Sure, it was cheesy and nonsensical and at times corny, but at least the filmmakers didn't try. While most TV movies border on the brink of mediocrity, this film actually has some redeeming qualities to it. The cinematography was pretty good for a TV film, and Viggo Mortensen displays shades of Aragorn in a film about a man who played by his own rules. Most of the flashback sequences were kind of cheesy, but the scene with the mountain lion was intense. I was kind of annoyed by Jason Priestly's role in the film as a rebellious shock-jock, but then again, it's a TV MOVIE! Despite all of the good things, the soundtrack was atrocious. However, it was nice to see Tucson, Arizona prominently featured in the film.


its not as good as the first movie,but its a good solid movie its has good car chase scenes,on the remake of this movie there a story for are hero to drive fast as his trying to rush to the side of his ailing wife,the ending is great just a good fair movie to watch in my opinion,


Sure this was a remake of a 70's film, but it had the suspense and action of a current film, say Breakdown. He's running, desperate to be with his hospitalized wife, the police are the least concern. The chases were very good, the part with him being

cornered at a rest stop was well done, the end of the movie was a great cliffhanger. This is better than Bullitt, a boring movie with what, a muscle car chase that was filmed badly? Vigo's character knew what he had to do to escape Johnny Law, few movies had the effects-night vision, CB radio-okay I forgot the name of the movie, guy has 76'Caddy souped up, toys with guy he upset. The ending is great, you can't tell if he fakes his suicide or not, a very good did-he-make-it-or-not.


I really liked this version of 'Vanishing Point' as opposed to the 1971 version. I found the 1971 version quite boring. If I can get up in the middle of a movie a few times(as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that great. Of course, this could be due to the fact that I was only nine at the time the 1971 version was brought out. However, I have seen many remakes, where I have liked the original and older one better. I found that the plot of the 1997 version was more understandable and had basically kept true to the original without undermining the meaning of the 1971 version. In my opinion, I felt the 1997 version had more excitement and wasn't so "blase".(Boring)


This is definitely an appropriate update for the original, except that "party on the left is now party on the right." Like the original, this movie rails against a federal government which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how tenuous our political liberties are in an era of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal government. Kowalski serves as a metaphor for Waco and Ruby Ridge, where the US government, with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw around words like "white supremacist" and "right wing extremists as well as trumped-up drug charges to abridge the most fundamental of its' citizens rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film could be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and countless others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he brilliantly portrays "the voice," and that sums up the dangerous (to some) message of this film.


This film was Excellent, I thought that the original one was quiet mediocre. This one however got all the ingredients, a factory 1970 Hemi Challenger with 4 speed transmission that really shows that Mother Mopar knew how to build the best muscle cars! I was in Chrysler heaven every time Kowalski floored that big block Hemi, and he sure did that a lot :)


Brilliant use of overstated technicolor illustrates the optimistic extremes of present day Christmas ceremonies. The voyeuristic element during the scenes (Santa & Pedro summarize society's behavior peering through a telescope) is unique (and obviously Jean-Luc Godard, although he was subtle, stole this theme in his film "Pierrot le-fou"). Highly recommended!


Shawshank, Godfather, Pulp Fiction... all good films. Great films. But nothing, and I mean nothing lives up to the greatest Christmas movie of all, Santa Claus.

The film is so great and has so many messages, I cried while watching it. Seriously, this is one of those movies you need to watch 10 times. When we see Pitch get told he will have to eat ice cream, we see the sadness in his eyes, and we feel the deep sorrow, and then we wonder... what is so bad about this ice cream? Is it implying that we as humans are treating ice cream as good when all it does is make us evil? Think movie makes you think.

This movie has the best rendition of Santa Claus ever. Unlike other Santas, he is a normal person. We see him imprisoning children and spying on kids dreams, and we wonder; is the Santa we believe in really that good? Also, this Santa actually mentions Christ, the whole meaning behind Christmas.

You owe yourself to watch this cinematic masterpiece. We should just stop making movies and air nothing but this epic 24/7. Whether it's Christmas or not, this movie gets a 500/10. Whoever says this movie is bad is an ignorant fool.


My mother took me to see this film as a child and I long to see it every year as I do all of my other Christmas favorites. What I remember most was the silly Devil and Santa looking through his telescope. I waited and looked through the T.V. Guide each year after that to see when it would be shown. I would usually find it playing on a Saturday afternoon. I only found the movie in English which took something special away from the film and have longed to find a copy of it in Spanish. I hold this film dear to my heart and have never suffered from nightmares as others might suggest. Yes, it is a different film about Santa Claus and that is what makes it special and unique. I can't wait to get a copy of this film and watch it with my children as I explain to them my favorite parts and memories!!


There are some things I will never understand; why underwear comes in packs of threes when clearly thats not enough is an example. Similarly, I will never understand this film, and that is brilliant. If you approach this film expecting an actual movie, you might as well be approaching Satan expecting a hug; although that may well be possible if you greet this film's Satanic figures. Take Pitch for instance; the most ineffectual, camp, unhellish portrayal of a devil since Freddy Mercury and Wayne Sleep joined forces to create a ten foot Satan costume from red body paint and horns covered with condoms. However, it does create some of the most hilarious moments of any film ever. Seriously, this is no understatement. The same can be applied to every other character, bar the little girl who acts so sickly innocent she's probably overcompensating for some serious crime she's part of. Then again, if Santa's inter-space recon station is real, there is no chance she could have avoided him this long. Put simply, if you haven't seen this movie, you cannot consider yourself a serious buff. The achingly funny characterisation, acting, concept, and almost-under-the-radar racism makes this a must see above any film to date (if you're after pure laughter that is).


I saw this movie when Mystery Science Theater ran it in 1993. It is the worst thing I've ever seen. So bad in fact, that by sheer freakiness, this movie must get a ten rating because it has to be seen to be believed.

Whoever wrote this script with children in mind should be beaten. I mean, really, the Devil vs. Santa? Visions of Hell? Creepy laughing wind-up reindeer? Forced Child labor with racial stereotypes? It ain't Sesame Street, that's for sure.As Crow exclaims during the MST3K showing, "This is good ol' fashioned nightmare fuel!"

There's plenty of weird innuendo and screwed up theology. Merlin (presumably the Arthurian Merlin) hangs out with Santa in his crazy castle in the clouds (i.e. Heaven). Santa talks about baby Jesus and sends letters to "Mr. Stork" for children who ask for siblings. There are symbols around the castle that either look like pentagrams or RAF stars.

My best friend and I have watch it every year since 1993 and we subject anybody we can hold down for 2 hours to watch it with us.


Perfect for families with small children who are looking for lighthearted films that contain no violence and are enthralling for the child and amusing, albeit, completely corny, to adults. Not a bad film for a low-budget job. Children will be amazed with Santa's workshop and the "magic" that enables him to enter homes through chimneys that appear too small, or homes that have no chimneys at all!

Kids will thrill over the Santa's success at thwarting the nasty devil named Pitch (complete in classic red outfit with horns and tail!). They will sympathize with the poor little girl who's greatest wish is to have a little doll to love. And the poor little rich boy who only wishes to spend time with his forever absent parents. And what child does not know someone at school who are just like the nasty boys that are enlisted by Pitch to help capture Santa and ruin Christmas? In the end, everyone, including the nasty boys, get just what they deserve for Christmas!

The film will endear children to both Santa and the message of love he delivers to people throughout the world.


Just get it. The DVD is cheap and easy to come by, the length is now standard and you've gone long enough without it. (When home video started, there were at LEAST three versions with parts missing..) Everything you've read is true. There is no defending it, and no living without it. The color is lush and wonderful to look at, and the production values are pretty good for a Saturday afternoon kiddie epic. But no question..the whole Santa Vs. Satan angle is so jaw dropping STRANGE it made the movie a hit at the time and a cult fave once home video really got underway. How good/bad/strange/ is it? I only saw the TRAILER as a kid,and remembered IT for nearly 30 years..including Murray's over the top voice over..I told my older sister, and she called me a liar and could not believe it was POSSIBLE for ANYONE to make a movie where Santa vs.Satan.. Add to it stuff like Santa asking for the Virgin Mary's blessing before setting off on Christmas eve, kids wanting to capture him and make him their SLAVE..and an international kiddie sweat shop..and it probably comes close to a lot of nightmares kids had in the 60's.. Like others here, I watch the thing every holiday season now. (My version of choice is The Mystery Science Theatre 3000 edition). But any old way you choose it, the movie is a demented masterpiece and a total must (along with Brianiac, by the way..).It never fails to make me laugh. Better, I think, then SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS. Parts of it can still make you cringe or just creep you out.(How many parents do YOU know go out for cocktails on Christmas Eve? "If you get bored, just go downstairs and play the piano." DANG..) Freaky, boring, disturbing, funny, childish, strange..hey, what more can you want?


I saw this movie when I was a little girl. And I have enjoyed it every time. Sure the graphics are a little cheesy, compared to now, but back in the 70's it was great. I saw it in the original Spanish version only and thought it was wonderful. That was how I remember my Christmases were with my family - magical. Santa Claus was amazing and I couldn't wait for him to come back each year.

If you have a child/children and speak Spanish, bring them up watching this old fashioned version of "Santa Claus". It's a different version than we are used to today, but who says there is one way?

It's a fun movie to watch. It teaches children good vs. bad. I don't know how the English subtitled version is or if there is an English one of this, but the Spanish is the best. Enjoy and Happy Holidays! Feliz Navidad!


