Question: Why is the movie popular?

Reviled by some, beloved by many, consistently referred to as the most  popular movie musical ever made, THE SOUND OF MUSIC more than fulfills the  promise of its beautiful visuals and expert song numbers on home video via  DVD.  This edition tops the 1995 laserdisc by allowing the sparkling,  exemplary design of its 70mm. Todd-AO frame to be exhibited with increased  sharpness and resolution.  The 4.1 Dolby Digital soundtrack is powerful and  clean, but since this film was originally mixed for six-track magnetic  stereo, it's curious why the effort wasn't made by Fox to split the  surrounds!  Nonethless, the film sounds terrific. The extra features make  this package a bargain at the price.  Full length commentary by director  Bob Wise, with the musical numbers presented sans vocals, is a great touch.  And the two documentaries are beautifully presented; full of facts and  bits of arcane information that any fan will truly enjoy. A great movie,  and a great DVD rendition.  More like this, PLEASE!

Answer: THE SOUND OF MUSIC more than fulfills the  promise of its beautiful visuals and expert song numbers on home video

<hl> Reviled by some, beloved by many, consistently referred to as the most popular movie musical ever made, THE SOUND OF MUSIC more than fulfills the promise of its beautiful visuals and expert song numbers on home video via DVD. <hl> This edition tops the 1995 laserdisc by allowing the sparkling, exemplary design of its 70mm. Todd-AO frame to be exhibited with increased sharpness and resolution. The 4.1 Dolby Digital soundtrack is powerful and clean, but since this film was originally mixed for six-track magnetic stereo, it's curious why the effort wasn't made by Fox to split the surrounds! Nonethless, the film sounds terrific. The extra features make this package a bargain at the price. Full length commentary by director Bob Wise, with the musical numbers presented sans vocals, is a great touch. And the two documentaries are beautifully presented; full of facts and bits of arcane information that any fan will truly enjoy. A great movie, and a great DVD rendition. More like this, PLEASE!

Reviled by some, beloved by many, consistently referred to as the most popular movie musical ever made, <hl> THE SOUND OF MUSIC more than fulfills the promise of its beautiful visuals and expert song numbers on home video <hl> via DVD. This edition tops the 1995 laserdisc by allowing the sparkling, exemplary design of its 70mm. Todd-AO frame to be exhibited with increased sharpness and resolution. The 4.1 Dolby Digital soundtrack is powerful and clean, but since this film was originally mixed for six-track magnetic stereo, it's curious why the effort wasn't made by Fox to split the surrounds! Nonethless, the film sounds terrific. The extra features make this package a bargain at the price. Full length commentary by director Bob Wise, with the musical numbers presented sans vocals, is a great touch. And the two documentaries are beautifully presented; full of facts and bits of arcane information that any fan will truly enjoy. A great movie, and a great DVD rendition. More like this, PLEASE!


Question: What do you think about the movie?

I couldn't believe how good this looked. The look and sound of perfect indeed. Can you believe this movie is 25 years old? Granted the dated computers look strange to us now, but the detail this version contains is incredible.I also like that there are two versions for those that want just the movies or those that want it all.WB hit a home run with this. I hope they give this treatment to all of their major catalog titles going forward.

Answer: I couldn't believe how good this looked

<hl> I couldn't believe how good this looked . <hl> The look and sound of perfect indeed. Can you believe this movie is 25 years old? Granted the dated computers look strange to us now, but the detail this version contains is incredible. I also like that there are two versions for those that want just the movies or those that want it all. WB hit a home run with this. I hope they give this treatment to all of their major catalog titles going forward.

<hl> I couldn't believe how good this looked <hl>. The look and sound of perfect indeed. Can you believe this movie is 25 years old? Granted the dated computers look strange to us now, but the detail this version contains is incredible.I also like that there are two versions for those that want just the movies or those that want it all.WB hit a home run with this. I hope they give this treatment to all of their major catalog titles going forward.

<hl> I couldn't believe how good this looked <hl> .


Question: How is the film?

The first movie was very dull and kinda boring. I saw the second one in the theatres, in was boiling hot, my Uncle was snorting continuously, the chairs were uncomfortable and the movie was just good enough, but not great enough to beat all the other unpleasentaries surrounding me. So, I come into this movie thinking it will just be like the rest of them, man, was I wrong. This is by far the best of three and the only one I would praise out of this trilogy. The ending is sad, yet happy and The WitchKing is the best bad guy yet. Plus, he can't help but love good old Gandolf. He makes his appearences in this movie much more notable then the first two, and even Frodo managed to get on my good side. This movie is terrific and if I were to go back and watch the first two now, I think it would be much more delightful and interesting. It's just a shame that they couldn't have made the first one like this because then I would have been fascinated from the beginning... and this is a great series to get in to because they have so much from this series. Overall, it's packed with excitement, good acting and a strong plot that builds throughout the trilogy. There is nothing more that I liked about this trilogy then the plot, the acting was always shaky in the first two, but they pull out of shaky and go to great in this one. Overall, it's a must see for anyone.

Answer: The first movie was very dull and kinda boring

<hl> The first movie was very dull and kinda boring . <hl> I saw the second one in the theatres, in was boiling hot, my Uncle was snorting continuously, the chairs were uncomfortable and the movie was just good enough, but not great enough to beat all the other unpleasentaries surrounding me. So, I come into this movie thinking it will just be like the rest of them, man, was I wrong. This is by far the best of three and the only one I would praise out of this trilogy. The ending is sad, yet happy and The WitchKing is the best bad guy yet. Plus, he can't help but love good old Gandolf. He makes his appearences in this movie much more notable then the first two, and even Frodo managed to get on my good side. This movie is terrific and if I were to go back and watch the first two now, I think it would be much more delightful and interesting. It's just a shame that they couldn't have made the first one like this because then I would have been fascinated from the beginning... and this is a great series to get in to because they have so much from this series. Overall, it's packed with excitement, good acting and a strong plot that builds throughout the trilogy. There is nothing more that I liked about this trilogy then the plot, the acting was always shaky in the first two, but they pull out of shaky and go to great in this one. Overall, it's a must see for anyone.

<hl> The first movie was very dull and kinda boring <hl>. I saw the second one in the theatres, in was boiling hot, my Uncle was snorting continuously, the chairs were uncomfortable and the movie was just good enough, but not great enough to beat all the other unpleasentaries surrounding me. So, I come into this movie thinking it will just be like the rest of them, man, was I wrong. This is by far the best of three and the only one I would praise out of this trilogy. The ending is sad, yet happy and The WitchKing is the best bad guy yet. Plus, he can't help but love good old Gandolf. He makes his appearences in this movie much more notable then the first two, and even Frodo managed to get on my good side. This movie is terrific and if I were to go back and watch the first two now, I think it would be much more delightful and interesting. It's just a shame that they couldn't have made the first one like this because then I would have been fascinated from the beginning... and this is a great series to get in to because they have so much from this series. Overall, it's packed with excitement, good acting and a strong plot that builds throughout the trilogy. There is nothing more that I liked about this trilogy then the plot, the acting was always shaky in the first two, but they pull out of shaky and go to great in this one. Overall, it's a must see for anyone.

<hl> The first movie was very dull and kinda boring <hl> .


Question: How was the movie?

A group of scientists and crewmembers set out to travel to a distant planet to discover the meaning behind some ancient cave drawings. It is the year 2093 and there may be life present on this remote planet. This prequel to the great 1980 film Alien contains the pre-story to the discovery of the species that terrified the crew of that film. Modern-day expertise has improved the visual capabilities that filmmakers can achieve, which are enhanced further by 3D technology in this film. Unfortunately, Ridley Scott populated this film with characters that you don't get to know well and don't particularly care about, sans one. However, the movie is exciting and visually stimulating enough to make it a worth while film-going experience.

Answer: the movie is exciting and visually stimulating enough to make it a worth while film-going experience

A group of scientists and crewmembers set out to travel to a distant planet to discover the meaning behind some ancient cave drawings. It is the year 2093 and there may be life present on this remote planet. This prequel to the great 1980 film Alien contains the pre-story to the discovery of the species that terrified the crew of that film. Modern-day expertise has improved the visual capabilities that filmmakers can achieve, which are enhanced further by 3D technology in this film. Unfortunately, Ridley Scott populated this film with characters that you don't get to know well and don't particularly care about, sans one. <hl> However, the movie is exciting and visually stimulating enough to make it a worth while film-going experience . <hl>

A group of scientists and crewmembers set out to travel to a distant planet to discover the meaning behind some ancient cave drawings. It is the year 2093 and there may be life present on this remote planet. This prequel to the great 1980 film Alien contains the pre-story to the discovery of the species that terrified the crew of that film. Modern-day expertise has improved the visual capabilities that filmmakers can achieve, which are enhanced further by 3D technology in this film. Unfortunately, Ridley Scott populated this film with characters that you don't get to know well and don't particularly care about, sans one. However, <hl> the movie is exciting and visually stimulating enough to make it a worth while film-going experience <hl>.

However, <hl> the movie is exciting and visually stimulating enough to make it a worth while film-going experience <hl> .


Question: How is the art direction?

