Question: What's the result?

My daughter and her boyfriend invited me to watch this movie with them. I did so, somewhat reluctantly, as it was not the film I would have chosen, even though I had previously seen the two other Austin Powers films and enjoyed them. Well, am I ever glad that I did! It was, without a doubt, the funniest Austin Powers film to date.From the great opening scene to the surprise ending, replete with cameos by Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, Danny Devito, the Ozzie Osbourne Family, Steven Spielberg, Britney Spears, Burt Bacharach, Quincy Jones, Nathan Lane, Katie Couric, and John Travolta, the film is a laugh riot. Austin Powers (Mike Myers) still has his mojo amd, together with his gorgeous female sidekick de jour, Foxxy Cleopatra (Beyonce Knowles), sets out to rescue his father, Nigel (Michael Caine), from the evil clutches of the notorious Dutchman, Goldmember (Mike Meyers). To do so, they must go back in time to 1975, the era of disco fever.Fans of Dr. Evil (Mike Myers), Fat Bastard (Mike Myers), Number Two (Robert Wagner), Scot Evil (Seth Green), Frau Farbissina (Mindy Sterling), Basil (Michael York), and Mini-Me (Verne Troyer) will be happy to know that they are all back in this film. Mini-Me very nearly steals the show, and he does this without ever uttering a single word. Fred Savage joins the party as Number Three/The Mole and becomes a running sight gag throughout the film for reasons that will be obvious to the viewer.The only problem in the film is with the character of Goldmember. He is the weak link, as he is simply gross and not particularly funny. What was Mike Myers thinking? Notwithstanding the fact that the title character is pretty much of a zero, however, the film is still hilarious, overall. The plot, what little there is, primarily exists to set up a lot of sight gags, send ups, and a number of very funny scenes. If, however, scatological humor offends your sensibilities, this is definitely not the film for you. If you are not easily offended by the crude and the lewd, then this film will make you laugh up a storm.

Answer: If you are not easily offended by the crude and the lewd, then this film will make you laugh up a storm

My daughter and her boyfriend invited me to watch this movie with them. I did so, somewhat reluctantly, as it was not the film I would have chosen, even though I had previously seen the two other Austin Powers films and enjoyed them. Well, am I ever glad that I did! It was, without a doubt, the funniest Austin Powers film to date. From the great opening scene to the surprise ending, replete with cameos by Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, Danny Devito, the Ozzie Osbourne Family, Steven Spielberg, Britney Spears, Burt Bacharach, Quincy Jones, Nathan Lane, Katie Couric, and John Travolta, the film is a laugh riot. Austin Powers (Mike Myers) still has his mojo amd, together with his gorgeous female sidekick de jour, Foxxy Cleopatra (Beyonce Knowles), sets out to rescue his father, Nigel (Michael Caine), from the evil clutches of the notorious Dutchman, Goldmember (Mike Meyers). To do so, they must go back in time to 1975, the era of disco fever. Fans of Dr. Evil (Mike Myers), Fat Bastard (Mike Myers), Number Two (Robert Wagner), Scot Evil (Seth Green), Frau Farbissina (Mindy Sterling), Basil (Michael York), and Mini-Me (Verne Troyer) will be happy to know that they are all back in this film. Mini-Me very nearly steals the show, and he does this without ever uttering a single word. Fred Savage joins the party as Number Three/The Mole and becomes a running sight gag throughout the film for reasons that will be obvious to the viewer. The only problem in the film is with the character of Goldmember. He is the weak link, as he is simply gross and not particularly funny. What was Mike Myers thinking? Notwithstanding the fact that the title character is pretty much of a zero, however, the film is still hilarious, overall. The plot, what little there is, primarily exists to set up a lot of sight gags, send ups, and a number of very funny scenes. If, however, scatological humor offends your sensibilities, this is definitely not the film for you. <hl> If you are not easily offended by the crude and the lewd, then this film will make you laugh up a storm . <hl>

My daughter and her boyfriend invited me to watch this movie with them. I did so, somewhat reluctantly, as it was not the film I would have chosen, even though I had previously seen the two other Austin Powers films and enjoyed them. Well, am I ever glad that I did! It was, without a doubt, the funniest Austin Powers film to date.From the great opening scene to the surprise ending, replete with cameos by Tom Cruise, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kevin Spacey, Danny Devito, the Ozzie Osbourne Family, Steven Spielberg, Britney Spears, Burt Bacharach, Quincy Jones, Nathan Lane, Katie Couric, and John Travolta, the film is a laugh riot. Austin Powers (Mike Myers) still has his mojo amd, together with his gorgeous female sidekick de jour, Foxxy Cleopatra (Beyonce Knowles), sets out to rescue his father, Nigel (Michael Caine), from the evil clutches of the notorious Dutchman, Goldmember (Mike Meyers). To do so, they must go back in time to 1975, the era of disco fever.Fans of Dr. Evil (Mike Myers), Fat Bastard (Mike Myers), Number Two (Robert Wagner), Scot Evil (Seth Green), Frau Farbissina (Mindy Sterling), Basil (Michael York), and Mini-Me (Verne Troyer) will be happy to know that they are all back in this film. Mini-Me very nearly steals the show, and he does this without ever uttering a single word. Fred Savage joins the party as Number Three/The Mole and becomes a running sight gag throughout the film for reasons that will be obvious to the viewer.The only problem in the film is with the character of Goldmember. He is the weak link, as he is simply gross and not particularly funny. What was Mike Myers thinking? Notwithstanding the fact that the title character is pretty much of a zero, however, the film is still hilarious, overall. The plot, what little there is, primarily exists to set up a lot of sight gags, send ups, and a number of very funny scenes. If, however, scatological humor offends your sensibilities, this is definitely not the film for you. <hl> If you are not easily offended by the crude and the lewd, then this film will make you laugh up a storm <hl>.

<hl> If you are not easily offended by the crude and the lewd, then this film will make you laugh up a storm <hl> .


Question: Is the image fully charged?

My granddaughter loved this movie.  The songs especially!  It is perfect for young children...imaginative, humorous, and tuneful!  It allows children to flex their imaginations.  They can sing along  and pretend ... Something very important in development.  Imagination is very important in the creative process.  The color and film quality were excellent. It just never gets old!

Answer: The color and film quality were excellent

My granddaughter loved this movie. The songs especially! It is perfect for young children...imaginative, humorous, and tuneful! It allows children to flex their imaginations. They can sing along and pretend ... Something very important in development. Imagination is very important in the creative process. <hl> The color and film quality were excellent . <hl> It just never gets old!

My granddaughter loved this movie. The songs especially! It is perfect for young children...imaginative, humorous, and tuneful! It allows children to flex their imaginations. They can sing along and pretend ... Something very important in development. Imagination is very important in the creative process. <hl> The color and film quality were excellent <hl>. It just never gets old!

<hl> The color and film quality were excellent <hl> .


Question: How is the movie?

You do not have to be a fan of the books to enjoy this movie.  In fact, I liked it better on my second watching, which happened about two years after the last time I had read the books.  For me, that is usually an indication that the movie holds up better on its merits as its own work than it does as an adaptation of some other kind of art.Cinematic high points:The rendering of a post war/catastrophic dystopia is really unimpeachable.  The cinematography is gorgeous, and the sets look great.  Art direction is superb, especially on the details of economic inequality.The maybe not so much points:Some of the CGI is a little transparent.  The political background is important but never explained.Practical Matters:If you are looking at reviews of this movie right now, it may be because you are wondering whether you need to see it before you see the sequel (s).  As of this writing, (Catching Fire is available for home viewing; Mockingjay is not out yet), no.  You won't be lost if you watch Catching Fire first.  However, I do recommend that you watch The Hunger Games for its own sake, just because it is a really good movie, and because it increases the emotional payoffs of the sequels.