I was a bit scared to watch this movie due to its rates. But living in Italy titles like this never ever come across and I love step so much that I decided to give it try. And how surprised I was! The story is different from any other dance-movie I've seen lately, with a deeper meaning than just "winning". It's touching and well written and well directed. Raya is such a strong character, I love the fact that she never doubts herself, she's so mature and focused and AWARE of her TALENT (and what talent Rutina Wesley has, my jaw dropped in the final dance scene). The way she pursues her dream and refuses to let anything stop her is, honestly, inspiring. Also, the fact that she's not the typical super-hot chick (see Jessica Alba, Briana Evigan, Jenna Dewan, Zoe Seldana...) makes her really appealing and real. Seriously, why is this movie rated so low? You can understand between the first 5 minutes that it's a good work. Really good actually. I even cried at the end of the movie. And the dancing routines are just sick.


I must give How She Move a near-perfect rating because the content is truly great. As a previous reviewer commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, believable acting, and amazing dance routines.

From start to finish the underlying story (this is not just about winning a competition) is very easy to delve into, and surprisingly realistic. None of the main characters in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the end of the film, it's very easy to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, even if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits roll.)

I definitely recommend this film to dance-lovers and, even more so, to those who can appreciate a poignant and well-acted storyline. How She Move isn't perfect of course (what film is?), but it's definitely a cut above movies that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very realistic ride that is equally enthralling thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers!


I noticed this movie was getting trashed well before it hit the theaters and I too didn't have high hopes for it. I figured it was another "You Got Served" type of movie with some nice dance moves and horrid acting. I was at the theater and deciding between this and Meet the Spartans and picked this. To my surprise the acting wasn't bad at all and the movie was actually pretty good. The fact that it has a lower rating than You Got Served is absolutely ridiculous. Instead of listening to the garbage posted on here I recommend going to see a matinée showing of this movie so you don't spend too much. I think you will be pleasantly surprised with how wrong everyone has been about it. When it comes to dance movies this is certainly one of the better ones with far superior acting than many of the other ones. Go see the movie and judge for yourself. Hopefully the rating will rise after it comes out on DVD and more people check the movie out instead of judging it based on comments before the movie released.

edit The movie is now moving closer to its correct rating. Over 1000 people have given it a rating of 9, a bit too high but at least it is helping to offset the ridiculous votes of 1.


Well, if you are open-minded enough to have liked Barber Shop, then you will like this Canadian film.

If your mind is as closed-minded as Fort Knox, then you will give it the current score that it has : 2.5.

This is a film for anybody prepared to watch films from outside of their own racial grounds. It is engaging, it is true to life, on two or three occasions you lose the connections between the scenes, but many times, especially towards the end, you find yourself having a tear or two in your eyes and this simply because it so often mirrors what life can be like.

I like it and recommend it to anyone open minded beyond the traditional American film.


I watch them all.

It's not better than the amazing ones (_Strictly Ballroom_, _Shall we dance?_ (Japanese version), but it's completely respectable and pleasingly different in parts.

I am an English teacher and I find some of the ignorance about language in some of these reviews rather upsetting. For example: the "name should scream don't watch. 'How she move.' Since when can movie titles ignore grammar?"

There is nothing inherently incorrect about Caribbean English grammar. It's just not Canadian standard English grammar. Comments about the dialogue seem off to me. I put on the subtitles because I'm a Canadian standard English speaker, so I just AUTOMATICALLY assumed that I would have trouble understanding all of it. It wasn't all that difficult and it gave a distinctly different flavour as the other step movies I have seen were so American.

I loved that this movie was set in Toronto and, in fact, wish it was even more clearly set there. I loved that the heroine was so atypically cast. I enjoyed the stepping routines. I liked the driven Mum character. I felt that many of the issues in the movie were addressed more subtly than is characteristic of dance movies.

In summary, if you tend to like dance movies, then this is a decent one. If you have superiority issues about the grammar of the English standard you grew up speaking, your narrow mind may have difficulty enjoying this movie.


This film is shockingly underrated on IMDb. Like so many films, this isn't Shawshank. But it's a reasonably good, if predictable, dance competition / personal growth film. If you want to spend an hour and a half watching a sort of 8 Mile for a female step dancer, than I think you'll like it.

Judging from the IMDb ratings, my guess is that this movie was approaching the top 250, and was "vote bombed" with many 1s, as happens to so many films that aren't about the mob, don't have special effects, or include non-white or non-straight characters.

It's an American film, but it's not a US film. Set mostly in Toronto the cues are subtle, and some audiences may think it's set entirely in the US just because the final competition is in the border city of Detroit.

I liked the music. I liked the dance (but not convinced it's worth $50,000 ... but what do I know). The characters were easy on the eyes.

I do agree the title sucks. I don't remember anyone in the film saying those words, and it should have an "s". (No, it's not a foreign language).

There's not a lot to hate about this film (and let's be honest, a vote of 1 means you hated it) so I can only assume that it's an expression of hate for the kind of people in it, and that's sad.


Beforehand Notification: I'm sure someone is going to accuse me of playing the race card here, but when I saw the preview for this movie, I was thinking "Finally!" I have yet to see one movie about popular African-influenced dance (be it popular hip hop moves, breaking, or stepping) where the main character was a Black woman. I've seen an excessive amount of movies where a non-Black woman who knew nothing about hip hop comes fresh to the hood and does a mediocre job of it (Breakin, Breakin 2, Save the Last Dance, Step Up), but the Black women in the film are almost nonexistent. That always bothered me considering so much of hip hop, African-influenced dance, and breaking was with Blacks and Latinos in massive amounts in these particular sets and it wasn't always men who performed it, so I felt this movie has been a long time coming. However, the race does not make the film, so I also wanted it to carry a believable plot; the dancing be entertaining; and interesting to watch.

Pros: I really enjoyed this film bringing Jamaican culture. I can't recall ever seeing a popular, mainstream film where all the main characters were Jamaican; had believable accents; and weren't stereotypical with the beanies. The steppers, family, friends, and even the "thugs" were all really intelligent, realistic people who were trying to love, live, and survive in the neighborhood they lived in by doing something positive. Even when the audience was made aware that the main character's sister chose an alternate lifestyle, it still didn't make the plot stereotypical. I was satisfied with the way it was portrayed. I LOVED the stepping; the romantic flirty relationship going on between two steppers; the trials that the main character's parents were going through; and how she dealt with coming back to her old neighborhood and dealing with Crabs in a Barrel. I respected that she was so intelligent and active at the same time, and so many other sistas in the film were handling themselves in the step world. They were all just as excellent as the fellas. I don't see that in too many movies nowadays, at least not those that would be considered Black films.

Cons: I'm not quite sure why the directors or whoever put the movie together did this, but I question whether they've been to real step shows. Whenever the steppers got ready to perform, some hip hop song would play in place of the steppers' hand/feet beats. At a real step show, there is zero need for music, other than to maybe entertain the crowds in between groups. And then when hip hop songs were played, sometimes the beat to the song was off to the beat of the steppers' hands and feet. It was awkward. I was more impressed with the stepping in this movie versus "Stomp the Yard" (another great stepping movie) because the women got to represent as fierce as the guys (in "Stomp the Yard," Meagan Good got all of a few seconds of some prissy twirl and hair flip and the (Deltas?) let out a chant and a few steps and were cut immediately). Even when there were very small scenes, the ladies tore it up, especially in the auto shop, and it was without all that music to drown out their physical music. I know soundtracks have to be sold, but the movie folks could've played the music in other parts of the film.

I'm not a Keyshia Cole fan, so every time I saw her, all I kept thinking was "Is it written in the script for her to constantly put her hand on her hip when she talks?" She looked uncomfortable on screen to me. I thought they should've used a host like Free or Rocsi instead. Deray Davis was funny as usual though. Also, I groaned when I found out that the movie was supposed to be in the ghetto, like stepping couldn't possibly happen anywhere else. Hollywood, as usual. However, only a couple of people were portrayed as excessively ignorant due to their neighborhood and losers, which mainstream movies tend to do.

I would've given this movie five stars, but the music playing killed it for me. I definitely plan to buy it when it comes out and hopefully the bonus scenes will include the actual step shows without all the songs.


Saw this movie twice at community screenings and really loved it. I work in the Jane Finch community and feel the film really captured some of the essence and flavour of the community - grit, determination, exuberance, creativity, in your faceness with a dose of desperation. The writing, dialogue and acting is solid and I really found myself drawn into the story of the young woman Raya as she struggles to pursue her goals and not lose herself in the process. Great dance sequences and it is not only the bodies that move smoothly and with electricity but the camera moves with great fluidity and intelligence as well. All the characters are multi dimensional - none wholly good or bad and the women characters are admirably strong. This is a film that has a strong beating heart and celebrates the irrepressible spirit of youth, hip hop and communities like Jane Finch.


This is a more interesting than usual porn movie, because it is a fantasy adventure.The production values are high and the acting is(believe it or not) pretty good,especially Jenna Jameson.It`s also in widescreen which helps,it gives a feeling of a real motion picture and NOT a porn movie.But,of course it is a porn and a really good one with nice costumes,fine atmosphere and scenery.And by the way,the sex IS hot.

Watch out for this one...


this is really films outside (not in a motel room). With real costumes (not only strings and swimsuits). You have to see this movie. it's the only porn movie I know that is worth watching between the sex scenes.