"Tower Heist" is great! This is how the story goes: Queens native Josh Kovacs has managed one of the most luxurious and well-secured residences in New York City for more than a decade. Under his watchful eye, nothing goes undetected. In the swankiest unit atop Josh's building, Wall Street titan Arthur Shaw is under house arrest after being caught stealing two billion from his investors. The hardest hit among those he defrauded? The tower staffers whose pensions he was entrusted to manage.With only days before Arthur gets away with the perfect crime, Josh's crew turns to petty crook Slide to plan the nearly impossible, to steal what they are sure is hidden in Arthur's guarded condo. Though amateurs, these rookie thieves know the building better than anyone. Turns out they've been casing the place for years, they just didn't know it.The cast led by Ben Stiller (as Josh) & Eddie Murphy (as Slide, who was also a producer on the film) is great. The directing by Brett Ratner is great. The story by Ted Griffin, Bill Collage & Adam Cooper is great & the screenplay by Griffin & Jeff Nathanson is also great.The music by Christophe Beck is great. The cinematography by Dante Spinotti is great. The film editing by Mark Helfrich is great. The casting by Kathleen Chopin is great. The production design by Kristi Zea is great. The art direction by Nicholas Lundy is great. The set decoration by Diane Lederman is great. The costume design by Sarah Edwards is great.This is a great action-comedy that keeps you thinking and on the edge of your seat, laughing. This is a fun and entertaining movie. Ben Stiller & Eddie Murphy make a great comic duo. Brett Ratner has made a great movie that is better than some of the movies that he has done recently. This is a great movie to start the holiday season off with.

Answer: This is a great movie

"Tower Heist" is great! This is how the story goes: Queens native Josh Kovacs has managed one of the most luxurious and well-secured residences in New York City for more than a decade. Under his watchful eye, nothing goes undetected. In the swankiest unit atop Josh's building, Wall Street titan Arthur Shaw is under house arrest after being caught stealing two billion from his investors. The hardest hit among those he defrauded? The tower staffers whose pensions he was entrusted to manage. With only days before Arthur gets away with the perfect crime, Josh's crew turns to petty crook Slide to plan the nearly impossible, to steal what they are sure is hidden in Arthur's guarded condo. Though amateurs, these rookie thieves know the building better than anyone. Turns out they've been casing the place for years, they just didn't know it. The cast led by Ben Stiller (as Josh) & Eddie Murphy (as Slide, who was also a producer on the film) is great. The directing by Brett Ratner is great. The story by Ted Griffin, Bill Collage & Adam Cooper is great & the screenplay by Griffin & Jeff Nathanson is also great. The music by Christophe Beck is great. The cinematography by Dante Spinotti is great. The film editing by Mark Helfrich is great. The casting by Kathleen Chopin is great. The production design by Kristi Zea is great. The art direction by Nicholas Lundy is great. The set decoration by Diane Lederman is great. The costume design by Sarah Edwards is great. This is a great action-comedy that keeps you thinking and on the edge of your seat, laughing. This is a fun and entertaining movie. Ben Stiller & Eddie Murphy make a great comic duo. Brett Ratner has made a great movie that is better than some of the movies that he has done recently. <hl> This is a great movie to start the holiday season off with. <hl>

"Tower Heist" is great! This is how the story goes: Queens native Josh Kovacs has managed one of the most luxurious and well-secured residences in New York City for more than a decade. Under his watchful eye, nothing goes undetected. In the swankiest unit atop Josh's building, Wall Street titan Arthur Shaw is under house arrest after being caught stealing two billion from his investors. The hardest hit among those he defrauded? The tower staffers whose pensions he was entrusted to manage.With only days before Arthur gets away with the perfect crime, Josh's crew turns to petty crook Slide to plan the nearly impossible, to steal what they are sure is hidden in Arthur's guarded condo. Though amateurs, these rookie thieves know the building better than anyone. Turns out they've been casing the place for years, they just didn't know it.The cast led by Ben Stiller (as Josh) & Eddie Murphy (as Slide, who was also a producer on the film) is great. The directing by Brett Ratner is great. The story by Ted Griffin, Bill Collage & Adam Cooper is great & the screenplay by Griffin & Jeff Nathanson is also great.The music by Christophe Beck is great. The cinematography by Dante Spinotti is great. The film editing by Mark Helfrich is great. The casting by Kathleen Chopin is great. The production design by Kristi Zea is great. The art direction by Nicholas Lundy is great. The set decoration by Diane Lederman is great. The costume design by Sarah Edwards is great.This is a great action-comedy that keeps you thinking and on the edge of your seat, laughing. This is a fun and entertaining movie. Ben Stiller & Eddie Murphy make a great comic duo. Brett Ratner has made a great movie that is better than some of the movies that he has done recently. <hl> This is a great movie <hl> to start the holiday season off with.


Question: How much does the transfer have?

In 1991, Beauty and The Beast became one of the year's top grossing movies and a favorite among Critics and audiences, it's also the first animated movie to recieve a academy award nomminee for best picture making this movie into one of the greatest movies of all time.The DVD: Stunning! has a excellent transfer with not a single grain in sight but the sound is terrific as well certified with THX digital sound, this first disc contains three versions of the film which includes the Special Edition with a never-before-shown Musical number, the original Theatrical edition and the Work-in-progress edition, second disc includes games, documentaries, Music Videos and more.So if your a DVD lover, own this DVD cause it's one of the best movies of all time and best DVDs of all time.

Answer: excellent transfer

In 1991, Beauty and The Beast became one of the year's top grossing movies and a favorite among Critics and audiences, it's also the first animated movie to recieve a academy award nomminee for best picture making this movie into one of the greatest movies of all time. <hl> The DVD: Stunning! has a excellent transfer with not a single grain in sight but the sound is terrific as well certified with THX digital sound, this first disc contains three versions of the film which includes the Special Edition with a never-before-shown Musical number, the original Theatrical edition and the Work-in-progress edition, second disc includes games, documentaries, Music Videos and more. <hl> So if your a DVD lover, own this DVD cause it's one of the best movies of all time and best DVDs of all time.

In 1991, Beauty and The Beast became one of the year's top grossing movies and a favorite among Critics and audiences, it's also the first animated movie to recieve a academy award nomminee for best picture making this movie into one of the greatest movies of all time.The DVD: Stunning! has a <hl> excellent transfer <hl> with not a single grain in sight but the sound is terrific as well certified with THX digital sound, this first disc contains three versions of the film which includes the Special Edition with a never-before-shown Musical number, the original Theatrical edition and the Work-in-progress edition, second disc includes games, documentaries, Music Videos and more.So if your a DVD lover, own this DVD cause it's one of the best movies of all time and best DVDs of all time.


Question: Why is a film so powerful?

The film opens very strong with the premise of the pioneering Americans settling the West the turn of the century. Their goal, oil. Desert land is being bought up and wells are being dug by hand. One of these pioneers is Daniel (Lewis). Having already made his fortune he travels with his adopted son to a small desert shack said to be containing oil.Overnight Daniel buys up thousands of acres and turns this one shack is turned into a full size town with a train station, roads, house for workers, and accompanying businesses. This first 1:10 is very exhilarating as we see a how a town is built from scratch and progress is made. The excellent photography and musically score also add to this.However the next 1:30 minutes are a downward spiral. Both Daniel and the plot seem to stagger forward without direction on substance. Daniel abandons his son whom goes deaf and mad after an accident and murders a con man pretenting to be his lost brother. Down right embarrassing are the scenes with a crazed preacher with a Christ complex who mocks Daniel. These scenes were not humorous even in a dark way. I felt sorry for the actors.`There Will Be Blood' starts out strong but dies a slow and painful for the audience death.

Answer: The film opens very strong

<hl> The film opens very strong with the premise of the pioneering Americans settling the West the turn of the century. <hl> Their goal, oil. Desert land is being bought up and wells are being dug by hand. One of these pioneers is Daniel (Lewis). Having already made his fortune he travels with his adopted son to a small desert shack said to be containing oil. Overnight Daniel buys up thousands of acres and turns this one shack is turned into a full size town with a train station, roads, house for workers, and accompanying businesses. This first 1:10 is very exhilarating as we see a how a town is built from scratch and progress is made. The excellent photography and musically score also add to this. However the next 1:30 minutes are a downward spiral. Both Daniel and the plot seem to stagger forward without direction on substance. Daniel abandons his son whom goes deaf and mad after an accident and murders a con man pretenting to be his lost brother. Down right embarrassing are the scenes with a crazed preacher with a Christ complex who mocks Daniel. These scenes were not humorous even in a dark way. I felt sorry for the actors. `There Will Be Blood' starts out strong but dies a slow and painful for the audience death.

<hl> The film opens very strong <hl> with the premise of the pioneering Americans settling the West the turn of the century. Their goal, oil. Desert land is being bought up and wells are being dug by hand. One of these pioneers is Daniel (Lewis). Having already made his fortune he travels with his adopted son to a small desert shack said to be containing oil.Overnight Daniel buys up thousands of acres and turns this one shack is turned into a full size town with a train station, roads, house for workers, and accompanying businesses. This first 1:10 is very exhilarating as we see a how a town is built from scratch and progress is made. The excellent photography and musically score also add to this.However the next 1:30 minutes are a downward spiral. Both Daniel and the plot seem to stagger forward without direction on substance. Daniel abandons his son whom goes deaf and mad after an accident and murders a con man pretenting to be his lost brother. Down right embarrassing are the scenes with a crazed preacher with a Christ complex who mocks Daniel. These scenes were not humorous even in a dark way. I felt sorry for the actors.`There Will Be Blood' starts out strong but dies a slow and painful for the audience death.


