Entertaining film about a young girl whose parents are mute and depend upon her to communicate to the speaking world for them. Her aunt, a free-spirited musician, teaches her to play the clarinet, but the parents object. The young girl matures into a young woman whose musical abilities and desires become paramount. Her dependent parents attempt to keep her home and away from her chosen vocation. Well acted and a good drama. Large, yellow subtitles.


I am a high school German teacher and my kids absolutely love watching this movie! They always ask to watch it over and over when I can't be there and they have to have a sub.

I have learned some A.S.L. and can say that there are similarities but A.S.L. and German Sign Language are definitely different! I can appreciate the struggles Lara goes through and she does a good job, for her, at trying to balance in all 3 worlds. Deaf, Hearing and Music. It's only when outside factors cause tension that spill over into one or more of her worlds that she has trouble coping! There is that one sad moment in the film that gets me every time, something I can relate to but, overall, the entire film is captivating and leaves you wanting to know what happens with Lara, her career and her relationship with her family and Tom afterward! I'll never tire of this film!


i first saw this movie over 5 years ago when i was working at walt Disney world. after i first saw it i walked out of the theater in wonder... and the comments that i heard from others that saw it - they thought that it was just as good as i did!

coming from a background in Deaf education i can tell you that German sign language and asl are not the same. they are similar however... enough for me to know most of what was being said after watching the movie for a while.

i lived at a deaf school for a year and so to see the relationships between lara and her parents... well, let me tell you that was done quite nicely. and i just love the scene with tom and lara and the song 'i will survive'!! it made me laugh so hard!!!

for a while after i saw the movie i looked to buy it. i could not find it anywhere for quite some time. i finally found it available online and bought it on VHS. yes, there is a soundtrack, as i have that as well.


Jenseits der Stille (Beyond Silence) is an excellent film. I wish I had seen (or heard about) this film years ago! I am a big fan of German cinema and have worked closely with the Deaf community in Canada. The performances were outstanding and the story realistic. I hope to see more works by these actors, the writer and director.

Chad


I think this is a very neatly made movie. Although the focus of the movie itself is on Lara, the audience is also able to get to know each character's personality (e.g. Lara's parents, and her aunt and uncle). I personally found the reconciliation scene of Lara's Father and his sister very touching (though a bit too quick).

This movie encourages people to go and search for their own ideals and ambitions, and at the same time let them know that despite every kind of fame and riches in the world, nothing can be more important and precious than the love from your own family. Very touching indeed.

The music used in this movie is breath-taking as well. Alas that it doesn't have a soundtrack (or does it?).


Contrary to previous comments, sign language is NOT the same around the world. It is true that American Sign Language and French Sign Language are quite similar; this is because one of the first teachers of the deaf in the United States was a Frenchman, Laurent Clerc. However, at the the present time, French and American Sign Languages only have about 50% lexical similarity. Additionally, although German Sign Language is somewhat similar to other European sign languages, it is not related to ASL at all.

The sign language used by the little girl in this movie is German Sign Language. Her father is played by an American deaf man and her mother is played by a French deaf woman; their signing in German Sign Language is understandably accented.

For the record, I am a certified interpreter in American Sign Language.


Definitely a rare and wonderful find for a movie which includes a cast of REAL (instead of hired hearing-actor-pretending-as-a-deaf-person actors that you see sometimes in films!) deaf actors in the movie world nowadays....

Also, it's a bigger plus when you consider the directional approach chosen for this film -- it's an appreciative success.


As a German myself I know how bad usually German movies are. This one is one of the very very very few exceptions. What makes it an exception is: no overdoing morality, no sentimentality beyond realism, GOOD ACTORS (all of them newcomers, so nepotism didn't do it as in many other German movies), an original story. Is there a scent of dawn in German Filmindustry ?


Beyond Silence is a beautiful film that you never forget. Her beautiful scenes and her story make an excellent movie. Her director,Caroline Link,make a sence film about life and love.Her music is wonderfull,including the Klezmer music with the actress,Sylvie Testud,touched in a scene.The rest of actors have a perfect performance.Presented in Mar del Plata Film Festival in 1997,the movie is one of the best pictures of this decade in Argentina. My opinion:The best german film of every times.Please,don´t forget see.Is an order.