Answer: is a really good movie

You do not have to be a fan of the books to enjoy this movie. In fact, I liked it better on my second watching, which happened about two years after the last time I had read the books. For me, that is usually an indication that the movie holds up better on its merits as its own work than it does as an adaptation of some other kind of art. Cinematic high points:The rendering of a post war/catastrophic dystopia is really unimpeachable. The cinematography is gorgeous, and the sets look great. Art direction is superb, especially on the details of economic inequality. The maybe not so much points:Some of the CGI is a little transparent. The political background is important but never explained. Practical Matters:If you are looking at reviews of this movie right now, it may be because you are wondering whether you need to see it before you see the sequel (s). As of this writing, (Catching Fire is available for home viewing; Mockingjay is not out yet), no. You won't be lost if you watch Catching Fire first. <hl> However, I do recommend that you watch The Hunger Games for its own sake, just because it is a really good movie , and because it increases the emotional payoffs of the sequels. <hl>

You do not have to be a fan of the books to enjoy this movie. In fact, I liked it better on my second watching, which happened about two years after the last time I had read the books. For me, that is usually an indication that the movie holds up better on its merits as its own work than it does as an adaptation of some other kind of art.Cinematic high points:The rendering of a post war/catastrophic dystopia is really unimpeachable. The cinematography is gorgeous, and the sets look great. Art direction is superb, especially on the details of economic inequality.The maybe not so much points:Some of the CGI is a little transparent. The political background is important but never explained.Practical Matters:If you are looking at reviews of this movie right now, it may be because you are wondering whether you need to see it before you see the sequel (s). As of this writing, (Catching Fire is available for home viewing; Mockingjay is not out yet), no. You won't be lost if you watch Catching Fire first. However, I do recommend that you watch The Hunger Games for its own sake, just because it <hl> is a really good movie <hl>, and because it increases the emotional payoffs of the sequels.

However, I do recommend that you watch The Hunger Games for its own sake, just because it <hl> is a really good movie <hl> , and because it increases the emotional payoffs of the sequels.


Question: What is the score oh this movie?

Great movie with superb cast. Daniel DayLewis makes a perfect Deerslayer. The scenery is breathtaking and makes you appreciate how beautiful this country was to our earliest settlers and the native people.

Answer: Great movie with superb cast

Great movie with superb cast .

<hl> Great movie with superb cast . <hl> Daniel DayLewis makes a perfect Deerslayer. The scenery is breathtaking and makes you appreciate how beautiful this country was to our earliest settlers and the native people.

<hl> Great movie with superb cast <hl>. Daniel DayLewis makes a perfect Deerslayer. The scenery is breathtaking and makes you appreciate how beautiful this country was to our earliest settlers and the native people.

<hl> Great movie with superb cast <hl> .


Question: Is the plot in the film interesting to watch?

In Star Trek Into Darkness, his follow-up to 2009's blockbuster reimaginging of the Star Trek franchise, JJ Abrams delivers a visually spectacular and action-packed installment that's big on spectacle and a little forced on plot.The plot in its simplest form pits the crew of the Enterprise against a mysterious and vicious figure known as John Harrison, a former member of Starfleet who commits an act of terrorism against London and flees to a war-zone planet outside the neutral zone. Captain Kirk and his crew embark on a manhunt to capture Harrison with the hopes of exacting revenge and preventing further bloodshed.The film itself looks fantastic; Abrams is a true master of visuals and spectacle, both of which are on huge display here. The cityscapes, set pieces, and space effects, including travel and starships, are incredibly detailed and a wonder to behold.The cast, as in the previous film, are equally enjoyable to watch; Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto have really nailed their respective characters in Kirk and Spock and have a lot more camaraderie this time around. The rest of the fantastic crew has returned for this installment as well, including Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, and Bruce Greenwood. As for the newcomers, Peter Weller is well cast in his role as Admiral Marcus, the man responsible for sending Kirk to catch Harrison. Alice Eve is also very good as Carol Marcus, reassigned science officer of the Enterprise and daughter of Admiral Marcus. The biggest newcomer to the film is that of the villain, played by the increasingly intriguing and engaging Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays his part extremely well and, for me, is one of the highlights of the film.Alas, if only the story could have been as strong as the visuals and cast. The plot, while entertaining as hell and lot of fun to watch, has quite a few holes that can simply be chalked up to sloppy writing. I'll keep this review spoiler-free but there were multiple instances I found myself scratching my head because of what was unfolding onscreen. While this didn't detract from the fun I had while watching the movie, I found myself thinking more and more about the problems with the script afterwards. Don't get me wrong; the film is an outstanding summer blockbuster that will hold its own in the Trek catalog, it just contains a few plot points that were either too convenient or too unexplained for my taste.Overall this is a really good follow-up in the rebooted Star Trek universe and has everything an summer popcorn-flick should. Though it does have some plot issues, I highly recommend this if you're a fan of action blockbusters, sci-fi, or the 2009 reboot.

Answer: JJ Abrams delivers a visually spectacular and action

<hl> In Star Trek Into Darkness, his follow-up to 2009's blockbuster reimaginging of the Star Trek franchise, JJ Abrams delivers a visually spectacular and action -packed installment that's big on spectacle and a little forced on plot. <hl> The plot in its simplest form pits the crew of the Enterprise against a mysterious and vicious figure known as John Harrison, a former member of Starfleet who commits an act of terrorism against London and flees to a war-zone planet outside the neutral zone. Captain Kirk and his crew embark on a manhunt to capture Harrison with the hopes of exacting revenge and preventing further bloodshed. The film itself looks fantastic; Abrams is a true master of visuals and spectacle, both of which are on huge display here. The cityscapes, set pieces, and space effects, including travel and starships, are incredibly detailed and a wonder to behold. The cast, as in the previous film, are equally enjoyable to watch; Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto have really nailed their respective characters in Kirk and Spock and have a lot more camaraderie this time around. The rest of the fantastic crew has returned for this installment as well, including Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, and Bruce Greenwood. As for the newcomers, Peter Weller is well cast in his role as Admiral Marcus, the man responsible for sending Kirk to catch Harrison. Alice Eve is also very good as Carol Marcus, reassigned science officer of the Enterprise and daughter of Admiral Marcus. The biggest newcomer to the film is that of the villain, played by the increasingly intriguing and engaging Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays his part extremely well and, for me, is one of the highlights of the film. Alas, if only the story could have been as strong as the visuals and cast. The plot, while entertaining as hell and lot of fun to watch, has quite a few holes that can simply be chalked up to sloppy writing. I'll keep this review spoiler-free but there were multiple instances I found myself scratching my head because of what was unfolding onscreen. While this didn't detract from the fun I had while watching the movie, I found myself thinking more and more about the problems with the script afterwards. Don't get me wrong; the film is an outstanding summer blockbuster that will hold its own in the Trek catalog, it just contains a few plot points that were either too convenient or too unexplained for my taste. Overall this is a really good follow-up in the rebooted Star Trek universe and has everything an summer popcorn-flick should. Though it does have some plot issues, I highly recommend this if you're a fan of action blockbusters, sci-fi, or the 2009 reboot.

In Star Trek Into Darkness, his follow-up to 2009's blockbuster reimaginging of the Star Trek franchise, <hl> JJ Abrams delivers a visually spectacular and action <hl>-packed installment that's big on spectacle and a little forced on plot.The plot in its simplest form pits the crew of the Enterprise against a mysterious and vicious figure known as John Harrison, a former member of Starfleet who commits an act of terrorism against London and flees to a war-zone planet outside the neutral zone. Captain Kirk and his crew embark on a manhunt to capture Harrison with the hopes of exacting revenge and preventing further bloodshed.The film itself looks fantastic; Abrams is a true master of visuals and spectacle, both of which are on huge display here. The cityscapes, set pieces, and space effects, including travel and starships, are incredibly detailed and a wonder to behold.The cast, as in the previous film, are equally enjoyable to watch; Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto have really nailed their respective characters in Kirk and Spock and have a lot more camaraderie this time around. The rest of the fantastic crew has returned for this installment as well, including Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, and Bruce Greenwood. As for the newcomers, Peter Weller is well cast in his role as Admiral Marcus, the man responsible for sending Kirk to catch Harrison. Alice Eve is also very good as Carol Marcus, reassigned science officer of the Enterprise and daughter of Admiral Marcus. The biggest newcomer to the film is that of the villain, played by the increasingly intriguing and engaging Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays his part extremely well and, for me, is one of the highlights of the film.Alas, if only the story could have been as strong as the visuals and cast. The plot, while entertaining as hell and lot of fun to watch, has quite a few holes that can simply be chalked up to sloppy writing. I'll keep this review spoiler-free but there were multiple instances I found myself scratching my head because of what was unfolding onscreen. While this didn't detract from the fun I had while watching the movie, I found myself thinking more and more about the problems with the script afterwards. Don't get me wrong; the film is an outstanding summer blockbuster that will hold its own in the Trek catalog, it just contains a few plot points that were either too convenient or too unexplained for my taste.Overall this is a really good follow-up in the rebooted Star Trek universe and has everything an summer popcorn-flick should. Though it does have some plot issues, I highly recommend this if you're a fan of action blockbusters, sci-fi, or the 2009 reboot.

In Star Trek Into Darkness, his follow-up to 2009's blockbuster reimaginging of the Star Trek franchise, <hl> JJ Abrams delivers a visually spectacular and action <hl> -packed installment that's big on spectacle and a little forced on plot.


Question: How is the film?

