Question: Why are you making bad commentary?

Well, my friends, you may have heard the news.George Lucas and 2oth Century Fox are re-releasing the Star Wars trilogy on DVD.No, it's not the ORIGINAL CLASSIC TRILOGY THAT WE ALL LONG FOR.I sincerely wish it was, as those are the movies that made me fall in love with Star Wars to begin with (Well, not literally in love, but you get the point).No, apparently Lucas' ego cant come to grips with releasing the movies that made his hiney famous to begin with (The ORIGINAL Movies, untouched by Lucas' sometimes irritating "tweaking".)No, this set is the same exact set that was released last year  (The "Special Editions"), only, they have new packaging, and the 4th bonus disc that was included with last year's DVD set is NOT included with this set!That's correct, Lucas and Fox want you to spend over $30 for a set that is WITHOUT the 4th Bonus disc that the last set had.I.E., Lucas wants you to fork over $30+ dollars for a NEW BOX.That's it. New packaging. The packing looks much like the packing for the last set, only the metallic Silver/black, and Gold/black have been changed to the colors of the original Star Wars movie poster.You can see the new packaging, by going to [...]Is it worth over $30?That's up to YOU.But one question remains....WHY?Why re-release the SAME EXACT MOVIES, when the shelves of stores all across the world are still stocked with the original packaging?Why take the 4th bonus disc OUT of this set?Why charge people over $30 just for a new box, but with the same darn movies?Why not just release the ORIGINALS instead of releasing the same darn "special edition" Trilogy twice in Two years?It is easier to understand Jar Jar Binks, than it is to answer the questions asked above.But if you use the force, the answer will come to you.Yes, come to you it will.That answer?????M O N E YYes, the answer is money.Lucas and Fox have chosen to steal 30 MORE dollars from their fans, by redecorating the box that the same movies as last years release came in, in hopes that you'll fork over more money.Yes, Grinches, Lucas and Fox are, yes, yes!They could have given Star Wars fans the ULTIMATE Christmas DVD gift- The original movies, restored, remastered, for us to finally own and enjoy and for us to relive many fond memories with.But, those classic movies are not being released on DVD anytime in the near future. In fact, Lucas says that he will not EVER release them.When the rumored "Ultimate" Star Wars Saga 6 DVD set is released, we may be able to see some deleted scenes from the original trilogy....the ones that Lucas removed 20 years later.We MAY have that to look forward to. But then again, this comes from a man who says that he cares about the people who made him a billionaire, yet robs them of the movies that they DO want, and repackages the movies that they already have, so that they will buy the darn things a year later.Thus the reason why the 4th disc has been removed....it makes the set sell for only $30 dollars rather than close to $50.I.E, Lucas and Fox want to hypnotize as many fans as possible, into buying this cheaper set, for the Holiday rush. Is it a coincidence that the DVD's are being released December 6th?Not September 6th. Not January 6th. No, these DVD's are being re-released right square between Thanksgiving and Christmas, when shoppers will be most busy. They waited until Star wars fans would go to the store and buy Volume 2 of the cool "Clone wars" Cartoon, and they wanted to make us impulsively buy the movies that we impulsively bought two extra copies of a year ago.They are looking for "spur of the moment" dollars.If they cared for their fans, they would have made this CHEAPER set available to us last year, but then they would have lost that extra $20 dollars, and they couldnt allow that.No, they waited til they bled consumers dry on the last set, before they threw the DVD's in a new box and made them available in THIS set. Without the bonus disc of course.I am mad about this. Granted, there ARE more important things going on in the Universe than a damn DVD set.But this is an insult to Star Wars fans. Star Wars movies have always been about values, honor and integrity.It is a shame that the maker and distributors of these films do not hold the same values, honor and integrity. They have become money whores like any other businessmen.They are as greedy as Boba Fett negotiating on what a valued bounty should be worth to him. It's all about money. Star Wars is a business to George Lucas. That is why he hasnt had a problem re-doing many of the original movie scenes. To him, its just a job.To him, these are just movies.The force is NOT strong in George Lucas.If it was, he wouldn't throw these EXACT movies as last year's DVD release in our faces and ask for over $30.If the force was truly with Lucas, he would have done what Spielberg did with E.T.-Released the original AND Special Editions of the movies, so that his vision and his fans memories could BOTH be fulfilled.Mr Lucas, you have much to learn, my old Padawan.The dark side is greed. Consume you it has.Forgotten who made your dreams come true you have.Otherwise you would have made our dreams come true, and given us the movies that we have been dreaming of. Not the same movies in a new box.Grateful that is not.Ok, no more Yoda talk.Mr Lucas, you are wrong for re-releasing these movies on DVD.You just want people like me..... die-hard Star Wars fans to fork over 30 MORE dollars into your Billionaire account.And we will. And I probably will too. I'll see the new packaging, and say "No, this guy only wants money....you HAVE these movies already, Matt... walk away......but..... there IS new packaging......and the price is LOWER without the bonus disc...., well why not", and our urge to relive those Star wars memories will take us over and overshadow the reality that we are buying the movies because they appear different. You know that, and you let it occur anyway. You use our very love of the movies that made you who you are, and you use it to bleed even more and more money out of us.Palpatine would have been proud.

Answer: set?Why charge people over $30 just for a new box, but with the same darn movies?Why not just release the ORIGINALS instead of releasing the same darn "special edition

Well, my friends, you may have heard the news. George Lucas and 2oth Century Fox are re-releasing the Star Wars trilogy on DVD.No, it's not the ORIGINAL CLASSIC TRILOGY THAT WE ALL LONG FOR.I sincerely wish it was, as those are the movies that made me fall in love with Star Wars to begin with (Well, not literally in love, but you get the point).No, apparently Lucas' ego cant come to grips with releasing the movies that made his hiney famous to begin with (The ORIGINAL Movies, untouched by Lucas' sometimes irritating "tweaking".)No, this set is the same exact set that was released last year (The "Special Editions"), only, they have new packaging, and the 4th bonus disc that was included with last year's DVD set is NOT included with this set!That's correct, Lucas and Fox want you to spend over $30 for a set that is WITHOUT the 4th Bonus disc that the last set had. I.E., Lucas wants you to fork over $30+ dollars for a NEW BOX.That's it. New packaging. The packing looks much like the packing for the last set, only the metallic Silver/black, and Gold/black have been changed to the colors of the original Star Wars movie poster. You can see the new packaging, by going to [...]Is it worth over $30?That's up to YOU.But one question remains.... <hl> WHY?Why re-release the SAME EXACT MOVIES, when the shelves of stores all across the world are still stocked with the original packaging?Why take the 4th bonus disc OUT of this set?Why charge people over $30 just for a new box, but with the same darn movies?Why not just release the ORIGINALS instead of releasing the same darn "special edition " Trilogy twice in Two years?It is easier to understand Jar Jar Binks, than it is to answer the questions asked above. <hl> But if you use the force, the answer will come to you. Yes, come to you it will. That answer?????M O N E YYes, the answer is money. Lucas and Fox have chosen to steal 30 MORE dollars from their fans, by redecorating the box that the same movies as last years release came in, in hopes that you'll fork over more money. Yes, Grinches, Lucas and Fox are, yes, yes!They could have given Star Wars fans the ULTIMATE Christmas DVD gift- The original movies, restored, remastered, for us to finally own and enjoy and for us to relive many fond memories with. But, those classic movies are not being released on DVD anytime in the near future. In fact, Lucas says that he will not EVER release them. When the rumored "Ultimate" Star Wars Saga 6 DVD set is released, we may be able to see some deleted scenes from the original trilogy....the ones that Lucas removed 20 years later. We MAY have that to look forward to. But then again, this comes from a man who says that he cares about the people who made him a billionaire, yet robs them of the movies that they DO want, and repackages the movies that they already have, so that they will buy the darn things a year later. Thus the reason why the 4th disc has been removed....it makes the set sell for only $30 dollars rather than close to $50.I.E, Lucas and Fox want to hypnotize as many fans as possible, into buying this cheaper set, for the Holiday rush. Is it a coincidence that the DVD's are being released December 6th?Not September 6th. Not January 6th. No, these DVD's are being re-released right square between Thanksgiving and Christmas, when shoppers will be most busy. They waited until Star wars fans would go to the store and buy Volume 2 of the cool "Clone wars" Cartoon, and they wanted to make us impulsively buy the movies that we impulsively bought two extra copies of a year ago. They are looking for "spur of the moment" dollars. If they cared for their fans, they would have made this CHEAPER set available to us last year, but then they would have lost that extra $20 dollars, and they couldnt allow that. No, they waited til they bled consumers dry on the last set, before they threw the DVD's in a new box and made them available in THIS set. Without the bonus disc of course. I am mad about this. Granted, there ARE more important things going on in the Universe than a damn DVD set. But this is an insult to Star Wars fans. Star Wars movies have always been about values, honor and integrity. It is a shame that the maker and distributors of these films do not hold the same values, honor and integrity. They have become money whores like any other businessmen. They are as greedy as Boba Fett negotiating on what a valued bounty should be worth to him. It's all about money. Star Wars is a business to George Lucas. That is why he hasnt had a problem re-doing many of the original movie scenes. To him, its just a job. To him, these are just movies. The force is NOT strong in George Lucas. If it was, he wouldn't throw these EXACT movies as last year's DVD release in our faces and ask for over $30.If the force was truly with Lucas, he would have done what Spielberg did with E.T.-Released the original AND Special Editions of the movies, so that his vision and his fans memories could BOTH be fulfilled. Mr Lucas, you have much to learn, my old Padawan. The dark side is greed. Consume you it has. Forgotten who made your dreams come true you have. Otherwise you would have made our dreams come true, and given us the movies that we have been dreaming of. Not the same movies in a new box. Grateful that is not. Ok, no more Yoda talk. Mr Lucas, you are wrong for re-releasing these movies on DVD.You just want people like me..... die-hard Star Wars fans to fork over 30 MORE dollars into your Billionaire account. And we will. And I probably will too. I'll see the new packaging, and say "No, this guy only wants money....you HAVE these movies already, Matt... walk away...... but..... there IS new packaging......and the price is LOWER without the bonus disc...., well why not", and our urge to relive those Star wars memories will take us over and overshadow the reality that we are buying the movies because they appear different. You know that, and you let it occur anyway. You use our very love of the movies that made you who you are, and you use it to bleed even more and more money out of us. Palpatine would have been proud.