The story was beautiful and provoked deep emotions in many sections, but I felt that much of the talent was aimed at displaying the ordinary communication within the family rather than the love of music or whatever passion the main characters may have had for their chosen lives. I felt cheated in some respects because the music and jobs seemed more window-dressing that life choices. Seeing and hearing Giora Feldman was a surprise and a treat. I wish there had been more about the music or more about the parents and their internal lives.


When saying that because FSL, GSL, and ASL appear the same so they must be similar, is like saying because you can speak French, German, or English it is all similar, as you know isn't the case. Believe it or not, they are very much different and there is no such thing as universal signs. Although there are a few signs that are similar, just like we say "NO" and in Spanish the word for our no is in fact, "NO". But really, a Deaf person who signs ASL would have a VERY hard time communicating with someone who signs GSL. Sorry to be giving you an educational piece, but you wrote it so I had to comment it and I didn't want you to look bad to the Deaf Community. Thanks, have a great day!!!


I need to comment on this movie since reading all of the other comments and knowing how many times I've seen this movie...I should say something. First, I read the book after I saw the movie and was surprised by the different direction the movie took. Most of the names were changed, some of the characters themselves were totally different that described in the novella. Having seen the movie before reading the book, however, I thought it was an interesting story. Getting past the sets, editing, script and continuity issues, I saw interesting character study and flow of events. At least we got a little glimpse of some of the character's pasts, if we listened closely to some of the sometimes rambling conversation, and saw briefly into their personal lives...especially Royd Erris and Jon Winderman. When I look at the movie, I try to get into the meat of it ...as if it was really happening at that moment. What were they thinking, experiencing. What kind of emotional bond was going on between some of the characters. However, after I read the book, I thought the movie could have been so much better. I gave the movie an 8 out of 10 for a great attempt at creating the mood of the characters and atmosphere of the Nightflyer described in George R.R. Martin's awesome short story. I found the book at an old used bookstore 600 miles form my house. I believe you can get in online. Read it!


This sci-fi/horror film is very unusual.I really don't want to spoil it but it has a slow beginning and middle but the climax is a long intense ending!If you haven't seen this movie before than give it a chance,it'll be a different experience for the sci-fi and horror film fan!


Is it just me, or is this movie basically "Event Horizon"? It makes me wonder if Paul Anderson saw this movie as a kid and then subconsciously recreated it later. A crew of expendable caricatures head for deep space in a mysterious and uniquely experimental vessel which is secretly both sentient and malicious. The evil spaceship begins to throw spooky vibes and lethal accidents at them in equal measure, and a guy who is very "in tune" with the bodiless lurking evil gradually becomes obsessed and consumed by it, eventually graduating into a full-blown zombie possessee. He is killed in a messy, disfiguring way and yet because he is the ship's puppet/mascot he comes back again and again. Eventually what's left of the hardy crew manages to circumvent the "evil core" of the ship and explosions ensue. Does any of this sound familiar? It makes me wonder if EVERY contemporary genre film has its own obscure eighties counterpart that nobody remembers.

-H


Why the heck are high-tech spacecraft so misty in the interior!? Apparently, the humidity controls on the ship's air conditioning system were set up to maximum; either that or the filmmakers were trying to rip off Alien. Other than the spectre of mist, the action and the acting was pretty lacking and even grinded down to a halt at times. From the laser beam shooting out the side of the gun (bad, bad editing) to the cornball scenes of the headless, decapitated body choking someone, this movie is filled with flaws, but the worst flaw was the awful mist which seems to condense on my television.