Bon Cinema

Laurent


Before watching this movie I thought this movie will be great as Flashpoint because before watching this movie Flashpoint was the last Jenna Jameson and Brad Armstrong movie I previously watched. As far as sexual scenes are concerned I was disappointed, I thought sexual scenes of Dreamquest will be great as Flashpoint sexual scenes but I was disappointed. Except Asia Carrera's sexual scene, any sexual scene in this movie doesn't make me feel great (you know what I mean). The great Jenna Jameson doesn't do those kind of sexual scenes of what she is capable of. Felecia and Stephanie Swift both of those lovely girls disappoint me as well as far as sexual scenes are concerned.

Although its a adult movie but if you aside that sexual scenes factor, this movie is very good. If typical adult movie standards are concerned this movie definitely raised the standards of adult movies. Story, acting, direction, sets, makeups and other technical stuff of this movie are really great. The actors of this movie done really good acting, they all done a great job. Dreamquest is definitely raised the bar of quality of adult movies.


If you've ever wondered why they don't make porn with a plot, watch Dream Quest. On the one hand, you have to give the Armstrong credit both for making the effort to capitalize on this idea and for using such a strong adult cast to put some name power behind it. On the other hand, it also quickly becomes apparent why most porns never have more than 15 or 20 seconds of dialog connecting sex scenes together. These people simply cannot act (and the story is, unfortunately, lame to a ridiculous degree).

Still, I gave it a 7 because it was a nice try and there didn't seem to be much of an effort to cut corners. Also, I'd like to see more attempts like this one. Maybe someday I will see the perfect combination of porn and plot.


Very nice action with an interwoven story which actually doesn't suck. Interesting enough to merit watching instead of skipping past to get to the good parts. Having Jenna Jameson and Asia Carrere helps liven it up, too. Jenna in that sweater and those glasses is just astounding! Worth picking up just to see her!


This one is quite a nice surprise. Cute little story of the heroine's quest, very surprising metamorphosis of the four-eye prissy soon-to-be-spinster type into a raunchy DD-cup sex queen.

Visually a sight for sore eyes, not only for two quite stunning actresses but also for (most of) the costumes and make-up of the actors. An unnecessary bit of cheapness came in some ridiculous castle imitation.

Back to the positives: The movie is spiced with some unusually explicit camera-shots which you would not expect in a soft core. Loved that scene with the icicles, absolute classics potential. A slight minus only for (very) few odd scenes where bad acting by minor casts shortly suspended the suspension of disbelief.

9/10 including an extra credit for the serious drooling effect.


Oh yeah! Jenna Jameson did it again! Yeah Baby! This movie rocks. It was one of the 1st movies i saw of her. And i have to say i feel in love with her, she was great in this move.

Her performance was outstanding and what i liked the most was the scenery and the wardrobe it was amazing you can tell that they put a lot into the movie the girls cloth were amazing.

I hope this comment helps and u can buy the movie, the storyline is awesome is very unique and i'm sure u are going to like it. Jenna amazed us once more and no wonder the movie won so many awards. Her make-up and wardrobe is very very sexy and the girls on girls scene is amazing. specially the one where she looks like an angel. It's a must see and i hope u share my interests


Dreamquest is by far, the best porn movie I've ever viewed. This is a must see!!! And if you're skeptical about your little ones watching it, just skip over the naughty scenes. Of course, this shortens the movie to a length of about 15 minutes. But even then it's enjoyable. This movie is quite excellent and beats out almost any movie...even Shawshank Redemption.


Dream Quest was a surprisingly good movie. There were some noticeable goofs, but that can be expected in a movie like this that was made in such a short time. I did not feel any urge to fast forward during the movie and I found it pretty entertaining. It gets kind of silly at times, but overall I recommend it. They probably used up all the glitter in the nearby stores, and some of the costume designs were pretty good.


First things first! This isn't an action movie although there is a lot of action in it! I think you can compare it to American sports movies! Where a team of very bad players succeed in the unthinkable,winning a game or tournament beyond expectation! In this case it isn't about football or baseball,but Taekwondo! In the beginning these street thugs seem to be good for nothing! But soon we will find out that they don't want to be thugs and actually achieve something in life! It is nice to see them struggle and training! I was surprised how funny this movie was! From start till the end you will laugh your pants off! The young korean actors are very convincing! Go see this wonderful feel good movie!


Sure, the plot isn't Oldboy. It seems the only "great" movies these days are amazingly shocking or high-budget/hyped in some way.

Spin Kick is a drama/comedy about a group of people who decide to pour their hearts into tae kwon do. Regardless of what you expect from this film, you're guaranteed to feel moved by the work, pain, and expectations that the characters force themselves to experience. Though comedic at times, many moments and characters are rendered beautifully: there's the old guard character who takes things too seriously, the hoodlum turned good-guy who just wants a second chance at life, the meek team-substitute who would die happy if he just won once in his life, and many other well-rounded characters with their own problems-- but most importantly, their own their hopes and dreams. While the plot and the goals of the movie are simple, these aspects of the movie merely highlight the development of the characters as they overcome their personal and inter-personal struggles.

In short, this film will leave you feeling fresh, determined, and satisfied.


The movie never claims to be something spectacular like many films do. The films props itself as a fun and entertaining time. And that's exactly what it was. It is the Korean version of a male Bring It On.

From the get go you can feel for the rest of the film and how it will end but the enjoyment is not in the surprise twists nor is it the way the film is a carbon copy of another. Instead, the enjoyment is held in the journey of how the 2 remaining "thugs" came to be men in their own right. Therefore, the film is fun and entertaining.

The camera work, specially the dolly moves were very well executed. The script, being a tad weak, was overly enjoyable in the fact that the characters were not 2 dimensional but they were full of life and desire. This film will not win any Oscars, nor any DVD blockbuster sales, but a fun watch and a fun experience.


A good Korean film about not just Taekwondo but what its takes to be good, like a thugs way of fighting cannot beat a taekwondo guy in his sport because there are rules, just as there are to life and school and this film has undertones of this notion.

The martial arts in the film isn't that good but it is passable and enjoyable. Friends who go on to achieve something they once would mock become stronger through the mind and heart. This film isn't meant to be taken too seriously as it does have slapstick, but it also carries a message.

A good film again from Korea.


You know the story - a group of plucky no-hopers enter a competition they seemingly have no chance of winning - it's a tale that has been done to death by Hollywood (Bring It On, The Karate Kid, Escape to Victory, Best of the Best etc). Now Korea gives it a go with a Taekwondo team struggling for glory  and guess what  the result is predictable but ultimately satisfying.

The fact that this movie doesn't fall flat on its face is down to the talented young cast who really make you care about the characters, and this in turn keeps you watching to the end.

Fans of your typical martial arts movie may be disappointed  Taekwondo does not deliver the usual flurry of moves and acrobatics seen in most Kung Fu films; the action is limited to (albeit impressive) kicking and the occasional punch. This doesn't matter though, since it is the interaction of the characters and their fight to make something of themselves which makes this movie a success.


This animation TV series is simply the best way for children to learn how the human body works. Yes, this is biology but they will never tell it is.

I truly think this is the best part of this stream of "educational cartoons". I do remember you can find little books and a plastic body in several parts: skin, skeleton, and of course: organs.

 In the same stream, you'll find: "Il était une fois l'homme" which relate the human History from the big bang to the 20th century. There is: "Il était une fois l'espace" as well (about the space and its exploration) but that one is more a fiction than a description of the reality since it takes place in the future.


This is a cartoon series where most of the action takes place in the human body where the actors are vitamins, viruses, blood cells etc. I will not try to explain it in more details, you will simply have to see it for yourself: You will not be disappointed.

I remember watching this as a kid in the 80s (with Swedish voices). I have talked with a few people who were also children in the 80s and they loved it also! I must admit that the education-part of the episodes didn't get through to me at a conscious level but the whole idea of educating children while they have fun is wonderful. I have recently seen a few episodes; there is a humour and heart in it that is hard to find in other children programs nowadays.

5/5


We bought the DVD set of "Es war einmal das Leben" (German) / "Once Upon a Time... Life" (English) for our bilingual kids because everyone loved the "Es war einmal der Mensch" (German) / "Once Upon a Time... Man" (English) series (us parents had seen it as kids) and it has exceeded even high expectations! The series is very well made, does not show its age, and our kids at various ages really like to watch it. At the same time, they learn things us parents didn't know until way, way later. The series covers everything to do with the human body from organs, all senses, blood, infection, antibodies, and much more in animated 20-25 min episodes. Topics some people may find "sensible", such as digestion and reproduction are covered in a tasteful, discreet and child-friendly manner (the reproduction episode starts coverage mainly where the baby starts growing), while still (as typical) informative and fun.

Children are usually fascinated with how their bodies work and through the episodes gain an understanding of this in the context of their environment. The format of the episodes switches between the outside world (a family with 2 children) and the inside of the body. For example, in the episode covering infections, the boy cuts himself accidentally and the wound gets infected and the episode covers how the body reacts to this. Similarly, the episodes on the senses, e.g. hearing, seeing, link what happens inside the body to the context of the outside world and the episode on respiration and circulation of oxygen in the blood covers the complete lifecycle including (briefly) where the oxygen comes from (plants).

This is one of the best ever children's programs - I would say it's a must see for every family with kids!


This TV-series was one of the ones I loved when I was a kid. Even though I see it now through the pink-shaded glasses of nostalgia, I can still tell it was a quality show, very educational but still funny. I have not seen the original French version, only the Swedish. I have no idea how good the dubbing was, it was too long ago to remember.