Well, my friends, you may have heard the news.George Lucas and 2oth Century Fox are re-releasing the Star Wars trilogy on DVD.No, it's not the ORIGINAL CLASSIC TRILOGY THAT WE ALL LONG FOR.I sincerely wish it was, as those are the movies that made me fall in love with Star Wars to begin with (Well, not literally in love, but you get the point).No, apparently Lucas' ego cant come to grips with releasing the movies that made his hiney famous to begin with (The ORIGINAL Movies, untouched by Lucas' sometimes irritating "tweaking".)No, this set is the same exact set that was released last year (The "Special Editions"), only, they have new packaging, and the 4th bonus disc that was included with last year's DVD set is NOT included with this set!That's correct, Lucas and Fox want you to spend over $30 for a set that is WITHOUT the 4th Bonus disc that the last set had.I.E., Lucas wants you to fork over $30+ dollars for a NEW BOX.That's it. New packaging. The packing looks much like the packing for the last set, only the metallic Silver/black, and Gold/black have been changed to the colors of the original Star Wars movie poster.You can see the new packaging, by going to [...]Is it worth over $30?That's up to YOU.But one question remains....WHY?Why re-release the SAME EXACT MOVIES, when the shelves of stores all across the world are still stocked with the original packaging?Why take the 4th bonus disc OUT of this <hl> set?Why charge people over $30 just for a new box, but with the same darn movies?Why not just release the ORIGINALS instead of releasing the same darn "special edition <hl>" Trilogy twice in Two years?It is easier to understand Jar Jar Binks, than it is to answer the questions asked above.But if you use the force, the answer will come to you.Yes, come to you it will.That answer?????M O N E YYes, the answer is money.Lucas and Fox have chosen to steal 30 MORE dollars from their fans, by redecorating the box that the same movies as last years release came in, in hopes that you'll fork over more money.Yes, Grinches, Lucas and Fox are, yes, yes!They could have given Star Wars fans the ULTIMATE Christmas DVD gift- The original movies, restored, remastered, for us to finally own and enjoy and for us to relive many fond memories with.But, those classic movies are not being released on DVD anytime in the near future. In fact, Lucas says that he will not EVER release them.When the rumored "Ultimate" Star Wars Saga 6 DVD set is released, we may be able to see some deleted scenes from the original trilogy....the ones that Lucas removed 20 years later.We MAY have that to look forward to. But then again, this comes from a man who says that he cares about the people who made him a billionaire, yet robs them of the movies that they DO want, and repackages the movies that they already have, so that they will buy the darn things a year later.Thus the reason why the 4th disc has been removed....it makes the set sell for only $30 dollars rather than close to $50.I.E, Lucas and Fox want to hypnotize as many fans as possible, into buying this cheaper set, for the Holiday rush. Is it a coincidence that the DVD's are being released December 6th?Not September 6th. Not January 6th. No, these DVD's are being re-released right square between Thanksgiving and Christmas, when shoppers will be most busy. They waited until Star wars fans would go to the store and buy Volume 2 of the cool "Clone wars" Cartoon, and they wanted to make us impulsively buy the movies that we impulsively bought two extra copies of a year ago.They are looking for "spur of the moment" dollars.If they cared for their fans, they would have made this CHEAPER set available to us last year, but then they would have lost that extra $20 dollars, and they couldnt allow that.No, they waited til they bled consumers dry on the last set, before they threw the DVD's in a new box and made them available in THIS set. Without the bonus disc of course.I am mad about this. Granted, there ARE more important things going on in the Universe than a damn DVD set.But this is an insult to Star Wars fans. Star Wars movies have always been about values, honor and integrity.It is a shame that the maker and distributors of these films do not hold the same values, honor and integrity. They have become money whores like any other businessmen.They are as greedy as Boba Fett negotiating on what a valued bounty should be worth to him. It's all about money. Star Wars is a business to George Lucas. That is why he hasnt had a problem re-doing many of the original movie scenes. To him, its just a job.To him, these are just movies.The force is NOT strong in George Lucas.If it was, he wouldn't throw these EXACT movies as last year's DVD release in our faces and ask for over $30.If the force was truly with Lucas, he would have done what Spielberg did with E.T.-Released the original AND Special Editions of the movies, so that his vision and his fans memories could BOTH be fulfilled.Mr Lucas, you have much to learn, my old Padawan.The dark side is greed. Consume you it has.Forgotten who made your dreams come true you have.Otherwise you would have made our dreams come true, and given us the movies that we have been dreaming of. Not the same movies in a new box.Grateful that is not.Ok, no more Yoda talk.Mr Lucas, you are wrong for re-releasing these movies on DVD.You just want people like me..... die-hard Star Wars fans to fork over 30 MORE dollars into your Billionaire account.And we will. And I probably will too. I'll see the new packaging, and say "No, this guy only wants money....you HAVE these movies already, Matt... walk away......but..... there IS new packaging......and the price is LOWER without the bonus disc...., well why not", and our urge to relive those Star wars memories will take us over and overshadow the reality that we are buying the movies because they appear different. You know that, and you let it occur anyway. You use our very love of the movies that made you who you are, and you use it to bleed even more and more money out of us.Palpatine would have been proud.

WHY?Why re-release the SAME EXACT MOVIES, when the shelves of stores all across the world are still stocked with the original packaging?Why take the 4th bonus disc OUT of this <hl> set?Why charge people over $30 just for a new box, but with the same darn movies?Why not just release the ORIGINALS instead of releasing the same darn "special edition <hl> " Trilogy twice in Two years?It is easier to understand Jar Jar Binks, than it is to answer the questions asked above.


Question: Why is the movie soo confusing?

Inception is an interesting movie but might not be everyone's cup of tea.  Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a man who specializes in dream extractions (think corporate espionage) - going into a shared dream state using a military derived technique with a team and a subject to extract a piece of information from that subject's subconscious mind.  This can sometimes involve going into a dream within a dream (or more).Much was made of the complexities of this movie and indeed it is complex but for a generation growing up watching Matrix movies (especially the latter two) this is positively straight forward - and that's not a bad thing.  This is helped by Cobb's new dream architect (played by Ellen Page) who is also new to this world and to whom he explains the rules of the dream world (and thereby us - something not as well done in the Matrix flicks).  In addition to these dream rules there are the complexities of Cobb himself and the guilt he feels over the tragedy of his wife and kids and how this affects his missions.  And the complexities of the new job - to plant an idea into the mind (this process is called inception) of a young business tycoon who has a strained relationship with his dying father.  So yes it is complex but at no time did I feel lost either and this is a major plus for the movie.Some other plusses are extremely cool effects in the dream worlds, likable and believable characters whose interactions are fun to watch, effective action scenes, light comedic moments that pop up rarely but never fall flat and a satisfying emotional arc for our main character.  Truly there are many positive aspects to this movie.Some minuses are that it's a bit too long with a few dragging dialog sequences that could probably have been edited down.  This leads to the fact that it does slow down in parts such that you begin to get antsy (not that I have a short attention span but in a world where anything can happen?).  Despite the preceding two sentences I have to admit that all the dialog added to the movie in one way or another.I was a bit distracted by the fact that the dream rules - although meticulously laid out (which is appreciated) - did not always feel like the movie followed to the letter as laid forth.  (possible minor spoilers) For example the rules of time of a dream within a dream, etc. are laid forth but at times things seem to happen way too fast a layer or two in compared with what we know the rules are.  I also understand that the filmmakers wanted a realistic representation but I felt that dreams were - on the whole - rather boring.  I get that these particular dreams were tailor made but they were so orderly it was a bit disconcerting.  No chaos, no random events, unless provoked by the outside world (or only the next layer up),  just cities and buildings and people in suits.  Speaking for myself (but I'm insane) my dreams are a bit more chaotic.  Then again there were a few surprises in there and a few very cool dream fight sequences.Overall, yes, I do recommend this movie.  It's not as complicated as you may initially think but carries its own for sure.  The characters are well developed and the action carried out quite well within a well defined universe.  It is long and you may struggle with some of the rules but overall the movie is rewarding in visuals, story, overall action and emotional depts.  A solid four stars.

