Beverly Crusher), Michael Dorn (Lt. Commander Worf) and LeVar Burton (Lt. Commander LaForge) are given very little to do in the Star Trek films, and this one is no exception, though at least Worf and LaForge got their own small story lines - Worf had to go through puberty again and LaForge found himself with the ability to see.
I think the "Star Trek the Next Generation" films are probably the only action-type films in which the heroes are all (with the exception of Marina Sirtis) in their 50's and people still want to watch them.
But the way Insurrection was shot, the special moments achieved, a couple of twists in the plot, a reasonable dose of uncertainty and humour, leads me to say we are in the presence of a Star Trek masterpiece.It's a pity that the main motor of events isn't some larger than life quest or fight (or is it?).
Those of us who grew up familiar with the grand scale of events of the Star Wars saga, the details and realism of Blade Runner and Twelve Monkeys, the ingenuity of Batman, Dark City, The Matrix, expect of movies like Insurrection something that tops or equals these other masterpieces, and when that doesn't happen, something seems to fail.But Insurrection ends up being a good work by someone that had only directed some episodes of Star Trek - The next Generation.Well, the special effects are good, the acting is good (Patrick Stewart, Donna Murphy, Zerbe, Murray Abraham, Frakes, Levar Burton, Brent Spinner - they know exactly what to do and give this movie the extra-consistency), the soundtrack is ok.If mr.
Both movies have a different agenda, I think.I would dare to say that Insurrection would do a better job at converting people to the Star Trek "cause" than would any of the other films.
But the other elements that go into producing a good movie, such as the script, acting, directing, and, dare I say it, special effects, add up to an entertaining whole.I think that free of the limitations imposed by the "classic trek" rules, and the campy acting that dogged the earlier Trek flicks, the Star Trek franchise will flourish, and this movie shows how much a cast enjoying what they are doing adds to the fun and feel-good factor of watching the film with a cinema full of enthralled viewers.
It's a story about fighting for what you believe in, which every character in the film, even the bad guys, does until the bitter end.There is no rules that says a science fiction film or Star Trek must have a complex storyline, but a storyline that tells a story and tells it well is what Insurrection does perfectlyI don't enjoy action films and I think 'Star Trek: First Contact' is one of the most overrated sci-fi actioneers in years.
Insurrection had a very human story and is also very audience friendly for those who have never seen Star Trek.I think people need to take another look at this film and ask what is wrong with it apart from the story being too simple?
Production design looks great, the film is beautifully shot, Jerry Goldsmith's score was perfect, and the energy from performances from the entire cast comes off in the film like no other Star Trek movie.'Star Trek: Insurrection' is a very underrated film, and a film that deserves way more credit.SCORE: 9 out of 10.
While not in the same league as First Contact, Insurrection is a satisfying Sci-Fi film which feels more like a good tv episode (with great cinematography).
"We are betraying the principles upon which the Federation was founded," states Captain Jean-Luc Picard 49 minutes into the ninth Star Trek film, "It's an attack upon its very soul." "Jean-Luc," answers his superior, Admiral Dougherty, "We're only moving six-hundred people." "How many people does it take, Admiral, before it becomes wrong," asks Picard in return, "A thousand.
It's safe to assume a lot of people think that " Star Trek : Insurrection " is more like a 2 hour episode of TNG then a film.
In contrast to Star Trek-First Contact very many scenes of the film do not play on the Enterprise, but on the paradise-like planet of the Ba'ku.
Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden and Marina Sirtis once again give an awesome performance and bring more life to these characters we've grown to love over these past 12 years.This movie cost 50 million to produce and still lacked the intensity we've seen on Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: Generations.
I only hope the next Star Trek movie comes packed with lots of action and intensity like we've seen on First Contact!Great job Paramount!.
This ninth entry in the Star Trek series(and second outing for The Next Generation crew)is better than i remember it a few years ago.it is pretty light,as far as substance, and the plot,though also light,is somewhat interesting.and the movie is generally fun.it certainly has its whimsical moments,to be sure,but that's not a criticism of the movie.there's even a romantic aspect to it.there is less action than drama here,but the movie still maintains a good pace for the most.there are a few scenes where things get slow,but they don't last long enough to effect the film.i don't think this film is quite as good as the previous entry First Contact,but it's still more than watchable.it's actually a very good movie.as for the extras there are plenty of them on the second disc,many of them in depth.well worth the purchase price,in my opinion.
In fact,there is no such thing as "great SF",or "great Western",but only great cinematography."Star Trek IX" is a masterpiece of naturalness,humor,casualness,wit and art.This way,SF adventure who does not choose the dystopia avoids also the insipid utopianism.Frakes directed the "Star Trek" movies that I like most.This is what I want from a SF movie."Star Trek:Insurrection" is charming and fluent.Stewart,Spiner,Mrs. McFadden do great job in this film.Fortunately,Mrs. Sirtis has a greater role.There is a wonderful flavor of intelligence and good taste in this movie."Star Trek" VIII and IX,Frakes' works,are mature movies,with a wealth of ideas,resourcefulness,creativity,etc.,an exquisite visual quality, what I've always wished and asked for..
It still has the action and adventure of a Star Trek movie, but it's at a much slower pace and it has the morality that I love about Star Trek.What I found truly interesting about this movie is the fact that there is more character development then in most Star Trek films--Captain Picard falls in love and Data furthers his understanding of what it means to be human through a friendship with a young boy on the Baku planet.All in all, what's not to like?
The Next Generation crew does a nice job taking on the issue of forced displacement of a race, feels very "Trail of Tears" when they are marching up the mountains.The series continues to find hot women to play the love interest in Picard (and Kirk before him), You just can't hire a bombshell to play these roles, so you need to find someone who is beautiful, sexy, but a little more mature and Donna Murphy does a nice job at this.So, maybe not as action packed as "First Contact" but a pretty good film.
Dissilusioned fans on horror watch should look out for moments like Data's cringe inducing "lock and load" line (this is Star Trek not a Jerry Bruckheimer movie) or my all time favourite in which Riker proclaims "We're thorough running from these bastards!" before pressing a button to reveal a PC joystick to steer the ship.
The same goes for the crew of the Enterprise - the previous two Trek movies gave them character development, which was non-existent here and half the time they feel like over-the-top caricatures of themselves - even more so than the characters in Final Frontier.
Many Star Trek fans recall that infamously awful original series episode with the hippies; in terms of naffness this is probably the film equivalent.The strong performances from the previous film are missing, the script is weak and the ensemble do the best they can with a lack lustre plot whilst battling the unlikeable Sonar and a renegade Federation Admiral to protect a bunch of new age planet dwellers.Having said that, Riker looks like he is enjoying himself when let loose to blow up the Sonar but that is one of only a very few highlights in what is otherwise a very tiring and dull entry in the Trek franchise..
"Star Trek: First Contact (1996)" was a great movie, but this...The Plot Outline pretty much describes the complete movie: "When the crew of the Enterprise learn of a Federation plot against the inhabitants of a unique planet, Capt.
Picard begins an open rebellion." Just that, plus some more 'explorations' of Data's 'psyche' and some battle sequences.Nothing happens, one of the most boring and empty movies I've ever seen, (and I'm a great fan of ST: Original Series & ST: Voyager)Bottom line: Any episode of Star Trek original series beats this..
True the film had its moments, what it lost in plot it made up for in special effects, but having watched Star Trek for a very long time I felt this was a step back.
The plot was shallower than the infants end of a swimming pool, I mean yes you could see where they were trying to go with the film, and the idea was nice, but they did a poor job communicating that idea on the screen, could have possibly done with a rewrite, but honestly I talked to many hardened Star Trek fans after watching the film and most agreed that it seemed like it belonged as an episode in one of the series.
but, just in case, I won't ever go to see the next ST movie: "STAR TREK 10: MAMBO GLAMOROSO" (and extended version of ST9 including more deleted scenes of Picard dancing along with mambo music inside the Enterprise's holodeck , Riker having sex with Troy in the kitchen, Data suffering of an embarrassing loss of makeup (take a look at his neck towards the end of the movie...), and much, much more...
Picard gets in the way, and adventure and excitement ensue.I like my Star Trek movies to have some kind of meaning to them, so I appreciate that screenwriter Michael Piller tried to make this a story about forced relocation.
It's the first Star Trek film to rely exclusively on computer-generated (CGI) special effects, and while some of the effects shots are pretty, others already look rather primitive and cartoon-like, by contemporary standards.Adding to the list of woes, the space battle scenes are distinctly lacking in verve.
By contrast, "Wrath of Khan" and "First Contact" generally used close-up shots that were far more effective (the photon torpedoes in those films tend to shoot right toward the viewer's face, for example).I also really hate the fact that Riker needs to contrive a weird gimmick to defeat the Son'a ships, which somehow involves a joystick and lots of incomprehensible techno-babble.
Lest I sound entirely negative, I'd like to point out that Jonathan Frakes' direction in this film is still pretty solid (he also helmed the previous, far more successful Star Trek film, "First Contact").
It's up to the crew of the Enterprise-E to withhold the Prime Directive which states no Starfleet expedition may interfere with the natural development of other civilizations.All non-Trekkie's aren't likely to appreciate all the allusions to past Ster Trek events, as revealed on ST: TNG, nor the particularities of both the quarks and nobilities of the characters, so if you're one of those aforementioned people feel free to take a few stars of my rating.