The premise of the show was to show you how the body works. I swear, school still hasn't taught me half of what I know from this show. It also tied in other things, like what happens if you eat unhealthy food and don't exercise, with nice examples within the body. Who wants to have another bar of chocolate when you know miniature virus tanks can invade you? :D The cartoon looked nice, very kids friendly of course, but done with care. Cells, viruses, electric signals in the brain, antibodies and everything else are represented by smiling cartoon figures, looking pretty much how you'd expect what they should look like in the animated body.

This, and the series about history(especially the environmentally scary finale) were key parts of my childhood. I'm so happy I found them here.


This was one of my favorite series when I was a kid. The Swedish broadcasting company decided to broadcast it once again a couple of summers ago when I had just finished my first semester of medical school. I was surprised to see the depth in which the organs was explained. Sure, some things are simplified but most of it was correct (even though it was made 22 years ago!) and quite understandable. I would suggest that all soon-to-be medical student should watch it. It is a very good way to learn some of the basic medical words for example. Now I'm in my 7th semester and I think I'll watch the series once again as soon as I've bought the DVD-box :-)


My name is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my name is Domino Harvey. {CUT, CHOP} My name is Domino Harvey. {EDIT. CUT. Playback}

Never have I seen a director take so much flack for his style before. By now it is evident that most people do not appreciate Tony Scott's choppy, flashy, dizzying editing technique. If I have to choose between loving it and hating it, I'd say I love it. It was borderline distracting at times, but the end result was pretty good and it's nice to see a director with a creative edge to his style and some originality (even if it borrows heavily from MTV videos).

This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue seems strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty much hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she suffered. We follow Domino through her life as she joins up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew become tangled up in the FBI and suddenly has a reality show contract under Christopher Walken's TV production company (what is Christopher Walken doing in every film, by the way?). I guess that is a clever film technique, because now Tony Scott is free to use as much flashy MTV/Reality Show editing footage as he likes. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.

It followes then that the story is told at an amazingly rapid-fire pace, with lots of raunchy strong language and gun violence. There are some funny jokes; it's all very modern and surreal at the same time. It's a mess, but it's a rather enjoyable mess. It is ultimately flawed in so many ways (the actors try too hard to make their characters "cool", for one) but it works. I give it a weak 7/10 which may seem generous when compared to the general consensus of movie-goers who graded this film  but I feel it had some good ideas and executed them well.

7 out of 10


" Domino " has been widely condemned on this site for its frenetic editing style and " sickening " photography. It's detractors cite its superficiality and criticize its deployment of " style over substance" I couldn't disagree more. I believe that " Domino " represents the absolute height of Tony Scott's film-making career.

After having created the dominant Hollywood action movie style throughout the late eighties and early nineties Tony Scott has moved progressively closer to a more subjective style of cinema. As early as "Crimson Tide" Scott used his stylistic talent to portray the inner worlds of his characters- the claustrophobia and drama inherent in the conflict on board a nuclear submarine was embodied in the excellent use of long lenses combined with dutched-angle framing. This was then carried through to " Enemy Of The State" and "Spy Game" which visually represented the worlds of surveillance and espionage respectively.

" Man On Fire" was an extreme departure , a move into an expressionist more painterly aesthetic. Here Scott used an antiquated hand cranked camera and flash frames to express his character's explosive rage . Although not entirely successful it introduced the techniques which were to find their full expression in " Domino"

Couched in the framing device of an FBI interrogation " Domino" presents the life of the infamous bounty hunter via her narrated disjointed fragments of memory. She grasps at memories as we all do- in fragments, flashes and brief snatches. As Domino relays her story verbally Scott relays it visually illustrating not only the events which she describes but also the point of view which guides them. She does have " traces of mescaline" in her system but her individual vision is anyway Unusual -that of an woman who eschewed the life of luxury for bounty hunting.

It is when Domino begins to relate the events which lead to her captivity that Scott really lets rip. Together with Cinematographer Dan Mindel and composer Harry-Gregson Williams Scott orchestrates a postmodern canvas of contemporary Americana. Gradually we begin to realize that unusual though she may be Domino is no more disjointed than the "90210" culture she has rejected. As she wades through this cultural melange Scott makes his viewer more aware of the innocence which it destroys through the underprivileged children which the narrative introduces. Ultimately Scott portrays their salvation as the only escape we have from this surreal trip.

To criticize this movie for being overly stylized is akin to criticizing a Picasso or a Pollock for not representing that which is recognizably human. Like any great painting the meaning in " Domino" is in the surface and the surface is everything.

I am not in any way associated with Scott Free but have always been and will continue to be a huge admirer of Tony Scott's work


If you find yourself in need of an escape, something that will hold your attention for two hours and allow you to be lost in another world, Domino will satisfy that need. This is entertainment, after all! The plot keeps your brain in motion - one of those movies (like Usual Suspects) where you want to see it a second time to figure it all out. I wondered about Domino Harvey herself, how her life became of interest to Hollywood. As for the acting, lots of celebrity appearances not shown in the trailers. And any actor that makes me forget who they are has done their job well. Not once did I think of Kiera in a soccer uniform or pirate costume. And granted, Mickey Rourke plays Mickey Rourke well and often, but here, despite the violence, he shows signs of being capable of caring for other people.


If you go to this movie expecting something it isn't, you will be disappointed, as with any movie. This movie contains what Hemmingway described as the "iceberg effect". On the surface, its simply a cache of random movie clips smashed together to make a movie. If this would be written in a book, it would be a short story, because the action in the movie is very fast paced, and unless you actually try to catch it, the reasoning behind the plot (along with some subtle foreshadowing) can very well pass you by. Definitely a movie you will have to see twice in order to fully appreciate. Experimental Cinematography barely describes this movie. The camera-work and post production add much to the overall flavour of the film, making it quite artistic at some points and open to interpretation at others (something to be desired in American movies as of late). Although, at some parts it may get a little raunchy, gruesome and too heavy for some audiences, the movie never becomes completely unrealistic. The only aspect of the movie that I would write off as "needs improvement" is the soundtrack selection. No movie is ever good without a fitting soundtrack, and although the soundtrack is quite fitting, the opening is a little too long, and the other rap songs in the film really could have been replaced with something more appropriate (heavy, grungy rock or psychedelic electronica would have made this film a real trip). The flooding of imagery and dynamic... color palettes adds another "artistic" aspect to it, also combined with the events that happen throughout the film, this is not a movie you can miss any part of and still understand. However, that also makes it much more of a desirable film to watch, and not one you'll quickly get bored of. 8.5/10


I rented domino on a whim, not even knowing it was inspired by a true story, and even though it's the least likely and true biopic you'll probably see. i found it to be rather awesome.

With Richard Kelly writing he crams together a mass of plots and narratives into 2 hours of pure entertainment. And once you've seen it more than once you get it and appreciate it.

Domino is a model turned bounty hunter who leaves the perfect Hollywood life to pursue a not so subtle or perfect career. It has an edgy acid trip style provided by director Tony Scott. And with fast paced music and editing, it provides the visual flare to keep your attention, with slick performances and unexpected comedy, the movie is well made and enjoyable and should have reached a wider audience.

I suggest it to anyone who wants to think and be entertained at the same time for 2 hours.


I'm totally surprised by some of the comments on this forum, and many of the reviews. I think Tony Scott made a good movie here. Yes, it is highly stylized, flashy and over the top, but it is very entertaining. I'm glad at least Ebert and Roeper agrees with me :)

This movie may not be for anyone, but if you like over-the-top, dark humor, cool action and dialog, you should see it.

I've previously seen Scott's Man on Fire, Crimson Tide and Enemy of the State - all good movies, but I like this one more. It's like a roller-coaster ride, with great soundtrack selections, visual styles and in a time when all movies seem to be pg13, it is nice to see that someone isn't afraid of showing nudity, gory violence, and have explicit dialog.

It doesn't hurt that Keira is super-hot, and even shows nipples in this one, either...


I doubt much of this film is based on a true story. At the beginning it says based on a true story, sort of. I bet the only truth to it was there was an ex-model turned bounty hunter possibly named Domino.

Anyways, it begins with Domino talking to Lucy Liu, who works for the FBI. Domino is being interrogated about what she knows about a theft of 10 million dollars. Through flashbacks, we see Domino as a child, then as a model, and how she became interested in being a bounty hunter. She basically tells 2 other bounty hunters off, Ed and Choco. They let her join the group. She's tough, can use any kind of weapon, and will use her good looks if needed.

They get involved with a scam that Clarmont, a bailsman, has going. Along the way, the group starts a reality TV show, and that's where Ian Zering and Brian Austin Green become involved. They are sort of like hosts and must have been really desperate to appear in this.

I thought the story was entertaining and it had some laughs. The editing didn't bother me. There's also a lot of violence, mainly using guns, and blood. It could have been a little shorter.

FINAL VERDICT: Good enough to watch.


As soon as I knew Keira Knighteley being in this flick, I said "I have to watch this movie". She's the undisputed main character, Domino, a bounty hunter. Her "job", as the "no action" scenes would teach us, reflects her rebel, violent attitude to life. I have to admit that it's the very first time that I watch an action movie whose most important scenes are the one in which the guns are far away from characters' hands. So, this stomped me a bit. Anyway, for all the John Woo's fans, there are helicopters falling down, explosions, gunfire as if it would rain, and a lovely Keira that shoots with two machine guns, one per hand. The cast is absolutely brilliant. Going beyond Keira, which in this movie is a real tomboy, pretty much different from the lovely action figure we're used to see, Mickey Rourke is back, with his usual slap-throwing face and his potent body. Christopher Walken makes his job pretty well, as a reality show producer.