Answer: is an interesting movie but might not be everyone's cup of tea

<hl> Inception is an interesting movie but might not be everyone's cup of tea . <hl> Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a man who specializes in dream extractions (think corporate espionage) - going into a shared dream state using a military derived technique with a team and a subject to extract a piece of information from that subject's subconscious mind. This can sometimes involve going into a dream within a dream (or more).Much was made of the complexities of this movie and indeed it is complex but for a generation growing up watching Matrix movies (especially the latter two) this is positively straight forward - and that's not a bad thing. This is helped by Cobb's new dream architect (played by Ellen Page) who is also new to this world and to whom he explains the rules of the dream world (and thereby us - something not as well done in the Matrix flicks). In addition to these dream rules there are the complexities of Cobb himself and the guilt he feels over the tragedy of his wife and kids and how this affects his missions. And the complexities of the new job - to plant an idea into the mind (this process is called inception) of a young business tycoon who has a strained relationship with his dying father. So yes it is complex but at no time did I feel lost either and this is a major plus for the movie. Some other plusses are extremely cool effects in the dream worlds, likable and believable characters whose interactions are fun to watch, effective action scenes, light comedic moments that pop up rarely but never fall flat and a satisfying emotional arc for our main character. Truly there are many positive aspects to this movie. Some minuses are that it's a bit too long with a few dragging dialog sequences that could probably have been edited down. This leads to the fact that it does slow down in parts such that you begin to get antsy (not that I have a short attention span but in a world where anything can happen?). Despite the preceding two sentences I have to admit that all the dialog added to the movie in one way or another. I was a bit distracted by the fact that the dream rules - although meticulously laid out (which is appreciated) - did not always feel like the movie followed to the letter as laid forth. (possible minor spoilers) For example the rules of time of a dream within a dream, etc. are laid forth but at times things seem to happen way too fast a layer or two in compared with what we know the rules are. I also understand that the filmmakers wanted a realistic representation but I felt that dreams were - on the whole - rather boring. I get that these particular dreams were tailor made but they were so orderly it was a bit disconcerting. No chaos, no random events, unless provoked by the outside world (or only the next layer up), just cities and buildings and people in suits. Speaking for myself (but I'm insane) my dreams are a bit more chaotic. Then again there were a few surprises in there and a few very cool dream fight sequences. Overall, yes, I do recommend this movie. It's not as complicated as you may initially think but carries its own for sure. The characters are well developed and the action carried out quite well within a well defined universe. It is long and you may struggle with some of the rules but overall the movie is rewarding in visuals, story, overall action and emotional depts. A solid four stars.

Inception <hl> is an interesting movie but might not be everyone's cup of tea <hl>. Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a man who specializes in dream extractions (think corporate espionage) - going into a shared dream state using a military derived technique with a team and a subject to extract a piece of information from that subject's subconscious mind. This can sometimes involve going into a dream within a dream (or more).Much was made of the complexities of this movie and indeed it is complex but for a generation growing up watching Matrix movies (especially the latter two) this is positively straight forward - and that's not a bad thing. This is helped by Cobb's new dream architect (played by Ellen Page) who is also new to this world and to whom he explains the rules of the dream world (and thereby us - something not as well done in the Matrix flicks). In addition to these dream rules there are the complexities of Cobb himself and the guilt he feels over the tragedy of his wife and kids and how this affects his missions. And the complexities of the new job - to plant an idea into the mind (this process is called inception) of a young business tycoon who has a strained relationship with his dying father. So yes it is complex but at no time did I feel lost either and this is a major plus for the movie.Some other plusses are extremely cool effects in the dream worlds, likable and believable characters whose interactions are fun to watch, effective action scenes, light comedic moments that pop up rarely but never fall flat and a satisfying emotional arc for our main character. Truly there are many positive aspects to this movie.Some minuses are that it's a bit too long with a few dragging dialog sequences that could probably have been edited down. This leads to the fact that it does slow down in parts such that you begin to get antsy (not that I have a short attention span but in a world where anything can happen?). Despite the preceding two sentences I have to admit that all the dialog added to the movie in one way or another.I was a bit distracted by the fact that the dream rules - although meticulously laid out (which is appreciated) - did not always feel like the movie followed to the letter as laid forth. (possible minor spoilers) For example the rules of time of a dream within a dream, etc. are laid forth but at times things seem to happen way too fast a layer or two in compared with what we know the rules are. I also understand that the filmmakers wanted a realistic representation but I felt that dreams were - on the whole - rather boring. I get that these particular dreams were tailor made but they were so orderly it was a bit disconcerting. No chaos, no random events, unless provoked by the outside world (or only the next layer up), just cities and buildings and people in suits. Speaking for myself (but I'm insane) my dreams are a bit more chaotic. Then again there were a few surprises in there and a few very cool dream fight sequences.Overall, yes, I do recommend this movie. It's not as complicated as you may initially think but carries its own for sure. The characters are well developed and the action carried out quite well within a well defined universe. It is long and you may struggle with some of the rules but overall the movie is rewarding in visuals, story, overall action and emotional depts. A solid four stars.

Inception <hl> is an interesting movie but might not be everyone's cup of tea <hl> .


Question: How is the movie?

Just a quick review to highlight the good and bad. Number one the animation.Wow!!! I was drawn into a magical world under the sea! Truly spectacular animation!!! In some ways the water and physics of water behave more "lifelike" than real water!!! Astounding, although anyone who is an avid PC gamer would have seen the extent of water effects in 3-D animation by now. Second, the voice acting. Some great performances, some instantly recognisable such as Albert Brooks or Geoffrey Rush. And the jokes are generally  not crass or rude, in some instances however only adults will "get it"!!! but it's always safe for the kids.The audio is great with a deep full bass and dynamic audio utilization through all ranges. The video quality is also great with sharp and distinct colours and contrasts. "Reds" look paritculary good. The one complaint I have is with the "blues" of Dory, Ellen DeGeneres. It seems that they are so bright that they are not defined as a result.She seems to be blending into whatever ocean environment she finds  herself.The characters that Marlin meets are for the most part interesting. My favourites are however the three sharks led by Bruce, a Great White with a wonderful Aussie accent, who is the leader of a self-help group promoting goodwill between fish and sharks. "Remember, fish are friends, not food!" the groups motto is recited at every meeting!!! I suppose i would have prefered it if they has spent more time with Bruce and his companions or possibly spent more time at the "paaaahty".All in all, "Finding Nemo" is a fun adventure, (2nd on my list after Monsters Inc), and should delight all children. A friend of mine's son has seen it at least 30 times in the last month, so I suppose he would be the best critic and his opinion the most prudent.

Answer: than real water

Just a quick review to highlight the good and bad. Number one the animation. Wow!!! I was drawn into a magical world under the sea! Truly spectacular animation!!! <hl> In some ways the water and physics of water behave more "lifelike" than real water !!! <hl> Astounding, although anyone who is an avid PC gamer would have seen the extent of water effects in 3-D animation by now. Second, the voice acting. Some great performances, some instantly recognisable such as Albert Brooks or Geoffrey Rush. And the jokes are generally not crass or rude, in some instances however only adults will "get it"!!! but it's always safe for the kids. The audio is great with a deep full bass and dynamic audio utilization through all ranges. The video quality is also great with sharp and distinct colours and contrasts. "Reds" look paritculary good. The one complaint I have is with the "blues" of Dory, Ellen DeGeneres. It seems that they are so bright that they are not defined as a result. She seems to be blending into whatever ocean environment she finds herself. The characters that Marlin meets are for the most part interesting. My favourites are however the three sharks led by Bruce, a Great White with a wonderful Aussie accent, who is the leader of a self-help group promoting goodwill between fish and sharks. "Remember, fish are friends, not food!" the groups motto is recited at every meeting!!! I suppose i would have prefered it if they has spent more time with Bruce and his companions or possibly spent more time at the "paaaahty".All in all, "Finding Nemo" is a fun adventure, (2nd on my list after Monsters Inc), and should delight all children. A friend of mine's son has seen it at least 30 times in the last month, so I suppose he would be the best critic and his opinion the most prudent.

Just a quick review to highlight the good and bad. Number one the animation.Wow!!! I was drawn into a magical world under the sea! Truly spectacular animation!!! In some ways the water and physics of water behave more "lifelike" <hl> than real water <hl>!!! Astounding, although anyone who is an avid PC gamer would have seen the extent of water effects in 3-D animation by now. Second, the voice acting. Some great performances, some instantly recognisable such as Albert Brooks or Geoffrey Rush. And the jokes are generally not crass or rude, in some instances however only adults will "get it"!!! but it's always safe for the kids.The audio is great with a deep full bass and dynamic audio utilization through all ranges. The video quality is also great with sharp and distinct colours and contrasts. "Reds" look paritculary good. The one complaint I have is with the "blues" of Dory, Ellen DeGeneres. It seems that they are so bright that they are not defined as a result.She seems to be blending into whatever ocean environment she finds herself.The characters that Marlin meets are for the most part interesting. My favourites are however the three sharks led by Bruce, a Great White with a wonderful Aussie accent, who is the leader of a self-help group promoting goodwill between fish and sharks. "Remember, fish are friends, not food!" the groups motto is recited at every meeting!!! I suppose i would have prefered it if they has spent more time with Bruce and his companions or possibly spent more time at the "paaaahty".All in all, "Finding Nemo" is a fun adventure, (2nd on my list after Monsters Inc), and should delight all children. A friend of mine's son has seen it at least 30 times in the last month, so I suppose he would be the best critic and his opinion the most prudent.

In some ways the water and physics of water behave more "lifelike" <hl> than real water <hl> !!!


Question: When did that number come out?

Even my husband loved this movie. Great for family movie night for any age my children are 10 and 13 they loved it. Both boys and girls will love this movie and the songs are great too.

Answer: 10 and 13

Even my husband loved this movie. <hl> Great for family movie night for any age my children are 10 and 13 they loved it. <hl> Both boys and girls will love this movie and the songs are great too.

Even my husband loved this movie. Great for family movie night for any age my children are <hl> 10 and 13 <hl> they loved it. Both boys and girls will love this movie and the songs are great too.


Question: What do you think about animation?

I watched this movie with my husband and we both really liked it. I am a cartoom-movie fan so I especially liked it because it was unusual and funny, but still a nice fairy tale and very well drawn and animated. The animation is actually absolutely brilliant, it really looks more like a movie than a cartoon!I think some kids can watch this movie and enjoy the fairy tale aspect, but on the other hand, I think that some kids around 7 and 8 won't get, as one reviewer objected, some of the jokes, which are actually not targeted for that age, but more for a late teen and adult audience. I would not say the jokes are downright dirty, some have a double meaning but they are not vulgar or offensive and I don't see the need to get offended. I would not buy it specifically for a kid, but it is a movie that the whole family can watch together.