Question: How is the cast?

This is the most satisfying of the Batman movies.  No goofy villains or campy lines here.  This Batman has a great script, plenty of action and terrific acting.Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freemen, Rutger Hauer and of course Christian Bale.  These guys are professionals.  Even though many of the parts seemed minor, each actor makes their presence felt.  They make this the most realistic of the Batman movies.High marks for the director, Tim Nolan who got these wonderful performances from these excellent actors.  He really had a handle on his movie and it shows.  He allowed his actors to  become multi-dimensional people, not simply side-kicks to Batman.  In a good "period" piece, the director develops his characters slowly; in some cases leaving the viewer to ponder if they are good or bad or somewhere in-between.  Nolan manages to create this struggle in his characters and at the same time keep the action level high.The plot is far more intricate than other Batman movies too;  taking it from a comic book action movie to an action mystery.  Gotham is dark and forboding and the Batman is tough and sober about his mission.Side note:  the chase scene is probably the best I have ever seen.

Answer: These guys are professionals

These guys are professionals .

This is the most satisfying of the Batman movies. No goofy villains or campy lines here. This Batman has a great script, plenty of action and terrific acting. Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freemen, Rutger Hauer and of course Christian Bale. <hl> These guys are professionals . <hl> Even though many of the parts seemed minor, each actor makes their presence felt. They make this the most realistic of the Batman movies. High marks for the director, Tim Nolan who got these wonderful performances from these excellent actors. He really had a handle on his movie and it shows. He allowed his actors to become multi-dimensional people, not simply side-kicks to Batman. In a good "period" piece, the director develops his characters slowly; in some cases leaving the viewer to ponder if they are good or bad or somewhere in-between. Nolan manages to create this struggle in his characters and at the same time keep the action level high. The plot is far more intricate than other Batman movies too; taking it from a comic book action movie to an action mystery. Gotham is dark and forboding and the Batman is tough and sober about his mission. Side note: the chase scene is probably the best I have ever seen.

This is the most satisfying of the Batman movies. No goofy villains or campy lines here. This Batman has a great script, plenty of action and terrific acting.Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freemen, Rutger Hauer and of course Christian Bale. <hl> These guys are professionals <hl>. Even though many of the parts seemed minor, each actor makes their presence felt. They make this the most realistic of the Batman movies.High marks for the director, Tim Nolan who got these wonderful performances from these excellent actors. He really had a handle on his movie and it shows. He allowed his actors to become multi-dimensional people, not simply side-kicks to Batman. In a good "period" piece, the director develops his characters slowly; in some cases leaving the viewer to ponder if they are good or bad or somewhere in-between. Nolan manages to create this struggle in his characters and at the same time keep the action level high.The plot is far more intricate than other Batman movies too; taking it from a comic book action movie to an action mystery. Gotham is dark and forboding and the Batman is tough and sober about his mission.Side note: the chase scene is probably the best I have ever seen.

<hl> These guys are professionals <hl> .


Question: How is story?

The story of an Aids patient who refuses to accept his death sentence is compelling. His illness makes him fight our government FDA that had not yet approved the drugs he researched that were commonly used in other countries.  Throughout the movie he developed friends that he would never associate with under normal circumstances. I loved the determination and hope you feel as you watch him refuse to cave in to the government and the medical community.l will recommend this to anyone who needs to be an advocate for themselves in any situation.  Watching this movie you can't help but cheer for the underdog who refuses to roll over and die when it seems so many people are comfortable with the status quo.

Answer: The story of an Aids patient who refuses to accept his death sentence is compelling

<hl> The story of an Aids patient who refuses to accept his death sentence is compelling . <hl> His illness makes him fight our government FDA that had not yet approved the drugs he researched that were commonly used in other countries. Throughout the movie he developed friends that he would never associate with under normal circumstances. I loved the determination and hope you feel as you watch him refuse to cave in to the government and the medical community.l will recommend this to anyone who needs to be an advocate for themselves in any situation. Watching this movie you can't help but cheer for the underdog who refuses to roll over and die when it seems so many people are comfortable with the status quo.

<hl> The story of an Aids patient who refuses to accept his death sentence is compelling <hl>. His illness makes him fight our government FDA that had not yet approved the drugs he researched that were commonly used in other countries. Throughout the movie he developed friends that he would never associate with under normal circumstances. I loved the determination and hope you feel as you watch him refuse to cave in to the government and the medical community.l will recommend this to anyone who needs to be an advocate for themselves in any situation. Watching this movie you can't help but cheer for the underdog who refuses to roll over and die when it seems so many people are comfortable with the status quo.

<hl> The story of an Aids patient who refuses to accept his death sentence is compelling <hl> .


Question: What is the best extra?

I know alot of Halloween fans were disappointed with this box set because there's really nothing new but if you haven't already purchased the Halloween films, this is a great place to start. You get 3 versions of the classic original film that was released in 1978 & went on to become the most successful independent film of its time. What can I say about this film that hasn't been said already? There's a reason why it's my all time favorite horror film & my all time favorite horror franchise. The 3 versions of the film you get are the Blu-Ray edition, the regular DVD edition & the extended version that includes extra scenes that were filmed for the NBC airing. I personally love the extended version & usually always watch it instead of the original because I love the added scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis & PJ Soles who played Linda. The special features on the regular DVD version aren't as good as the 25th Anniversary DVD but they are still great & interesting to watch. The set also includes the first disc of Halloween: 25 Years Of Terror which is a brilliant documentary on the series hosted by PJ Soles. I don't know why they didn't include disc two because it has some great special features but you can buy the documentary seperately for a reasonable price if you really want disc two. It also includes the awesome Divimax editions of Halloween 4 & Halloween 5 which are great. I love the special features on these films, especially the commentaries. Danielle Harris & Ellie Cornell provide some interesting insight into these movies. I also love the artwork & all of this makes this a great addition to any horror fan's collection. I purchased this & then I bought Halloween II & III as a double feature DVD & Halloween: The Curse Of Michael Myers, Halloween H20 & Halloween: Resurrection in a 3 DVD set. Neither set was very expensive at all so if you haven't purchased the Halloween films yet, this is a great place to start.

Answer: the extended version that includes extra scenes that were filmed for the NBC airing

I know alot of Halloween fans were disappointed with this box set because there's really nothing new but if you haven't already purchased the Halloween films, this is a great place to start. You get 3 versions of the classic original film that was released in 1978 & went on to become the most successful independent film of its time. What can I say about this film that hasn't been said already? There's a reason why it's my all time favorite horror film & my all time favorite horror franchise. <hl> The 3 versions of the film you get are the Blu-Ray edition, the regular DVD edition & the extended version that includes extra scenes that were filmed for the NBC airing . <hl> I personally love the extended version & usually always watch it instead of the original because I love the added scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis & PJ Soles who played Linda. The special features on the regular DVD version aren't as good as the 25th Anniversary DVD but they are still great & interesting to watch. The set also includes the first disc of Halloween: 25 Years Of Terror which is a brilliant documentary on the series hosted by PJ Soles. I don't know why they didn't include disc two because it has some great special features but you can buy the documentary seperately for a reasonable price if you really want disc two. It also includes the awesome Divimax editions of Halloween 4 & Halloween 5 which are great. I love the special features on these films, especially the commentaries. Danielle Harris & Ellie Cornell provide some interesting insight into these movies. I also love the artwork & all of this makes this a great addition to any horror fan's collection. I purchased this & then I bought Halloween II & III as a double feature DVD & Halloween: The Curse Of Michael Myers, Halloween H20 & Halloween: Resurrection in a 3 DVD set. Neither set was very expensive at all so if you haven't purchased the Halloween films yet, this is a great place to start.

I know alot of Halloween fans were disappointed with this box set because there's really nothing new but if you haven't already purchased the Halloween films, this is a great place to start. You get 3 versions of the classic original film that was released in 1978 & went on to become the most successful independent film of its time. What can I say about this film that hasn't been said already? There's a reason why it's my all time favorite horror film & my all time favorite horror franchise. The 3 versions of the film you get are the Blu-Ray edition, the regular DVD edition & <hl> the extended version that includes extra scenes that were filmed for the NBC airing <hl>. I personally love the extended version & usually always watch it instead of the original because I love the added scenes with Jamie Lee Curtis & PJ Soles who played Linda. The special features on the regular DVD version aren't as good as the 25th Anniversary DVD but they are still great & interesting to watch. The set also includes the first disc of Halloween: 25 Years Of Terror which is a brilliant documentary on the series hosted by PJ Soles. I don't know why they didn't include disc two because it has some great special features but you can buy the documentary seperately for a reasonable price if you really want disc two. It also includes the awesome Divimax editions of Halloween 4 & Halloween 5 which are great. I love the special features on these films, especially the commentaries. Danielle Harris & Ellie Cornell provide some interesting insight into these movies. I also love the artwork & all of this makes this a great addition to any horror fan's collection. I purchased this & then I bought Halloween II & III as a double feature DVD & Halloween: The Curse Of Michael Myers, Halloween H20 & Halloween: Resurrection in a 3 DVD set. Neither set was very expensive at all so if you haven't purchased the Halloween films yet, this is a great place to start.