Let's go to the contents: this movie has a journalistic shape. The talk show scene is "disgustingly" real. Anyone that watched that load of . . . you-know-what, can tell that this is the air that you breath in those situations. As well as the producer, when Domino's mom says that the reality that should show Domino's life is "trash; no offense", he answers "I don't take it like an offense". This movie portrays a difficult life. Domino, coming from a world that didn't want her, Ed (Mickey Rourke), a bounty hunter "not so bounty", Choco (the third guy of the band), which family is (using Ed's words), "the correctional institutes he's been", and Alf, the driver/bomber coming from Afghanistan during the Russian occupation. This bunch of people represents in some way the humankind born "without the shirt"; unlucky, violent, and with nothing to lose, excepts their (as they would consider) miserable lives. The intro of the movie says that it is "inspired by true story . . . more or less", so I couldn't possibly tell you how much of this stuff is true. Anyway, going beyond explosions and dozens of weapons (which could have been "added" to make the film easier to see, and be classified as an action movie), the characters' story is too realistic to be "edulcorated".

The interaction between the characters is various, well studied, and definitely not boring. What hasn't convinced me so much is the role of the psychiatrist (Lucy Liu, sober as never in her acting career). It represents only the reason by which Domino starts telling her story (and that's a story). Probably, the only "con", in a movie with a lot of "pros".

All in all: This isn't "SWAT". The characters are crafted; they have an identity, a shape. They have a name and a surname (not just "Gamble" and "Street"). It's the case to say, it's the biography of a girl whose life went as fast as a bullet.


Domino is a great movie. It's about a young woman names Domino Harvey (Kiera Knightley) who becomes a bounty-hunter because of her boredom with her lifestyle. She joins with two fellow hunters (Mickey Rourke & Edgar Ramirez) and the adventures begin. The script is good. Very down-to-earth and realistic with the tone of the film. The only problem I had with this movie is that it concentrates on the different things that they do, instead of the character of Domino.

Even with that, Kiera Knightley gives a fierce performance. She shows the right amount of anger and dedication in this performance. Mickey Rourke follows up his Oscar-Worthy performance in 'Sin City' with another tough-guy performance. Edgar Ramirez really doesn't do anything except speak Spanish every once in a while and stare at Kiera. Delroy Lindoi gives a good supporting performance. Mo'Nique was herself, although she did surprise me on one particular scene. Lucy Liu has great chemistry with Kiera Knightley in her scenes with her.

The best thing about the movie though, is the direction. Tony Scott's fast-paced style really brings the movie to life. The cinematography is some of the best, I've ever seen. It takes a regular movie and puts on acid. All the blacks are blacker, the whites are brighter, and it has a sort of green glow to it. The action scenes are exhilarating.

OVERALL: If you liked Sin City & Man on Fire, you'll like Domino.


Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she could hardly have chosen to remake her image more dramatically. A great success in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is difficult to imagine this delicate frame standing up to a bounty hunters life... but then this is exactly what Domino Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's biggest fans) believe she carries if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more amazing than the fiction.


When I rented Domino I was expected it to be very dumb. I hate films that have really flashy editing and cinematography and Domino also just got very bad reviews. The only reason I watched it is because I like have liked Keira Knightley, Mickey Rourke, Christopher Walken, and Tony Scott on other occasions. I also just enjoy based on fact adventure stories. Yes the editing and cinematography were frantic, the story was weak, and the acting was mediocre, but I still loved this film for some bizarre reason. Domino was very, very entertaining and often very funny. It was horribly underrated when it was released I think because everyone wanted more of an emotional journey like Scotts last film Man on Fire and instead just got wonderful entertainment. I actually understand why everybody hated Domino so much, even though I loved it and recommend it.


Ah, Domino is actually a breath of fresh air, something new to the cinema world. I enjoyed the movie a lot because of the intricate plot, the varied characters, and the intense camera effects. I've seen some complain about the camera work and, in fact, according to the creators themselves, the flashy and wild shots were all the culmination of mistakes made through time. All of what you see was the desired effect. Perhaps some complain because something quite like this has never been done before, although that's what sets it apart. In a deeper aspect, what you are seeing is just how Domino sees things through her eyes, think about it.

When it comes to the story, I don't see anything quite bad about it. Despite it's "messy" nature, according to some, it is in fact just a rapid form of storytelling. The plot really isn't all that hard to follow, if you actually focus on what's going on. Maybe it's just me because I see movies from many different aspects such as the acting, the plot, etc. I'm no "interpreter" or anything who picks movies apart, it just comes to me. With that said, I believe this is quite an excellent movie indeed, despite it's future as a cult-classic, blockbuster, or whatever.

And the characters, well there's no doubting how varied the cast is. I believe the cast is excellent as they all do fine jobs portraying their characters effectively, that's what makes a movie ladies and gentlemen. The characters are all very unique and a plus is that you get to witness a small piece of each one of their lives, setting them apart even further. Basically, I personally loved the cast and characters.

All those who bash and burn this film perhaps just don't see it as I do, or it just doesn't appeal to them. No matter, this is a great film in it's own right, no, it's a great film period.


I read several mixed reviews and several of them downright trashed the movie. I originally became interested in this project because it was being directed by Tony Scott and I have become very interested in his work after Man On Fire had such a profound impact on me. Before I start my review, let me first say this...it's wonderful to see that this movie could have been told in a boring and ordinary manner, yet the writers and Scott chose a different approach.

Plot:

Simply stated, it's not boring. Most Hollywood movies give 'tried and true' plots that they know will connect with people, often ensuring the audiences acceptance of the film and creating a higher probability of profit. This plot was one of the more interesting ones I had seen in a while. Just for reference, I recently watched 'The Weather Man' and 'Lord of War' and while I will say that these movies are excellent, and I enjoyed them both tremendously, both the plots in these movies are boring and they are told exactly how you would expect them to be told. They don't take any chances whatsoever, and they are extremely predictable after you've watched a fair amount of American films. Domino's plot is both interesting and told in a manner that keeps you thinking, "oh man, they're screwed now". And I feel that has been lacking in a lot of recent films. It has a lot of depth to it, in my opinion, and gives you plenty of things to question while watching it. Overall, this is what kept me so interested in the movie.

Characters:

I felt that the characters were accurate. Knightley did a wonderful job of portraying a beautiful woman, who was anything but on the inside and wanted to be viewed as what she was. It was obvious that she wanted to prove herself and she took whatever means she had to accomplish that.

Choco was also very believable, his use of Spanish in inappropriate situations, his reactions to Domino's lack of affection, as well as his jealousy issues within the team...they all rang true to me, which made me feel that his character was that much more realistic.

Rourke's character was the least interesting to me, but it still rang true to me. He seemed like an ordinary guy, trying to make ends meet. I hope that's what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish with him because that's what I got out of it. He did a very good job of showing Ed in an Average Joe kind of way that has made his mistakes, yet is still trying to live.

Claremont/Ladies: I believe that they provided much needed 'heart' to the story. They weren't just people who are out getting money to buy a Bentley, these were real people who had a real problem and they sought others mean to accomplish that goal. You could empathize with them because, to them, this child's illness was a problem with no other solution. These characters were supposed to show real people who are less fortunate who got into this mess because they needed help.

The mobsters: They made the story seem sinister in a way that only the mob can. And I really liked that part. They also padded the story with small intricacies that made the plot that much more interesting.

Christopher Walken/90210 guys:

They provided the comic relief in an otherwise very serious movie. From Walken's awkward statements to the ceaseless references to the 90210 guys being has-beens. Their involvement in the movie only made it that much more enjoyable.

Cinematography....yes....the cinematography. This is where this movie seems to have lost a lot of potential fans. But in my opinion I thought it was genius, the use of the camera to translate the mood of the current situation was extremely effective in my opinion. I considered it a method that was properly realized but could always use improvement, just like anything else. I both applaud and congratulate Scott, the editor, the cinematographer and the director of photography on taking some real chances with this movie. Not only did they go far and above with its presentation, they went that much further. The use of colors, both extremely light and extremely dark provided the 'look' of the film with a sinister and grungy look that accurately depicts the life of the mob, bounty hunters and the less fortunate in a manner that show that their life isn't as peachy or 'clean' as everyone else. If you notice, in times of less stress or conflict, there were very few camera tricks if any at all. This shows that Scott and his crew were trying to achieve something with this look and weren't just doing it for the heck of it. I realize that most people who watched this movie weren't expecting it and it cause many of them to be turned off to this film but I think it was great that Scott took this approach. Hollywood films have grown predictable and bland. Most of them are shot in the same manner with the same twists and turns. And I'm glad that Scott tried to make something different.

Granted, this movie isn't for everyone, but to say it's trash and has nothing to offer is completely missing the point. I thoroughly enjoyed this film and I'm glad that I spent the money for it. I would recommend this to all, but I'm sure it will only hit a chord with few. I must agree with an earlier poster when he said that many of those who refuse to see outside the 'sphere of MTV' won't appreciate this movie, but I think many people will. We should all try to enjoy it for the fact that Scott and co. took some chances and tried to deliver something that was different and unique. And with that in mind, I think he succeeded tremendously.