Answer: I think that some kids around 7

I watched this movie with my husband and we both really liked it. I am a cartoom-movie fan so I especially liked it because it was unusual and funny, but still a nice fairy tale and very well drawn and animated. <hl> The animation is actually absolutely brilliant, it really looks more like a movie than a cartoon!I think some kids can watch this movie and enjoy the fairy tale aspect, but on the other hand, I think that some kids around 7 and 8 won't get, as one reviewer objected, some of the jokes, which are actually not targeted for that age, but more for a late teen and adult audience. <hl> I would not say the jokes are downright dirty, some have a double meaning but they are not vulgar or offensive and I don't see the need to get offended. I would not buy it specifically for a kid, but it is a movie that the whole family can watch together.

I watched this movie with my husband and we both really liked it. I am a cartoom-movie fan so I especially liked it because it was unusual and funny, but still a nice fairy tale and very well drawn and animated. The animation is actually absolutely brilliant, it really looks more like a movie than a cartoon!I think some kids can watch this movie and enjoy the fairy tale aspect, but on the other hand, <hl> I think that some kids around 7 <hl> and 8 won't get, as one reviewer objected, some of the jokes, which are actually not targeted for that age, but more for a late teen and adult audience. I would not say the jokes are downright dirty, some have a double meaning but they are not vulgar or offensive and I don't see the need to get offended. I would not buy it specifically for a kid, but it is a movie that the whole family can watch together.


Question: Why do I have a flawed character?

It would be superficial to say that Serenity is a science fiction movie. Serenity is a movie that uses genres as a foundation upon which to build a story about real people, who just happen to be vagabonds on a rusty old spaceship.The plot: Malcolm, captain of the space-ship Serenity and his crew are doing their usual gallivanting around in space, trying to eke out a living in a politically hostile environment, with one difference: their crew is temporarily supplemented by a young doctor (Simon) and his mentally unstable, but very telepathic, younger sister, River. Simon and River are fugitives from the afore-mentioned political hostility, embodied by a sword-wielding man known as "the Operative". The crew, the fugitives, the government, and a group of very evil secondary villains called Reavers, provide a magnificent cast of characters whose conflict (and other interactions, but mostly conflict) kept me spellbound for the entire movie.I've long been a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek, but Serenity is better than either.  Reflecting on the movie afterwards, I kept finding similarities to Star Trek: Voyager.  Both shows focus on a small ship and her rag-tag crew. The crews squabble a lot, but ultimately pull together for the common good.  However, I liked Serenity much more than I ever liked Voyager because it was so much more real and alive.  Star Trek has science fiction, and interesting characters.  Star Wars has this plus a nice background mythology and some realistic grittiness.  Serenity includes all of the above, plus humor, more grittiness, sex, theft, and really nasty bad guys.  The result is a realistic universe that people in this messed up world can relate to.In the last few years a lot of science fiction and fantasy movies have had two things:  lots of characters with British accents, and cheesy lines.  Serenity once again leaves its competitors in the dust by transcending all predictability by using fairly neutral, Chinese, and American accents, as well as a British accent from India.  Instead of cheesy lines, it goes for totally-unexpected-and-hilarious, such as: "Been more'n a year since I had anything twixt my nethers weren't run on batteries!"  There is no denying that the language is odd, and it may take you a while to get used to it.  But stay with the language, because it's so worth listening to!  The odd terminology and turns of phrase drive home the fact that this is not just another sci-fi copy.(Spoiler alert!) A popular phrase in screen-writing these days is "action that tells the story". I first remember seeing this concept in The Bourne Identity. Serenity does an even better job because it has an even more interesting motivation for violence, and it juggles multiple action characters. If you've read anything about the history of Serenity you already know that River has some amazing skills. She is also a very attractive young woman. In an average movie, a young male viewer (such as myself) might be inclined to focus on the person on screen more than on her character. In this case, River's character is so incredibly fascinating that you can't help but focus on her character. She is complex, she invokes sympathy, and she has more dimensions than the average human, let alone movie character. Although Malcolm and his crew seem like the main characters of the movie, it is ultimately River who steals the show.  (End spoiler).I've always assumed that if you notice computer graphics in a movie, it is because they are badly done.  Serenity dashed this theory for me.  The three or four times I noticed effects elements, they didn't take center stage or in any way distract from the movie.  They simply communicated the necessary information to the audience and then got out of the way and let the story continue.  The shots of planets were extremely beautiful; an excellent counterpoint to other, more disturbing, images in the movie.As I mentioned before, Serenity has some elements that border on horror.  The filmmakers made an excellent decision when they decided to leave most of the disturbing imagery to the audience's imagination. The Reavers are a hideous and evil "people" whose presence could easily have been overplayed for shock value. But the film judiciously cuts around them, never showing more than a glimpse of their horrible faces. In place of these images are lines such as, "You know he's better off dead than what the Reavers would have done to him." Once again, the movie is about the characters, rather than about something as superficial as Reaver make-up.I can only think of one negative thing to say about Serenity: There were a few times during big action scenes when two characters would hold an important (and usually emotional) conversation. Obviously, in terms of sound mixing, you have to turn the environmental sounds down so that you can hear the dialog, but I think they went too far.  Two or three times, the contrast of these suddenly quiet conversations broke the mood for me.On the other hand, there was another kind of mood change that I liked a lot. Being a mentally unstable psychic, River expresses a lot of her personality inside her own head. In the medium of film, it is easy to go inside someone's head, and Serenity does a marvelous job of it. I didn't grow up watching movies, so I have often found myself a little confused when movies do things like this. In Serenity it was always crystal clear to me, and the revelations brought by these psychic journeys helped connect the audience to River and her huge part in the story.Serenity is an excellent movie.  It might be a little confusing at first, but if you are a action movie fan or science-fiction fan at all, or if you just like great story-telling, you will like it.Note: For the few who don't know, Serenity is based on the TV series Firefly.  When I watched Serenity, I had never seen Firefly, but I still loved the movie!  Since then, I have watched most of the Firefly series.  All the praise I have given the movie also applies to the TV series.

Answer: Two or three times

It would be superficial to say that Serenity is a science fiction movie. Serenity is a movie that uses genres as a foundation upon which to build a story about real people, who just happen to be vagabonds on a rusty old spaceship. The plot: Malcolm, captain of the space-ship Serenity and his crew are doing their usual gallivanting around in space, trying to eke out a living in a politically hostile environment, with one difference: their crew is temporarily supplemented by a young doctor (Simon) and his mentally unstable, but very telepathic, younger sister, River. Simon and River are fugitives from the afore-mentioned political hostility, embodied by a sword-wielding man known as "the Operative". The crew, the fugitives, the government, and a group of very evil secondary villains called Reavers, provide a magnificent cast of characters whose conflict (and other interactions, but mostly conflict) kept me spellbound for the entire movie. I've long been a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek, but Serenity is better than either. Reflecting on the movie afterwards, I kept finding similarities to Star Trek: Voyager. Both shows focus on a small ship and her rag-tag crew. The crews squabble a lot, but ultimately pull together for the common good. However, I liked Serenity much more than I ever liked Voyager because it was so much more real and alive. Star Trek has science fiction, and interesting characters. Star Wars has this plus a nice background mythology and some realistic grittiness. Serenity includes all of the above, plus humor, more grittiness, sex, theft, and really nasty bad guys. The result is a realistic universe that people in this messed up world can relate to. In the last few years a lot of science fiction and fantasy movies have had two things: lots of characters with British accents, and cheesy lines. Serenity once again leaves its competitors in the dust by transcending all predictability by using fairly neutral, Chinese, and American accents, as well as a British accent from India. Instead of cheesy lines, it goes for totally-unexpected-and-hilarious, such as: "Been more'n a year since I had anything twixt my nethers weren't run on batteries!" There is no denying that the language is odd, and it may take you a while to get used to it. But stay with the language, because it's so worth listening to! The odd terminology and turns of phrase drive home the fact that this is not just another sci-fi copy.(Spoiler alert!) A popular phrase in screen-writing these days is "action that tells the story". I first remember seeing this concept in The Bourne Identity. Serenity does an even better job because it has an even more interesting motivation for violence, and it juggles multiple action characters. If you've read anything about the history of Serenity you already know that River has some amazing skills. She is also a very attractive young woman. In an average movie, a young male viewer (such as myself) might be inclined to focus on the person on screen more than on her character. In this case, River's character is so incredibly fascinating that you can't help but focus on her character. She is complex, she invokes sympathy, and she has more dimensions than the average human, let alone movie character. Although Malcolm and his crew seem like the main characters of the movie, it is ultimately River who steals the show. (End spoiler).I've always assumed that if you notice computer graphics in a movie, it is because they are badly done. Serenity dashed this theory for me. The three or four times I noticed effects elements, they didn't take center stage or in any way distract from the movie. They simply communicated the necessary information to the audience and then got out of the way and let the story continue. The shots of planets were extremely beautiful; an excellent counterpoint to other, more disturbing, images in the movie. As I mentioned before, Serenity has some elements that border on horror. The filmmakers made an excellent decision when they decided to leave most of the disturbing imagery to the audience's imagination. The Reavers are a hideous and evil "people" whose presence could easily have been overplayed for shock value. But the film judiciously cuts around them, never showing more than a glimpse of their horrible faces. In place of these images are lines such as, "You know he's better off dead than what the Reavers would have done to him." Once again, the movie is about the characters, rather than about something as superficial as Reaver make-up. I can only think of one negative thing to say about Serenity: There were a few times during big action scenes when two characters would hold an important (and usually emotional) conversation. Obviously, in terms of sound mixing, you have to turn the environmental sounds down so that you can hear the dialog, but I think they went too far. <hl> Two or three times , the contrast of these suddenly quiet conversations broke the mood for me. <hl> On the other hand, there was another kind of mood change that I liked a lot. Being a mentally unstable psychic, River expresses a lot of her personality inside her own head. In the medium of film, it is easy to go inside someone's head, and Serenity does a marvelous job of it. I didn't grow up watching movies, so I have often found myself a little confused when movies do things like this. In Serenity it was always crystal clear to me, and the revelations brought by these psychic journeys helped connect the audience to River and her huge part in the story. Serenity is an excellent movie. It might be a little confusing at first, but if you are a action movie fan or science-fiction fan at all, or if you just like great story-telling, you will like it. Note: For the few who don't know, Serenity is based on the TV series Firefly. When I watched Serenity, I had never seen Firefly, but I still loved the movie! Since then, I have watched most of the Firefly series. All the praise I have given the movie also applies to the TV series.