The 3 versions of the film you get are the Blu-Ray edition, the regular DVD edition & <hl> the extended version that includes extra scenes that were filmed for the NBC airing <hl> .


Question: What reunion is the story?

I picked this movie up for our daughter since she enjoys Shrek and Shrek II. I thought this movie was very cute and gave the viewer a different side to zoo animals. It starts out as the characters are in the zoo minding their own business when the penguins have an idea to leave the zoo for Antarctica. Marty (the zebra) decides the zoo life is not for him as well. Long story short, they end up getting boarded up and sent to Madagascar and have to survive on the island.It has funny moments, songs, and a good story line.

Answer: I thought this movie was very cute

I picked this movie up for our daughter since she enjoys Shrek and Shrek II. <hl> I thought this movie was very cute and gave the viewer a different side to zoo animals. <hl> It starts out as the characters are in the zoo minding their own business when the penguins have an idea to leave the zoo for Antarctica. Marty (the zebra) decides the zoo life is not for him as well. Long story short, they end up getting boarded up and sent to Madagascar and have to survive on the island. It has funny moments, songs, and a good story line.

I picked this movie up for our daughter since she enjoys Shrek and Shrek II. <hl> I thought this movie was very cute <hl> and gave the viewer a different side to zoo animals. It starts out as the characters are in the zoo minding their own business when the penguins have an idea to leave the zoo for Antarctica. Marty (the zebra) decides the zoo life is not for him as well. Long story short, they end up getting boarded up and sent to Madagascar and have to survive on the island.It has funny moments, songs, and a good story line.


Question: Is the movie transfer good?

A tale of heroes and adventure finally on DVD. Indiana Jones was created by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. It is an homage to the great cliff hangers of early cinema. Many scenes from these films come right out of Dick Tracey and other serials.Harrison Ford plays Dr. Jones an archeologist and adventurer who seeks to place precious relics in museum hands and out of the reach of scoundrels who use the antiquities for their own gains, and in the Nazis case their own agenda. To find out more about the film and why it is such a great adventure and a classic series I suggest viewing this set.I carry very fond memories of this series and I have enjoyed all the adventures of Indiana Jones. The box comes with 4 disc. The picture is sharp and the sound is in THX for those who have a certified system. The menus are nice here too and feature changing picture clips and music from the film.  One of the drawbacks of this set for me however was the absence of a director commentary on each disc and there are no German subtitles nor German language options. Those of you who have seen this series know that two of the three films featured the use of sparse German dialog and it would be nice to read what was said. The extra features have been saved to the fourth disc which includes a making of and other behind the scenes you would come to expect. I would however liked to have seen more from Lucas and Spielberg about their films and get some answers on what we can expect to see in the next film. Over all I was very pleased with the box set and look forward to seeing the Lucas Star Wars Trilogy come to DVD in a similar fashion.

Answer: A tale of heroes and adventure finally

<hl> A tale of heroes and adventure finally on DVD. <hl> Indiana Jones was created by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. It is an homage to the great cliff hangers of early cinema. Many scenes from these films come right out of Dick Tracey and other serials. Harrison Ford plays Dr. Jones an archeologist and adventurer who seeks to place precious relics in museum hands and out of the reach of scoundrels who use the antiquities for their own gains, and in the Nazis case their own agenda. To find out more about the film and why it is such a great adventure and a classic series I suggest viewing this set. I carry very fond memories of this series and I have enjoyed all the adventures of Indiana Jones. The box comes with 4 disc. The picture is sharp and the sound is in THX for those who have a certified system. The menus are nice here too and feature changing picture clips and music from the film. One of the drawbacks of this set for me however was the absence of a director commentary on each disc and there are no German subtitles nor German language options. Those of you who have seen this series know that two of the three films featured the use of sparse German dialog and it would be nice to read what was said. The extra features have been saved to the fourth disc which includes a making of and other behind the scenes you would come to expect. I would however liked to have seen more from Lucas and Spielberg about their films and get some answers on what we can expect to see in the next film. Over all I was very pleased with the box set and look forward to seeing the Lucas Star Wars Trilogy come to DVD in a similar fashion.

<hl> A tale of heroes and adventure finally <hl> on DVD. Indiana Jones was created by Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. It is an homage to the great cliff hangers of early cinema. Many scenes from these films come right out of Dick Tracey and other serials.Harrison Ford plays Dr. Jones an archeologist and adventurer who seeks to place precious relics in museum hands and out of the reach of scoundrels who use the antiquities for their own gains, and in the Nazis case their own agenda. To find out more about the film and why it is such a great adventure and a classic series I suggest viewing this set.I carry very fond memories of this series and I have enjoyed all the adventures of Indiana Jones. The box comes with 4 disc. The picture is sharp and the sound is in THX for those who have a certified system. The menus are nice here too and feature changing picture clips and music from the film. One of the drawbacks of this set for me however was the absence of a director commentary on each disc and there are no German subtitles nor German language options. Those of you who have seen this series know that two of the three films featured the use of sparse German dialog and it would be nice to read what was said. The extra features have been saved to the fourth disc which includes a making of and other behind the scenes you would come to expect. I would however liked to have seen more from Lucas and Spielberg about their films and get some answers on what we can expect to see in the next film. Over all I was very pleased with the box set and look forward to seeing the Lucas Star Wars Trilogy come to DVD in a similar fashion.


Question: Is a good film?

This will not doubt be compared to "Red Eye" since both came out so closely to the same time and both take place aboard an airplane.  Both are also psychological thrillers.  But the plots and details are very different.In Flight Plan, there are not flying on just "any" airlplane.  It is the new two story plane that is the worlds largest which in reality will start flying this year.  Jodie Foster's character is no ordinary person.  She is a propulsion engineer who had a big role in designing the plan.  Where Red Eye takes an average flight with (apparently) average people and puts them in a great plot, Flight Plan makes the lead character a powerful person.  To me this is a negative.  I'm sure the fact that she is an engineer, a job which few women hold, helped its political correctness score.But back to the movie.  I gave it four stars because it was very entertaining.  But like so many have said, it falls apart on closer scrutiny.  Wouldn't SOMEONE have seen or noticed the little girl coming on the plane?  Wouldn't someone have seen her being taken?  The "plot" had been planned out so thoughtfully by the antagonist (the air marshall), but what would have happened to the plan to take the girl if Foster's character had not fallen asleep.  There are only some of the problems with the movie.A strong part of the movie is that it sets up a very dreadful mood on the plane.  We can almost feel the emotions that Foster is feeling.  I could almost put myself in her position under those cicumstances.  One reviewer (not to give away more info. but I assume most people reading this review have already seen the movie) mentioned that the movie seemed to be going in the direction that she WAS dillusional and there really was no girl to being with.  Some viewers would have been angry at a "sad" ending like that, but it also would have bold and surprising.To me it would have make it a much better movie.  As it is, sit back and enjoy the movie, just don't try to make too much sense out of it.  And try not to be too dissapointed by the ending.

Answer: compared

<hl> This will not doubt be compared to "Red Eye" since both came out so closely to the same time and both take place aboard an airplane. <hl> Both are also psychological thrillers. But the plots and details are very different. In Flight Plan, there are not flying on just "any" airlplane. It is the new two story plane that is the worlds largest which in reality will start flying this year. Jodie Foster's character is no ordinary person. She is a propulsion engineer who had a big role in designing the plan. Where Red Eye takes an average flight with (apparently) average people and puts them in a great plot, Flight Plan makes the lead character a powerful person. To me this is a negative. I'm sure the fact that she is an engineer, a job which few women hold, helped its political correctness score. But back to the movie. I gave it four stars because it was very entertaining. But like so many have said, it falls apart on closer scrutiny. Wouldn't SOMEONE have seen or noticed the little girl coming on the plane? Wouldn't someone have seen her being taken? The "plot" had been planned out so thoughtfully by the antagonist (the air marshall), but what would have happened to the plan to take the girl if Foster's character had not fallen asleep. There are only some of the problems with the movie. A strong part of the movie is that it sets up a very dreadful mood on the plane. We can almost feel the emotions that Foster is feeling. I could almost put myself in her position under those cicumstances. One reviewer (not to give away more info. but I assume most people reading this review have already seen the movie) mentioned that the movie seemed to be going in the direction that she WAS dillusional and there really was no girl to being with. Some viewers would have been angry at a "sad" ending like that, but it also would have bold and surprising. To me it would have make it a much better movie. As it is, sit back and enjoy the movie, just don't try to make too much sense out of it. And try not to be too dissapointed by the ending.