The silly, uninteresting story (a computer that has the mind of a mother with a fixation on her son?) and the annoying overacting of some of the players are the two most important - but not the only - problems with this very, very minor sci-fi flick. However, the effects are good for what they probably cost, and Catherine Mary Stewart shows indications of being a strong female lead - she deserves a better movie. (*1/2)


OK, so this movie isn't all that fantastic. Having been a LONG time fan of George R. R. Martin, and having literally cried real tears at the ending of this short story, I was a little disappointed in the way this was converted from story to movie. The many changes made no sense to me at all, and as is usual in a situation like this, the movie ends up being nearly terrible. Still, it has many redeeming features, including the To Die For gorgeous Michael Praed, the always fun Catherine Mary Stuart (playing what was a black amazon woman in the book as a rather uninteresting white girl - can't blame HER for that). It's really not the casts fault that the script was mangled. Even the crazy Michael Des Barres is great, but I would have rather seen the oh-so-cool pocket void-head explosion brought on by the blood-pressure-increasing psychic drug scene, over the silly cuts-off-half-his-head-and-he-keeps-on-fighting nonsense this movie had.

The whole thing with Royd's "mother" was badly handled - in the book, she was sinister and creepy, terrifying and powerful, here she's kinda creepy and somehow pathetic, instead of tragic and still sympathetic as she is in the book.

The book is MUCH better - all of Martin's short stories are just awesome - and I have to admit, I envisioned Michael Praed when I read Royd Eris's adventure, and that probably helped bring on the tears when it reached the end. The movie's ending is, in the sense that it didn't make me cry, better, but the tragedy that was Royd Eris's life in the book is really the better quality ending.

Like Sandkings, the TV version takes out all the fun parts, dumbs down the smart parts, and assumes we can't deal with the complications and ideas as presented by Martin in the originals.

Shame on whoever made the changes, you could have kept the same cast, and not changed the story any, and it would have been a MUCH better movie. All in all, it's not a bad sci fi romp, but don't expect much. Read the book after you see it, and you'll be amazed.


It's unbelievable how silly some movies can be. I forgot completely why it was that I started watching this movie. It has a story, I'm sure of that, but it can't have been a very thick one. Everybody seems to have motivations, but they don't say anything about them. They just look pondering into the camera for a moment or two (three, ten) and then take action. A little more light on the flyers activities would in other ways also have been nice. I mean: they're on a spaceship, the electricity bill will not be the largest post. And that way it is actually possible to see what is happening to some of the flyers, fights in the dark do so little to me.

By far the worst film I've ever seen.


In the final days of the year 1999, most everyone in Taiwan has died. A strange plague has ravished the island. Supposedly spread by cockroaches, the disease sends its victims into a psychosis where they act like the insects. Eventually, they die. The Hole takes place in a crumbling apartment building (which is especially well created; kudos to the set designer!). Its two protagonists live right above and below each other. The woman is on the lower floor, and the pipes above her apartment are leaking fiercely, threatening to destroy her food supply, not to mention her sanity. She calls a plumber to go check it out, and he accidentally pokes a hole through the floor of the man's apartment. The two have never met before, and they come into contact through the hole.

The script is quite brilliant. Few films are simultaneously this funny while remaining completely human, deeply exploring the human condition, especially feelings of loneliness and despair. Tsai's direction is simply beautiful. Like a lot of other Taiwanese directors, he uses a lot of long takes. But unlike, say, Hou Hsiao-Hsien, Tsai doesn't overuse them. In fact, I don't know if I've ever seen them used better. They're always effective and never tedious.

It would be wrong to review this film without mentioning the musical numbers. Yes, The Hole is also a musical, and a great one, at that. In the film's best scenes - which is saying something, considering how good all the other scenes are - the man imagines that the woman is a singer, almost a cabaret singer. These numbers are fully choreographed, often with backup dancers and singers. In a stroke of genius, Tsai has these elaborately produced numbers take place in the crumbling building, the signs of apocalypse and decay unhidden. This provides both a sense of pathos and absurdity.

The Hole is a film that begs to be seen. It ought to be a cult classic, if nothing else. Before I went to see this, I was told that it was a decent film, but probably Tsai Ming-liang's least good one. Well, if that is true, I just cannot wait to see another one! 10/10.


*MINOR SPOILERS*

Need any further proof that Tsai Ming-liang ranks among the most original and provocative filmmakers working anywhere today? See this film.