It would be superficial to say that Serenity is a science fiction movie. Serenity is a movie that uses genres as a foundation upon which to build a story about real people, who just happen to be vagabonds on a rusty old spaceship.The plot: Malcolm, captain of the space-ship Serenity and his crew are doing their usual gallivanting around in space, trying to eke out a living in a politically hostile environment, with one difference: their crew is temporarily supplemented by a young doctor (Simon) and his mentally unstable, but very telepathic, younger sister, River. Simon and River are fugitives from the afore-mentioned political hostility, embodied by a sword-wielding man known as "the Operative". The crew, the fugitives, the government, and a group of very evil secondary villains called Reavers, provide a magnificent cast of characters whose conflict (and other interactions, but mostly conflict) kept me spellbound for the entire movie.I've long been a fan of both Star Wars and Star Trek, but Serenity is better than either. Reflecting on the movie afterwards, I kept finding similarities to Star Trek: Voyager. Both shows focus on a small ship and her rag-tag crew. The crews squabble a lot, but ultimately pull together for the common good. However, I liked Serenity much more than I ever liked Voyager because it was so much more real and alive. Star Trek has science fiction, and interesting characters. Star Wars has this plus a nice background mythology and some realistic grittiness. Serenity includes all of the above, plus humor, more grittiness, sex, theft, and really nasty bad guys. The result is a realistic universe that people in this messed up world can relate to.In the last few years a lot of science fiction and fantasy movies have had two things: lots of characters with British accents, and cheesy lines. Serenity once again leaves its competitors in the dust by transcending all predictability by using fairly neutral, Chinese, and American accents, as well as a British accent from India. Instead of cheesy lines, it goes for totally-unexpected-and-hilarious, such as: "Been more'n a year since I had anything twixt my nethers weren't run on batteries!" There is no denying that the language is odd, and it may take you a while to get used to it. But stay with the language, because it's so worth listening to! The odd terminology and turns of phrase drive home the fact that this is not just another sci-fi copy.(Spoiler alert!) A popular phrase in screen-writing these days is "action that tells the story". I first remember seeing this concept in The Bourne Identity. Serenity does an even better job because it has an even more interesting motivation for violence, and it juggles multiple action characters. If you've read anything about the history of Serenity you already know that River has some amazing skills. She is also a very attractive young woman. In an average movie, a young male viewer (such as myself) might be inclined to focus on the person on screen more than on her character. In this case, River's character is so incredibly fascinating that you can't help but focus on her character. She is complex, she invokes sympathy, and she has more dimensions than the average human, let alone movie character. Although Malcolm and his crew seem like the main characters of the movie, it is ultimately River who steals the show. (End spoiler).I've always assumed that if you notice computer graphics in a movie, it is because they are badly done. Serenity dashed this theory for me. The three or four times I noticed effects elements, they didn't take center stage or in any way distract from the movie. They simply communicated the necessary information to the audience and then got out of the way and let the story continue. The shots of planets were extremely beautiful; an excellent counterpoint to other, more disturbing, images in the movie.As I mentioned before, Serenity has some elements that border on horror. The filmmakers made an excellent decision when they decided to leave most of the disturbing imagery to the audience's imagination. The Reavers are a hideous and evil "people" whose presence could easily have been overplayed for shock value. But the film judiciously cuts around them, never showing more than a glimpse of their horrible faces. In place of these images are lines such as, "You know he's better off dead than what the Reavers would have done to him." Once again, the movie is about the characters, rather than about something as superficial as Reaver make-up.I can only think of one negative thing to say about Serenity: There were a few times during big action scenes when two characters would hold an important (and usually emotional) conversation. Obviously, in terms of sound mixing, you have to turn the environmental sounds down so that you can hear the dialog, but I think they went too far. <hl> Two or three times <hl>, the contrast of these suddenly quiet conversations broke the mood for me.On the other hand, there was another kind of mood change that I liked a lot. Being a mentally unstable psychic, River expresses a lot of her personality inside her own head. In the medium of film, it is easy to go inside someone's head, and Serenity does a marvelous job of it. I didn't grow up watching movies, so I have often found myself a little confused when movies do things like this. In Serenity it was always crystal clear to me, and the revelations brought by these psychic journeys helped connect the audience to River and her huge part in the story.Serenity is an excellent movie. It might be a little confusing at first, but if you are a action movie fan or science-fiction fan at all, or if you just like great story-telling, you will like it.Note: For the few who don't know, Serenity is based on the TV series Firefly. When I watched Serenity, I had never seen Firefly, but I still loved the movie! Since then, I have watched most of the Firefly series. All the praise I have given the movie also applies to the TV series.

<hl> Two or three times <hl> , the contrast of these suddenly quiet conversations broke the mood for me.


Question: How is the film?

"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" is the magnificent movie dramatization of the characters of Patrick O'Brian's Naval novels.Set in the Napoleonic Wars, the storyline is built around the pursuit by British Royal Navy Captain "Lucky" Jack Aubrey and his ship, HMS Surprise, of the French warship "Acheron".  The pursuit begins with an encounter in the South Atlantic in which the smaller Surprise comes off second best but survives.  Aubrey decides to repair his ship at sea and pursue the Acheron around Cape Horn and into the South Pacific.  The ship and crew will enjoy a brief visit to the stunning Galapagos before returning to the hunt.  The climax of the movie is the second confrontation between the Surprise and the Acheron.Russell Crowe is pitch-perfect as Jack Aubrey, firm but fair master and commander.  Paul Bettany is equally perfect as the ship's doctor and the commander's best friend, who will try to mitigate the effects on the crew of Aubrey's obcessive pursuit of the Acheron halfway around the world.The movie is rich in period detail and provides a fascinating glimpse into life aboard a British warship, crewed by tough sailors and officered by a interesting collection of sometimes desperately young officers.  The sequences at sea, whether rounding the Horn in horrendous weather or boarding an enemy vessel, are thrilling and well-executed.This movie is highly recommended as a thrilling drama and as a glimpse into the British Royal Navy at what was arguably its peak as the best navy in the world.

Answer: is the magnificent movie dramatization of the characters of Patrick O'Brian's Naval novels

<hl> "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" is the magnificent movie dramatization of the characters of Patrick O'Brian's Naval novels .Set in the Napoleonic Wars, the storyline is built around the pursuit by British Royal Navy Captain "Lucky" Jack Aubrey and his ship, HMS Surprise, of the French warship "Acheron". <hl> The pursuit begins with an encounter in the South Atlantic in which the smaller Surprise comes off second best but survives. Aubrey decides to repair his ship at sea and pursue the Acheron around Cape Horn and into the South Pacific. The ship and crew will enjoy a brief visit to the stunning Galapagos before returning to the hunt. The climax of the movie is the second confrontation between the Surprise and the Acheron. Russell Crowe is pitch-perfect as Jack Aubrey, firm but fair master and commander. Paul Bettany is equally perfect as the ship's doctor and the commander's best friend, who will try to mitigate the effects on the crew of Aubrey's obcessive pursuit of the Acheron halfway around the world. The movie is rich in period detail and provides a fascinating glimpse into life aboard a British warship, crewed by tough sailors and officered by a interesting collection of sometimes desperately young officers. The sequences at sea, whether rounding the Horn in horrendous weather or boarding an enemy vessel, are thrilling and well-executed. This movie is highly recommended as a thrilling drama and as a glimpse into the British Royal Navy at what was arguably its peak as the best navy in the world.

"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" <hl> is the magnificent movie dramatization of the characters of Patrick O'Brian's Naval novels <hl>.Set in the Napoleonic Wars, the storyline is built around the pursuit by British Royal Navy Captain "Lucky" Jack Aubrey and his ship, HMS Surprise, of the French warship "Acheron". The pursuit begins with an encounter in the South Atlantic in which the smaller Surprise comes off second best but survives. Aubrey decides to repair his ship at sea and pursue the Acheron around Cape Horn and into the South Pacific. The ship and crew will enjoy a brief visit to the stunning Galapagos before returning to the hunt. The climax of the movie is the second confrontation between the Surprise and the Acheron.Russell Crowe is pitch-perfect as Jack Aubrey, firm but fair master and commander. Paul Bettany is equally perfect as the ship's doctor and the commander's best friend, who will try to mitigate the effects on the crew of Aubrey's obcessive pursuit of the Acheron halfway around the world.The movie is rich in period detail and provides a fascinating glimpse into life aboard a British warship, crewed by tough sailors and officered by a interesting collection of sometimes desperately young officers. The sequences at sea, whether rounding the Horn in horrendous weather or boarding an enemy vessel, are thrilling and well-executed.This movie is highly recommended as a thrilling drama and as a glimpse into the British Royal Navy at what was arguably its peak as the best navy in the world.

"Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World" <hl> is the magnificent movie dramatization of the characters of Patrick O'Brian's Naval novels <hl> .Set in the Napoleonic Wars, the storyline is built around the pursuit by British Royal Navy Captain "Lucky" Jack Aubrey and his ship, HMS Surprise, of the French warship "Acheron".


Question: What is the quality of the music?

The music is wonderful and the acting is great.  The story is remarkable.  I saw Elizabeth Von Trapp in concert in Omaha and she inherited a beautiful voice and personality.