Why didn't this movie win the Oscar for Best Motion Picture?For an adaptation of a book, this film is perfect.  Every little detail was covered and covered extremely well.  It once seemed that the size and scale of the books would make it impossible to be adapted into a movie, but Peter Jackson hit every mark right on the nail.  In every essence of this, he stayed true to Tolkien's epic visions of fantasy grandeur.The cast was portrayed perfectly.  There could have been no better an Aragorn than Viggo Mortensen, none as passionate to play Frodo than Elijah Wood.  I loved Sean Bean's performance, he gave his all to the spirit of Boromir, and in the end when he was tempted by the Ring, he was perfect-you could vividly see the turmoil in his eyes, and that is something not often found in an actor.  The elves were made up perfectly-even Galadriel, whose portrayal by Cate Blanchet I was not very fond of.  I enjoyed the hobbits' role as the comedic effect-they did it well.  And Gandalf.  Not enough can be said about Gandalf.  Ian McKellen's role as the wonderful wizard was better than perfect-Gandalf is one of those roles where you can either do it well, or make a complete fool of yourself.  McKellen was definitely the former.The special features on this DVD were something worth mentioning, too.  I loved all the little featurettes and 'making-of' programs, which went into great depth of the movie.  I was surprised to see the several-minute long featurette about The Two Towers, that gave me a better understanding of it-can't wait to see that one in theatres.  I saw this movie four times in theatres and was thrilled to finally be able to watch it in my own home and I can not wait to get the four-disc collector's edition, it is sure to be as good as this one.

Answer: this film is perfect

<hl> Why didn't this movie win the Oscar for Best Motion Picture?For an adaptation of a book, this film is perfect . <hl> Every little detail was covered and covered extremely well. It once seemed that the size and scale of the books would make it impossible to be adapted into a movie, but Peter Jackson hit every mark right on the nail. In every essence of this, he stayed true to Tolkien's epic visions of fantasy grandeur. The cast was portrayed perfectly. There could have been no better an Aragorn than Viggo Mortensen, none as passionate to play Frodo than Elijah Wood. I loved Sean Bean's performance, he gave his all to the spirit of Boromir, and in the end when he was tempted by the Ring, he was perfect-you could vividly see the turmoil in his eyes, and that is something not often found in an actor. The elves were made up perfectly-even Galadriel, whose portrayal by Cate Blanchet I was not very fond of. I enjoyed the hobbits' role as the comedic effect-they did it well. And Gandalf. Not enough can be said about Gandalf. Ian McKellen's role as the wonderful wizard was better than perfect-Gandalf is one of those roles where you can either do it well, or make a complete fool of yourself. McKellen was definitely the former. The special features on this DVD were something worth mentioning, too. I loved all the little featurettes and 'making-of' programs, which went into great depth of the movie. I was surprised to see the several-minute long featurette about The Two Towers, that gave me a better understanding of it-can't wait to see that one in theatres. I saw this movie four times in theatres and was thrilled to finally be able to watch it in my own home and I can not wait to get the four-disc collector's edition, it is sure to be as good as this one.

Why didn't this movie win the Oscar for Best Motion Picture?For an adaptation of a book, <hl> this film is perfect <hl>. Every little detail was covered and covered extremely well. It once seemed that the size and scale of the books would make it impossible to be adapted into a movie, but Peter Jackson hit every mark right on the nail. In every essence of this, he stayed true to Tolkien's epic visions of fantasy grandeur.The cast was portrayed perfectly. There could have been no better an Aragorn than Viggo Mortensen, none as passionate to play Frodo than Elijah Wood. I loved Sean Bean's performance, he gave his all to the spirit of Boromir, and in the end when he was tempted by the Ring, he was perfect-you could vividly see the turmoil in his eyes, and that is something not often found in an actor. The elves were made up perfectly-even Galadriel, whose portrayal by Cate Blanchet I was not very fond of. I enjoyed the hobbits' role as the comedic effect-they did it well. And Gandalf. Not enough can be said about Gandalf. Ian McKellen's role as the wonderful wizard was better than perfect-Gandalf is one of those roles where you can either do it well, or make a complete fool of yourself. McKellen was definitely the former.The special features on this DVD were something worth mentioning, too. I loved all the little featurettes and 'making-of' programs, which went into great depth of the movie. I was surprised to see the several-minute long featurette about The Two Towers, that gave me a better understanding of it-can't wait to see that one in theatres. I saw this movie four times in theatres and was thrilled to finally be able to watch it in my own home and I can not wait to get the four-disc collector's edition, it is sure to be as good as this one.

Why didn't this movie win the Oscar for Best Motion Picture?For an adaptation of a book, <hl> this film is perfect <hl> .


Question: How do you like the episode?

Great shows, but WOW, what average sound and video...  For a show that I think was broadcast in HighDef, it seems nearly impossible that the DVD looks so unimpressive.  Last I checked WB was a recording company...  Man, if the show wasn't soooo good I'd return the discs.  Video is unsharp, overly high contrast in dark areas, and the sound is like an old stereo DVD mix (Like Highlander if you know what I mean).  I have a 36" WEGA and audiophile quality sound system so its not that.  Oh well, Lana looks good on a black and white TV so I give points for that.  Hah.

Answer: For a show that I think was broadcast in HighDef

<hl> Great shows, but WOW, what average sound and video... For a show that I think was broadcast in HighDef , it seems nearly impossible that the DVD looks so unimpressive. <hl> Last I checked WB was a recording company... Man, if the show wasn't soooo good I'd return the discs. Video is unsharp, overly high contrast in dark areas, and the sound is like an old stereo DVD mix (Like Highlander if you know what I mean). I have a 36" WEGA and audiophile quality sound system so its not that. Oh well, Lana looks good on a black and white TV so I give points for that. Hah.

Great shows, but WOW, what average sound and video... <hl> For a show that I think was broadcast in HighDef <hl>, it seems nearly impossible that the DVD looks so unimpressive. Last I checked WB was a recording company... Man, if the show wasn't soooo good I'd return the discs. Video is unsharp, overly high contrast in dark areas, and the sound is like an old stereo DVD mix (Like Highlander if you know what I mean). I have a 36" WEGA and audiophile quality sound system so its not that. Oh well, Lana looks good on a black and white TV so I give points for that. Hah.

Great shows, but WOW, what average sound and video... <hl> For a show that I think was broadcast in HighDef <hl> , it seems nearly impossible that the DVD looks so unimpressive.


Question: How is an intense movie?

I'm no history professor, but where's the rest of the story?  It focuses on the Hollywood portion of the story, with the happy-ish ending.  I'm growing weary on these microscopic carve-outs of history.  However, this little known story is very interesting, kind of suspenseful, but not as intense as I have heard. The acting was excellent, and they did a great job of recreating the era, right down to the filming style.  Great actors, all... well almost.  I really appreciate Affleck's movies, and believe him to be a better director than actor.  If you are trying to decide if you should rent this -- do so absolutely.

Answer: not as intense as I have heard

I'm no history professor, but where's the rest of the story? It focuses on the Hollywood portion of the story, with the happy-ish ending. I'm growing weary on these microscopic carve-outs of history. <hl> However, this little known story is very interesting, kind of suspenseful, but not as intense as I have heard . <hl> The acting was excellent, and they did a great job of recreating the era, right down to the filming style. Great actors, all... well almost. I really appreciate Affleck's movies, and believe him to be a better director than actor. If you are trying to decide if you should rent this -- do so absolutely.

I'm no history professor, but where's the rest of the story? It focuses on the Hollywood portion of the story, with the happy-ish ending. I'm growing weary on these microscopic carve-outs of history. However, this little known story is very interesting, kind of suspenseful, but <hl> not as intense as I have heard <hl>. The acting was excellent, and they did a great job of recreating the era, right down to the filming style. Great actors, all... well almost. I really appreciate Affleck's movies, and believe him to be a better director than actor. If you are trying to decide if you should rent this -- do so absolutely.

However, this little known story is very interesting, kind of suspenseful, but <hl> not as intense as I have heard <hl> .


Question: What is the style of the movie?

This movie's pretty good but I would not call it a classic like the original Alien or it's sequel Aliens. I do prefer this one over Alien 3 though. Even though the ending is pretty weak it's still an enjoyable film.

Answer: This movie's pretty good

<hl> This movie's pretty good but I would not call it a classic like the original Alien or it's sequel Aliens. <hl> I do prefer this one over Alien 3 though. Even though the ending is pretty weak it's still an enjoyable film.

<hl> This movie's pretty good <hl> but I would not call it a classic like the original Alien or it's sequel Aliens. I do prefer this one over Alien 3 though. Even though the ending is pretty weak it's still an enjoyable film.