I liked this film of Star Trek "First Contact" because it was not as serious and was more interesting.
This is just another long TV-episode that the greedy people of the Star Trek enterprise attempt to pass on as an real film.
If you haven´t followed the TV-series you will not even be able to understand what the characters are all about.At least the first Star Trek films, with the excellent ´Wrath of Khan´ at the helm, were real movies made for the silver screen.
First Contact was fantastic and it left me thinking wow I like Star Trek movies again.
The ship in focus in "Star Trek: Insurrection" is called the Enterprise, with a crew including Commander Geordi LaForge (LeVar Burton), Commander Data (Brent Spiner) and Captain Jean-Luc Picard.The plot basically involves one individual planet located in the middle of space.
I like "Star Trek." The characters are fun to watch and the movies are usually entertaining, sometimes very good.In "Star Trek: Insurrection," the latest in the series, the crew must try to protect a mystical "fountain of youth" planet from being over-taken by villains using an alliance with the Federation.OK.
This film is not a Star Trek movie anymore, this is a really stupid action-only movie (finally with some cool jokes in it, that's right, but that does not make a good movie), and it breaks with nearly all the characters of Next Generation, their behaviours, intentions toward each other, everything you know about them.
Movie Review: "Star Trek: Insurrection" (1998)After a totally-convincing "Star Trek: First Contact" releasing toward Thanksgiving-favoring late November of 1996 to major "Next Generation" crew successes on the U.S. domestic market by exceeding a closing-in 50-Million-Dollar production budget, when here it must have been a 100-Million-Dollars from nevertheless "Star Trek" license-securing Hollywood major "Paramount Pictures"; a 1912 as legendary studio coming into hard standings of a hit-movie succession, when reprising directions by Commander Riker-actor Jonathan Frakes are noded with the best intentions to present a story fabricated by somehow at that time more benefited weekly-television-striker "Star Trek: Voyager" - in its 3rd to 4th striking seasons - to constant-showrunning as screenwriting producers Rick Berman and Michael Piller (1948-2005), who dug up deep-space-tribes of rivaling hostility-forcing Son'a in actions of fair, but budget-undermining space-battles between super-stylish "Enterprise NCC-1701-E" and a sharply-designed pair of attacking space crusaders near the orbit of a just-too-pleasantly-received harmony-loving beauty of "Planet Ba'ku", when it must have been a stake-raising firing-breathing monster of a showdown between a charming, but growing-soft character of Captain Jean-Luc Picard with changes to finish his career for a single kiss of a perfectly-matching "Ba'ku" woman, when his 1st officer Riker commands the crew with chair and manual enterprising joystick surrounded by minor-suspense-ringing supports of underplayed characters as klingon-warrior-turned-Starfleet-officer Worf, given face under heavy Oscar-worthy make-up actor Michael Dorn and metaphysical psychic Diana Troi, always hidden as balancing performance by actress Marina Sirtis, get eventually denied in a noteworthy, but then again falling short hand-to-hand combat in never-finished blue-screen-backdrops, where potential nemesis character Ru'afo, here visciously as too-briefly-built with just single-beat striking performance by F.
And here in the 9th installment of the Star Trek films "Insurrection", the story isn't just about Picard & friends trying to save a planet from yet another imperial takeover; it is a poignant and self deprecating look at how humans have this thing about trampling cultures that get in the way of progress.As my title goes, this is a throwback to some of the great social commentaries that the original Trek threw at us.
Though often reviewed as a typical "odd numbered" Star Trek movie (for some reason, the even numbered movies in the series have performed much better than the even numbers), Star Trek: Insurrection is actually a rather strong forte into the Trek universe.The conflict of this film works on two levels: First, there is the conflict between two races of people (a plot point as old as time but one that, if done right, can be quite effective).
If you are new to the Star Trek universe and are interested in this movie, I would recommend watching the previous film, First Contact, in order to get a better handle on the Next Generation characters before watching this film.
Both of those story points worked well.Sure, there are a few editing issues and plenty of scenes that don't work or even make sense at all, but the different approach to this Star Trek adventure proved to be all I needed to enjoy my time watching Insurrection.+Data+Interesting plot developments late in the game-Romantic subplots-Extended TV episode approach didn't always pan out6.3/10.
Some people say this is the worst Star Trek movie, I don't know if I would go that far.I would say its still worth watching.
Its good enough for me, I enjoyed all the Star Trek films and I watch because I enjoy them..
The most common comment and/or complaint one hears about 'Star Trek: Insurrection' is that it feels more like a two-part episode of the TV series than a blockbuster film.
The side story of the Enterprise's skirmish is both dull and unnecessary.At the end of the movie Picard shifts about scaffolding, much like in Generations.When I watched the film at the cinema, I was grateful for just a slither of trek. |
tt0062482 | Welcome to Hard Times | A vicious stranger, the "Man from Bodie" (Aldo Ray), terrorizes the small settlement of Hard Times. (In Doctorow's book, the town is in the Dakota territory. In the movie, it is assumed to be in western Nevada.) He kills the only men who stand up to him, town founder Mr. Fee (Paul Birch) and town undertaker Mr. Hanson (Elisha Cook, Jr.), as well as raping and killing Fee's girlfriend Flo (Ann McCrea). Before he leaves, he burns down the handful of buildings.
Only a few people stay, among them Will Blue (Henry Fonda). Blue takes in Fee's young orphaned son Jimmy (Michael Shea) and convinces his woman Molly (Janice Rule) to stay there with them. A few other people arrive. Zar (Keenan Wynn) and his four saloon girls settle in to serve the nearby miners. Isaac Maple (John Anderson) comes looking for his long-gone storekeeper brother, so Blue persuades him to reopen the general store. A drifter, Leo Jenks (Warren Oates), also lazes around town.
Blue tries hard to build a family and a prosperous community, but Molly despises him for not standing up against the Man from Bodie and is obsessed with revenge against him for what he did. They both expect the Man will return in the spring. Molly works on Jenks, a fine shot, and even infects Jimmy with her consuming hatred, getting him a shotgun.
Finally, the villain shows up and resumes his terrorizing ways. Molly persuades Jenks to go after him. Jenks ends up killing Zar by mistake and is gunned down. Blue is wounded in the shoulder, but then the Man runs out of bullets and Blue shoots him several times.
Blue carries the body home to show Molly. When she gingerly approaches, the dying Man revives and grabs her hand. Her panicked yell for help brings Jimmy running with his shotgun. Blue tries to grab the weapon, but it goes off, hitting the Man in the face killing him, but also hitting Molly in the stomach. Just before she dies, she asks Blue to hold her. Later, from her gravesite, Blue and Jimmy see a growing town. | revenge, murder, sadist | train | wikipedia | this is one of the lousiest movies i've ever seen.The only reason i kept watching this is because i was trying to understand why H.Fonda was in this movie.It seems to be trying to promote pacifism but its so stupidly done that it actually manages the complete opposite,the viewer is convinced by the end of this movie that guns and violence are absolutely necessary.Fonda's character doesn't make any sense other than he is a total spineless coward.There is absolutely no rational excuse for his actions.The whole story is supposed to convince the viewer that Fonda's character is right,but there is very little argument in favor of a man who just sits around doing nothing to stop evil because he is afraid.
There are a lot of interesting aspects to this above average adult western -- Fonda plays a wimp, Keenan Wynn plays a pimp who operates out of a bible tent, and Ray plays a "badman" who seems to have no motive for his destruction of the town of "Hard Times" (they could've picked a better name, eh?) than pure sadism.
In Fonda's quest to prove his manhood and make a stand in Hard Times, a lot of fairly complex human themes come to the fore.
Rule plays a believably highstrung Western Woman, bent on teaching her adopted son how to kill because she doesn't think Fonda has the guts.One of Kennedy's better later westerns before he switched completely to the comedic mode, notable for a solid script based on an interesting story with great character performances throughout..
Henry Fonda must have felt like Tyrone Power in Nightmare Alley, he and the film got great critical reviews and the public stayed away in droves.No accident, western fans expect certain things in their films and Welcome to Hard Times delivers none of them.
It is a realistic depiction of the growth of a western town, maybe too realistic.Henry Fonda is the mayor of this little burg and purportedly the hero of the piece.
The main story line is the conflict between Rule and Fonda, especially over young Michael Shea whose father was killed by Aldo Ray and who Fonda has now taken over raising.Some veteran players like Keenan Wynn, Warren Oates, Denver Pyle, Edgar Buchanan, and Lon Chaney, Jr., make things interesting as the story drags on.
We are supposed to believe that one man rides into a town and kills people and burns it to the ground while everybody just sits around and watches.
(Thanks to the IMDb 'My Movies' I can set them up and get alerted to them coming on, a very nice feature.) This has to be the all-time worst Western I have ever seen.The townspeople in this movie are the direct ancestors of the families in the home security system ads, where they put a night stand up against the bedroom door and are talking to the security guy on the phone.
Just cower and hope he won't make it hurt too much for too long.As another reviewer said, in the old West, any idiot who tried to do what 'the bad man' did in this movie would find himself dead in side of five minutes, because back then, people stood up for and defended their family and property and town.