This will not doubt be <hl> compared <hl> to "Red Eye" since both came out so closely to the same time and both take place aboard an airplane. Both are also psychological thrillers. But the plots and details are very different.In Flight Plan, there are not flying on just "any" airlplane. It is the new two story plane that is the worlds largest which in reality will start flying this year. Jodie Foster's character is no ordinary person. She is a propulsion engineer who had a big role in designing the plan. Where Red Eye takes an average flight with (apparently) average people and puts them in a great plot, Flight Plan makes the lead character a powerful person. To me this is a negative. I'm sure the fact that she is an engineer, a job which few women hold, helped its political correctness score.But back to the movie. I gave it four stars because it was very entertaining. But like so many have said, it falls apart on closer scrutiny. Wouldn't SOMEONE have seen or noticed the little girl coming on the plane? Wouldn't someone have seen her being taken? The "plot" had been planned out so thoughtfully by the antagonist (the air marshall), but what would have happened to the plan to take the girl if Foster's character had not fallen asleep. There are only some of the problems with the movie.A strong part of the movie is that it sets up a very dreadful mood on the plane. We can almost feel the emotions that Foster is feeling. I could almost put myself in her position under those cicumstances. One reviewer (not to give away more info. but I assume most people reading this review have already seen the movie) mentioned that the movie seemed to be going in the direction that she WAS dillusional and there really was no girl to being with. Some viewers would have been angry at a "sad" ending like that, but it also would have bold and surprising.To me it would have make it a much better movie. As it is, sit back and enjoy the movie, just don't try to make too much sense out of it. And try not to be too dissapointed by the ending.


Question: How was your memory?

Another classic film that I really wanted to add to my collection.  It is very long so I have watched it just once.  The color is good and the packaging looks very nice.  It came in secure wrappings and arrived soon after I ordered it.  I still feel that Clark Gable is the only man that could ever play Rhett Butler.  I do not even bother with remakes.  Loved Gable and Leigh.

Answer: It is very long so I have watched it just once

Another classic film that I really wanted to add to my collection. <hl> It is very long so I have watched it just once . <hl> The color is good and the packaging looks very nice. It came in secure wrappings and arrived soon after I ordered it. I still feel that Clark Gable is the only man that could ever play Rhett Butler. I do not even bother with remakes. Loved Gable and Leigh.

Another classic film that I really wanted to add to my collection. <hl> It is very long so I have watched it just once <hl>. The color is good and the packaging looks very nice. It came in secure wrappings and arrived soon after I ordered it. I still feel that Clark Gable is the only man that could ever play Rhett Butler. I do not even bother with remakes. Loved Gable and Leigh.

<hl> It is very long so I have watched it just once <hl> .


Question: What are the production values on the series?

a co-worker and I watch this during our lunch time...we completely enjoy the humor and jaw dropping happenings. each new episode is better than the last and we can't wait to see what the next episode will hold.

Answer: we completely enjoy the humor and jaw dropping happenings

a co-worker and I watch this during our lunch time... <hl> we completely enjoy the humor and jaw dropping happenings . <hl> each new episode is better than the last and we can't wait to see what the next episode will hold.

a co-worker and I watch this during our lunch time...<hl> we completely enjoy the humor and jaw dropping happenings <hl>. each new episode is better than the last and we can't wait to see what the next episode will hold.

<hl> we completely enjoy the humor and jaw dropping happenings <hl> .


Question: How is the set?

The epic starts here.It was hard to fathom The Lord Of The Rings ever becoming a live-action motion picture. Two horribly failed attempts to animate the story (both failed so miserably the funding was pulled before they could be completed) proved the work was too big, too complicated and too adored by readers to be translated less than perfectly. On top of that Tolkien created this thick, complex world and languages that could not easily be shown or translated to the screen.But Peter Jackson did it.From the grand opening shots of the Shire, to the showdown with the Balrog, this is a moving, stirring, emotional spectacle. A masterpiece.The episodic first installment covers the handing over of the one ring from Hobbit Bilbo to nephew Frodo, neither of whom know the rings powers or origin. A dark force, Sauron, who forged the ring of power to control the lords and kings of Man, Elves and Dwarves. Existing only as a powerful spirit, a great fiery eye, Sauron searches tirelessly for the ring that can bring him back to form and power. When Wizard Gandalf figures out the nature of the ring (in an abiding Duh! moment) he hurries Frodo - who is quickly joined by fellow hobbits Merry, Pippin and loyal servant Samwise - away from the shire so that Gandalf can figure what the enemy is up to, plot a course of action and find a way for Frodo to be released of his task of baring the desperately hunted ring of power. He fails, being capture by turned-evil wizard Saruman and does not meet up with Frodo at the designated place and time.Frodo and friends being pursued by Dark Riders, the kings of men possessed by the one ring and now Ring Wraiths, is taken under wing by Stryder, a mysterious Vagabond who seems to know more about Frodo that Frodo.The journey takes them to Rivendell, one of home of the elves, and master Elrod. A council of Man, Wizard, Dwarf and Hobbit is convened and nine go forward to destroy the ring, by carrying it into the stronghold of Sauron and casting it into the fire from which it was forged.The Quest take Frodo and Company to the top of a mountain nearly brought down by Saruman to the mines of Moria, where the entire population of Dwarfs mining it have been slaughtered and the Fellowship must face an impress army of thousands of orcs, a cave troll and the satan-like Balrog.In the end the story concludes by not solving anything, but leaving us open for the next film.The ride is breathtaking, the sets are amazing, the costumes, acting, directing, music and sound are all dead on perfect. Peter Jackson never lets the camera stop moving and knows how to film action in a personal and involving way that is rarely seen. This grand operatic quest is on a scale never before seen and the DVD and Dolby or DTS sound are brilliant. There's nearly an over abundance of commentary tracks here, nearly everyone involved gets one, the actors and director / writer are the hands down best and worth the four hours to listen to.Never mind the theatrical version, that was great this is grand. A must have.

Answer: the sets are amazing

The epic starts here. It was hard to fathom The Lord Of The Rings ever becoming a live-action motion picture. Two horribly failed attempts to animate the story (both failed so miserably the funding was pulled before they could be completed) proved the work was too big, too complicated and too adored by readers to be translated less than perfectly. On top of that Tolkien created this thick, complex world and languages that could not easily be shown or translated to the screen. But Peter Jackson did it. From the grand opening shots of the Shire, to the showdown with the Balrog, this is a moving, stirring, emotional spectacle. A masterpiece. The episodic first installment covers the handing over of the one ring from Hobbit Bilbo to nephew Frodo, neither of whom know the rings powers or origin. A dark force, Sauron, who forged the ring of power to control the lords and kings of Man, Elves and Dwarves. Existing only as a powerful spirit, a great fiery eye, Sauron searches tirelessly for the ring that can bring him back to form and power. When Wizard Gandalf figures out the nature of the ring (in an abiding Duh! moment) he hurries Frodo - who is quickly joined by fellow hobbits Merry, Pippin and loyal servant Samwise - away from the shire so that Gandalf can figure what the enemy is up to, plot a course of action and find a way for Frodo to be released of his task of baring the desperately hunted ring of power. He fails, being capture by turned-evil wizard Saruman and does not meet up with Frodo at the designated place and time. Frodo and friends being pursued by Dark Riders, the kings of men possessed by the one ring and now Ring Wraiths, is taken under wing by Stryder, a mysterious Vagabond who seems to know more about Frodo that Frodo. The journey takes them to Rivendell, one of home of the elves, and master Elrod. A council of Man, Wizard, Dwarf and Hobbit is convened and nine go forward to destroy the ring, by carrying it into the stronghold of Sauron and casting it into the fire from which it was forged. The Quest take Frodo and Company to the top of a mountain nearly brought down by Saruman to the mines of Moria, where the entire population of Dwarfs mining it have been slaughtered and the Fellowship must face an impress army of thousands of orcs, a cave troll and the satan-like Balrog. In the end the story concludes by not solving anything, but leaving us open for the next film. <hl> The ride is breathtaking, the sets are amazing , the costumes, acting, directing, music and sound are all dead on perfect. <hl> Peter Jackson never lets the camera stop moving and knows how to film action in a personal and involving way that is rarely seen. This grand operatic quest is on a scale never before seen and the DVD and Dolby or DTS sound are brilliant. There's nearly an over abundance of commentary tracks here, nearly everyone involved gets one, the actors and director / writer are the hands down best and worth the four hours to listen to. Never mind the theatrical version, that was great this is grand. A must have.

The epic starts here.It was hard to fathom The Lord Of The Rings ever becoming a live-action motion picture. Two horribly failed attempts to animate the story (both failed so miserably the funding was pulled before they could be completed) proved the work was too big, too complicated and too adored by readers to be translated less than perfectly. On top of that Tolkien created this thick, complex world and languages that could not easily be shown or translated to the screen.But Peter Jackson did it.From the grand opening shots of the Shire, to the showdown with the Balrog, this is a moving, stirring, emotional spectacle. A masterpiece.The episodic first installment covers the handing over of the one ring from Hobbit Bilbo to nephew Frodo, neither of whom know the rings powers or origin. A dark force, Sauron, who forged the ring of power to control the lords and kings of Man, Elves and Dwarves. Existing only as a powerful spirit, a great fiery eye, Sauron searches tirelessly for the ring that can bring him back to form and power. When Wizard Gandalf figures out the nature of the ring (in an abiding Duh! moment) he hurries Frodo - who is quickly joined by fellow hobbits Merry, Pippin and loyal servant Samwise - away from the shire so that Gandalf can figure what the enemy is up to, plot a course of action and find a way for Frodo to be released of his task of baring the desperately hunted ring of power. He fails, being capture by turned-evil wizard Saruman and does not meet up with Frodo at the designated place and time.Frodo and friends being pursued by Dark Riders, the kings of men possessed by the one ring and now Ring Wraiths, is taken under wing by Stryder, a mysterious Vagabond who seems to know more about Frodo that Frodo.The journey takes them to Rivendell, one of home of the elves, and master Elrod. A council of Man, Wizard, Dwarf and Hobbit is convened and nine go forward to destroy the ring, by carrying it into the stronghold of Sauron and casting it into the fire from which it was forged.The Quest take Frodo and Company to the top of a mountain nearly brought down by Saruman to the mines of Moria, where the entire population of Dwarfs mining it have been slaughtered and the Fellowship must face an impress army of thousands of orcs, a cave troll and the satan-like Balrog.In the end the story concludes by not solving anything, but leaving us open for the next film.The ride is breathtaking, <hl> the sets are amazing <hl>, the costumes, acting, directing, music and sound are all dead on perfect. Peter Jackson never lets the camera stop moving and knows how to film action in a personal and involving way that is rarely seen. This grand operatic quest is on a scale never before seen and the DVD and Dolby or DTS sound are brilliant. There's nearly an over abundance of commentary tracks here, nearly everyone involved gets one, the actors and director / writer are the hands down best and worth the four hours to listen to.Never mind the theatrical version, that was great this is grand. A must have.