Question: Is the movie recommended?

I hate subtitles. I just don't like not having to try to read the dialogue while I'm trying to watch the visuals. I guess I am not that coordinated. However..... I absolutley loved Amelie. This movie is visually breathtaking and wonderfully original. It celebrates the little quirks in life and in people. That's how the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film is opened, with a quick rundown of all the things these characters love and hate and how those things define who they are.To warn you all, this film is not for everyone. It is not the standard hollywood type of story. But if you are ready for something different and something uplifting this movie would be for you. I myself was caught off guard and loved it.

Answer: This movie is visually breathtaking and wonderfully

I hate subtitles. I just don't like not having to try to read the dialogue while I'm trying to watch the visuals. I guess I am not that coordinated. However..... I absolutley loved Amelie. <hl> This movie is visually breathtaking and wonderfully original. <hl> It celebrates the little quirks in life and in people. That's how the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film is opened, with a quick rundown of all the things these characters love and hate and how those things define who they are. To warn you all, this film is not for everyone. It is not the standard hollywood type of story. But if you are ready for something different and something uplifting this movie would be for you. I myself was caught off guard and loved it.

I hate subtitles. I just don't like not having to try to read the dialogue while I'm trying to watch the visuals. I guess I am not that coordinated. However..... I absolutley loved Amelie. <hl> This movie is visually breathtaking and wonderfully <hl> original. It celebrates the little quirks in life and in people. That's how the first ten to fifteen minutes of the film is opened, with a quick rundown of all the things these characters love and hate and how those things define who they are.To warn you all, this film is not for everyone. It is not the standard hollywood type of story. But if you are ready for something different and something uplifting this movie would be for you. I myself was caught off guard and loved it.


Question: How is the film?

With it rapidly approaching 4,000 reviews, I'm not going to rehash the plot of AVATAR, which has literally been seen by billions.  This is (was?) a groundbreaking film when released in 2009; and although the plot is unoriginal and predictable, the process and technology creating another world, Pandora, populated by the Na'Vi, 10-foot tall, blue-skinned natives--all the product of motion capture technology by the various actors portraying the humanoids--are stunning.  I've seen AVATAR on cable several times, and while I'm not enough of a fan of the film to purchase this 3-disc extended collector's edition, I do give kudos to James Cameron and his very talented team of filmmakers; these pros have successfully created a very believable world inhabited by very believable natives and wildlife.  This film is a stunning visual feast.And this doesn't even consider the minutiae--like creating a whole new language, for goodness' sake.  Again, I am in total awe of the process involved bringing AVATAR to life; no telling how many countless hours were involved, on the part of thousands of people, during production and post-production, to make this film a reality.  Finally, although leads Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana give solid performances, I really enjoyed the second tier of the cast, including the sizzling Michelle Rodriguez (Trudy), the menacing Stephen Lang (Colonel Miles Quaritch), Joel David Moore (Norm), Dileep Rao (Max), Giovanni Ribisi (Parker, in charge of running the mining operation laying waste to Pandora; he's a scoundrel, but you can't help but like him), the incredible Wes Studi (Eytukan), and Laz Alonso (Tsu'tey).  These actors fill in the various gaps quite nicely.  No, I'm not endorsing buying this collector's edition--but I highly recommend, if you're one of the ten people who haven't seen AVATAR, to watch this incredible film.  And if you become a huge admirer and fan, then this 3-disc spectacular is going to be right down your alley.--D. Mikels, Esq.

Answer: I'm not going to rehash the plot of AVATAR, which has literally been seen by billions

<hl> With it rapidly approaching 4,000 reviews, I'm not going to rehash the plot of AVATAR, which has literally been seen by billions . <hl> This is (was?) a groundbreaking film when released in 2009; and although the plot is unoriginal and predictable, the process and technology creating another world, Pandora, populated by the Na'Vi, 10-foot tall, blue-skinned natives--all the product of motion capture technology by the various actors portraying the humanoids--are stunning. I've seen AVATAR on cable several times, and while I'm not enough of a fan of the film to purchase this 3-disc extended collector's edition, I do give kudos to James Cameron and his very talented team of filmmakers; these pros have successfully created a very believable world inhabited by very believable natives and wildlife. This film is a stunning visual feast. And this doesn't even consider the minutiae--like creating a whole new language, for goodness' sake. Again, I am in total awe of the process involved bringing AVATAR to life; no telling how many countless hours were involved, on the part of thousands of people, during production and post-production, to make this film a reality. Finally, although leads Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana give solid performances, I really enjoyed the second tier of the cast, including the sizzling Michelle Rodriguez (Trudy), the menacing Stephen Lang (Colonel Miles Quaritch), Joel David Moore (Norm), Dileep Rao (Max), Giovanni Ribisi (Parker, in charge of running the mining operation laying waste to Pandora; he's a scoundrel, but you can't help but like him), the incredible Wes Studi (Eytukan), and Laz Alonso (Tsu'tey). These actors fill in the various gaps quite nicely. No, I'm not endorsing buying this collector's edition--but I highly recommend, if you're one of the ten people who haven't seen AVATAR, to watch this incredible film. And if you become a huge admirer and fan, then this 3-disc spectacular is going to be right down your alley.--D. Mikels, Esq.

With it rapidly approaching 4,000 reviews, <hl> I'm not going to rehash the plot of AVATAR, which has literally been seen by billions <hl>. This is (was?) a groundbreaking film when released in 2009; and although the plot is unoriginal and predictable, the process and technology creating another world, Pandora, populated by the Na'Vi, 10-foot tall, blue-skinned natives--all the product of motion capture technology by the various actors portraying the humanoids--are stunning. I've seen AVATAR on cable several times, and while I'm not enough of a fan of the film to purchase this 3-disc extended collector's edition, I do give kudos to James Cameron and his very talented team of filmmakers; these pros have successfully created a very believable world inhabited by very believable natives and wildlife. This film is a stunning visual feast.And this doesn't even consider the minutiae--like creating a whole new language, for goodness' sake. Again, I am in total awe of the process involved bringing AVATAR to life; no telling how many countless hours were involved, on the part of thousands of people, during production and post-production, to make this film a reality. Finally, although leads Sam Worthington and Zoe Saldana give solid performances, I really enjoyed the second tier of the cast, including the sizzling Michelle Rodriguez (Trudy), the menacing Stephen Lang (Colonel Miles Quaritch), Joel David Moore (Norm), Dileep Rao (Max), Giovanni Ribisi (Parker, in charge of running the mining operation laying waste to Pandora; he's a scoundrel, but you can't help but like him), the incredible Wes Studi (Eytukan), and Laz Alonso (Tsu'tey). These actors fill in the various gaps quite nicely. No, I'm not endorsing buying this collector's edition--but I highly recommend, if you're one of the ten people who haven't seen AVATAR, to watch this incredible film. And if you become a huge admirer and fan, then this 3-disc spectacular is going to be right down your alley.--D. Mikels, Esq.

With it rapidly approaching 4,000 reviews, <hl> I'm not going to rehash the plot of AVATAR, which has literally been seen by billions <hl> .


Question: How did you like the idea?

Signs is a messy kind of film. The idea sounds good but the execution and delivery ultimately falls to pieces. The cast is strong, Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, and adorable Abigail Breslin keep this suspense thriller watchable but this film is not scary in any way. M. Night Shyamalan's films are a hit and miss for me, his storytelling is too predictable and he is a sloppy, confusing writer. This is a film you watch a couple of times but don't expect another home run like The Sixth Sense.

Answer: The idea sounds good

Signs is a messy kind of film. <hl> The idea sounds good but the execution and delivery ultimately falls to pieces. <hl> The cast is strong, Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, and adorable Abigail Breslin keep this suspense thriller watchable but this film is not scary in any way. M. Night Shyamalan's films are a hit and miss for me, his storytelling is too predictable and he is a sloppy, confusing writer. This is a film you watch a couple of times but don't expect another home run like The Sixth Sense.

Signs is a messy kind of film. <hl> The idea sounds good <hl> but the execution and delivery ultimately falls to pieces. The cast is strong, Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix, and adorable Abigail Breslin keep this suspense thriller watchable but this film is not scary in any way. M. Night Shyamalan's films are a hit and miss for me, his storytelling is too predictable and he is a sloppy, confusing writer. This is a film you watch a couple of times but don't expect another home run like The Sixth Sense.


Question: How is the plot?

I really cannot appreciate this movie in more areas than visual special effects. The plot was weak, the acting wasn't exactly top notch, and it just felt so... cliche. Granted, I'm not much of a Star Wars fan, but I  know people who stayed in line eight hours to catch the first night who  felt disappointed. Aside from some really awesome graphics, I can't give  any credit to this over-hyped fluke.