The 'bad man' would have been the 'dead man' in no time, and a person as wimpy as the mayor played here by Fonda would have been disgraced and yanked out of office pronto.This whole movie is written from the viewpoint that bad people will eventually stop being bad if we let them tire themselves out beating us up, so we should not do anything about them.
It is a complete frantic fantasy from the viewpoint of a clueless, modern-day political liberal, plain and simple.I can almost forgive Henry Fonda for appearing in this cow plop of a movie because his role in 'Once Upon A Time In The West' was so powerful.
They died as ineffectual cowards, and their only legacy was the shame of being too afraid to stand up for themselves against the power of bad.The 'bad man', riding through town, doing crazy things and cackling and laughing the whole time, is one of the most bizarre and totally unrealistic characters I have ever seen in a movie, let alone one around whom the story is supposed to revolve.
The bad man who comes down from the hills and destroys the town is analagous to Moby Dick, more about dark fate than satanic evil.
Aldo Ray is scary and Henry Fonda is a great weak guy.
This movie was produced in the 60s and bears the stamp of those times, times when the inmates tried to run the asylum--and very nearly succeeded.So watch and enjoy the fine acting in this film, but don't succumb to it's defeatist message..
Residents of a lawless three-horse town in the Old West are paralyzed with fear after psychopathic stranger Aldo Ray arrives, shooting people and setting fires.
Time passes, and lawyer-turned-mayor Henry Fonda helps rebuild what's left of the community, but when Ray returns, Fonda has to confront his own fear and mortality.
Lots of familiar western-movie faces in the cast, but the characters are clichés and cut-outs, and the melodramatic plotting is only useful for unintended laughs.
It would be very important to have a dialogue between Fonda and Janice at that time, then the statement of the film would come through.
From dottering old Norman Thayer in "On Golden Pond" to the child-murdering gunman in "Once Upon a Time in the West" and everything in between, Henry Fonda showed us his multi-faceted talent over and over again, as he does here as a waffling, semi-cowardly man initially unwilling to confront a bully that terrorizes a small community in the old west.Aldo Ray's is ideally suited for his character as well, as the murderous brute intent upon destroying a small town and anyone who tries to stop him.As usual, mild-mannered Good eventually triumphs over seemingly unstoppable Evil, but then, by 1967 Clint Eastwood already had a lock on the other outcome.
A sociopathic stranger (vicious as well as marvelously wicked Aldo Ray) takes advantage of the frightened townspeople and burns down the saloon , destroys the small hardscrabble village but the 'mayor' Will Blue (Henry Fonda , his role mentions he is 49 years old at one point and turning 50 at another and yet Fonda was well over 60 at the time of the filming) doesn't stand up to crazed murderous .
The traditional story and exciting script was well screen-written by Burt Kennedy though clichés run through-out , the agreeable tale is enhanced for interesting moments developed among main characters and especially on the relationship between Henry Fonda and Janice Rule .
Here are reunited a top-notch plethora of secondary actors , most of them playing the frightened townspeople as Keenan Wynn , Janis Paige , John Anderson , Warren Oates , Fay Spain , Edgar Buchanan , Paul Fix , Denver Pyle , Lon Chaney Jr. and Royal Dano who is exactly right as Indian medicine man .
This violent Western ¨Welcome to Hard Times¨ is a Henry Fonda vehicle , if you like his particular performance ,you'll enjoy this one ..
Elisha Cook is given the opportunity to reprise his Shane role, the spunky, fearless, impulsive, and doomed fool: Jack Palance, with one of cinema's great sneers, shot him dead in Shane and Aldo Ray does him the same courtesy in Welcome to Hard Times.
Absolutely nothing interesting happens in this odd western.OK so the story is as follows; A very bad man comes to town, he rapes a whore, kills a couple of people and sets the town on fire.
The rest of the movie focuses on the rebuilding of the town leaded by Blue (Henry Fonda), some whores and a couple of other completely uninteresting people.
At the end the very bad man returns of course again (surprise, surprise!).The characters are absolutely the dullest and weirdest I have seen in a long time.
UK: '"Welcome to Hard Times" inadvertently delivers so much in the way of good times that it seems uncharitable to criticise.' Ji: "It seems to be trying to promote pacifism but its so stupidly done that it actually manages the complete opposite,the viewer is convinced by the end of this movie that guns and violence are absolutely necessary." I was 22 when I saw it and unprepared to appreciate unintended comedy at the time so I found it one of the most frustratingly boring experiences of my life--it actually contended with our high school's football games for top honors.
TV writer and director Burt Kennedy brought together a great collection of western actors (e.g., Henry Fonda, Warren Oates, Royal Dano, Paul Fix, Denver Pyle, Edgar Buchanan, Lon Chaney Jr.) and then wasted their talents on this heavy handed and predictable script.
The evil man (Aldo Ray) that comes into town can mean a lot of things.
Mayor Will Blue, played by Henry Fonda, on the other hand is our good side, which has to find courage to fight the evil side.
It is always difficult to fight evil, whether it comes from our own personality or somewhere else.This town, named Hard Times, is hardly an easy place to life.
This is a great Henry Fonda film from 1967 where Fonda plays the role as Mayor Will Blue who is a peace abiding man and hates to use his fists or a weapon against anyone.
This is a great Henry Fonda film which he made when he reached the age of 60 years and was beginning to find very few roles on the Silver Screen and then decided to perform on the Broadway Stage in New York City.
A brutal western morality tale starring Henry Fonda as the "mayor" of a tiny frontier town whose courage is tested when deranged outlaw Aldo Ray runs rampant burning buildings, raping saloon girl Janice Rule and killing anyone who stands up to him.
Henry Fonda's role tries to show that the peaceful method is preferable to wild gunsling executions (in contrast to the Clint Eastwood films) but realizes that he will be called on to draw the line and finally stand up to be counted as a man, however modest that maybe.
Aldo Rey is frighteningly ferocious as the homicidal maniac that terrorizes the town of Hard Times.He really steals the film.
When the film begins, a crazed gunman (Aldo Ray) comes into a crappy western town and terrorizes everyone.
He brutalizes the women, burns down many of the buildings and kills a bunch of men--all the while, the town's mayor, Blue (Henry Fonda) does nothing.
Eventually, the man leaves and Blue tries to put what's left of the town (and there ain't much) back in one piece.After a VERY long time and LOTS of meandering, the crazed gunman returns.
The Problem is that Unlike the Spaghetti Westerns of Sergio Leone and the Western's of Sam Peckinpah this one from Director Burt Kennedy and Star Henry Fonda was a Monumental Flop because it is just Bad Entertainment.It's not the Pacifistic Message that is at Fault here, it is the Unrealistic, Frustrating, Flat-Line of the Movie's Unappealing Nature that made this Dead On Arrival both with Critics and at the Box Office.
it is really a good movie because it shows the stupidity and pointlessness of violence.hero is not a typical western saviour who can do everything to please our sense of believing big lies without questions but a real human being who fights with difficulty while going through almost every emotion we come across in our daily lives.his very inglorious, unheroic attempts at killing a better gun fighter are our glorious efforts to find a way of happiness in misery.his persistence to stay is like our struggle to live in this dangerous world.the terrible winter in which the people in this movie experience resembles our lives full of fear, hopes, revenge, love, hatred and above all struggle for a peaceful live.the stranger who destroys everything is an embodiment of our negative destructive psychological attitudes to civilization, our sadism and our expertise at destroying things.
Well, Burt Kennedy is responsible for some screenplays that sometimes sound like folk poetry, but this movie, written and directed by Kennedy, just seems to go on and on, from one outrage to the next, without discernible point.Aldo Ray is the big hulking flab that terrorizes the tiny wooden town of Hard Times for no reason other than that it seems to give him pleasure to pillage the place, rape the women, and kill any men who object and any females who happen to get in the way of a bullet.
Wonderfully daft piece of movie-making that actually grows worse with age, "Welcome to Hard Times" is a presumably honest description of the feeling author E L Doctorow experienced when viewing the Burt Kennedy screen version of his work.By turns jaunty, tedious, unfathomable and unwatchable, it actually suffers from a greater absence of structure than the town it purports to chronicle, a place which keeps being, er, burned down by a laughing madman who no-one can stop because he's A Symbol.Most of the time, of course, this doesn't matter, because Kennedy thinks he's directing a musical, a sort of Seven Whores for Seven Miners, as a result of which one scene after another has dancing girls a-dancing and drinking men a-drinking, all of this to the accompaniment of a music score that if not played by someone tone-deaf was certainly written by one.Script felicities are many and varied, though none is more rewarding than the scene where Fonda is told that the mine -- upon whose fortunes the town depends -- has just closed, after which he immediately begs his adopted son to settle down in this selfsame place of doom and earn himself an education instead of playing around with guns.Logic, right.When it's not being burned down, the town -- a tent and two wood-frame buildings whose Nouvelle Vague minimalism is echoed by a cemetery with just one grave -- is regularly assailed by Janice Rule's hilarious Irish accent, though she certainly gets her just desserts (as indeed, do nearly all the cast, shot down either accidentally or deliberately in a climax so stupefyingly barmy that you wonder if Russ Meyer assumed the direction after Kennedy took an errant slug.)With a budget to die for -- well, no self-respecting production designer could contemplate living on the money allocated here -- "Welcome to Hard Times" inadvertently delivers so much in the way of good times that it seems uncharitable to criticise.But then, my name isn't Doctorow..