This is the most recent addition to a new wave of educational documentaries like "The Corporation" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." Its commentary is clear and unwavering as is the breathtaking cinematic style of this well crafted feature. The film manages to impose a powerful sense of how unsteady our world is as we rush toward an environmentally unsustainable future at lightning speed - while showing us the terrifying beauty in our pursuit of progress.

Truly a remarkable accomplishment which must be seen by all who care about the world we leave to our children. Bravo!

NB - this is also the only film (of 8) at Varsity theaters (Toronto) boasting a stick-on tag which reads... "To arrange group viewings please contact...." ... a further testament to the popularity and importance of this gem.

My bet... an academy award nomination for best documentary.

OB101


I have been an admirer of Edward Burtynsky's work for years, and it was such a pleasure to be able to see the man at work, thanks to Jennifer Baichwal's documentary. The severe beauty of the ship-breaking yard in Bangladesh, the stone quarry in Vermont, the enormous assembly plant in China, the beleaguered old neighbourhoods in Shanghai that are just waiting to be torn down: these landscapes are captured so well by the photographer and the filmmaker.

At times I thought of old TV documentaries on abandoned coal mines and plastic-mold factories; the sort of stuff I grew up watching. Burtynsky's work has the great value of pointing out how the industrial activity has only shifted to Asia, it has not stopped. The strangest scene for me was the computer scrap-yard somewhere in China--the waste had a threatening air about it, while the workers were very jovial.


This is a documentary that came out of the splendid work of a Canadian landscape photographer whose interest has long been in the ravages left on earth by the excavations or buildings of man. It begins with a vast factory complex crammed with people making a great variety of little things, parts of high-tech equipment presumably; it isn't really made very clear. The emphasis is on how big the place is and how many people are there and how they're herded around outside in little yellow jackets. The film also shows the photographer working on a tall structure to do a still of the array of these people outside the factory, and talking with his crew as he does so. This is a world of relentless industrialization. It's a relief at least to know these soulless images aren't going to be presented without a human voice, as is the case in Nikolaus Geyrhalter's gleefully cold documentary about the food industry, 'Our Daily Bread.' 'Manufactured Landscapes' contains images of people scavenging e-waste and a town (many towns, really) being wiped out by the biggest dam ever, with a single plangent trademark shot of a little girl in the rubble of her own neighborhood eating out of a bowl using a pair of chopsticks almost bigger than she is. Some of these scenes, the ones with miserably underpaid workers slaving in dangerous and toxic places, might have been shot memorably by the premier engagé photographer Sebastião Salgado. But this photographer isn't as interested in seeing people up close. His orientation places him somewhere in between Salgado and the cold, neutral modern landscape photographs of Lewis Baltz.

All this happens in China, of course, though there is earlier footage in black and white of the photographer working around a large shipbuilding site in Bangladesh. It is backed up by music in a New Age industrial style that is alternately soothing and oppressive. There are a good many stills of the photographer's work--or were some of them made by the film crew? It isn't made clear.

Edward Burtynsky is the name of the photographer. We see people wandering through exhibitions of his beautiful work-- big dramatic prints of carefully composed view camera color images with a handsome glow. The irony is that Burtynsky makes such unique and glorious pictures of places that are essentially blighted, and to the ordinary eye are dispiriting and boring. He admits himself that he takes no political stand. When we are able to compare his images with those caught by the roaming eye of the film's cinematographer Peter Mettler, Burtynsky's work almost amounts to a kind of glorification, and hence falsification. But he is showing us places that, if we look closely, reveal their full dark story of ravage and neglect no matter how finely crafted the photographs of them may be.

Logically, but not entirely fortunately, it is Burtynsky whose voice-overs narrate most of the film as it ranges over various sites. Burtynsky's "epiphanies" may have inspired his decades of fine work, but they amount to nothing but truisms about how we're changing the planet irreparably; are dependent on oil, which will run out; that China has come into the game of massive industrialization late, and so may burn out early with the depletion of fossil fuel. The interest of 'Manufactured Landscapes' would be much greater if there were perceptive new ideas to accompany it. The reasons for watching it are two: to see glimpses of Burtynsky's work and the raw materials, the spaces he visits and chronicles so beautifully; and to observe scenes from the vast, awesome, daunting, and rather horrifying industrialization of modern China.

Because of the limitations of the narration, the idea of the title 'Manufactured Landscapes' feels insufficiently developed. It even seems a misnomer. New landscapes they are, but they are the byproduct of manufacturing rather than "manufactured." 'Landscapes of Waste' or 'Wasted Landscapes' might be better titles. There is much room left by this documentary for more intellectually searching work on film about this intriguing subject; and those who want to know more about Edward Burtynsky might do better to peruse his books or exhibitions.


Mesmerizing, breathtaking and horrifying, this hauntingly beautiful film is the "Apocalypse Now" without fiction. Slow in pace, quiet in mood, it gives good glimpses of the poisoned patches of Earth that may well be signs of an inevitable doom.

There is no doubt in my mind -- the nature is plagued and we are the disease. Greed, the very essence of humanity that drives evolution and progress, has turned us into something like cancer, on its way to consume the host and die with it...

Manufactured Landscapes is quite an unforgettable viewing experience - at least I'll never regard my toaster and iron the same way again.


I had heard this film was a study of a landscape photographer's art by presenting the beauty in man's deconstructing the natural landscape. It certainly showed the laborious activities to find locations, setup shots, and capture stark images whose final destinations were art studios worldwide. Put together in moving pictures it is truly a horror show.

This film oozes by you supplanting the shock of ghastly images with gentle waves of a wonderful industrial soundtrack that guides you like on slow moving river. Each sequence stands on its own, but in combination you get deeper and deeper into the feeling of overwhelming inevitability. There are few words, this allowing the grandeur in what is shown to preach in its own way. An awful, massive factory filled with human automata who live in hopelessly lifeless dormitories. Individuals dying early while rummaging for recyclable scraps in mountains of our E-waste. The birthing of gigantic ships and their destruction by hand in giant graveyards. The construction of the Three Gorges Dam, the largest industrial project in human history and likely for all time. The time lapse as a city dies and is simultaneously reborn into a replica of modernity that purposefully destroys all relics of the culture that was.

The most terrifying image for me was a dam engineer explaining that the most important function of the dam was flood control. The shot shifts to the orchard behind the spokesperson where you witness the level of the last flood by the toxic water having eaten the bark from the trees, demonstrating that nothing but the most hideous vermin could be living in the waters.

The obvious not being stated is far more powerful than your normal preachy Save the Earth documentaries. The artist Edward Burtynsky explains the method wonderfully. 'By not saying what you should see  many people today sit in an uncomfortable spot where you don't necessarily want to give up what we have but we realize what we're doing is creating problems that run deep. It is not a simple right or wrong. It needs a whole new way of thinking'. The subtlety of this descends into an either/or proposition, but the film images scream that the decision has very much been made in favor of the dark side.

Though never stated directly in any way, as the waves of what you witness wash away from your awareness and you contemplate, there is only one conclusion possible  we are doomed. The progress of mankind that is inexorable from our natures leaves behind carnage that this artist finds terrifying beauty in. What he is actually capturing are the tracks of we the lemmings rushing unconsciously toward our own demise. Unlike most films with environmental themes, this one ends with no call to arms. It argues basically what's the point, but makes certain you place the blame properly on all of us equally.


This is the most confronting documentary I have ever seen. It was a simple and breathtaking view of a beautiful idea. Based on photographs of the hidden industrial landscapes centred around the modern industrial growth of China, Edward Burtynsky brings to life confronting issues that we so easily chose to ignore.

Taking no political sides, this movie is a neutral moving picture of realities that our western societies chooses not to educate us about - the by-products of economical growth, the externalities paid by citizens of the lesser-developed communities, the source of our comforts and the wastes of our consumer lifestyles.

Amazing, heart-breaking, impossible to ignore. This is a challenging journey but one worth taking - please stop staying ignorant and at least see these photographs of truth without feeling any pressure to take a standing to these issues. 10/10 definitely!


Edward Burtynsky is a Canadian photographer who makes art out of the least "artful" objects imaginable. Everyday items such as crates, boxes, metal containers, etc. - items which most of us perceive as utilitarian at best and dismiss as being utterly without aesthetic merit - are instead converted into glorious objects d'art by Burtynsky's camera. He achieves this result by focusing on the recurring colors and geometric patterns that are apparently ever present in the industrialized world - for those perceptive enough to spot them, that is. Even heaps of compacted trash can become objects of beauty when seen through Burtynsky's lens (but didn't we already know that from "Wall-E"?). He is particularly interested in photographing areas like mines and shipyards where Man has already made incursions into nature - which may explain why at times even the people in his pictures (i.e. the workers in those places), with their uniform clothing and robotic movements, become part of the industrial landscape.

"Manufactured Landscapes," a documentary about Burtynsky's work, has much of the feel of a "Koyaanisqatsi" about it as it dazzles us with its richly variegated kaleidoscope of images and patterns. Indeed, director Jennifer Baichwal and cinematographer Peter Mettler capture the essence of the original photos in purely cinematic terms, as their own camera records Burtynsky and his assistant running photo shoots at a factory in China, a dockyard in Bangladesh, and the construction site at the massive Three Rivers Gorge Dam project in China. With their fluid camera-work, the filmmakers match point-for-point the beauty of Burtynsky's images. In fact, the movie opens with a stunning eight-minute-long tracking shot of a Chinese factory in which hundreds of similarly dressed workers toil away in perfectly symmetrical and color-coordinated rows.