Answer: The plot was weak

I really cannot appreciate this movie in more areas than visual special effects. <hl> The plot was weak , the acting wasn't exactly top notch, and it just felt so... cliche. <hl> Granted, I'm not much of a Star Wars fan, but I know people who stayed in line eight hours to catch the first night who felt disappointed. Aside from some really awesome graphics, I can't give any credit to this over-hyped fluke.

I really cannot appreciate this movie in more areas than visual special effects. <hl> The plot was weak <hl>, the acting wasn't exactly top notch, and it just felt so... cliche. Granted, I'm not much of a Star Wars fan, but I know people who stayed in line eight hours to catch the first night who felt disappointed. Aside from some really awesome graphics, I can't give any credit to this over-hyped fluke.

<hl> The plot was weak <hl> , the acting wasn't exactly top notch, and it just felt so... cliche.


Question: What are the reason of the village farmer?

I'm not too sure what some of these reviewers are talking about or what movie they saw, but it sure wasn't the FLYBOYS movie that I saw. TOP GUN rip off with extended volleyball scenes? What? American men vacationing in France? For the record. I didn't see one volleyball in the film. In fact, I didn't see one guy without his shirt or a shower scene. Don't listen to bogus reviews. Please, don't listen to these comments, because you will be missing a marvelous, sharp, beautiful and BASED ON A TRUE STORY World War I picture that blew me away.The extent that the filmmakers went to make this a realistic, poigniant and time capturing homage to the FLYBOYS of World War I who went over to France BEFORE America joined the war, is stunning. After watching this film, I couldn't believe that this film hasn't received more accolades.It's a little one dimensional, but that was the way life was for the pilots of World War I who were volunteering to fly war planes only years after the plane was even invented. They arrived in France, they trained for three weeks and they were flying missions that had claimed thousands of lives and had a less than 5% return rate.In between missions, their lives were dull and simple. Parked in the middle of a French country side, they would frequent a single pub and drink to the men who didn't return that day.FLYBOYS is based on real stories from journals of the real men the movie portrays. The lives they left behind to become pilot gods. The loves they lost and left behind. The people they met and the amazing world changing missions they embarked on.James Franco plays Blaine Rawlings, a young man who was about to lose his ranch and be arrested, motivating him to enter World War I as a fighter pilot before the American government joined the fight. He meets a beautiful french women named Lucienne (newcomer Jennifer Decker) who speaks little english, but their bond is realistic and beauiful portrayed.The most breathtaking part of FLYBOYS is the battle scenes themselves. The planes circle and dart between the clouds, streaming their clouds of bullets across the sky. The rudementry targeting system and the flaws in their guns. Everything is captured.Bottom line. FLYBOYS is breath-taking. A wonderful film and exactly the kind of movie that Howard Hughes wanted to make. Today's technology allows it to happen in glorious fashion.

Answer: not

<hl> I'm not too sure what some of these reviewers are talking about or what movie they saw, but it sure wasn't the FLYBOYS movie that I saw. <hl> TOP GUN rip off with extended volleyball scenes? What? American men vacationing in France? For the record. I didn't see one volleyball in the film. In fact, I didn't see one guy without his shirt or a shower scene. Don't listen to bogus reviews. Please, don't listen to these comments, because you will be missing a marvelous, sharp, beautiful and BASED ON A TRUE STORY World War I picture that blew me away. The extent that the filmmakers went to make this a realistic, poigniant and time capturing homage to the FLYBOYS of World War I who went over to France BEFORE America joined the war, is stunning. After watching this film, I couldn't believe that this film hasn't received more accolades. It's a little one dimensional, but that was the way life was for the pilots of World War I who were volunteering to fly war planes only years after the plane was even invented. They arrived in France, they trained for three weeks and they were flying missions that had claimed thousands of lives and had a less than 5% return rate. In between missions, their lives were dull and simple. Parked in the middle of a French country side, they would frequent a single pub and drink to the men who didn't return that day. FLYBOYS is based on real stories from journals of the real men the movie portrays. The lives they left behind to become pilot gods. The loves they lost and left behind. The people they met and the amazing world changing missions they embarked on. James Franco plays Blaine Rawlings, a young man who was about to lose his ranch and be arrested, motivating him to enter World War I as a fighter pilot before the American government joined the fight. He meets a beautiful french women named Lucienne (newcomer Jennifer Decker) who speaks little english, but their bond is realistic and beauiful portrayed. The most breathtaking part of FLYBOYS is the battle scenes themselves. The planes circle and dart between the clouds, streaming their clouds of bullets across the sky. The rudementry targeting system and the flaws in their guns. Everything is captured. Bottom line. FLYBOYS is breath-taking. A wonderful film and exactly the kind of movie that Howard Hughes wanted to make. Today's technology allows it to happen in glorious fashion.

I'm <hl> not <hl> too sure what some of these reviewers are talking about or what movie they saw, but it sure wasn't the FLYBOYS movie that I saw. TOP GUN rip off with extended volleyball scenes? What? American men vacationing in France? For the record. I didn't see one volleyball in the film. In fact, I didn't see one guy without his shirt or a shower scene. Don't listen to bogus reviews. Please, don't listen to these comments, because you will be missing a marvelous, sharp, beautiful and BASED ON A TRUE STORY World War I picture that blew me away.The extent that the filmmakers went to make this a realistic, poigniant and time capturing homage to the FLYBOYS of World War I who went over to France BEFORE America joined the war, is stunning. After watching this film, I couldn't believe that this film hasn't received more accolades.It's a little one dimensional, but that was the way life was for the pilots of World War I who were volunteering to fly war planes only years after the plane was even invented. They arrived in France, they trained for three weeks and they were flying missions that had claimed thousands of lives and had a less than 5% return rate.In between missions, their lives were dull and simple. Parked in the middle of a French country side, they would frequent a single pub and drink to the men who didn't return that day.FLYBOYS is based on real stories from journals of the real men the movie portrays. The lives they left behind to become pilot gods. The loves they lost and left behind. The people they met and the amazing world changing missions they embarked on.James Franco plays Blaine Rawlings, a young man who was about to lose his ranch and be arrested, motivating him to enter World War I as a fighter pilot before the American government joined the fight. He meets a beautiful french women named Lucienne (newcomer Jennifer Decker) who speaks little english, but their bond is realistic and beauiful portrayed.The most breathtaking part of FLYBOYS is the battle scenes themselves. The planes circle and dart between the clouds, streaming their clouds of bullets across the sky. The rudementry targeting system and the flaws in their guns. Everything is captured.Bottom line. FLYBOYS is breath-taking. A wonderful film and exactly the kind of movie that Howard Hughes wanted to make. Today's technology allows it to happen in glorious fashion.


Question: Does that movie have a good screenplay?