A strange man from Bodie (Aldo Ray) rides into a jerkwater town that he proceeds to terrorize.
All the while the semi-cowardly pacifist lawyer-sheriff (Will Blue = Henry Fonda) sits, then watches, and then works up the courage to get the drop on the sadist or perhaps shoot him in the back.
He certainly does a good job in killing off much of the veteran cast in his two town "visits." A movie feature is the double ending, perhaps one of the first for a US Western, and perhaps a prelude to future slasher flicks.There is no way this movie was the real West, which was tamed after all.
Then the cowardice continues in full bloom.(BIG spoiler) Fonda, the film's alleged hero, persists with his interference to protect the murderer-rapist-bad-smeller, and manages to get his best friend and a town businessman, both needlessly killed.
It seems that Kennedy's sole purpose of making this film was to annoy and irritate viewers - and to see how many western movie clichés he can cram into 100 minutes.The film opens with twenty minutes of pure imbecility: the "bad man"/drunkard kills, rapes, loots, and then burns the "town" down, and about a dozen inhabitants of this town don't do a thing to stop him.
After the "bad man" leaves, the cowardly, philosophizing Fonda starts rebuilding the town; what follows from here onwards is over an hour of pure tedium, with Fonda moralizing endlessly and giving preachy, corny PACIFISTIC speeches every time he can get someone to listen.At the end of the movie the "bad man" comes back, very predictably, and he starts doing the EXACT SAME thing he did a year earlier - this being one of Kennedy's numerous attempts to inject symbolism into this dreary mess of a movie.
(Look up my review of another cinematic piece of crap, "Gandhi".) This film was made at the height of popularity of Eastwood's spaghetti westerns, so my guess is that it was a major flop, since most people can't identify with the sort of arrogant quasi-hippy gobbledygook that movies like this espouse.
And labeling the town "Hard Times" is worse than pretentious; it's downright pathetic.I guess it'll be quite a while until I come across a movie as bad as this rubbish.
Fonda plays a cowardly mayor who lets a outlaw rape, kill and burn down his town.
SMALL SPOILERS Hard Times is the name of a town...well, it's more like only just a street, where the people have no joy, no past and certainly no future.
There are about 20 people living there and about 65 % of that population dies when a big, angry man ( Aldo Ray ) comes to town to raise a little hell.
Still, there's fear in the air because the man who already destroyed the town once is most likely to come back...Welcome to Hard Times isn't that much of a good film.
Henry Fonda ( if he wouldn't star in it, I'd probably never seen it ) is great as the pathetic, cowardly mayor.
Aldo Ray is very impressive as the tough-looking brute man who comes to destroy the town twice.
"Welcome to Hard Times" (Burt Kennedy, 1967) is a visibly cheap, shabby little Western starring Henry Fonda in his senior stage as a movie star.
The spastic, sudden violence of the opening and closing acts, and the conflict between Fonda and Rule over the fate of the young boy (played by 13-year old Michael Shea), make "Welcome to Hard Times" worthy of a look. |
tt0102729 | Pure Luck | The film opens as the klutzy Valerie Highsmith (Sheila Kelley) arrives at an airport in Puerto Vallarta. She calls her father (Wanamaker), a wealthy businessman, to let him know that she has arrived. While she is on the phone, she clumsily leans on the railing of her balcony and falls several stories onto a canvas. Soon after, an encounter with some street thieves knocks her unconscious and she loses her memory, then a local criminal named Frank Grimes (Scott Wilson) spirits Valerie away from her hotel.
A psychologist named Monosoff (Harry Shearer), knowing that Valerie has ultra bad luck, persuades her father to send one of his employees, Eugene Proctor (Martin Short), an accountant with super bad luck, to find her. Perhaps he will be lucky, and his bad luck could help to find the unlucky girl. Eugene is partnered with Raymond Campanella (Danny Glover), a hardnosed investigator, who bristles at Eugene's every move.
As they travel to Mexico together, they endure one mishap after another, from damaged luggage and bad hotel rooms to bar fights with strangers. Eventually, they are told by the local police that Valerie was last seen with Frank Grimes. Eugene thinks that he can press a local prostitute for information, but she robs him. Raymond tracks the prostitute down at a gambling club and confronts several men at gunpoint to retrieve Eugene's money. Neither of them realizes that Frank Grimes is seated at the table, until after they drive away and look at his picture one more time.
Raymond and Eugene return to the club and abduct Grimes to find out where Valerie is. He confesses that Valerie's extreme clumsiness required him to keep going to hospitals with her, wiping out all his money. He could no longer afford to keep her hostage. So, Grimes turned Valerie over to a man named Fernando (Puebla). Before Grimes can take them to Valerie, he is killed in a drive-by shooting. The police arrest Raymond and Eugene by mistake. After a short stint in jail, they find out that Grimes had put Valerie on a plane to Mexico City which never arrived, and Valerie is presumed dead in a plane crash.
They charter a plane to look for Valerie's wreckage, hoping that she might have survived. During the flight, Eugene is stung by a bee and swells to an enormous size, due to an allergy. As he recovers at a field hospital, he talks to a local man who tells about a strange woman who wandered into their village one day. She was so grateful for being taken in by the villagers that she offered to make them all breakfast in the morning, but she ended up burning the village down on accident. Musing that she might be Valerie, Raymond shows the man her picture, and he screams in terror.
Raymond and Eugene head towards the burned village in search of Valerie. Eugene nearly drives them off a cliff. After barely escaping, Raymond has had enough of Eugene's dreadful luck. In a rage, he reveals to Eugene that the only reason he was hired to find Valerie was because Monosoff thought Eugene's bad luck would somehow combine with Valerie's to create some good luck. Eugene tries to fight Raymond, but he only manages to knock himself out.
Raymond takes Eugene to a local hospital. Realizing that he has befriended Eugene, he asks the nurse to take extra care with him. When Eugene wakes up, he is in a bed next to Valerie, who has also suffered a head wound. They blithely walk off hand in hand. Raymond discovers their empty beds and spots them on the end of a pier. He shouts at Eugene to let him know that he has found Valerie. Eugene stares at her in a daze and asks, "Valerie?" Hearing her name, Valerie recovers her memory. The film ends with the pair floating down the river on a piece of the pier that has broken off and is headed towards a massive waterfall. | entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0977855 | Fair Game | Valerie Plame is employed by the Central Intelligence Agency, a fact known outside the agency to no one except her husband and parents. She is an intelligence officer involved in a number of sensitive and sometimes dangerous covert operations overseas.
Her husband, Joseph C. Wilson, is a diplomat who most recently has served as the U.S. ambassador to Gabon. Due to his earlier diplomatic background in Niger, Wilson is approached by Plame's CIA colleagues to travel there and glean information as to whether yellowcake uranium is being procured by Iraq for use in the construction of nuclear weapons. Wilson determines to his own satisfaction that it is not.
After military action is taken by George W. Bush, who justifies it in a 2003 State of the Union address by alluding to the uranium's use in building weapons of mass destruction, Wilson submits an op-ed piece to The New York Times, claiming these reports to be categorically untrue.
Plame's status as a CIA operative is subsequently revealed in the media, the leak possibly coming from White House officials, including the Vice President's chief of staff and national security adviser, Scooter Libby, in part to discredit her husband's allegation that the Bush administration had manipulated intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq. As a result, Plame is instantly dismissed from the agency, leaving several of her delicate operations in limbo and creating a rift in her marriage.
Plame leaves her husband, further angered by his granting of television and print interviews, which expose them both to public condemnation and death threats. Wilson ultimately persuades her, however, that there is no other way to fight a power as great as that of the White House for citizens like them. Plame returns to him and testifies before a Congressional committee, while Libby is convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice and given a 30-month prison sentence, although President Bush commutes the jail time on Libby's behalf. | romantic, intrigue, historical, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0099460 | Downtown | Police Officer Alex Kearney (Edwards) is a patrolman in Bryn Mawr, a rich plush suburb of Philadelphia until he stops an important businessman and his story of the incident is not believed. He is sent to work Downtown, the most dangerous, crime filled precinct in the city. Everyone there is sure that this 'by the book' suburb pampered cop is going to get himself and whoever is assigned as his partner, killed. Sergeant Dennis Curren (Whitaker) draws the unfortunate 'babysitting' assignment but when Alex's best friend is killed investigating a stolen car, Alex throws the book out the window tracking down the killer.
Though the plot of the movie references a Philadelphia suburb, Bryn Mawr, most of the exterior filming is done within the City of Philadelphia. The beginning of the film features Cresheim Valley Road, Stenton, and Germantown Avenues. This is in the Mount Airy and Chestnut Hill neighborhoods. However, there are a few early scenes that are filmed in and around Los Angeles. For example, the scene where Anthony Edwards pretends to pull over Penelope Ann Miller is filmed on Yale Street, in Claremont, CA. Later portions of the film are in the Fairhill and Norris Square neighborhoods which are now known as "The Badlands" circa 2000. Diamond Street is within this area, but Philadelphia police districts are numbered, not named for streets or neighborhoods. Any Philadelphian would enjoy trying to catch their street in the fast paced filming. | neo noir | train | wikipedia | Better than expected, funny, some good car chases.