The ride is breathtaking, <hl> the sets are amazing <hl> , the costumes, acting, directing, music and sound are all dead on perfect.


Question: Do you have any positive views about the movie?

The third installment of Lord of the Rings trilogy have turned out to be a pretty exciting and entertaining film. However, the viewers might be divided in their opinions on how good the movie may be. For those who have not read the book, this movie will be their version of the One Ring that Rule them all. For those who have read the book, they may find it slightly disappointed at the choices Peter Jackson (director) made in the story. Now I have read the book I was slightly disappointed by some of the things Jackson did in the movie. (Did Gandalf forgot that he was a wizard?) All the stirring parts of the book was totally ignored but he did make other parts quite exciting and entertaining so I guess it even out. I can lived happily with Jackson's version outside of one part. I thought his treatment of Frodo and Sam was pretty shameful in the end. Here was two hobbits who basically saved Middle Earth from ultimate evil and there was little or almost no real acknowledgement from the Aragon or people of Gondor. Yes, they did all bend their knees to them in one scene but they also honor Pippin and Merry as well, equalizing Pippin and Merry with Frodo and Sam must be considered as an ultimate insult to the latter two hobbits. Jackson should had Frodo carrying the crown of Gondor to Aragon instead of Gimili and  he and Sam should had the higher honor then any other, since their was the most important of all the quests. Aragorn became King only due to Gandalf and Frodo/Sam's effort, they should be honored above all else. Only other major weakness as a film goes, it had to do with the end. Peter Jackson apparently lost his magic as he simply couldn't figured out how to end the movie. The ending dragged on and on and on like some endless poem that should have ended several verses ago. Those who will watch the movie will understand.Of course, I will be looking forward to the extended version of this movie on DVD since the story did suffered from point to point. Only then will there be a true classic in making.

Answer: the viewers might be divided in their opinions on how good the movie may be

The third installment of Lord of the Rings trilogy have turned out to be a pretty exciting and entertaining film. <hl> However, the viewers might be divided in their opinions on how good the movie may be . <hl> For those who have not read the book, this movie will be their version of the One Ring that Rule them all. For those who have read the book, they may find it slightly disappointed at the choices Peter Jackson (director) made in the story. Now I have read the book I was slightly disappointed by some of the things Jackson did in the movie. (Did Gandalf forgot that he was a wizard?) All the stirring parts of the book was totally ignored but he did make other parts quite exciting and entertaining so I guess it even out. I can lived happily with Jackson's version outside of one part. I thought his treatment of Frodo and Sam was pretty shameful in the end. Here was two hobbits who basically saved Middle Earth from ultimate evil and there was little or almost no real acknowledgement from the Aragon or people of Gondor. Yes, they did all bend their knees to them in one scene but they also honor Pippin and Merry as well, equalizing Pippin and Merry with Frodo and Sam must be considered as an ultimate insult to the latter two hobbits. Jackson should had Frodo carrying the crown of Gondor to Aragon instead of Gimili and he and Sam should had the higher honor then any other, since their was the most important of all the quests. Aragorn became King only due to Gandalf and Frodo/Sam's effort, they should be honored above all else. Only other major weakness as a film goes, it had to do with the end. Peter Jackson apparently lost his magic as he simply couldn't figured out how to end the movie. The ending dragged on and on and on like some endless poem that should have ended several verses ago. Those who will watch the movie will understand. Of course, I will be looking forward to the extended version of this movie on DVD since the story did suffered from point to point. Only then will there be a true classic in making.

The third installment of Lord of the Rings trilogy have turned out to be a pretty exciting and entertaining film. However, <hl> the viewers might be divided in their opinions on how good the movie may be <hl>. For those who have not read the book, this movie will be their version of the One Ring that Rule them all. For those who have read the book, they may find it slightly disappointed at the choices Peter Jackson (director) made in the story. Now I have read the book I was slightly disappointed by some of the things Jackson did in the movie. (Did Gandalf forgot that he was a wizard?) All the stirring parts of the book was totally ignored but he did make other parts quite exciting and entertaining so I guess it even out. I can lived happily with Jackson's version outside of one part. I thought his treatment of Frodo and Sam was pretty shameful in the end. Here was two hobbits who basically saved Middle Earth from ultimate evil and there was little or almost no real acknowledgement from the Aragon or people of Gondor. Yes, they did all bend their knees to them in one scene but they also honor Pippin and Merry as well, equalizing Pippin and Merry with Frodo and Sam must be considered as an ultimate insult to the latter two hobbits. Jackson should had Frodo carrying the crown of Gondor to Aragon instead of Gimili and he and Sam should had the higher honor then any other, since their was the most important of all the quests. Aragorn became King only due to Gandalf and Frodo/Sam's effort, they should be honored above all else. Only other major weakness as a film goes, it had to do with the end. Peter Jackson apparently lost his magic as he simply couldn't figured out how to end the movie. The ending dragged on and on and on like some endless poem that should have ended several verses ago. Those who will watch the movie will understand.Of course, I will be looking forward to the extended version of this movie on DVD since the story did suffered from point to point. Only then will there be a true classic in making.

However, <hl> the viewers might be divided in their opinions on how good the movie may be <hl> .


Question: Is it a recommended story?