Answer: The music is wonderful

<hl> The music is wonderful and the acting is great. <hl> The story is remarkable. I saw Elizabeth Von Trapp in concert in Omaha and she inherited a beautiful voice and personality.

<hl> The music is wonderful <hl> and the acting is great. The story is remarkable. I saw Elizabeth Von Trapp in concert in Omaha and she inherited a beautiful voice and personality.


Question: When features are good?

We watched this at the theater in IMAX 3D, so watching a Blu ray of this film at home had a lot to measure up to. I would say that it was quite acceptable. We watched it on a 55" LG with passive 3D. The image was crisp and the 3D added, in my opinion, to the viewing experience over watching a standard Blu ray ... and I think that standard Blu rays normally look pretty good.I doubt I have to fill anyone in about the subject of this movie. It takes several Marvel super-heroes who have all had their own films leading up to this and puts them in one epic package. True to the Marvel taste, for most of the film they do not get along well with each other, but come together when it counts to fight an exhausting and dangerous battle against seemingly impossible odds. But what else are super-heroes supposed to do? LOLThe acting is convincing, and there are quite a few moments of humor to give you a break from the more serious tone of the movie (a defect in the otherwise brilliant movies in the new Batman series).The sound in this presentation is simply outstanding. I don't remember another film which has driven my subwoofer more powerfully or effectively. The rest of the sound comes through powerfully and crisply too. There is no problem with level balancing between the score, the sound effects and the dialogue.If you like super-hero movies, this very well may be the best one ever released.

Answer: look pretty good

We watched this at the theater in IMAX 3D, so watching a Blu ray of this film at home had a lot to measure up to. I would say that it was quite acceptable. We watched it on a 55" LG with passive 3D. <hl> The image was crisp and the 3D added, in my opinion, to the viewing experience over watching a standard Blu ray ... and I think that standard Blu rays normally look pretty good .I doubt I have to fill anyone in about the subject of this movie. <hl> It takes several Marvel super-heroes who have all had their own films leading up to this and puts them in one epic package. True to the Marvel taste, for most of the film they do not get along well with each other, but come together when it counts to fight an exhausting and dangerous battle against seemingly impossible odds. But what else are super-heroes supposed to do? LOLThe acting is convincing, and there are quite a few moments of humor to give you a break from the more serious tone of the movie (a defect in the otherwise brilliant movies in the new Batman series).The sound in this presentation is simply outstanding. I don't remember another film which has driven my subwoofer more powerfully or effectively. The rest of the sound comes through powerfully and crisply too. There is no problem with level balancing between the score, the sound effects and the dialogue. If you like super-hero movies, this very well may be the best one ever released.

We watched this at the theater in IMAX 3D, so watching a Blu ray of this film at home had a lot to measure up to. I would say that it was quite acceptable. We watched it on a 55" LG with passive 3D. The image was crisp and the 3D added, in my opinion, to the viewing experience over watching a standard Blu ray ... and I think that standard Blu rays normally <hl> look pretty good <hl>.I doubt I have to fill anyone in about the subject of this movie. It takes several Marvel super-heroes who have all had their own films leading up to this and puts them in one epic package. True to the Marvel taste, for most of the film they do not get along well with each other, but come together when it counts to fight an exhausting and dangerous battle against seemingly impossible odds. But what else are super-heroes supposed to do? LOLThe acting is convincing, and there are quite a few moments of humor to give you a break from the more serious tone of the movie (a defect in the otherwise brilliant movies in the new Batman series).The sound in this presentation is simply outstanding. I don't remember another film which has driven my subwoofer more powerfully or effectively. The rest of the sound comes through powerfully and crisply too. There is no problem with level balancing between the score, the sound effects and the dialogue.If you like super-hero movies, this very well may be the best one ever released.

The image was crisp and the 3D added, in my opinion, to the viewing experience over watching a standard Blu ray ... and I think that standard Blu rays normally <hl> look pretty good <hl> .I doubt I have to fill anyone in about the subject of this movie.


Question: How was Jones' humor?

My daughter came along a little later in life than her siblings. I was 46 when she was born. She has made it to Middle School, now. Sometimes it feels awfully hard to find something that she and I really enjoy together. I want to watch my macho TV shows while she plays on the laptop."Brave" come out and I thought it looked cute. I bought it sight-unseen for my daughter. The movie arrived the night my daughter had planned a sleepover with a couple of friends. I popped the movie in and soon all three girls, myself, and my wife were enthralled.The movie is clever with a message to be yourself but also be responsible. There are some really fun situations. Billy Connelly is, of course, great.I will watch the movie, again and again. I hope it is a thing my daughter and I can share with hot chocolate, popcorn, and a lot of laughs.

Answer: My daughter came along a little later

<hl> My daughter came along a little later in life than her siblings. <hl> I was 46 when she was born. She has made it to Middle School, now. Sometimes it feels awfully hard to find something that she and I really enjoy together. I want to watch my macho TV shows while she plays on the laptop. "Brave" come out and I thought it looked cute. I bought it sight-unseen for my daughter. The movie arrived the night my daughter had planned a sleepover with a couple of friends. I popped the movie in and soon all three girls, myself, and my wife were enthralled. The movie is clever with a message to be yourself but also be responsible. There are some really fun situations. Billy Connelly is, of course, great. I will watch the movie, again and again. I hope it is a thing my daughter and I can share with hot chocolate, popcorn, and a lot of laughs.

<hl> My daughter came along a little later <hl> in life than her siblings. I was 46 when she was born. She has made it to Middle School, now. Sometimes it feels awfully hard to find something that she and I really enjoy together. I want to watch my macho TV shows while she plays on the laptop."Brave" come out and I thought it looked cute. I bought it sight-unseen for my daughter. The movie arrived the night my daughter had planned a sleepover with a couple of friends. I popped the movie in and soon all three girls, myself, and my wife were enthralled.The movie is clever with a message to be yourself but also be responsible. There are some really fun situations. Billy Connelly is, of course, great.I will watch the movie, again and again. I hope it is a thing my daughter and I can share with hot chocolate, popcorn, and a lot of laughs.


Question: How is the quality of the lesson?

Cars is another winner from the combined efforts of Disney and Pixar. Anyone who watches this movie will be able to relate to a character, from the spiteful Hudson Hornet/Doc Hudson to the easygoing Mater. A star studded cast of voice actors gives this film recognizable voices for anyone. Some of the actors are: Paul Newman (one of my favorites in this film), Owen Wilson (Marley and Me, Drillbit Taylor, Night at The Museum), Larry the Cable Guy, (another one of my favorites) and John Ratzenberger, who has appeared in all the Pixar film and plays his most prominent role in this one. The general gist of the movie is a stuck-up rookie racecar, namely Lightning McQueen, getting arrested in a small Route 66 town called Radiator Springs, where life is mostly about trying to passing through tourist to buy something from one of the characters stores. Over the course of the movie, you find that the town doctor was the best racecar around in his younger days, but had a big crash that ended his career. He know does not want anything to do with the racecar that comes to town. McQueen learns the importance of slowing down and enjoying the ride on the Highway of Life. He helps everyone in the town, and even restores the 60's neon lights in the town. Also, he falls in love with the town attorney, a 911 Porsche. But the best part is the end, when McQueen has a chance to win the Piston Cup, but instead helps one of the greats (called "The King" in the movie and modeled after Richard Petty's Plymouth Firebird and voiced by Petty himself) finish his final race. This movie has the best moral of any of the Pixar movies. An added bonus is all the retro cars, from a Model T to a 50's Chevy Impala. Plus there are some great punch lines as with all the Pixar movies. I've saved the best part of this movie for last. The soundtrack is simply awesome. Featuring Rascall Flatts, Sheryl Crow, and Brad Paisley, I would rate it as one notch below the soundtrack ofRocky IV, which has the best soundtrack of all time. Overall this is a phenomenal film. HIGHLY RECCOMMENDED!!!!

Answer: HIGHLY RECCOMMENDED

HIGHLY RECCOMMENDED !!!!

Cars is another winner from the combined efforts of Disney and Pixar. Anyone who watches this movie will be able to relate to a character, from the spiteful Hudson Hornet/Doc Hudson to the easygoing Mater. A star studded cast of voice actors gives this film recognizable voices for anyone. Some of the actors are: Paul Newman (one of my favorites in this film), Owen Wilson (Marley and Me, Drillbit Taylor, Night at The Museum), Larry the Cable Guy, (another one of my favorites) and John Ratzenberger, who has appeared in all the Pixar film and plays his most prominent role in this one. The general gist of the movie is a stuck-up rookie racecar, namely Lightning McQueen, getting arrested in a small Route 66 town called Radiator Springs, where life is mostly about trying to passing through tourist to buy something from one of the characters stores. Over the course of the movie, you find that the town doctor was the best racecar around in his younger days, but had a big crash that ended his career. He know does not want anything to do with the racecar that comes to town. McQueen learns the importance of slowing down and enjoying the ride on the Highway of Life. He helps everyone in the town, and even restores the 60's neon lights in the town. Also, he falls in love with the town attorney, a 911 Porsche. But the best part is the end, when McQueen has a chance to win the Piston Cup, but instead helps one of the greats (called "The King" in the movie and modeled after Richard Petty's Plymouth Firebird and voiced by Petty himself) finish his final race. This movie has the best moral of any of the Pixar movies. An added bonus is all the retro cars, from a Model T to a 50's Chevy Impala. Plus there are some great punch lines as with all the Pixar movies. I've saved the best part of this movie for last. The soundtrack is simply awesome. Featuring Rascall Flatts, Sheryl Crow, and Brad Paisley, I would rate it as one notch below the soundtrack ofRocky IV, which has the best soundtrack of all time. Overall this is a phenomenal film. <hl> HIGHLY RECCOMMENDED !!!! <hl>