They've nailed it. They've absolutely nailed it. My long-going, seemingly insurmountable level of anticipation (three years worth) has been shattered. I am just blown away by the brilliance of Christopher Nolan's masterpiece. Yes, masterpiece.The Nolan brothers and David Goyer created a story that is wonderfully complex and truly gripping. They drew pieces from some of the best parts of Batman classics like The Long Halloween, The Man Who Laughs, The Killing Joke, and surely many others (those are just what came to mind as I watched) and made something possibly even better. This isn't your usual throwaway piece of pop culture entertainment. It's much closer to art. The screenplay says so many intriguing things about humanity. Where is the proverbial line? How far can it be pushed to achieve what is ultimately a good and honorable goal? What is true heroism? When the chips are down, how will people react? These are the questions we're faced with. The Dark Knight doesn't presume to answer them for us, but it challenges us to discover the answers for ourselves. I've read several articles that go so far as to say that they think the film is being political, but I argue otherwise. I can't speak for the filmmakers, so maybe I'm wrong. However, the challenging topics of this film have been explored in countless Batman stories over a span of 70 years. These aren't new ideas to the Batman mythos. If anything, this just proves how relevant Batman continues to be, generation after generation.As for the film's technical aspects, let's talk about the guy most responsible for this film: Christopher Nolan. Can this guy make a bad film? Film by film, Nolan's been cementing himself as one of the great directors of our time. Memento, Batman Begins, The Prestige.... these are all amazing, top-tier films. And now, with The Dark Knight, I think everyone is going to finally realize just how good this guy is. And how about Wally Pfister's cinematography? Just gorgeous, gorgeous stuff. The score is very well done, too. It feels like a natural progression of the themes presented in Batman Begins. The new, much talked about one-note-based theme for The Joker works exceptionally well. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Batman film without some great action. Aerial stunts, car chases, explosions, and plenty of fight sequences.... The Dark Knight is a jolt of caffeine that keeps your heart racing from start to finish.While the action sequences and stunts are amazing, the more intimate scenes are the heart of the film. As a prime example, an interrogation scene between The Batman and The Joker honestly just shocked me. I figured their interaction would be good.... but it's much, much better than that. It's amazing to see such great character work in a blockbuster. And not only is it great character work, but the fabled complex relationship between Batman and The Joker is portrayed perfectly. At one point in the film, The Joker says this to Batman: "You won't kill me, out of some misguided morality, and I won't kill you because you're just too much fun. I think we're destined to do this forever." Just perfect. Talk about a Batman fan's dream come true....One thing I don't think I can say enough about (and can't really do justice for anyway) is this interpretation of The Joker. After this performance, The Joker is definitely Ledger's. I can't imagine his take ever being topped. The Joker has always been one of the classic literary villains just aching for an accurate big-screen portrayal and man, Heath did it better than I could've ever hoped. He's somehow managed to pull off being funny, sadistic, charismatic, and downright frightening all at once. You can't take your eyes off the guy. And you can't decide whether you want to laugh or throw up when you hear his jokes. And often when he does make you laugh, you feel bad for doing so. That, my friends, is The Joker. And most importantly, this Joker is the perfect opposition for The Batman.... a true and constant threat that challenges him in nearly every way imaginable. Everyone's talking posthumous Oscar for Heath and I sure hope he not only gets nominated, but that he wins. This performance is just that good.I also really, really appreciate the other new central character: Aaron Eckhart's performance as Harvey Dent and Two-Face. Eckhart's Harvey is noble, yet cocky and angry enough before the accident to really sell it when Harvey is horribly injured and unleashes his darker side. I have to give some serious credit to the writers here, as well, for adapting the character so well. The tragic side of the character comes across perfectly. The rest of the performances are solid, too. I love the way Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, and Morgan Freeman have elevated these films. These guys are some of the best we have and never seem to disappoint. Also, Maggie Gyllenhaal is a welcome addition to the cast replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes. Going in, I think I would've preferred Katie Holmes to stick around just for continuity sake, but Gyllenhaal does such a fine job that it's really not an issue.But who is this picture about? The Batman, of course, and they're continuing to get him absolutely right. Christian Bale is just an excellent Bruce Wayne. He's perfected the "fake Bruce Wayne" by acting like a silly rich drunkard, womanizer, and egomaniac. He's hilarious a lot of the time, but we never forget just how selfless of an act it really is. He also embodies the real Bruce Wayne which only Alfred and Rachel (and Fox to some degree) truly know. And last, but definitely not least, he's a heck of a Batman. In The Dark Knight, you can tell Batman is maturing. He's becoming the signature Batman who pushes the line of what's decent and acceptable. He walks the razor's edge every night. He's also becoming more self-sufficient. We see him doing more detective work. We see him making technological advances with little or no help from Lucius Fox. As for the title of the film: Batman truly becomes The Dark Knight in this story. The decisions he makes throughout the film show us this progression. And the decision he makes at the end of the film is one of the most refreshing takes on heroism and selflessness that I've ever seen put on film.I think it's safe to say that after this no one will ever look at the "comic book genre" the same again (if it's even fair to label this artistic vision as such). This is the father -- or The Godfather, as many critics have said -- of the genre. Look, I love Citizen Kane, Vertigo, Casablanca, Gone With The Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, and The Godfather. Those are fantastic films that I could watch over and over again. But I'm going to go ahead and say it: this is the best film I've ever seen. Yes, probably all of those films (and many others) will always have a bigger impact on the history and future of filmmaking, but the quality of this film -- groundbreaking for the genre -- combined with my love of the Batman character and his world leave me completely unable to say otherwise. The film also, of course, dethrones the great Batman Begins as my favorite film of all-time. Begins did a magnificent job exploring the origins of the character, but along with its main theme, "escalation," The Dark Knight just takes things to a whole new level. Finally, we've gotten the film that will almost certainly be met with unanimous agreement as the definitive take on the character. This is The Batman.... this is The Dark Knight.

Answer: The screenplay says so many intriguing things about humanity

They've nailed it. They've absolutely nailed it. My long-going, seemingly insurmountable level of anticipation (three years worth) has been shattered. I am just blown away by the brilliance of Christopher Nolan's masterpiece. Yes, masterpiece. The Nolan brothers and David Goyer created a story that is wonderfully complex and truly gripping. They drew pieces from some of the best parts of Batman classics like The Long Halloween, The Man Who Laughs, The Killing Joke, and surely many others (those are just what came to mind as I watched) and made something possibly even better. This isn't your usual throwaway piece of pop culture entertainment. It's much closer to art. <hl> The screenplay says so many intriguing things about humanity . <hl> Where is the proverbial line? How far can it be pushed to achieve what is ultimately a good and honorable goal? What is true heroism? When the chips are down, how will people react? These are the questions we're faced with. The Dark Knight doesn't presume to answer them for us, but it challenges us to discover the answers for ourselves. I've read several articles that go so far as to say that they think the film is being political, but I argue otherwise. I can't speak for the filmmakers, so maybe I'm wrong. However, the challenging topics of this film have been explored in countless Batman stories over a span of 70 years. These aren't new ideas to the Batman mythos. If anything, this just proves how relevant Batman continues to be, generation after generation. As for the film's technical aspects, let's talk about the guy most responsible for this film: Christopher Nolan. Can this guy make a bad film? Film by film, Nolan's been cementing himself as one of the great directors of our time. Memento, Batman Begins, The Prestige.... these are all amazing, top-tier films. And now, with The Dark Knight, I think everyone is going to finally realize just how good this guy is. And how about Wally Pfister's cinematography? Just gorgeous, gorgeous stuff. The score is very well done, too. It feels like a natural progression of the themes presented in Batman Begins. The new, much talked about one-note-based theme for The Joker works exceptionally well. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Batman film without some great action. Aerial stunts, car chases, explosions, and plenty of fight sequences.... The Dark Knight is a jolt of caffeine that keeps your heart racing from start to finish. While the action sequences and stunts are amazing, the more intimate scenes are the heart of the film. As a prime example, an interrogation scene between The Batman and The Joker honestly just shocked me. I figured their interaction would be good.... but it's much, much better than that. It's amazing to see such great character work in a blockbuster. And not only is it great character work, but the fabled complex relationship between Batman and The Joker is portrayed perfectly. At one point in the film, The Joker says this to Batman: "You won't kill me, out of some misguided morality, and I won't kill you because you're just too much fun. I think we're destined to do this forever." Just perfect. Talk about a Batman fan's dream come true.... One thing I don't think I can say enough about (and can't really do justice for anyway) is this interpretation of The Joker. After this performance, The Joker is definitely Ledger's. I can't imagine his take ever being topped. The Joker has always been one of the classic literary villains just aching for an accurate big-screen portrayal and man, Heath did it better than I could've ever hoped. He's somehow managed to pull off being funny, sadistic, charismatic, and downright frightening all at once. You can't take your eyes off the guy. And you can't decide whether you want to laugh or throw up when you hear his jokes. And often when he does make you laugh, you feel bad for doing so. That, my friends, is The Joker. And most importantly, this Joker is the perfect opposition for The Batman.... a true and constant threat that challenges him in nearly every way imaginable. Everyone's talking posthumous Oscar for Heath and I sure hope he not only gets nominated, but that he wins. This performance is just that good. I also really, really appreciate the other new central character: Aaron Eckhart's performance as Harvey Dent and Two-Face. Eckhart's Harvey is noble, yet cocky and angry enough before the accident to really sell it when Harvey is horribly injured and unleashes his darker side. I have to give some serious credit to the writers here, as well, for adapting the character so well. The tragic side of the character comes across perfectly. The rest of the performances are solid, too. I love the way Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, and Morgan Freeman have elevated these films. These guys are some of the best we have and never seem to disappoint. Also, Maggie Gyllenhaal is a welcome addition to the cast replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes. Going in, I think I would've preferred Katie Holmes to stick around just for continuity sake, but Gyllenhaal does such a fine job that it's really not an issue. But who is this picture about? The Batman, of course, and they're continuing to get him absolutely right. Christian Bale is just an excellent Bruce Wayne. He's perfected the "fake Bruce Wayne" by acting like a silly rich drunkard, womanizer, and egomaniac. He's hilarious a lot of the time, but we never forget just how selfless of an act it really is. He also embodies the real Bruce Wayne which only Alfred and Rachel (and Fox to some degree) truly know. And last, but definitely not least, he's a heck of a Batman. In The Dark Knight, you can tell Batman is maturing. He's becoming the signature Batman who pushes the line of what's decent and acceptable. He walks the razor's edge every night. He's also becoming more self-sufficient. We see him doing more detective work. We see him making technological advances with little or no help from Lucius Fox. As for the title of the film: Batman truly becomes The Dark Knight in this story. The decisions he makes throughout the film show us this progression. And the decision he makes at the end of the film is one of the most refreshing takes on heroism and selflessness that I've ever seen put on film. I think it's safe to say that after this no one will ever look at the "comic book genre" the same again (if it's even fair to label this artistic vision as such). This is the father -- or The Godfather, as many critics have said -- of the genre. Look, I love Citizen Kane, Vertigo, Casablanca, Gone With The Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, and The Godfather. Those are fantastic films that I could watch over and over again. But I'm going to go ahead and say it: this is the best film I've ever seen. Yes, probably all of those films (and many others) will always have a bigger impact on the history and future of filmmaking, but the quality of this film -- groundbreaking for the genre -- combined with my love of the Batman character and his world leave me completely unable to say otherwise. The film also, of course, dethrones the great Batman Begins as my favorite film of all-time. Begins did a magnificent job exploring the origins of the character, but along with its main theme, "escalation," The Dark Knight just takes things to a whole new level. Finally, we've gotten the film that will almost certainly be met with unanimous agreement as the definitive take on the character. This is The Batman.... this is The Dark Knight.