The movie does less well when Burtynsky gets around to articulating the "themes" of his work, which, quite frankly, come out sounding confused, contradictory and decidedly half-baked at best. But it is as a purely aesthetic experience, highlighting image and form, that "Manufactured Landscapes" resonates most. In the case of Burtynsky, perhaps, a picture really IS worth a thousand words.


I had nowhere to go. I was on a flight to Vancouver. I would probably have missed this film if I hadn't chosen Air Canada. Watched on a small screen in the back of the seat in front, I found this captivating and mesmerising. I did drift in a couple of places and had to skip back but I had to watch to it's end. Now I'm looking forward to the DVD release in Europe though whether I'll be quite as transfixed when I can walk out the door, is yet to be discovered!

The photographic composition is stunning and the film gives so much insight and 'fills out' the story the photographs tell.

Recommended (if you have time on your hands).


Reviewed at the World Premiere screening Sept. 9, 2006 at the Isabel Bader Theatre during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting premise but seemed to go on too long with too many shots of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The bits of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were especially striking. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was quite something as well. Scenes of the activity at the Three Gorges Dam project were also a complement to the Jia Khang-je films at TIFF (the feature Still Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were also built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, Producer Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on stage for a Q&A after the world premiere. Producer Noah Weinzweig was introduced from the audience and was thanked as the most key person that assisted in the on the ground access in China itself.


In addition to being an extremely fun movie, may I add that the costumes and scenery were wonderful. This kind, fun loving woman had a great deal of money. Unfortunately, she also had two greedy daughters who were anxious to get their hands on her money. This woman was lonely since the death of her husband. He had proposed to her in a theater that was going to be torn down. To prevent that, she bought it. Her daughters were afraid she was throwing away "their" money and decided to take action. The character actors in this film were a great plus also. I would give almost anything to have a copy of this film in my video library, but as of yet, it's never been released. Sad.


Absolutely wonderful drama and Ros is top notch...I highly recommend this movie. Her performance, in my opinion, was Academy Award material! The only real sad fact here is that Universal hasn't seen to it that this movie was ever available on any video format, whether it be tape or DVD. They are ignoring a VERY good movie. But Universal has little regard for its library on DVD, which is sad. If you get the chance to see this somewhere (not sure why it is rarely even run on cable), see it! I won't go into the story because I think most people would rather have an opinion on the film, and too many "reviewers" spend hours writing about the story, which is available anywhere.

a 10!


Rosalind Russell executes a power-house performance as Rosie Lord, a very wealthy woman with greedy heirs. With an Auntie Mame-type character, this actress can never go wrong. Her very-real terror at being in an insane assylum is a wonderful piece of acting. Everyone should watch this.


As with most Rosalind Russell movies, this one is very entertaining -- it's fun all the way through. It's definitely one of the last of this genre of film -- just good wholesome entertainment. Give it a try - I don't think you will be disappointed.


A serious comedy. Ross Hunter-produced movie version of the French play "Les Joies de la famille" (later Americanized as "A Very Rich Woman") is plush, well cast, occasionally funny...and unfortunately timeless. A wealthy California widow, who appears to be frittering away her money, is railroaded by her two grown, greedy daughters, both of whom are afraid Mama Rosie is carelessly spending their inheritance. The whole issue of a vital--but aged--woman sent to a rest home against her will, and later having to prove herself sane in a court hearing, is touchy material for a comedy (and to his credit, director David Lowell Rich doesn't overload the picture with crass gags or obvious sentiment). Some of the humor is a little broad and doesn't work, yet Rosalind Russell understands the gravity inherent in this scenario and never hits a false note. Sandra Dee is also good as Rosalind's granddaughter, and James Farentino is very charming as a young lawyer. The movie has so much to say about the importance of our elderly, and the ways in which they choose to spend their remaining time, that the seriousness of "Rosie!"'s theme almost gets lost in the rush to a happy ending. The picture leaves you smiling--and at the same time wondering how many older ladies there are who were never quite so lucky. *** from ****


God Bless 80's slasher films. This is a fun, fun movie. This is what slasher films are all about. Now I'm not saying horror movies, just slasher films. It goes like this: A high school nerd is picked on by all these stupid jocks and cheerleaders, and then one of their pranks goes horribly wrong. Disfigured and back for revenge, sporting a Joker/Jester mask (pretty creepy looking, might i add), Marty begins to kill off those teens one by one many years later, after he manages to make them believe that their old abandoned high school is having a reunion. That is basically the plot? What's wrong with that? That's the beauty of 80's slasher films, most of them i would say. A lot of things could be so ridiculous, but they keep drawing you more in an' in as they go by. Especially this film.

It features some outrageous killings, and some are quite creative as well. (poisoning of a beer can, acid bath, i can't remember a javelin ever being used before in any other slasher film either)It really is a fun, fun movie. That's all it is. Nevermind the fact that the characters are complete idiots, never mind their stupidity, and never mind the outrageous, random things that occur in this film. Such as lights being able to be controlled by the killer (when he's not even switching any buttons, you'll see) and toilets being able to cough up blood, baths being able to have acid come out of them, just use that as part of your entertainment! Because thats what really makes it entertaining.

Movies like this represent 80's slashers. Never again could movies like this get made, know why? It isn't the 80's anymore. That is why you should just cherish them for what they are, good fun! I highly recommend this film if you're a hardcore fan of Slahsers such as Friday the 13th.

One last note this movie also had a kick ass villain as well, Marty Rantzen. A disfigured, nerd, who kills all his old foes in a creepy Jester mask. A good villain makes a good slasher. Simon Scuddamore, who played Marty apparently committed suicide shortly after Slaughter High was released. That alone adds something creepy to the film, and sticks with it and it even makes you feel more sorry for the Marty character, i guess. All in all, great 80's slashers fun! It's a shame it will never be the same again...


"Slaughter High" is, perhaps, the most underrated slasher flick of the 1980s. It is one of the few films in the genre that is enthralling throughout. That being said, it also relies heavily on the standard slasher formula: A group of young men and women get killed one by one gruesomely until the final showdown.

The reason why "Slaughter High" stands above most movies in its genre is that it goes more over-the-top. Marty, the killer, has good reason to hold a grudge against his former classmates. They electrocuted him as he stood naked in a girl's locker room shower, jabbed at his crotch with a javelin, and, to top it off, rigged his science lab experiment so it could disfigure him.

So, the victims in this movie are about as unlikeable as you get. When they reunite years later -- at a high school reunion put on by Marty himself -- you realize they haven't matured all that much. They're a bunch of sociopaths.

It is mind-boggling why they would not wonder why they were the only ones to show up to the reunion, which, by the way, is held at a school that has since fell into disrepair. And who would think it's a good idea to drink beer and liquor found in the abandoned building in a room that happens to have their old lockers -- as well as Marty's -- on display? There are many leaps of faith the viewer needs to take to enjoy this film. The ending makes little or no sense. And the screenwriters have a strange understanding of how April Fool's Day works: The movie claims that pranks are no longer allowed after noon.

In all, the movie is one of the best examples of the slasher genre, despite all of its flaws. It is hard to understand why it hasn't yet found its way to DVD, when so many other run-of-the-mill slasher flicks are graced with special editions.


YES, the plot is hardly plausible and very thin. YES, the acting does range from average to laughable. YES, it has been done so many times before. However what we are dealing with is a film that does not shy away from these facts and pretends to be nothing more than it is. There are indeed some original death scenes and the tension does increase throughout the movie. In addition you are never more than a few minutes away from a gory killing. I urge everyone to watch this film with an unprejudiced eye and see it for what it set out to be; a scary, funny slasher flick with a theme tune second to none.


I have lost count of how many reviews I've written on Slaughter High. I've read a lot of bad ones and I will say right now this is a fantastic movie. Simon Scuddamore made his fame in a short time for his well known suicide, and even though this was his only film, he is what made the movie so great. At first I did not know anything about Simon until I read a review about his suicide. Then I found out due to the current webpage at www.IMDb.com he was born in 1957, in Dayton, Ohio. Simon may have played the most pathetic character known to man, but his real life self certainly had their strenghths and weaknesses. He did a good acting job, who can disagree? I always wondered how he felt showing himself naked in a movie. Must have been pretty embarrassing to say the least. I first saw this movie when I was 12 in the sixth grade. I agree with some pointers like the girl would not take a bath after somebody was murdered, and that high schools do NOT have bath tubs! I think Caroline Munro who was 36 at the time was the only other star that had any dignified acting talent, and unfortunately for Simon's death he made no future films. The reason(s) for his suicide are a mystery, and hopefully will be discovered in the near future. Doing the math on his webpage it tells you he was 29 years old when he made Slaughter High. He looked like a teenager. I give this film two thumbs up, the best horror film made. Probably because of their horrible acting the others didn't make fame in the movie business. -Jacob Young


Slaughter High is about a boy named Marty. He was harassed, and picked on in high school. A group of kids played several pranks on him, and these pranks were REALLY bad. The last prank ended tragically.

cue to 5 years later. The gang of kids meet up again for a reunion. One of them set it up at the old high school. The school is now abandoned, and they have to break in. For some reason, the Janitor is still there, but he tells them to go ahead and have fun because they give him a beer.