Downtown wouldn't have been a personal choice but i was lent it with some other movies so I watched it.
I understood that Forest Whitaker was in downtown (actor of recent film The Last King Of Scotland) The film turned out to be quite reasonable, co-star Anthony Edwards was actually quite funny at times making the film that little bit better, and not forgetting the soundtracks that make a good film.The film included shooting scenes, car chase scenes, and a bit of comedy splashed in for good measure.Forest Whitaker played a fairly good part and is a decent actor, the problem with films these day is that 90% of them are swarming with new/fresh from drama school teens, we need to hang on to our good actors.overall, a good cop flick worth the 90 min.
Fun buddy cop movie..
I had been eying this movie for a while in cheap DVD bins but didn't think I would risk spending all the money I had in my pocket at the time on it.
Luckily I found it at a video library so decided to check it out.Forest Whitaker did a good job acting in this one.
He's a skilled actor.
He's been in a lot of movies I've seen but I didn't know it was him at the time because he wasn't one of the main characters so I couldn't pick him in the credits.It is a good blend of action and comedy.
There are some exciting chase scenes and good jokes.
Overall I thought it probably isn't worth all the money I had in my pocket at the time but is still worth a rent.
It is a good buddy cop movie, any fans of the Lethal Weapon series will probably find this enjoyable..
"The terminator wouldn't go to Diamond street"..
Simply a boisterous, if run-of-the-mill buddy cop action comedy that won't offer much in a way of surprises, but delivers a good amount of laughs, action, "Beach Boys" tunes and actor chemistry between Anthony Edwards and Forest Whitaker as two mismatched cops.
One that is a rookie, by-the-book civil officer compared to the other who's a rogue, street-smart cop who does anything to get the job done.
This wouldn't have been the first time these guys shared the screen, as Edwards and Whitaker had worked with each other in the classic 1982 teen comedy "Fast times in Ridgemont High".
The plot follows that of a idealistic young rookie cop Kearny of a rich, peaceful suburb taking a transfer to downtown; Diamond street the most brutal and crime-ridden district.
When his ex-police partner is brutally murdered in the area, he goes about trying to get those responsible but he will need the help of a detective Curren who knows how to get around this neighbourhood.
Director Richard Benjamin provides many chaotic situations, clichéd but amusing and surprisingly brutal at times with its war zone like feel etched out from its urban settings.
The bad guys here really do earn their strips.
David Clennon is perfectly smug and showy as a rich, important community figure and Joe Pantoliano is effective as the ruthlessly psychotic hired killer who goes out in a very memorable manner.
But where the amusement arises is the constant clashes between Edwards and Whitaker.
Also showing up is Penelope Ann Millar, Ricky Aiello, Art Evans and Roger Aaron Brown.
Generic, but still a fine addition to the fold."See I have this problem with authority"..
Another goddamn, four-star, class-A f*ck-up!.
OK, so it's not Mel Gibson and Danny Glover, but this cop movie deserves a look.It's not really a cop movie.
Yes, the scumbags are dealing dope and killing cops, but this is about a black cop that lost his partner (Forest Whitaker) and a fish out of water - a white cop in the worst precinct in the inner city (Anthony Edwards).
One is afraid of losing another partner, and the other just wants to learn how to do real police work.It's funny, it's tender, it's sickly sweet at times, but it is really a good story about relationships; not only between cop partners, but between the wives and their husbands.Give it a chance..
A well-done 80's Comedy with the swing of great action.
Here is another of my personal favourites 80's comedies.
A solid production with a marvellous Anthony Edwards and a bad-ass Forest Whitaker.
Lots of the scenes have an unique Choreography.A good surprise for 80's fans!!.
Forget Lethal Weapon!!!.
I really enjoyed this film.
It was a perfect cop/buddy movie.
The story is cool and it has a lot of comedy for an action film, but not too much.
If you are a fan of Lethal Weapon or Bad Boys, then this is for you!.
Hack Writer Alert.
"Downtown" is a box office crash & burn from 1990.
Basically it is yet another unsuccessful attempt to follow-up on the success of "Beverly Hills Cop" (without the benefit of Eddie Murphy).
These inter-racial, buddy picture, cop movie, comedy-action features simply don't work without a talented comic and Anthony Edwards of "Revenge of the Nerds" fame is only mildly funny.
Add to this a more serious group of themes than Murphy had to deal with and the incongruity of mixing these conflicting genres makes the whole a lot less than the sum of its parts.
Yet "Downtown" is more entertaining than its "bomb at the box office" reputation would lead you to believe.
The production design, filming, and editing are first class.
Although the action scenes are unconvincing, this is due more to lamely inserted comedy elements than cheap staging.
Much is genuinely embarrassing such as when a PCP abuser holds a little girl hostage, with a gun to her head, and the subtext lamely plays the scene for laughs.
What genius thought that scene would work?
And they wonder why these things lose money?
In this exercise in schizoid film-making, Anthony Edwards and Forest Whitaker are the standard odd couple partnering up to solve the murder of Edwards' former partner.
Nerd boy Alex (Edwards) in his worst scenes listens to Beach Boys music and in his best scenes is paired with his girlfriend (Penelope Ann Miller).
Alex is a suburban patrolman who has been banished to the worst downtown Philly division because of a confrontation with a slimy bigwig (unconvincingly overplayed by David Clennon).
Dennis (Whitaker) is a detective with a lot of baggage that makes it difficult for him to warm up to Alex.But Alex and Dennis eventually bond (big surprise) and Whitaker turns in a pretty good performance (much too good for this material).
Whitaker and Miller assist the marginally talented but generally likable Edwards enough that it is possible for the average viewer to suspend disbelief most of the time and actually get into the story.
Just be prepared for a lot of extremely lame moments that would have been more entertaining had the editor relegated them to his deleted scenes bin.
Then again, what do I know?
I'm only a child..
Cop out of water, big time..
Police Officer Alex Kearney is a keen, by the book cop who's happy with his beat in a nice part of Philadelphia.
Unfortunately his adherence to the rules lands him in trouble with his chiefs after he tries to arrest an an important businessman with long standing police connections.
When his side of the story is not believed, he is given the choice of suspension or a transfer downtown.
Choosing the transfer, Kearney isn't quite prepared for how dangerous and crime filled downtown is.
Worse still, his new tough no nonsense partner positively hates him!It's churlish to suggest that Downtown is merely a cash in of the buddy buddy inter racial cop movies, that, as we know, were made viable entertaining fare by the likes of Lethal Weapon and Beverly Hills Cop. Starring Forest Whitaker (Dennis Curren) and Anthony Edwards {Alex Kearney}, Downtown is as much about a fish out of water scenario than it is polar opposite cops working together.
With both things dovetailing together to create an engaging actioner that's worth the time of those who are stuck for a rental one evening.
Suffering a touch in the last finale due to the inevitable mawkish character strand, IE:just why is Curren so miserable and mean,?
while a stronger villain than David Clennon's barely grumpy Jerome Sweet would have helped enormously.
But with some genuinely funny sequences, and some well staged action set pieces, Downtown achieves most of the requisites set down for the action/comedy genre.
Nice support comes from Joe Pantoliano as a bizarre looking hit-man and Penelope Ann Miller as Kearney's fraught girlfriend, Lori Mitchell.
Tim the Bus Driver.
I'm just watching this movie and I think it's great.
One question, Kearney greets the bus driver on his commute "Downtown" as "Tim." I only caught a brief glimpse, but I think the driver is played by Tim Roth.
Can anyone confirm?Anthony Edward's performance, in my opinion, is very much like Judge Reinhold in Beverley Hills Cop. In fact I think the whole movie has a Beverley Hills Cop feel to it, albeit without the knockout performance of Eddie Murphy.
Forest Whitaker is good in this movie, as usual a very skilled performance,and I wish his character was given a little more emphasis and depth.All in all a great movie and a credit to the Buddy Cop genre..
I can't believe there is only 6 comments on this movie.
It is hard to believe there is only 6 comments on this movie.
This is a great buddy cop movie, easily one of the better ones you will see.
Both Forest Whitaker and Anthony Edwards are fine actors in anything they have been in and this movie is no exception.
The action starts right away and is very steady throughout the movie.
There is a lot of good comedy in this movie as well, slightly cheesy but no worse then most other movies.
Forest Whitaker finally received significant recognition for his acting ability for The Last King Of Scotland, it is about time!
His fine performances in movies like Phonebooth, Phenomenon, Platoon, Good Morning Vietnam and countless other roles he has played over the years have been overlooked for far too long!
The chemistry between Whitaker and Edwards is very good there are a few very funny moments between them.
If you like cop movies take a look you should not regret it and if you do it is like I always say you never have to watch it again. |
tt0382734 | Harvie Krumpet | The story revolves around the life of Harvek Milos Krumpetzki, born in Poland in 1922. As a child, he begins to collect pieces of information he calls "fakts", which are presented throughout the film. At the outbreak of World War II, shortly after his parents' death in a house fire, he migrates to Australia as a refugee, settling in Spotswood, Victoria, and changing his name to Harvie Krumpet.