Cars is another winner from the combined efforts of Disney and Pixar. Anyone who watches this movie will be able to relate to a character, from the spiteful Hudson Hornet/Doc Hudson to the easygoing Mater. A star studded cast of voice actors gives this film recognizable voices for anyone. Some of the actors are: Paul Newman (one of my favorites in this film), Owen Wilson (Marley and Me, Drillbit Taylor, Night at The Museum), Larry the Cable Guy, (another one of my favorites) and John Ratzenberger, who has appeared in all the Pixar film and plays his most prominent role in this one. The general gist of the movie is a stuck-up rookie racecar, namely Lightning McQueen, getting arrested in a small Route 66 town called Radiator Springs, where life is mostly about trying to passing through tourist to buy something from one of the characters stores. Over the course of the movie, you find that the town doctor was the best racecar around in his younger days, but had a big crash that ended his career. He know does not want anything to do with the racecar that comes to town. McQueen learns the importance of slowing down and enjoying the ride on the Highway of Life. He helps everyone in the town, and even restores the 60's neon lights in the town. Also, he falls in love with the town attorney, a 911 Porsche. But the best part is the end, when McQueen has a chance to win the Piston Cup, but instead helps one of the greats (called "The King" in the movie and modeled after Richard Petty's Plymouth Firebird and voiced by Petty himself) finish his final race. This movie has the best moral of any of the Pixar movies. An added bonus is all the retro cars, from a Model T to a 50's Chevy Impala. Plus there are some great punch lines as with all the Pixar movies. I've saved the best part of this movie for last. The soundtrack is simply awesome. Featuring Rascall Flatts, Sheryl Crow, and Brad Paisley, I would rate it as one notch below the soundtrack ofRocky IV, which has the best soundtrack of all time. Overall this is a phenomenal film. <hl> HIGHLY RECCOMMENDED <hl>!!!!


Question: How short is this story?

I was surprised at how much I liked this film. It is very well done and has a lovely story. I will watch it again.

Answer: It is very well done and has a lovely story

I was surprised at how much I liked this film. <hl> It is very well done and has a lovely story . <hl> I will watch it again.

I was surprised at how much I liked this film. <hl> It is very well done and has a lovely story <hl>. I will watch it again.

<hl> It is very well done and has a lovely story <hl> .


Question: How is the impact?

I have to say I totally understand this debate over the altering of NEW versions of the Star Wars Trilogy (episodes 4, 5 and 6). I am truly looking forward to these films in their new versions but I sympathize with those who want their films untouched as they first viewed them. Perhaps in my mind, these may be some of the very FEW films ever made which could stand the updating and restoration... I say that for a few reasons. First of all, the Star Wars films in question depended so greatly on the prequels that have been made in the years since.... also they depend on their "look", and seen compared to episodes 1 and 2.. and probably the upcoming episode 3, they may not look so great to future Star Wars fans who will instead see them IN ORDER, which most of us DID NOT. To my thinking, if it these were not revamped, they would look weaker and more primitive to future generations caught up with the clarity and tone of the first 3 films.I TOTALLY agree that to change details of the story might not be wise, and I am not aware to what degree this will be done except for rumour... we all need to actually see them to make a judgement call for how each of us feels about the changes... but if it's simply a matter of cleaning up the special effects (like removing the gray boxes from the spacecraft against the black skies) and making Yoda look more like a living being and not a "Muppet" I am all for it.ARTISTS ALTERING THEIR WORKS:Is it okay for an artist to change his works? Some say NO. Yet in history, classical composers such as Bach, Bruckner, Debussy and many more, often had "versions" or new "editions" to change orchestration, orders of movements and even which instrument would take the lead in a concerto. Every art scholar knows that paintings are often painted and repainted by their original creators and sometimes overpainted by other painters many years later. The museums are filled with works that have had faces painted out, figures added, coats of arms changed or painted out and fig leaves added to male nudes. There are even paintings that are painted over other paintings that were already completed. This is more common in art history that you think. Many Italian and Dutch paintings have gone through extensive realtering. Sometimes even an artist would sign his name to another mans painting.... some works by Rembrandt were actually painted by others in his studio. He knew the painting would sell better with his name on it.These days, many a brand new Harley Davidson with state of the art design is bought by an owner only to be remodelled into a custom chopper to the raves of the magazines and buyers .... and that logic applies to cars, great buildings and other things.The REAL question is SHOULD motion picture films be altered? My general answer is probably "NO"... I believe in cleaning them, fixing badly done special effects, reprinting from the original negative, etc... if it does not ruin the integrity and look of the original (just as art museums routinely "restore" great paintings without a fuss from anyone).... but on the question of adding scenes and altering storylines... that is a trickier question. STAR WARS COULD be the exception for the above reasons and since it is their creator who is doing it. It is well known over the years, he has expended on his original 1977 ideas on these sagas and he wants to "right" that. This vision may conflict with OUR individual ideas of what these films may mean to us... but since when do individuals agree on what is "right" or lacking in any given film? I know many a Star Wars fan who hated the introduction of "Jar Jar Binks", or did not care for other aspects of one of the films upon release. So what is "right" for "Star Wars" remains the discretion of Mr. Lucas... the creator of these "worlds" we have been allowed to visit... and in 1977 he set to film a world he wanted to share with us and now, 30 years later, he wants to evolve that world for generations to be born long after we are gone while he still can.I think we need to see what the man will give us in this new set and then judge if it is for us or not. For what it's worth, I DO believe the original theatrical release should be available to those who want them... and the films are so popular, I think both the new versions and the original versions in release will be profitable for 20th Century Fox to have on the market.

Answer: that have been made in the years

I have to say I totally understand this debate over the altering of NEW versions of the Star Wars Trilogy (episodes 4, 5 and 6). I am truly looking forward to these films in their new versions but I sympathize with those who want their films untouched as they first viewed them. Perhaps in my mind, these may be some of the very FEW films ever made which could stand the updating and restoration... I say that for a few reasons. <hl> First of all, the Star Wars films in question depended so greatly on the prequels that have been made in the years since.... also they depend on their "look", and seen compared to episodes 1 and 2.. and probably the upcoming episode 3, they may not look so great to future Star Wars fans who will instead see them IN ORDER, which most of us DID NOT. <hl> To my thinking, if it these were not revamped, they would look weaker and more primitive to future generations caught up with the clarity and tone of the first 3 films. I TOTALLY agree that to change details of the story might not be wise, and I am not aware to what degree this will be done except for rumour... we all need to actually see them to make a judgement call for how each of us feels about the changes... but if it's simply a matter of cleaning up the special effects (like removing the gray boxes from the spacecraft against the black skies) and making Yoda look more like a living being and not a "Muppet" I am all for it. ARTISTS ALTERING THEIR WORKS:Is it okay for an artist to change his works? Some say NO. Yet in history, classical composers such as Bach, Bruckner, Debussy and many more, often had "versions" or new "editions" to change orchestration, orders of movements and even which instrument would take the lead in a concerto. Every art scholar knows that paintings are often painted and repainted by their original creators and sometimes overpainted by other painters many years later. The museums are filled with works that have had faces painted out, figures added, coats of arms changed or painted out and fig leaves added to male nudes. There are even paintings that are painted over other paintings that were already completed. This is more common in art history that you think. Many Italian and Dutch paintings have gone through extensive realtering. Sometimes even an artist would sign his name to another mans painting.... some works by Rembrandt were actually painted by others in his studio. He knew the painting would sell better with his name on it. These days, many a brand new Harley Davidson with state of the art design is bought by an owner only to be remodelled into a custom chopper to the raves of the magazines and buyers .... and that logic applies to cars, great buildings and other things. The REAL question is SHOULD motion picture films be altered? My general answer is probably "NO"... I believe in cleaning them, fixing badly done special effects, reprinting from the original negative, etc... if it does not ruin the integrity and look of the original (just as art museums routinely "restore" great paintings without a fuss from anyone).... but on the question of adding scenes and altering storylines... that is a trickier question. STAR WARS COULD be the exception for the above reasons and since it is their creator who is doing it. It is well known over the years, he has expended on his original 1977 ideas on these sagas and he wants to "right" that. This vision may conflict with OUR individual ideas of what these films may mean to us... but since when do individuals agree on what is "right" or lacking in any given film? I know many a Star Wars fan who hated the introduction of "Jar Jar Binks", or did not care for other aspects of one of the films upon release. So what is "right" for "Star Wars" remains the discretion of Mr. Lucas... the creator of these "worlds" we have been allowed to visit... and in 1977 he set to film a world he wanted to share with us and now, 30 years later, he wants to evolve that world for generations to be born long after we are gone while he still can. I think we need to see what the man will give us in this new set and then judge if it is for us or not. For what it's worth, I DO believe the original theatrical release should be available to those who want them... and the films are so popular, I think both the new versions and the original versions in release will be profitable for 20th Century Fox to have on the market.