Answer: This is the best Sci-Fi I've seen in decades. I don't often hand out praise. This movie was enjoyable to watch a dozen times when I received it and is highly recommended. An excellent cast although there was no chemistry with the actress who played Julia. Olga was not right for the part. She lacked the on screen presence and appeal and simply did not mesh with Cruise on screen. It wasn't any lack of acting. They simply lacked the chemistry needed for the role she played. They needed someone who stands out in a crowd and has sincerity in their eyes. I also think once the background story was known... it should have emphasized the fact that their marriage was kept secret from their crew and aerospace command center at the time which is why she wore the ring around her neck. It also should have included the fact that Vika had interests in him at the beginning and did not know about his marriage. Those two issues were not made clear.I was delighted that there was no blood and gore for a change other than a stain on a shirt. So thank you to the director, writer and producers for not subjecting the audience to violent gore.This was clearly the best set design I have ever seen when it came to the sky house. I found their front projection quite effective and visually stunning for both the audience and cast.The story had some wonderful new ideas... and it might have been nice to have seen some scenes of the thousands who came to attack 50 years earlier.This movie did have a unique story. A wonderful clean, futuristic design of architecture and high-tech devices. The intent to bring Sci-Fi back out into the sunlight is a concept I agree with. Over the years it had become dark and dirty and violent which is a turn off and most of us are sick and tired of those other grungy sci-fi's. While this did have some drone battle scenes (which were a bit long for my taste... but that's what fast forward is for) but some of the most important scenes were cut in favor of useless, prolonged drone battles inside a power plant and unnecessary CGI expense. Battle scenes are boring and monotonous & the audience is quite tired of them.Hasn't anyone noticed that the blockbuster hit movies all had good personal stories, limited battle scenes and no dark, dank or grungy... hit movies like Independence Day. This movie is also one of the best movies in recent years.In general it is the depth of the story, the characters & interaction, the cast and visual technologies which are important. Movies need the audience to invest their emotions. This movie aced the technology and clean futuristic architecture. The relationship with Vika was quite unique. She did a superb job of acting and nearly stole the entire film. The cast was excellent. The designs were beautiful as was the concept. I thought the writers approach to selling the story was a refreshing change from their usual antiquated script formats. I'm amazed it worked. I think more should have been done with Tet and we are more interested in seeing additional scenes of the condition of the cities and survivors survival attempts (like the grain crop concept in The Host) than barraging us with battles. This movie was very sparing about that so it was appreciated. Only 2 significant battle scenes which were fast forwarded through.The 3 most glaring errors were the deleting of the archives scene where Morgan showed him the book of his career. In fact, there should have been more scenes of the archives and more on what they had salvaged. The second was a simple blunder in the script dialogue. Vika told Sally that she needed a drone to scout grid 17 and Sally responds that she is sending a drone to grid 22. Clearly... Sally should have sent the drone to grid 17. Grid 22 wasn't even mentioned in the conversation. Someone should have caught that either on editing or at least when prescreening the movie without talking through it... and someone might have heard the mistake. It was pretty glaring. And finally, to hear Morgan talking about waves and bedrock in Chicago was a bit ridiculous. While New York and San Francisco are on bedrock and next to an ocean for tidal waves... Chicago is not on bedrock as far as I know... I've drilled in all three areas... and certainly would not be subject to Tsunami's from the great lakes. Some wave action perhaps... but would not bury Chicago... so that was the third glaring error.It was also obvious that Sally wasn't quite right in the first few minutes with the constant asking about being an "effective team". Her Texas accent was also waaay overdone. Plus, I would have waited a few minutes and established the future before doing the dream sequence rather than opening the movie with it. There also should have been more lighting in the lower level workshop. Most workshops are brightly lit. His should have been no different in that respect. But the set for their house was fabulous. I'd like to see all Sci-Fi's use projection screens like that.Unlike some people who judge actors on their personal lives, those issues are of no interest and should not be an issue in regard to the success of a movie. I only care how they do on screen and I must say they were all terrific with the chemistry exception I noted.However... we could have done without the cigar and the goggles on Morgan Freeman. It was not only ridiculous that he would still have access to Cigars after 50 years considering the planet was a wasteland... but it is about time to stop pushing tobacco products on our films. It is a gross affront to the audience especially when it has been banned in practically every building in the country... so what makes these filmmakers think we want to see some nasty cigar... especially Sci-Fi fans who usually have backgrounds in science, technology or engineering. Most of us know better than to smoke and don't enjoy watching it either. Prometheus did the same thing. It was offensive both times. Find a technology company to finance your sci-fi films. Microsoft or Sony or Toshiba, Apple or Verizon. Not tobacco companies. They should know that watching someone smoke only repulses people these days. It doesn't work like it did in the 40's. It does not make anyone want to smoke unless they are already addicted.We probably could have done without the scene of the 3 drones in that dark, dripping, dingy power plant. I hope the Director and producers realize you exposed your crew and cast to dangerous PCB's and lead and sulfuric acid left behind in that abandoned plant you chose to film in. It can't be cleaned from the concrete floors. It seeps into the concrete floors and then rained down all over the cast and crew during filming. That particular dark, grungy site  also contradicted your intention to bring Sci-Fi back in to the sunlight.I find it disturbing when the directors expose the cast and crew to hazardous and unpleasant conditions. What purpose did it serve to place that poor girl in a tank top in Iceland where she was freezing? It certainly didn't add to her appeal. And why would you allow your high dollar star to become injured? That knee or neck injury could affect him for the rest of his life. It was clear he was having great pain and difficulty walking on it during the library scene. The audience does  not require nor appreciate the actors being injured or subjected to miserable conditions. I think any directors who do this should be banned for life from working on any more films, regardless of how well the movie may have done. Injuring an actor is inexcusable and unnecessary. Their contracts should spell out that they are prohibited from engaging in precarious behavior which may result in injuries. In addition to the damage to the actor, it could bankrupt a studio and infuriate an audience over the gross inconsideration shown to the cast. NO movie is important enough to cause harm or discomfort to a cast... such as filming in 100 degree weather as Star Trek Generations did to 3 star actors who could have died from heat related heart attacks as did Clark Gable and John Candy under similar conditions... or like this movie... putting their actors on top of a mountain Cliff in Iceland. Cruise is over 51 and shouldn't be running up cliffs and high sand dunes if he doesn't want to end up like Ritter, Gable and Candy... despite how energetic he feels. Guys who go overboard to overdo everything to prove their youth are prime candidates for fatal heart attacks.If you want Iceland... then green-screen it. We won't know the difference. Many of us have a long memory about damage to actors and stunt crews... Harry Potter's stunt double who is paralyzed. Vic Morrow and 2 children dead from a helicopter crash on set. Elizabeth Taylor in National Velvet age 12 caused a life long back injury. William Shatner with Tinnitus. Ida Lupino, Wayne and crew from cancers after filming in fallout Nevada. I didn't look up any of these incidents. We do remember these incidents and it definitely needs to stop.I'm willing to bet Cruise will require arthroscopic surgery on that knee in 5 years and will end up with stenosis from the neck hyperextension in less than 10 years just from that one library scene in this movie. Frankly, I don't think any movie is worth it.

<hl> This is the best Sci-Fi I've seen in decades. I don't often hand out praise. This movie was enjoyable to watch a dozen times when I received it and is highly recommended. An excellent cast although there was no chemistry with the actress who played Julia. Olga was not right for the part. She lacked the on screen presence and appeal and simply did not mesh with Cruise on screen. It wasn't any lack of acting. They simply lacked the chemistry needed for the role she played. They needed someone who stands out in a crowd and has sincerity in their eyes. I also think once the background story was known... it should have emphasized the fact that their marriage was kept secret from their crew and aerospace command center at the time which is why she wore the ring around her neck. It also should have included the fact that Vika had interests in him at the beginning and did not know about his marriage. Those two issues were not made clear.I was delighted that there was no blood and gore for a change other than a stain on a shirt. So thank you to the director, writer and producers for not subjecting the audience to violent gore.This was clearly the best set design I have ever seen when it came to the sky house. I found their front projection quite effective and visually stunning for both the audience and cast.The story had some wonderful new ideas... and it might have been nice to have seen some scenes of the thousands who came to attack 50 years earlier.This movie did have a unique story. A wonderful clean, futuristic design of architecture and high-tech devices. The intent to bring Sci-Fi back out into the sunlight is a concept I agree with. Over the years it had become dark and dirty and violent which is a turn off and most of us are sick and tired of those other grungy sci-fi's. While this did have some drone battle scenes (which were a bit long for my taste... but that's what fast forward is for) but some of the most important scenes were cut in favor of useless, prolonged drone battles inside a power plant and unnecessary CGI expense. Battle scenes are boring and monotonous & the audience is quite tired of them.Hasn't anyone noticed that the blockbuster hit movies all had good personal stories, limited battle scenes and no dark, dank or grungy... hit movies like Independence Day. This movie is also one of the best movies in recent years.In general it is the depth of the story, the characters & interaction, the cast and visual technologies which are important. Movies need the audience to invest their emotions. This movie aced the technology and clean futuristic architecture. The relationship with Vika was quite unique. She did a superb job of acting and nearly stole the entire film. The cast was excellent. The designs were beautiful as was the concept. I thought the writers approach to selling the story was a refreshing change from their usual antiquated script formats. I'm amazed it worked. I think more should have been done with Tet and we are more interested in seeing additional scenes of the condition of the cities and survivors survival attempts (like the grain crop concept in The Host) than barraging us with battles. This movie was very sparing about that so it was appreciated. Only 2 significant battle scenes which were fast forwarded through.The 3 most glaring errors were the deleting of the archives scene where Morgan showed him the book of his career. In fact, there should have been more scenes of the archives and more on what they had salvaged. The second was a simple blunder in the script dialogue. Vika told Sally that she needed a drone to scout grid 17 and Sally responds that she is sending a drone to grid 22. Clearly... Sally should have sent the drone to grid 17. Grid 22 wasn't even mentioned in the conversation. Someone should have caught that either on editing or at least when prescreening the movie without talking through it... and someone might have heard the mistake. It was pretty glaring. And finally, to hear Morgan talking about waves and bedrock in Chicago was a bit ridiculous. While New York and San Francisco are on bedrock and next to an ocean for tidal waves... Chicago is not on bedrock as far as I know... I've drilled in all three areas... and certainly would not be subject to Tsunami's from the great lakes. Some wave action perhaps... but would not bury Chicago... so that was the third glaring error.It was also obvious that Sally wasn't quite right in the first few minutes with the constant asking about being an "effective team". Her Texas accent was also waaay overdone. Plus, I would have waited a few minutes and established the future before doing the dream sequence rather than opening the movie with it. There also should have been more lighting in the lower level workshop. Most workshops are brightly lit. His should have been no different in that respect. But the set for their house was fabulous. I'd like to see all Sci-Fi's use projection screens like that.Unlike some people who judge actors on their personal lives, those issues are of no interest and should not be an issue in regard to the success of a movie. I only care how they do on screen and I must say they were all terrific with the chemistry exception I noted.However... we could have done without the cigar and the goggles on Morgan Freeman. It was not only ridiculous that he would still have access to Cigars after 50 years considering the planet was a wasteland... but it is about time to stop pushing tobacco products on our films. It is a gross affront to the audience especially when it has been banned in practically every building in the country... so what makes these filmmakers think we want to see some nasty cigar... especially Sci-Fi fans who usually have backgrounds in science, technology or engineering. Most of us know better than to smoke and don't enjoy watching it either. Prometheus did the same thing. It was offensive both times. Find a technology company to finance your sci-fi films. Microsoft or Sony or Toshiba, Apple or Verizon. Not tobacco companies. They should know that watching someone smoke only repulses people these days. It doesn't work like it did in the 40's. It does not make anyone want to smoke unless they are already addicted.We probably could have done without the scene of the 3 drones in that dark, dripping, dingy power plant. I hope the Director and producers realize you exposed your crew and cast to dangerous PCB's and lead and sulfuric acid left behind in that abandoned plant you chose to film in. It can't be cleaned from the concrete floors. It seeps into the concrete floors and then rained down all over the cast and crew during filming. That particular dark, grungy site also contradicted your intention to bring Sci-Fi back in to the sunlight.I find it disturbing when the directors expose the cast and crew to hazardous and unpleasant conditions. What purpose did it serve to place that poor girl in a tank top in Iceland where she was freezing? It certainly didn't add to her appeal. And why would you allow your high dollar star to become injured? That knee or neck injury could affect him for the rest of his life. It was clear he was having great pain and difficulty walking on it during the library scene. The audience does not require nor appreciate the actors being injured or subjected to miserable conditions. I think any directors who do this should be banned for life from working on any more films, regardless of how well the movie may have done. Injuring an actor is inexcusable and unnecessary. Their contracts should spell out that they are prohibited from engaging in precarious behavior which may result in injuries. In addition to the damage to the actor, it could bankrupt a studio and infuriate an audience over the gross inconsideration shown to the cast. NO movie is important enough to cause harm or discomfort to a cast... such as filming in 100 degree weather as Star Trek Generations did to 3 star actors who could have died from heat related heart attacks as did Clark Gable and John Candy under similar conditions... or like this movie... putting their actors on top of a mountain Cliff in Iceland. Cruise is over 51 and shouldn't be running up cliffs and high sand dunes if he doesn't want to end up like Ritter, Gable and Candy... despite how energetic he feels. Guys who go overboard to overdo everything to prove their youth are prime candidates for fatal heart attacks.If you want Iceland... then green-screen it. We won't know the difference. Many of us have a long memory about damage to actors and stunt crews... Harry Potter's stunt double who is paralyzed. Vic Morrow and 2 children dead from a helicopter crash on set. Elizabeth Taylor in National Velvet age 12 caused a life long back injury. William Shatner with Tinnitus. Ida Lupino, Wayne and crew from cancers after filming in fallout Nevada. I didn't look up any of these incidents. We do remember these incidents and it definitely needs to stop.I'm willing to bet Cruise will require arthroscopic surgery on that knee in 5 years and will end up with stenosis from the neck hyperextension in less than 10 years just from that one library scene in this movie. Frankly, I don't think any movie is worth it. <hl>