Despite a life filled with bad luck—having Tourette syndrome, being struck by lightning, and losing one of his testicles to cancer—Harvie remains optimistic, living out his own eccentric way of life. In one of the pivotal episodes of his life, Harvie sits in the park next to a statue of Horace while he hears the instructional Carpe diem, which inspires him to make many changes in his life, such as embracing nudism and embarking on daring rescue missions for animal rights. He marries Val, a nurse he meets in hospital, and they adopt a daughter, Ruby, who has deformed limbs due to the effects of thalidomide.
After Ruby moves to America and Val dies of a stroke, Harvie develops Alzheimer's disease and is placed in a nursing home. Although he briefly considers suicide, he decides to continue living his life to the fullest. The final "fakt" presented reads: "Life is like a cigarette. Smoke it to the butt". | comedy, entertaining | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0065738 | Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed | The film begins with Baron Victor Frankenstein obtaining a brain for his next experiment, but he's surprised by a thief when he returns to his lab. The Baron destroys most of the evidence and moves on, with a haughty Police Inspector on his trail. He obtains a room at a boarding house run by Anna, whose fiance Karl is a doctor at the local insane asylum where a former scientific collaborator of the Baron's, who has lost his mind, now resides.
After discovering that Anna's fiance has been stealing narcotics in order to support her ailing mother, Frankenstein blackmails them into helping him kidnap the now insane Dr. Brandt so he can operate on his brain and cure him. Thereby allowing the Baron to obtain his knowledge of brain transplantation. Unfortunately Dr. Brandt suffers a heart attack during the escape, necessitating a transfer of his brain into another body. The Baron and Karl then kidnap the asylum's director Professor Richter and transplants Brandt's brain into the Professor's body.
They bury Brandt's now worthless body in the garden, but a water main break almost gives up the game. The police also start searching every house in the area as well. Unfortunately Brandt's wife recognizes the Baron on the street, but he's able to convince her to give him time to heal her husband completely. After she leaves, Frankenstein forces Karl and Anna to help him escape with the Dr. Brandt/Richter "Creature."
While the Creature recovers, Frankenstein and the lovers relocate to a deserted manor house as the police begin to close in. The Creature awakens and is horrified by his appearance. He scares Anna who stabs him with a scalpel, and then escapes. Finding the Creature gone, Frankenstein kills Anna in a rage. The Creature makes it to his former home, but his wife refuses to accept him as her husband. Wanting revenge on Frankenstein, and knowing the Baron will eventually track him there, he allows his wife to go free and pours paraffin around the house.
Frankenstein soon arrives, followed by Karl, and they fight while the Creature sets the house alight, at one point stating: "You must choose between the flames and the police, Frankenstein". The fight between Karl and Frankenstein continues, until The Creature knocks out Karl and carries a screaming Frankenstein into the burning house, which quickly explodes into a raging inferno. | insanity, gothic, murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0368314 | Surplus: Terrorized Into Being Consumers | Opening
Footage of the protests at the 27th G8 summit in Genoa.
Fidel Castro gives a speech.
John Zerzan
John Zerzan is interviewed.
RealDoll
RealDoll manufacturer gives a tour of his warehouse, showing the variety and cost of the sex-dolls.
Cuba
Mirta Muñes shows the Cuban ration card, Cuban toothpaste.
Pre Fidel Speech Parade, Fidel going up to the pulpit.
Tania speaks about having gone out of Cuba, amazed by supermarkets, McDonald's, and gaining a lot of weight.
Internet
Internet-wealthy Svante says he hates money, feels empty.
John Zerzan on emptiness in consumer society.
Balmer's monkeyboy dance and then "I love this company" statement intermixed with workers stretching, then Fidel Castro lip-synched to "I love this company".
footage from Alang, India where it says 40,000 workers scrap ships to recycle steel.
John Zerzan speech saying violent protesting is better than peaceful protesting, intermixed with a car show, and protesting.
New Ethic
John Zerzan says corporate property of Starbucks or similar is the main target of his criticism due to being understood as destructive and wiping out freedom and diversity.
footage of primitive man.
landfills, with conclusion: there is a paradigm shift coming where people will not want corporate products and will desire a simple, fulfilling life. This can be understood ironically.
Credits | avant garde | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0101701 | Delirious | Jack Gable is the lead writer and producer of the soap opera Beyond Our Dreams. Consumed by his work, he harbors an unspoken attraction to Laura Claybourne, the selfish actress playing the lead character, Rachel Hedison.
Jack crosses paths with Louise, who is there to audition for the part of Janet DuBois, a character Jack did not want introduced. Jack then has a contentious meeting with his co-producers, the Sherwoods. The Sherwoods reveal that they are displeased with several elements of Jack's outline for the upcoming season and wish to kill off Rachel, due to Laura's outrageous contract demands. Feigning compromise, the Sherwoods immediately hire Arnie Federman, a rival of Jack's, to make the changes they desire. At the same time, Jack has suggested a new character, Jack Gates, a ruthless tycoon. The Sherwoods make no promise of writing Gates into the show, despite Jack's interest.
Planning a trip to Vermont for the weekend, Jack is contacted by Laura. She has just broken up with her boyfriend Dennis, the actor who plays Dr. Paul Kirkwood on the show, and wishes to accompany Jack. As Jack loads their luggage into the trunk, Dennis suddenly calls out to Rachel. Jack looks up to see them kissing just as the trunk lid hits him in the head. Upon awakening, he leaves for Vermont alone. Not far out of New York, he crashes his car.
Upon waking, Jack finds himself in Ashford Falls Community Hospital, one of the settings of his show. Thinking himself the victim of a prank by the actors, he goes to the window to confirm his suspicions, only to see a real town. Incredulous, he manages to convince Dr. Kirkwood of his good health and checks out of the hospital. He is immediately intercepted by Janet DuBois. She believes him to be Jack Gates, who is seeking to buy a miracle weight-loss formula developed by her late father. Jack rebuffs her, denies he is Gates and says that he is only a writer. As she leaves in frustration, she angrily tells him to "write his way out". On a whim, Jack gets out his typewriter and writes a scene of the local mechanic calling to say that his damaged car is fixed. Immediately after, the mechanic calls and confirms the repairs are finished. Jack realizes that he can control events by writing them.
Jack seizes his new found power to pursue Rachel, saving her from the death arranged for her by Federman. Despite his writing skills, she ignores him. His efforts are redeemed by the attentions of Janet. He assists her in her efforts to avoid the machinations of the Hedisons, including patriarch Carter and his sons, Blake and Ty. The Hedisons own a large pharmaceutical company, and wish to acquire her formula at any cost. The Federman version of Jack Gates appears, but Jack sends him on a business trip to Cleveland.
As Jack works to ingratiate himself to Rachel, he continues to run into Janet. The episodes culminate in a party at the Hedison mansion, where Jack accidentally breaks his typewriter. Helen Caldwell, a nurse at the hospital reveals that Rachel and Janet were switched at birth, with Janet being Carter's actual daughter. Rachel is confronted by a gun-wielding Blake, who has been experiencing side effects of an overdose of medication prescribed by Kirkwood, a scheme orchestrated by Rachel. Blake shoots Janet and she is rushed to the hospital, where Rachel convinces Kirkwood to kill her in surgery. Jack must race against time to repair his typewriter and write Janet back to health. As Jack begins to write, he is confronted by Gates, who is furious at having been sent to Cleveland and shoots at Jack with a shotgun, hitting the typewriter.
Jack wakes up back in New York, on the set of his own show, tended to by Laura and Dennis. He immediately confronts Laura about her behavior, revealing to her that she will be fired from the show. He confronts the Sherwoods about their plans for the show, and ensures that they will do things his way. He finds Louise in a delicatessen, gets her the part of Janet, and begins a relationship with her. | fantasy | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0305632 | Fascination | In April 1905 a group of fashionable Parisian women arrive at an abattoir to drink the blood of an ox as a way to cure anemia.
Nearby a man named Mark, a thief, escapes from four other thieves. He is planning on heading to London with a bag of gold coins, but for the time being must take refuge in a mansion, looked after by two bisexual chambermaids, Elizabeth and Eva, who are awaiting the arrival of the Marchioness and her servants. The women are not at all scared believing Mark is taking them hostage, in fact, they find him attractive. Elizabeth gets jealous when Eva sleeps with Mark. The thieves wait outside to kill Mark, so Eva goes out to hand over the gold, but while two of them count, the woman takes Eva's dress and the man sleeps with her in the stables, so Eva kills them all. The Marchioness later arrives with her servants and they hold a party in which Mark is the only male, so he gets all the attention. When midnight comes, it is revealed that the women habitually lure people into the castle and drink their blood. Elizabeth helps Mark escape, so they hide out in the stables and the servants eat Eva alive. Mark confesses that he loves Elizabeth, whereas she admits that she never loved him and kills him. Elizabeth and the Marchioness go into the sunrise together. | neo noir, murder, flashback | train | wikipedia | null |
tt1474684 | Luther | The film begins during a thunderstorm in 1505, as Luther is returning to his home. For fear of losing his life in the storm, Luther commits his life to God and becomes an Augustinian monk.