I have to say I totally understand this debate over the altering of NEW versions of the Star Wars Trilogy (episodes 4, 5 and 6). I am truly looking forward to these films in their new versions but I sympathize with those who want their films untouched as they first viewed them. Perhaps in my mind, these may be some of the very FEW films ever made which could stand the updating and restoration... I say that for a few reasons. First of all, the Star Wars films in question depended so greatly on the prequels <hl> that have been made in the years <hl> since.... also they depend on their "look", and seen compared to episodes 1 and 2.. and probably the upcoming episode 3, they may not look so great to future Star Wars fans who will instead see them IN ORDER, which most of us DID NOT. To my thinking, if it these were not revamped, they would look weaker and more primitive to future generations caught up with the clarity and tone of the first 3 films.I TOTALLY agree that to change details of the story might not be wise, and I am not aware to what degree this will be done except for rumour... we all need to actually see them to make a judgement call for how each of us feels about the changes... but if it's simply a matter of cleaning up the special effects (like removing the gray boxes from the spacecraft against the black skies) and making Yoda look more like a living being and not a "Muppet" I am all for it.ARTISTS ALTERING THEIR WORKS:Is it okay for an artist to change his works? Some say NO. Yet in history, classical composers such as Bach, Bruckner, Debussy and many more, often had "versions" or new "editions" to change orchestration, orders of movements and even which instrument would take the lead in a concerto. Every art scholar knows that paintings are often painted and repainted by their original creators and sometimes overpainted by other painters many years later. The museums are filled with works that have had faces painted out, figures added, coats of arms changed or painted out and fig leaves added to male nudes. There are even paintings that are painted over other paintings that were already completed. This is more common in art history that you think. Many Italian and Dutch paintings have gone through extensive realtering. Sometimes even an artist would sign his name to another mans painting.... some works by Rembrandt were actually painted by others in his studio. He knew the painting would sell better with his name on it.These days, many a brand new Harley Davidson with state of the art design is bought by an owner only to be remodelled into a custom chopper to the raves of the magazines and buyers .... and that logic applies to cars, great buildings and other things.The REAL question is SHOULD motion picture films be altered? My general answer is probably "NO"... I believe in cleaning them, fixing badly done special effects, reprinting from the original negative, etc... if it does not ruin the integrity and look of the original (just as art museums routinely "restore" great paintings without a fuss from anyone).... but on the question of adding scenes and altering storylines... that is a trickier question. STAR WARS COULD be the exception for the above reasons and since it is their creator who is doing it. It is well known over the years, he has expended on his original 1977 ideas on these sagas and he wants to "right" that. This vision may conflict with OUR individual ideas of what these films may mean to us... but since when do individuals agree on what is "right" or lacking in any given film? I know many a Star Wars fan who hated the introduction of "Jar Jar Binks", or did not care for other aspects of one of the films upon release. So what is "right" for "Star Wars" remains the discretion of Mr. Lucas... the creator of these "worlds" we have been allowed to visit... and in 1977 he set to film a world he wanted to share with us and now, 30 years later, he wants to evolve that world for generations to be born long after we are gone while he still can.I think we need to see what the man will give us in this new set and then judge if it is for us or not. For what it's worth, I DO believe the original theatrical release should be available to those who want them... and the films are so popular, I think both the new versions and the original versions in release will be profitable for 20th Century Fox to have on the market.


Question: How is movie?

Movie was sad and uplifting at the same time. Being based on a true story really highlighted the failures of our country to address the AIDS epidemic early on.

Answer: Movie was sad and uplifting at the same time

<hl> Movie was sad and uplifting at the same time . <hl> Being based on a true story really highlighted the failures of our country to address the AIDS epidemic early on.

<hl> Movie was sad and uplifting at the same time <hl>. Being based on a true story really highlighted the failures of our country to address the AIDS epidemic early on.

<hl> Movie was sad and uplifting at the same time <hl> .


Question: How is the score?

Acclaimed filmmaker George Lucas catapulted the Sci-Fi genre to new heights with the breakthrough masterpiece, the "Star Wars" Trilogy. A long time ago in a galaxy far away, a small band of rebels have dared to fight back the ruthless Galactic Empire. A simple farm boy named Luke Skywalker who dreams of something greater, will seized his true destiny and help the Rebellion overthrow the Empire. This amazing Sci-Fi spectacle is one of the most successful franchises in film history and contains a strong fan following unlike any other. The blockbuster trilogy is the ultimate battle of good versus evil and features a compelling epic storyline, memorable characters, thrilling action sequences and award-winning special effects. The fine cast includes Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Alec Guinness, Billy Dee Williams and James Earl Jones as the voice of the ruthless Darth Vader. All three films were very successful at the box office and also won many Academy Awards. This marvelous 4-Disc box set features Episodes IV (A New Hope), V (The Empire Strikes Back) and VI (Return of the Jedi).The "Star Wars" Trilogy is the must-have DVD of 2004. The entire science fiction saga is presented in 2.35:1 THX certified anamorphic widescreen format. The box set contains an outstanding picture quality that brings new life to the popular Sci-Fi trilogy. Its intense Dolby Digital 5.1-EX sound delivers an excellent home theater experience. The box set also features informative audio commentaries by creator George Lucas, cast member Carrie Fisher and technical crew, theatrical trailers, still galleries, an in-depth feature-length "Star Wars" saga documentary (Disc 4), behind-the-scenes featurettes and a exclusive preview of the upcoming "Star Wars: Episode III". Overall, the "Star Wars" Trilogy gets a winning "A".

Answer: 2.35:1

Acclaimed filmmaker George Lucas catapulted the Sci-Fi genre to new heights with the breakthrough masterpiece, the "Star Wars" Trilogy. A long time ago in a galaxy far away, a small band of rebels have dared to fight back the ruthless Galactic Empire. A simple farm boy named Luke Skywalker who dreams of something greater, will seized his true destiny and help the Rebellion overthrow the Empire. This amazing Sci-Fi spectacle is one of the most successful franchises in film history and contains a strong fan following unlike any other. The blockbuster trilogy is the ultimate battle of good versus evil and features a compelling epic storyline, memorable characters, thrilling action sequences and award-winning special effects. The fine cast includes Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Alec Guinness, Billy Dee Williams and James Earl Jones as the voice of the ruthless Darth Vader. All three films were very successful at the box office and also won many Academy Awards. This marvelous 4-Disc box set features Episodes IV (A New Hope), V (The Empire Strikes Back) and VI (Return of the Jedi).The "Star Wars" Trilogy is the must-have DVD of 2004. <hl> The entire science fiction saga is presented in 2.35:1 THX certified anamorphic widescreen format. <hl> The box set contains an outstanding picture quality that brings new life to the popular Sci-Fi trilogy. Its intense Dolby Digital 5.1-EX sound delivers an excellent home theater experience. The box set also features informative audio commentaries by creator George Lucas, cast member Carrie Fisher and technical crew, theatrical trailers, still galleries, an in-depth feature-length "Star Wars" saga documentary (Disc 4), behind-the-scenes featurettes and a exclusive preview of the upcoming "Star Wars: Episode III". Overall, the "Star Wars" Trilogy gets a winning "A".

Acclaimed filmmaker George Lucas catapulted the Sci-Fi genre to new heights with the breakthrough masterpiece, the "Star Wars" Trilogy. A long time ago in a galaxy far away, a small band of rebels have dared to fight back the ruthless Galactic Empire. A simple farm boy named Luke Skywalker who dreams of something greater, will seized his true destiny and help the Rebellion overthrow the Empire. This amazing Sci-Fi spectacle is one of the most successful franchises in film history and contains a strong fan following unlike any other. The blockbuster trilogy is the ultimate battle of good versus evil and features a compelling epic storyline, memorable characters, thrilling action sequences and award-winning special effects. The fine cast includes Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Harrison Ford, Alec Guinness, Billy Dee Williams and James Earl Jones as the voice of the ruthless Darth Vader. All three films were very successful at the box office and also won many Academy Awards. This marvelous 4-Disc box set features Episodes IV (A New Hope), V (The Empire Strikes Back) and VI (Return of the Jedi).The "Star Wars" Trilogy is the must-have DVD of 2004. The entire science fiction saga is presented in <hl> 2.35:1 <hl> THX certified anamorphic widescreen format. The box set contains an outstanding picture quality that brings new life to the popular Sci-Fi trilogy. Its intense Dolby Digital 5.1-EX sound delivers an excellent home theater experience. The box set also features informative audio commentaries by creator George Lucas, cast member Carrie Fisher and technical crew, theatrical trailers, still galleries, an in-depth feature-length "Star Wars" saga documentary (Disc 4), behind-the-scenes featurettes and a exclusive preview of the upcoming "Star Wars: Episode III". Overall, the "Star Wars" Trilogy gets a winning "A".


Question: How is cast?

This really a very entertaining film.  The cast is perfect. It is an enjoyable couple of hours.  Reading the Amazon reviews, the reviewers hail the main characters but fail to mention one cast member: Ernest Borgnine.  He is in two short scenes but this 90 something gentleman is just great.  It is good to see him still performing in films.  You get a warm feeling watching him perform.  The rest of the cast is, of cource, fantastic.  Great movie.

Answer: This really a very entertaining film

This really a very entertaining film .

<hl> This really a very entertaining film . <hl> The cast is perfect. It is an enjoyable couple of hours. Reading the Amazon reviews, the reviewers hail the main characters but fail to mention one cast member: Ernest Borgnine. He is in two short scenes but this 90 something gentleman is just great. It is good to see him still performing in films. You get a warm feeling watching him perform. The rest of the cast is, of cource, fantastic. Great movie.

<hl> This really a very entertaining film <hl>. The cast is perfect. It is an enjoyable couple of hours. Reading the Amazon reviews, the reviewers hail the main characters but fail to mention one cast member: Ernest Borgnine. He is in two short scenes but this 90 something gentleman is just great. It is good to see him still performing in films. You get a warm feeling watching him perform. The rest of the cast is, of cource, fantastic. Great movie.

<hl> This really a very entertaining film <hl> .


Question: How is actor?

This season is so good. Never a dull moment. Some shocking surprises of major characters being killed off. I'm so looking forward to season 4. I watch these shows over & over & never get bored. All the actors are wonderful, but I think Maggie Smith takes the cake!

Answer: All the actors are wonderful, but I think Maggie Smith takes the cake

This season is so good. Never a dull moment. Some shocking surprises of major characters being killed off. I'm so looking forward to season 4. I watch these shows over & over & never get bored. <hl> All the actors are wonderful, but I think Maggie Smith takes the cake ! <hl>

This season is so good. Never a dull moment. Some shocking surprises of major characters being killed off. I'm so looking forward to season 4. I watch these shows over & over & never get bored. <hl> All the actors are wonderful, but I think Maggie Smith takes the cake <hl>!

<hl> All the actors are wonderful, but I think Maggie Smith takes the cake <hl> !