Question: How was the write style on this movie?

Juliana Margolis (spelling - my apologies) is brilliant, as are all the big name actors. The writing is rich and intelligent while the story line is captivating. I want to grow up to be just like her.

Answer: writing is rich and intelligent

Juliana Margolis (spelling - my apologies) is brilliant, as are all the big name actors. <hl> The writing is rich and intelligent while the story line is captivating. <hl> I want to grow up to be just like her.

Juliana Margolis (spelling - my apologies) is brilliant, as are all the big name actors. The <hl> writing is rich and intelligent <hl> while the story line is captivating. I want to grow up to be just like her.


Question: How is the character?

This movie has a somewhat lame story, but it is a decent movie.  If you just get over the intricacies of the stories and silliness of the whole "health care" theme, then you can find and enjoyable movie.  Matt Damon plays the main character, a drifter-like individual who lives on the futuristic earth which is now a big sh**hole, akin to the ghettos of a big major city.I found a qoute online from the director where he stated that the movie is not about the future, it is "about now, things going on right now."  Earth in this movie is the bad place, and the good place is a space station called 'elysium'.  I'm not sure why they called it elysium, considering how they presented it, they should have just called it Irvine.  Anyways, earth bad, elysium good, got it?As the movie unfolds, you see how dirty and polluted earth is and how clean and safe elysium is.  Earth is patrolled by a force of police-robots.  These robots are built on earth and we soon learn that Matt Damon works at a factory where the robots are built; how uplifting...There's a subplot involving a sick kid and rebel force whose goal is to invade elysium.  On elysium, the citizens can be treated by a medical machine that will cure any ailment you have, including disease, broken bones, etc...  I don't remember if the movie explains if these machines are in the people's homes are at the hospital, but either way, Damon gets caught up in  a plan to get to elysium, hack the sysytem so everyone can become citizens and have access to these machines and be able to save the sick girl.So as you have figured out by know hopefully, yes, the movie is about free health care for everyone.  If you don't enjoy that part of the movie and can get over it, there's an interesting movie aside, and you see Damon take on the police-robots(with the help of a mechanic torso) and his journey to elysium while being targeted by an assassin(played by the guy who was Mudoch on the recent A-Team movie) sent by the powers of elysium.As a sci-fi movie, it is entertaining, there's many shots of the landscape of earth, the sky is bright white and you understand the idea behind it that space travel has become so easy that elysium and likewise other plants are just a hop on a plane away; the only problem with the whole scenario being the division of humans in an "ideal" place and into the not so ideal place(like the Time Machine).This movie is definitely worth a viewing, just don't expect Blade Runner level imagination.

Answer: This movie has a somewhat lame story

<hl> This movie has a somewhat lame story , but it is a decent movie. <hl> If you just get over the intricacies of the stories and silliness of the whole "health care" theme, then you can find and enjoyable movie. Matt Damon plays the main character, a drifter-like individual who lives on the futuristic earth which is now a big sh**hole, akin to the ghettos of a big major city. I found a qoute online from the director where he stated that the movie is not about the future, it is "about now, things going on right now." Earth in this movie is the bad place, and the good place is a space station called 'elysium'. I'm not sure why they called it elysium, considering how they presented it, they should have just called it Irvine. Anyways, earth bad, elysium good, got it?As the movie unfolds, you see how dirty and polluted earth is and how clean and safe elysium is. Earth is patrolled by a force of police-robots. These robots are built on earth and we soon learn that Matt Damon works at a factory where the robots are built; how uplifting...There's a subplot involving a sick kid and rebel force whose goal is to invade elysium. On elysium, the citizens can be treated by a medical machine that will cure any ailment you have, including disease, broken bones, etc... I don't remember if the movie explains if these machines are in the people's homes are at the hospital, but either way, Damon gets caught up in a plan to get to elysium, hack the sysytem so everyone can become citizens and have access to these machines and be able to save the sick girl. So as you have figured out by know hopefully, yes, the movie is about free health care for everyone. If you don't enjoy that part of the movie and can get over it, there's an interesting movie aside, and you see Damon take on the police-robots(with the help of a mechanic torso) and his journey to elysium while being targeted by an assassin(played by the guy who was Mudoch on the recent A-Team movie) sent by the powers of elysium. As a sci-fi movie, it is entertaining, there's many shots of the landscape of earth, the sky is bright white and you understand the idea behind it that space travel has become so easy that elysium and likewise other plants are just a hop on a plane away; the only problem with the whole scenario being the division of humans in an "ideal" place and into the not so ideal place(like the Time Machine).This movie is definitely worth a viewing, just don't expect Blade Runner level imagination.

<hl> This movie has a somewhat lame story <hl>, but it is a decent movie. If you just get over the intricacies of the stories and silliness of the whole "health care" theme, then you can find and enjoyable movie. Matt Damon plays the main character, a drifter-like individual who lives on the futuristic earth which is now a big sh**hole, akin to the ghettos of a big major city.I found a qoute online from the director where he stated that the movie is not about the future, it is "about now, things going on right now." Earth in this movie is the bad place, and the good place is a space station called 'elysium'. I'm not sure why they called it elysium, considering how they presented it, they should have just called it Irvine. Anyways, earth bad, elysium good, got it?As the movie unfolds, you see how dirty and polluted earth is and how clean and safe elysium is. Earth is patrolled by a force of police-robots. These robots are built on earth and we soon learn that Matt Damon works at a factory where the robots are built; how uplifting...There's a subplot involving a sick kid and rebel force whose goal is to invade elysium. On elysium, the citizens can be treated by a medical machine that will cure any ailment you have, including disease, broken bones, etc... I don't remember if the movie explains if these machines are in the people's homes are at the hospital, but either way, Damon gets caught up in a plan to get to elysium, hack the sysytem so everyone can become citizens and have access to these machines and be able to save the sick girl.So as you have figured out by know hopefully, yes, the movie is about free health care for everyone. If you don't enjoy that part of the movie and can get over it, there's an interesting movie aside, and you see Damon take on the police-robots(with the help of a mechanic torso) and his journey to elysium while being targeted by an assassin(played by the guy who was Mudoch on the recent A-Team movie) sent by the powers of elysium.As a sci-fi movie, it is entertaining, there's many shots of the landscape of earth, the sky is bright white and you understand the idea behind it that space travel has become so easy that elysium and likewise other plants are just a hop on a plane away; the only problem with the whole scenario being the division of humans in an "ideal" place and into the not so ideal place(like the Time Machine).This movie is definitely worth a viewing, just don't expect Blade Runner level imagination.

<hl> This movie has a somewhat lame story <hl> , but it is a decent movie.


Question: When did that number come out?

This is a disney princess classic. My two year old daughter loves it along with everyone in the house. The songs are great. And the animation is a disney classic. Its overall an awesome movie that young and old will love.

Answer: This is a disney

This is a disney princess classic.

<hl> This is a disney princess classic. <hl> My two year old daughter loves it along with everyone in the house. The songs are great. And the animation is a disney classic. Its overall an awesome movie that young and old will love.

<hl> This is a disney <hl> princess classic. My two year old daughter loves it along with everyone in the house. The songs are great. And the animation is a disney classic. Its overall an awesome movie that young and old will love.