In the next scene, it is 1507 and Luther is a monk in Erfurt. During his time at the monastery, he is constantly troubled by viewing God as a God of hate and vengeance. Martin is encouraged by Johann von Staupitz, an older monk who is his supervisor and mentor. Staupitz tells Luther to look to Christ instead of himself.
Later Luther delivers a letter for Staupitz to Rome, where he becomes troubled by the wicked lifestyles of those in the city. He also views the skull believed to be that of John the Baptist and purchases an indulgence. It is during this time that Luther begins to question the veracity of indulgences.
Returning to Germany, Luther is sent to Wittenberg, where he begins to teach his congregation that God is not a God of hate, but a God of love. Luther begins to emphasize the love of God instead of his judgment.
John Tetzel then comes close to Luther's town, where he scares the people into buying indulgences. (The proceeds will be used to build St. Peter's Basilica in Rome, and to recover the Hohenzollern bribes to the Holy See, advanced by Fugger, for the investiture of Archbishop Albert of Mainz and Magdeburg). In his church, Luther denounces the indulgences, calling them "just a piece of paper." He then posts his 95 theses on the door of the church, calling for an open debate regarding the indulgences. For this act, Luther is called to Augsburg, where he is questioned by church officials.
After his excommunication, Pope Leo X orders Luther to be delivered to Rome, but Prince-elector Frederick the Wise of Saxony protects him by moving him into Wartburg Castle. Frederick and Charles V decide that Luther will be tried at the diet of Worms.
After his trial at Worms, Luther is forced into hiding by Frederick the Wise at the Wartburg, while his former professor, Andreas Karlstadt, encourages the Great Peasants' Revolt against the oppressive nobles. Luther, shocked by the revolts, encourages the princes to put them down. Meanwhile, Luther translates the Bible into German.
After Luther marries Katharina von Bora, a former nun, Charles V summons the evangelical Princes of the Holy Roman Empire to the Diet of Augsburg, so he can force them to outlaw Protestantism and the German Bible. The nobles refuse, and Charles is forced to allow the nobles to read their Augsburg Confession.
The film ends with the following words:
What happened at Augsburg pushed open the door of religious freedom. Martin Luther lived for another 16 years, preaching and teaching the Word. He and Katharina von Bora enjoyed a happy marriage and six children. Luther's influence extended into economics, politics, education and music, and his translation of the Bible became a foundation stone of the German language.
Today over 540 million people worship in churches inspired by his Reformation. | murder | train | wikipedia | null |
tt0478394 | Vikaren | Jonathan Shale (Berenger) is a mercenary and a Vietnam veteran who returns home to Miami after a botched covert operation in Cuba in which three men from his platoon were killed. He surprises his girlfriend, Jane Hetzko (Diane Venora) at her apartment and is warmly welcomed. On the outside, Jane is a schoolteacher at inner-city Columbus High School, an institution with a considerable gang problem. She is particularly disliked by Juan Lacas (Anthony), leader of the KOD ("Kings of Destruction") gang. While jogging one morning, Jane is attacked and has her leg broken. Jane and Shale believe this to be related to the KOD, which prompts the latter to go undercover as an Ivy League-educated, government-affiliated substitute teacher for his girlfriend's class.
Shale arrives at Columbus High School and is, at first, taken back by the lowly conditions. He is unable to control his class of poorly-educated students on the first day, but decides to use his street-smarts and military tactics to gain the upper hand. Soon enough, he is able to take command of the students by displaying his combat self-defence techniques when students attack him. He is warned not to use such methods by Principal Claude Rolle (Hudson), but gains the respect of his students when he bonds with them over the similarities between his early gang and Vietnam War experiences and their involvement in petty crime and street gangs. During this time, he befriends fellow schoolteacher Darrell Sherman (Plummer) and also crosses paths with Lacas, one of his students.
Suspicious of odd conditions within the high school, Shale sets up surveillance cameras throughout the building. He discovers that Lacas orchestrated the attack on Jane. He also discovers that Lacas is secretly working with Rolle to distribute cocaine around Miami for a major narcotics ring. Shale and his team raid a drug deal, using the stolen money to buy music and sports equipment in the form of a "school donation." While Sherman initially denies Shale's discovery, Sherman and a female student inadvertently witness the drugs being loaded into one of the school buses later that day. Sherman tells the student to warn Shale and Hetzko, and sacrifices himself by creating a distraction.
Rolle, who at this point is aware of Shale's interference orders a "car accident" for Shale, and sends Lacas after Hetzko. With the help of another student, Lacas is killed and Shale saves Hetzko, learning the full story from the female witness. Shale and his team garrison the school grounds to enter combat against the remaining K.O.D. members, a rival mercenary company led by Janus, and Rolle himself. Ultimately, Shale and Joey Six end up as the sole survivors of the battle, walking away from the school grounds discussing future operations as substitute teachers. | cult, horror | train | wikipedia | One might be ready to believe a film about Middle School children to be a Ghost House movie.
But, this isn't about Middle School children, it is about the substitute teacher in the 6th grade class.The students know right away that something isn't right, but it isn't until later that they discover just what is wrong.
Of course, their parents don't believe them, and it is up to the kids, one in particular, Carl (Jonas Wandschneider), to save the others.
Of course, Carl is the least likely student to save the day as he lost his mother in a car accident and has not gotten past it.The film has first rate acting by Paprika Steen as the substitute teacher, outstanding cinematography, lots of black humor, a slam on psychology and parents who don't trust in their children, and some really fascinating special effects.I am really impressed with Ole Bornedal, who wrote and directed this film and look forward to his new films..
If this would have been an American movie, the monster would have been silly, the parents understandable in their gullibility and the kids more concerned with their social standing.
Also, anything scary would have probably been removed and the film would have been a Disney production.Well, they do things differently in Denmark, so they have some smart kids, with a complex relationship dynamic, completely ignorant parents that only believe what suits them best (especially when it comes to their children fantasies) and the monster is both fairly benign, totally scary and absolutely alien.The film is thus suitable for both parents and children, although I would call it more a family film with horrorish specks, and even if the whole "planet without love" thing was too corny and not very related to the rest of the film, the movie is watchable and enjoyable.
A Great Movie for Adults and Children.
When an alien comes from another planet to learn the meaning of love on Earth, it possesses the body of Ulla Harms (Paprika Steen), who is the wife of an owner of a poultry farm in Denmark.
Meanwhile, the boy Carl (Jonas Wandschneider) grieves the loss of his mother, who died in a car crash, and is outcast in his school.
When the teacher of Carl has a health problem with salmonella, Ulla is assigned as the substitute teacher for his class.
Sooner Carl and his friends discovers that Ulla is a monster from outer space, but their parents do not trust them and believe the children are fantasizing "Vikaren" (a.k.a.
"The Substitute") is a great movie for adults and children, with a witty story and great performances.
The unknown Danish actress Paprika Steen has an awesome performance with her change of behavior, and her body and facial expressions are fantastic.
She really makes this movie work and I regret only the cover of the DVD that misguides the genre to the viewers, indicating that it is a horror movie when it is actually a funny sci-fi adventure.
A quite simple kids movie plot gets elevated to hilarious heights by the truly inspired casting of Paprika Steen as Ulla Harms, the substitute who dares to say and do all the things some of the more cynical teachers in this world only dream of.
Steen's trademark Dogme-trained nuanced, natural acting this time only serves as a masquerade for a flat-out over-the-top monster, and you can see how much wicked fun she has switching between those two faces, proving her impressive emotional outbursts and character quirks to be nothing but a cold, calculated lie within the blink of an eye.The other actors do fine, too, as only Danish actors can.
Also, his love story with the new girl remains a bit under-developed.
But hey, they're teenagers, love comes and goes quickly at that age, I guess.The film is a great fun romp from start to finish, never buried under the weight of its kid-friendly message, and comes highly recommended.
Mainstream family cinema doesn't get much better than this.P.S.: The only real letdown: right at the beginning of the end credits there is a high school prom dance scene that is totally out of tune with the rest of the film.
It's as if the filmmakers wanted to be 'cool' with the young audience in a way the film otherwise thankfully doesn't feel the need to be..
One of the best surprises I had in early 2008, when one professor brought to the film school where I work one of those "for your consideration" copies for some kind of national academy award.
It was "Vikaren", a very funny, original and sometimes scary science-fiction comedy, in which an ugly alien who comes from a planet where love is unknown, assumes the figure of an attractive teacher to replace the one who, in a Danish school, has to prepare 6th grade students for a competition in Paris.
If you can, do not miss this version (my favorite sequence is the first day she confronts the class!), since Hollywood has already bought the rights for a 2011 remake loaded with special effects --and although we have to give them the chance to prove they can improve something already good, you will lose watching Paprika Steen doing the real thing in Danish.
A Splendid Horror Movie For Children (and Adults).
Usually parents tend to say no to their kids when it comes to horror movies but with 'Vikaren' they should make an exception as it would be wrong to deprive children from the sheer entertaining experience of this film.
Yet, this film isn't restricted to children as adults can easily enjoy it.
Ole Bornedal and Henrik Prip have written a superb screenplay meshing it with both humour, irony and horror while telling a linear story.