They've nailed it. They've absolutely nailed it. My long-going, seemingly insurmountable level of anticipation (three years worth) has been shattered. I am just blown away by the brilliance of Christopher Nolan's masterpiece. Yes, masterpiece.The Nolan brothers and David Goyer created a story that is wonderfully complex and truly gripping. They drew pieces from some of the best parts of Batman classics like The Long Halloween, The Man Who Laughs, The Killing Joke, and surely many others (those are just what came to mind as I watched) and made something possibly even better. This isn't your usual throwaway piece of pop culture entertainment. It's much closer to art. <hl> The screenplay says so many intriguing things about humanity <hl>. Where is the proverbial line? How far can it be pushed to achieve what is ultimately a good and honorable goal? What is true heroism? When the chips are down, how will people react? These are the questions we're faced with. The Dark Knight doesn't presume to answer them for us, but it challenges us to discover the answers for ourselves. I've read several articles that go so far as to say that they think the film is being political, but I argue otherwise. I can't speak for the filmmakers, so maybe I'm wrong. However, the challenging topics of this film have been explored in countless Batman stories over a span of 70 years. These aren't new ideas to the Batman mythos. If anything, this just proves how relevant Batman continues to be, generation after generation.As for the film's technical aspects, let's talk about the guy most responsible for this film: Christopher Nolan. Can this guy make a bad film? Film by film, Nolan's been cementing himself as one of the great directors of our time. Memento, Batman Begins, The Prestige.... these are all amazing, top-tier films. And now, with The Dark Knight, I think everyone is going to finally realize just how good this guy is. And how about Wally Pfister's cinematography? Just gorgeous, gorgeous stuff. The score is very well done, too. It feels like a natural progression of the themes presented in Batman Begins. The new, much talked about one-note-based theme for The Joker works exceptionally well. And, of course, this wouldn't be a Batman film without some great action. Aerial stunts, car chases, explosions, and plenty of fight sequences.... The Dark Knight is a jolt of caffeine that keeps your heart racing from start to finish.While the action sequences and stunts are amazing, the more intimate scenes are the heart of the film. As a prime example, an interrogation scene between The Batman and The Joker honestly just shocked me. I figured their interaction would be good.... but it's much, much better than that. It's amazing to see such great character work in a blockbuster. And not only is it great character work, but the fabled complex relationship between Batman and The Joker is portrayed perfectly. At one point in the film, The Joker says this to Batman: "You won't kill me, out of some misguided morality, and I won't kill you because you're just too much fun. I think we're destined to do this forever." Just perfect. Talk about a Batman fan's dream come true....One thing I don't think I can say enough about (and can't really do justice for anyway) is this interpretation of The Joker. After this performance, The Joker is definitely Ledger's. I can't imagine his take ever being topped. The Joker has always been one of the classic literary villains just aching for an accurate big-screen portrayal and man, Heath did it better than I could've ever hoped. He's somehow managed to pull off being funny, sadistic, charismatic, and downright frightening all at once. You can't take your eyes off the guy. And you can't decide whether you want to laugh or throw up when you hear his jokes. And often when he does make you laugh, you feel bad for doing so. That, my friends, is The Joker. And most importantly, this Joker is the perfect opposition for The Batman.... a true and constant threat that challenges him in nearly every way imaginable. Everyone's talking posthumous Oscar for Heath and I sure hope he not only gets nominated, but that he wins. This performance is just that good.I also really, really appreciate the other new central character: Aaron Eckhart's performance as Harvey Dent and Two-Face. Eckhart's Harvey is noble, yet cocky and angry enough before the accident to really sell it when Harvey is horribly injured and unleashes his darker side. I have to give some serious credit to the writers here, as well, for adapting the character so well. The tragic side of the character comes across perfectly. The rest of the performances are solid, too. I love the way Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, and Morgan Freeman have elevated these films. These guys are some of the best we have and never seem to disappoint. Also, Maggie Gyllenhaal is a welcome addition to the cast replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes. Going in, I think I would've preferred Katie Holmes to stick around just for continuity sake, but Gyllenhaal does such a fine job that it's really not an issue.But who is this picture about? The Batman, of course, and they're continuing to get him absolutely right. Christian Bale is just an excellent Bruce Wayne. He's perfected the "fake Bruce Wayne" by acting like a silly rich drunkard, womanizer, and egomaniac. He's hilarious a lot of the time, but we never forget just how selfless of an act it really is. He also embodies the real Bruce Wayne which only Alfred and Rachel (and Fox to some degree) truly know. And last, but definitely not least, he's a heck of a Batman. In The Dark Knight, you can tell Batman is maturing. He's becoming the signature Batman who pushes the line of what's decent and acceptable. He walks the razor's edge every night. He's also becoming more self-sufficient. We see him doing more detective work. We see him making technological advances with little or no help from Lucius Fox. As for the title of the film: Batman truly becomes The Dark Knight in this story. The decisions he makes throughout the film show us this progression. And the decision he makes at the end of the film is one of the most refreshing takes on heroism and selflessness that I've ever seen put on film.I think it's safe to say that after this no one will ever look at the "comic book genre" the same again (if it's even fair to label this artistic vision as such). This is the father -- or The Godfather, as many critics have said -- of the genre. Look, I love Citizen Kane, Vertigo, Casablanca, Gone With The Wind, Lawrence of Arabia, and The Godfather. Those are fantastic films that I could watch over and over again. But I'm going to go ahead and say it: this is the best film I've ever seen. Yes, probably all of those films (and many others) will always have a bigger impact on the history and future of filmmaking, but the quality of this film -- groundbreaking for the genre -- combined with my love of the Batman character and his world leave me completely unable to say otherwise. The film also, of course, dethrones the great Batman Begins as my favorite film of all-time. Begins did a magnificent job exploring the origins of the character, but along with its main theme, "escalation," The Dark Knight just takes things to a whole new level. Finally, we've gotten the film that will almost certainly be met with unanimous agreement as the definitive take on the character. This is The Batman.... this is The Dark Knight.

<hl> The screenplay says so many intriguing things about humanity <hl> .


Question: What is the quality of the color?

This classic SF adventure has never looked better than it does on Blu-Ray.  I watched it with the DTS soundtrack and the audio is excellent.  Colors are bold, rich and vibrant and the picture is razor-sharp.I've seen this in the theater, on tape, laserdisc, and the Ultimate Edition DVD.  I certainly don't regret purchasing it on Blu-Ray.Some fans will be disappointed as this doesn't include the extended cut, only the theatrical version.  Also, there is almost nothing in the way of bonus material.If all you want is the movie, this is the one to get.  If the bonus features are important, the Extreme Edition DVD (which I haven't seen) may be a better choice.

Answer: This classic SF adventure has never looked better than it does

<hl> This classic SF adventure has never looked better than it does on Blu-Ray. <hl> I watched it with the DTS soundtrack and the audio is excellent. Colors are bold, rich and vibrant and the picture is razor-sharp. I've seen this in the theater, on tape, laserdisc, and the Ultimate Edition DVD. I certainly don't regret purchasing it on Blu-Ray. Some fans will be disappointed as this doesn't include the extended cut, only the theatrical version. Also, there is almost nothing in the way of bonus material. If all you want is the movie, this is the one to get. If the bonus features are important, the Extreme Edition DVD (which I haven't seen) may be a better choice.