They start partying ,and looking at their old lockers, and they see something of Marty's. One girl feels sorry for Marty but another guy calms her down.

Once the kills begin, it is great. Every kills is creative and gory. We see a figure in a jester mask, hunting them one by one throughout the school. It appears Marty is back to exact revenge. After the first person is killed, they find out they are locked in the school. They begin looking for a way out.

Now, there are a number of illogical things in this movie. First of all, I don't know anyone who has a 5 year reunion. Second of all, after the first kid dies, a girl gets blood all over her. They all run away in a panic, yet she runs to the bathroom, and finds a bathtub. Hrr friend has just been killed, and she decides to take a bath!? More importantly, why is there a bathtub in a school bathroom. Anyways, the bathtub doesn't seem to really work....and she dies a horrible death this is an 80s movie. it is a horror slasher. WHO CARES if it has some illogical parts. I for one don't. This movie has really great deaths. The ending.... there is a twist. Having recently seen Haute Tension, I can compare the two. The only way they are similar is that there is a twist, which kind of left me disappointed.....THEN right after the twist, comes a great, if not the best kill, in the movie.

After the last kill, the killer looks at the screen and also does something crazy, and it was the perfect way to end the movie. It has me going "wow..."


Wow, praise IMDb and Google, for I have been trying to remember the name of this f'ing awesome movie for over 15 years now. Slaughter High, man! Hells yeah!

I'm not going to bore you with a plot summary, and actors, and yadda yadda yadda, 'cause you all know what's up. That's why you're here anyway. What I will do, however, is explain the fond memory I have of this quintessential 80's D-Movie slasher joint.

In 1987, when I was around the age of 7, my father used to rent all these horror movies. Would he care that his kids were watching them with him? No. So, at that young age i saw Slaughter High. What I saw in that movie stuck with me big time. I haven't seen it since, but I remember to this day most of the ridiculous kills in the movie. For example, the post-sex scene (why is there a metal bed in a school?) gets electrocuted. Or, the guy being drowned in a cess pool. Come on! My personal favorite, though...the exploding stomach from the tainted beer. Amazing! How can you honestly hate on a movie where one of the characters finds a beer in an abandoned school, like, 10 or 15 years later and thinks it would be a good idea to drink it? Then his stomach explodes? What!? And that great line: Let's take my car...it always starts. Classic crap all the way.

I mean, I look back now, almost 20 years later, and laugh at it. But when I was 7, I was scared sh!tless. That jester hat (or was it a mask?) that the killer rocks throughout freaked me the f*ck out!

All in all, yes, a crappy movie. But for nostalgia purposes and for humor factor this movie gets a 9 out of 10 from me. Either stay up every night real late and hope to catch this on same Late Late Late Movie show, or hunt down a VHS copy and dust off your VCR.


Slaughter High starts like any other day at Doddsville County High School where little minx Carol Manning (Caroline Munro) has tricked resident nerd Marty Rantzen (Simon Scuddamore) into the girls locker rooms where she tells him to get undressed in the shower, while doing so Carol's gang of friends come in & give the now naked Marty a big surprise as they film him as they stick his head down the girls toilet in an April fool's day joke. The school's sports coach (Marc Smith) saves Marty & punishes the gang who rather harshly blame Marty, they decide to play another trick on him only this time things get out of hand & Marty is caught in an explosion & has nitric acid splashed over his face. Years later & the whole gang are invited to a class reunion at the now closed down school, they all arrive to discover they are the only ones there. They all venture inside where they quickly learn they aren't the only ones there as Marty is back & has revenge on his mind...

Originally shot under the title April Fool's Day which they changed probably because of another slasher film named April Fool's Day (1986) made the same year this American English co-production is unusual in that it has three credited writers & directors, George Dugdale, Mark Ezra & Peter Litten (after never seeing a film with three credited director's I've now seen two in a week the other being the Jean-Claude Van Damme flick Kickboxer (1989)) & I have to say I really rather liked Slaughter High even though it seems to have a pretty bad reputation. One of the things I like about the script is that it is a pure unashamed slasher flick, it doesn't try to be anything else & it just accepts the genres rules, short comings & trappings & plays up to them. Basically it delivers what it promises, a homicidal killer, blood, boobs & babes. I thought the character's were alright, the story was OK even though it's just an excuse to get a load of teens inside an isolated location so some killer can bump them off one at a time & I actually liked the twist ending as well which is also something for which Slaughter High gets a lot of flak for. The first half starts off a little slow but the second half moves along at a rate of knots as there is one gory killing after another. Some of the situations & character reactions make little sense but the same can be said of just about any film ever made so who's complaining?

Despite three credited director's Slaughter High turned out pretty good, I liked the look of the film a lot. The isolated rundown school made for a really atmospheric location & looked good, the makers throw in a good thunderstorm as well & there's some nice photography especially at the end where there are numerous impressive uninterrupted long lasting stedicam tracking shots which follow Carol through various corridors of the rundown school. While not particularly stylish it certainly looks nice enough & is professionally made. There is some good gore here including burnt bodies, people melted with acid, impalings, stomach explosions, axes in faces & death by lawnmower as well as someone who gets drowned in fecal matter down a drain! The special effects are also better than one would expect & I was both impressed & pleased with the higher than expected body count.

Technically the film is better than I had expected & beats most low budget horror crap that gets released today, I would have thought it was relatively low budget itself though. Supposedly set in America this was very obviously shot in England. Harry Manfredini composes another score which sounds exactly like all of his other musical scores & is basically the same as the theme from Friday the 13th (1980) & it's sequels. Anyone living here in the UK will probably recognise Billy Hartman who played Frank as a regular in Emmerdale Farm (one of our nations top rated soap operas) in which he plays Terry Woods! While most horror fans will recognise the sexy Caroline Munro in a rare staring role. Legendary exploitation producer Dick Randall did the deed on Slaughter High & actually appears in the film as a porno movie producer... talk about typecasting! You can also see a poster for the misunderstood brilliance that was Pieces (1982) which he also produced behind him in his office.

Slaughter High is a slasher film that I liked a lot, did you see that? I didn't say it was great I actually said I liked it on a personal level & I'm sure the predictable plot & lack of story will probably put many off so I can't recommend it but I can say I liked it, make of that what you want. Make sure you you watch the uncut version if you ever decide you want to check it out. If your not a fan of the slasher flick genre then Slaughter High won't change your mind but if your looking for a simple & effective slasher then you could do a lot worse than this.


This movie looked like a classic in the cheesy 80s slasher genre, which is my favorite genre of them all, so when I saw it was Free on Demand, I had to watch it! It stars Caroline Munro, from both Dr. Phibes films (she was his wife that died!), Dracula A.D. 1972, The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, Captain Kronos - Vampire Hunter, The Spy Who Loved Me, Maniac, and Faceless.

Brought to you by the people behind Don't Open Til Christmas and Pieces, Heres my thoughts on this...

It opens on April Fools Day, where a bunch of kids play an elaborate prank on the school nerd- promising him sex in the shower, and giving him public humiliation and a face in the toilet (all while hes naked!). The coach puts a stop to it, but both parties swear revenge. But, the cool kids end up burning the nerd alive.

Cut to the future, and its th High School reunion, or so they think (bwahahha?). The only ones with invitations were the gang who burned the kid, and its April Fools Day (or really, the day before April Fools, but the fun starts at midnight), yet they fail to see the coincidence and hang out in front of the school until nightfall. Then they finally break into the school and it starts storming.

Inside they find food/drink and a little shrine for each of them, each of their lockers and belongings, along with Marty's (the nerds) locker and yearbook. They also find the old black janitor/caretaker who spends his time saying "Oooh yesser! Yesser! I don't want no trouble, sir!" and then is killed instantly. Pretty pointless character, but hes still my favorite.

The movie takes a page out of Alien's book, in a deliciously gory way that you just have to see! Thats when everyone realizes that they're there to die, and they start freaking out, except for Shirley, who decides it would be best to take a bath in the old school showers at a time like this. Of course, it pours out blood and acid and her face melts off (very cool, mind you) The rest of the night goes as usual, sex, drugs, and Marty killing everyone whilst wearing a jester mask.. Whats their plan? "All we have to do is stay awake and wait till noon. Marty wont kill us during mid-day!". Seriously, thats what he said. Apparently you can only kill at nighttime. But will they survive through the night? Who will live and who will die? And why are all the bodies disappearing? Rent, buy, or steal this great movie to find out! The movie is actually very good, filled with clichés (car wont start, DAMMIT!) and just plain slasher fun. Not to mention they all have names like Carol and Nany and Frank and Joe and Susan. I recommend it to all of you! And, not to mention, it has a Spin Off! 1989's Cutting Class is a spin-off from this slasher gem, and that movie starts the career of Brad Pitt and Roddy McDowell.

Favorite scene: 2 people having sex, the guy wants to finish but the girl doesn't. "Talk dirty to me, Frank!!" she screams "Uh... tits!" "DIRTIER!" "Uh... tits. F*ck. tits. Boobs. F*ck.". It seems to work for her and at her climax, the killer electrocutes them both!


it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd growing up in school. If you liked this movie, then I would suggest you watch Valentine. I just found out today that the guy who played Marty(Simon) killed himself a little after the movie was released which is a shame since he did a good job. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when Carol tricks him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was changing in the showers, Carols popular friends snuck into the bathroom and got everything ready, camera, electric shock, pole. When Marty open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab Marty and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They picked him up, dunked his head in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like cocaine but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time.