The washed out colours and score bring that horror movie feel.
Then there's the outstanding performance of Paprika Steen as Ulla Harms.
Steen beautifully carries the role very naturally and with an amazing balance between restraint and over-the-top acting she just proves what a masterful actress she is.
'Vikaren' is sheer fun and one of the best examples of family entertainment.
It doesn't go over the top in delivering its message while maintaining a fine gradient such that both adults and children could enjoy it to the full..
Sometimes,the cultural context of a movie results very interesting and it adds points to the film itself,independently of its intrinsic quality.As examples,I can mention The Art of Devil 2,a very good horror film which does not only work because of its good moments of tension and the fact that it is unpredictable,but also because of the creepy atmosphere of Thai marshes;or These Girls,a cold and mediocre romantic comedy which wins some points for its portrait of the working-class Canadian culture.Now,I can add to that list The Substitute,an excellent combination of horror and sci-fi which is very interesting for many things,specially for portraying a culture with the exact twist of urban sophistication and rural innocence.The modest premise from this film is perfectly well developed by director and co-screenwriter Ole Bornedal,whose previous movie,I Am Dina,had been very bad for its extremely boring screenplay and the pathetic performance from the main actress.Now,Bornedal has enormously redeemed himself on both fields because,as a co-screenwriter,he built an ingenious and dynamic screenplay full of black humor and,as a director,he could get a brilliant performance from the main actress,Paprika Steen,who completely becomes on her character and never seems to be acting.Also,Bornedal drove the film at a perfect rhythm and got some excellent moments of tension,whilethe movie resulted completely unpredictable to me because there were so many ingenious twists that it was impossible to predict what could happen next.Besides,the main concept behind the movie is audacious and provocative.The only fail I found on this movie was that the brief special effects did not fit with the tone and style of the movie.But,that's a minor fail.The Substitute is a brilliant movie which I recommend with a lot of enthusiasm.I clearly took a very nice surprise with this movie..
After a small Danish school class receives a strange substitute as a teacher, the students quickly discover she's an alien researching humanity and when their cries to their parents go unheeded, try to stop her plan from coming to fruition.This was actually a lot of fun and quite entertaining.
How this one builds up her identity, with the fake name, the strange photograph where objects keep appearing based on the revelations made by the group and the strange mind-control properties and the connection to the chickens make for great fun, and when it gets to the confirmation sequence, it's unbelievably suspenseful and generates a great shock, as well as the science-fiction centered finale that ends this one with some fun times.
There's some mild flaws here, mainly in the fact that the target of this one being centered on kids, and middle-school children even, there's going to be no deaths or even gore opportunities involved which is fine but definitely keeps this far more tamed than it should.
The bigger one, though, is that this one gets revealed so early on that the amount of time taken to convince others and spread the warning to the disbelieving parents feels more like a plot device to keep the movie going rather than any sort of truthful realness had this happened in real-life, but this is still a rather fun effort.Rated R: Graphic Language, Violence and children-in-jeopardy..
Paprika Steen Rocks!.
The films opening scene explains that aliens know only war.
Their goal is to learn about and understand the human emotion of love.
They take over the body of a farmers wife who reports to work as a grade six school teacher.
Paprika Steen who plays the teacher is fantastic.
It is one of the most amusing and entertaining characters I have seen in a horror film in some time.
The kids figure out almost immediately that there is something not quite right about their new teacher.
The more they learn about their new teacher the more horrified they become.
Unfortunately the films conclusion is a complete and utter crap-out.
This being said this film is still extremely watchable and I think that people who aren't generally fans of the horror genre will also enjoy it.
Not a scary movie, just film, not even a movie..
The scariest part of this movie happens in the first 3 minutes to a farmer's chicken.
After that we are introduced to a dubbed Danish film with poor voice overs.
The acting, the plot, the dialog and direction are like watching some poor Japanese Anime.
I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the little girls and little boys in this film without substance.
She is really great and it shows that she has fun with her role and the overall story.The kids and the parents are good too, the story has some neat twists (although most of them are pretty easy to spot), but it never achieves a status of greatness as I would call it.
Something is still missing, to make this movie great.
It might also be the fact, that once you've seen a few movies, like this one, it doesn't affect you as much.
There are no scary scenes in this film and only one pseudo-startling "large marge" reveal.
This film is about as scary as the average Goosebumps episode - only its three times as long and its predominately shot with a blue filter.
When I first saw the trailer for this film, I knew it was something I had to watch.
I can't remember any Danish sci-fi movies off the top of my head, and I knew that a director like Bornedal would never just tack on such a genre for no reason.
It also seemed wonderfully crazy, and Danish black humour does work very well on film.
When you actually go see the film, you realise that the fantastic elements of the story are only cosmetic, and that the film isn't about aliens with strange powers, but rather about what our society is changing into.The film's acting is spot on; the kids have been cast very well, their characters seeming genuine.
But in the end, with all due respect to all the other actors, Paprika Steen really outshines everyone else.
She is frighteningly effective in her role as Ulla Harms, the Substitute.
Constantly condescending towards the students in an effort to turn them into the best children possible, so they can compete in Paris with other students from various parts of Europe, Ulla Harms is a fantastic villain.
The way she doesn't show any remorse at all towards the students she insults, the way she'll stop at nothing in her quest to discover what love is (which she, of course, tries to do in totally psychopathic manner).One of the few flaws the movie has is that it doesn't really flesh out certain characters who, while not actually very important to the plot, still get a lot of screen time and thus should be made more clear than they were.
The final scene starts out very calmly, with a bit of narration from what I think is Ole Bornedal himself, and then suddenly explodes into a loud and very energetic series of credits.
It didn't really fit in, and it seemed fairly pointless.All in all, the Substitute is a very entertaining movie; part social commentary, part black comedy, part horror.
With stunning performances by virtually all the actors and a very effective script, the Substitute delivered everything I thought it would and much, much more.
I can recommend it to all fans of Danish film-making..
Finally a film, for both children and adults, which takes the kids and their thoughts seriously, with no exception whatsoever.
I have now been able to watch it several times and I keep trying to hold back the tears at the end, where the "lost" son finds his strength through the grief of loosing his mother, now hugging his father with great affection after having stopped the alien's attempt to steal the children's born compassion and empathy for each other.Ole Bornedal shows new modernistic storytelling in a classical and highly professional level, bringing psychology and uniqueness to his own story.
Thankyou for bringing and showing a great touch of the professional heart into film-making; finally.
That's why Ulla (Paprika Steen) has traveled to Earth from her home planet - because all she has on her planet is war.She becomes a substitute teacher for a sixth grade class that Carl (Jonas Wandschneider) belongs to.
Carl just went through the tragic death of his mother, and is seeking treatment.Even though the children bicker amongst each other, they all come together against Ulla when she berates them and treats them like garbage.
They try to tell their parents, but they don't believe them.Then Carl discovers the truth - Ulla is an alien, and she has some plans for the children.
Soon they band together to try and prevent Ulla from getting away with her evil plan."The Substitute" was an enjoyable film - filled with thrills, chills, and even laughter (especially the final climactic scene).
And the acting, especially from these young children, was exceptional for their age..
The Ghost House Underground presents an entry from Denmark with not a lot of special effects, but it sustains suspense and anxiety.
A small-town sixth-grade class gets a substitute teacher.
The children try to alert their clueless parents, but Miss Ulla(Paprika Steen)finds it too easy to manipulate them.
Carl(Jonas Wandschneider)and Phillip(Nikolaj Falkenberg-Klok)convinces the class to take matters into their own hands.
Upon some snooping they find reason enough to believe the substitute is from another planet..
Watched it earlier on fear net, at first i knew it was something eerie but i seemed to like it as the movie went on, it was starting to get strange about this teacher, and this kid who's afraid of heights and this teacher lady was telling him to climb the rope in a nasty way, and i thought why could someone bitch around 6th graders?
And as the movie started to come to an end started to like to see what happens in the end and what the fate would be of these kids plus the boy's father.
so they go on this stupid field trip and these kids are trying to tell their mamas and dads they don't want to go because their teacher is a friggin monster.
But i won't spoil the whole ending but i have to say you have to watch to see what happens.
This is a must see for horror movie lovers..
The story wavers between embarrassingly bad ("The ability to love is what makes humans unique in the universe") and cliché - a Bad Guy looking through the toilet stalls, one by one, for the hero trapped in the last stall, the middle-school boy unable to come to grips with the death of his mother (who was remarkably noxious), the parent who starts dating the alien invader...
you've seen these scenes too many times already.Plot absurdities include a scene transition from a bus full of terrified, paralyzed schoolchildren to the nonchalant children being boisterous the next day, and a printout of a photo, taken by cellphone of an alien data-plate.
Dreadful sci-fi entry from Germany, which features invaders from space who want the emotion of love from the people of Earth, even if they have to kill them for it.
So what better strategy to initiate this cosmic onslaught than to place the vanguard of the invasion force in a dead woman's body disguised as a substitute high school teacher--pretty clever!!
She's on her way to conquering the earth, smashing every human in her path, maybe even becoming the high school principle!
The kids know what's going on though, 'cause they've seen the invader eating live chickens in the barn.
So it goes....not much in the way of a gripping plot or special effects either. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.