<hl> This classic SF adventure has never looked better than it does <hl> on Blu-Ray. I watched it with the DTS soundtrack and the audio is excellent. Colors are bold, rich and vibrant and the picture is razor-sharp.I've seen this in the theater, on tape, laserdisc, and the Ultimate Edition DVD. I certainly don't regret purchasing it on Blu-Ray.Some fans will be disappointed as this doesn't include the extended cut, only the theatrical version. Also, there is almost nothing in the way of bonus material.If all you want is the movie, this is the one to get. If the bonus features are important, the Extreme Edition DVD (which I haven't seen) may be a better choice.


Question: How did you like the line?

Haven't thought of pirates movie would be able make it back again in the modern days, especially when we are talking about we are in the age of Si-fi and fantasy movies that rely heaps on state-of-the-arts computer special effects. Nontheless Pirates of the Caribbean made a good return of the genre to the audience.Frankly, judging from the dodgy and lengthy title, there was not much hope about it being either entertaining or creative. However, with Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush and Orlando Bloom as the leading cast, the attraction of the movie rocketed immediately. Johnny Depp, playing the weird ex-pirate head who got dumped on an isolated island in the middle of nowhere provided a lot of essential credits to the movie. His performance is stunning and spectacular and managed to turn this old jerk into a half-weighted hero. His gestures and all the small movements he created for the character did add a lot of spice to make the character jump out of the script. Johnny Depp once again proved that he could transform any roles into a real character that could last in people's mind.Geoffrey Rush as the cursed power and wealth hungry pirate provided a lot of dynamics to the movie, especially when he was working with Johnny Depp and Keira Knightley. The whole movement of the story just came in and pushed the plot forward. Although working will strong actors like Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, the two young cast members Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley were not worse off in performance. They showed great integrity in their characters and were able to match with their strong counterparts perfectly. Orlando Bloom still needs time to shake his Legolas image off, but everything needs to have a start and it seems that this is a good start for him. Keira Knightley showed huge difference when compared to her role in Bend it Like Beckam. Both of them should have good chance in the acting career should they be able to choose their roles carefully in the future.The special effects of the movie concentrated on the transformation of the cursed sailor crew at different occasions and they were well done. It provides a creepy feeling in certain scenes and at other scenes created a haunting effect for the audience.The story itself is a bit simple but in all is a very entertainment movie for just sit back and relax.

Answer: Frankly

Haven't thought of pirates movie would be able make it back again in the modern days, especially when we are talking about we are in the age of Si-fi and fantasy movies that rely heaps on state-of-the-arts computer special effects. Nontheless Pirates of the Caribbean made a good return of the genre to the audience. <hl> Frankly , judging from the dodgy and lengthy title, there was not much hope about it being either entertaining or creative. <hl> However, with Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush and Orlando Bloom as the leading cast, the attraction of the movie rocketed immediately. Johnny Depp, playing the weird ex-pirate head who got dumped on an isolated island in the middle of nowhere provided a lot of essential credits to the movie. His performance is stunning and spectacular and managed to turn this old jerk into a half-weighted hero. His gestures and all the small movements he created for the character did add a lot of spice to make the character jump out of the script. Johnny Depp once again proved that he could transform any roles into a real character that could last in people's mind. Geoffrey Rush as the cursed power and wealth hungry pirate provided a lot of dynamics to the movie, especially when he was working with Johnny Depp and Keira Knightley. The whole movement of the story just came in and pushed the plot forward. Although working will strong actors like Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, the two young cast members Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley were not worse off in performance. They showed great integrity in their characters and were able to match with their strong counterparts perfectly. Orlando Bloom still needs time to shake his Legolas image off, but everything needs to have a start and it seems that this is a good start for him. Keira Knightley showed huge difference when compared to her role in Bend it Like Beckam. Both of them should have good chance in the acting career should they be able to choose their roles carefully in the future. The special effects of the movie concentrated on the transformation of the cursed sailor crew at different occasions and they were well done. It provides a creepy feeling in certain scenes and at other scenes created a haunting effect for the audience. The story itself is a bit simple but in all is a very entertainment movie for just sit back and relax.

Haven't thought of pirates movie would be able make it back again in the modern days, especially when we are talking about we are in the age of Si-fi and fantasy movies that rely heaps on state-of-the-arts computer special effects. Nontheless Pirates of the Caribbean made a good return of the genre to the audience.<hl> Frankly <hl>, judging from the dodgy and lengthy title, there was not much hope about it being either entertaining or creative. However, with Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush and Orlando Bloom as the leading cast, the attraction of the movie rocketed immediately. Johnny Depp, playing the weird ex-pirate head who got dumped on an isolated island in the middle of nowhere provided a lot of essential credits to the movie. His performance is stunning and spectacular and managed to turn this old jerk into a half-weighted hero. His gestures and all the small movements he created for the character did add a lot of spice to make the character jump out of the script. Johnny Depp once again proved that he could transform any roles into a real character that could last in people's mind.Geoffrey Rush as the cursed power and wealth hungry pirate provided a lot of dynamics to the movie, especially when he was working with Johnny Depp and Keira Knightley. The whole movement of the story just came in and pushed the plot forward. Although working will strong actors like Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush, the two young cast members Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley were not worse off in performance. They showed great integrity in their characters and were able to match with their strong counterparts perfectly. Orlando Bloom still needs time to shake his Legolas image off, but everything needs to have a start and it seems that this is a good start for him. Keira Knightley showed huge difference when compared to her role in Bend it Like Beckam. Both of them should have good chance in the acting career should they be able to choose their roles carefully in the future.The special effects of the movie concentrated on the transformation of the cursed sailor crew at different occasions and they were well done. It provides a creepy feeling in certain scenes and at other scenes created a haunting effect for the audience.The story itself is a bit simple but in all is a very entertainment movie for just sit back and relax.

<hl> Frankly <hl> , judging from the dodgy and lengthy title, there was not much hope about it being either entertaining or creative.


Question: How is the rest of the cast?

I admit when I first heard about this movie, I had no desire to see it. But then my buddy sat me down and made me watch it from beginning to end.  I watched it once, and I have loved it from that day to this. The cast is  incredible, the story is twisted and interesting, and to top it all off,  it's very, very funny. I didn't really think much of Kevin Spacey before  this movie, but after this one performance, I was hooked. His ability to  physically and emotionally transform himself completely into Verbal Kint  really blew me away.  I have been a major Spacey fan ever since. If anyone  has yet to see this, I pity you.  It is really one of the best kept secrets  in the video world.

Answer: The cast is  incredible, the story is twisted and interesting

I admit when I first heard about this movie, I had no desire to see it. But then my buddy sat me down and made me watch it from beginning to end. I watched it once, and I have loved it from that day to this. <hl> The cast is incredible, the story is twisted and interesting , and to top it all off, it's very, very funny. <hl> I didn't really think much of Kevin Spacey before this movie, but after this one performance, I was hooked. His ability to physically and emotionally transform himself completely into Verbal Kint really blew me away. I have been a major Spacey fan ever since. If anyone has yet to see this, I pity you. It is really one of the best kept secrets in the video world.

I admit when I first heard about this movie, I had no desire to see it. But then my buddy sat me down and made me watch it from beginning to end. I watched it once, and I have loved it from that day to this. <hl> The cast is incredible, the story is twisted and interesting <hl>, and to top it all off, it's very, very funny. I didn't really think much of Kevin Spacey before this movie, but after this one performance, I was hooked. His ability to physically and emotionally transform himself completely into Verbal Kint really blew me away. I have been a major Spacey fan ever since. If anyone has yet to see this, I pity you. It is really one of the best kept secrets in the video world.

<hl> The cast is incredible, the story is twisted and interesting <hl> , and to top it all off, it's very, very funny.


Question: How do you like the message?

I love this movie and this was the perfect addition for my collection.  I'm so glad I got it on Blu-ray so now I can watch it as many times as I want.  The story is amazing and the soundtrack is wonderful.  Julie Andrews absolutely shines in this movie.

Answer: The story is amazing

I love this movie and this was the perfect addition for my collection. I'm so glad I got it on Blu-ray so now I can watch it as many times as I want. <hl> The story is amazing and the soundtrack is wonderful. <hl> Julie Andrews absolutely shines in this movie.

I love this movie and this was the perfect addition for my collection. I'm so glad I got it on Blu-ray so now I can watch it as many times as I want. <hl> The story is amazing <hl> and the soundtrack is wonderful. Julie Andrews absolutely shines in this movie.