Working from slight variations of a theme running through most of his work, THE HOLE represents a study in alienation and loneliness - in this case between a man and woman who are upstairs/downstairs neighbors - and how varied structures (real or psychological) of modernity wall people off from one another. Here, the woman (the downstairs neighbor) attempts to endure as her apartment is flooded by a prodigious leak from upstairs. A plumber attempts to locate the source of the problem, then disappears after creating a large hole in the floor. Already isolated and desperate (both characters are among the few residents of a housing project who haven't fled in advance of a mysterious, near-apocalyptic epidemic). The hole linking the two apartments functions first as yet another in a long line of indignities, but soon begins to take on a significance of near-mythic proportions.

Tsai's sense of humor, and sense of cinematic history is displayed with a bit more overtness than usual - as the woman's occasional daydreams revolving around her upstairs neighbor are visualized as musical numbers (set to the music of Grace Chang) which explode from the screen in brief bits of sensualistic, surreal romance and humor - quite reminiscent of the big-screen PENNIES FROM HEAVEN. And for all of the ennui and alienation on display here, Tsai's skewering of late 90s pre-millennial tensions is funny, absurd, and gives this film a very appealing strageness. The final scene is extraordinary.

Meanwhile Tsai - in typical fashion - subverts most of the usual expectations or preconceptions Westerners bring to Asian cinema with a nonchalant, casually-revealed directness, focusing on both the absurdist tendencies of the human mind, and the most absolute of mundanities. There's an utter, nonchalant demystification of almost everything about his characters, sidestepping backstory or most cultural signifiers (which does amplify the isolation of the characters), making THE HOLE - and his other films - rather disorienting, but also always fascinating and insightful.


(the description of the mood of the movie may be considered as a spoiler - because there is not much action in fact)

Great one...

Is it for my peculiar interest for the dystopias and utopias? Is it for the atmosphere of the movie. Or is there some more magic? If yes, it is for sure the utmost human one...

This film is, no doubt, extremely artistic/artificial (depends on taste). I can imagine most of the people who hate to watch slow movies (and those of Tsai Ming Liang (who I didn't enjoy other times) are one of the slowest that I know), suffering during the movie. Yes, people are unable to slow down and to let time pass - and to watch it without feeling they waste it. One can take this piece as torture or as a therapy...

The topic at the surface? The lack of communication - even if we live in rabbit cages - one next to each other - but not really together? People are tired, sick of something and unable to describe it - just don't want to meet, touch, talk, confront the others... like if they had disappeared. The big block of flats looks void and the rain falling constantly evokes the strange melancholy inside. And sometimes it must be something abnormal, unexpected, some unwanted decay as a hole in the floor of concrete - that allows us to reach each other.

One of the possible ways to look at it is this: Don't survey the inner world of the characters - consider the whole movie-space to be inside of yourself. And ask - why is it there? Where could these depressive states and moods come form? Is there a place for them, they don't have a right to be here? And search for the answers (if you need them) among the walls and halls of the block - instead of inside hardly transparent mind of a man.

The key to understand is not-to-understand - to let a movie borrow us - as a subject of study - inside itself - and at the end safely return us to our more colorful and "normal" looking reality.

Then, maybe, you will reach - like me - the feeling of real, possible, non-pathetic hope, that in core we are still humans... and this state of mind can help one much to live in this world.


It's less visceral than the only other Tsai film I've seen ("Vive L'amour"), but the idea of doorways (holes) into others' emotions and existences is vividly portrayed here, as Tsai sets up long shot after long shot, usually with long takes, suggesting a sense of alienation in Taipei. The musical interludes, inspired by Grace Chang, are perplexing but welcome mile-markers that add new dimensions to the slowly evolving relationship between the young man upstairs and the woman downstairs. It's not necessarily an easy film to watch (although it's not heavy-handed by any means), so I'd warn any casual viewers who are looking for some "indie" entertainment (like Tarantino or Guy Ritchie). But if you'd like to know something about isolation among city-dwellers in Taiwan, and something more universal about city alienation and romantic yearning, then watch this film immediately.


This movie, one of the best I've ever seen, talks about incommunicability. It does it plunging ourselves in a livid Taipei, stained in cold colors, where the rain falls incessantly; a DAMP world. It does it displaying us the story of two persons living in this world, a man and a woman. a coincidence, or the fate,links their existences, but they're not able to open one to the other with words. Characters are the mirror of the difficulty of our society concerning interpersonal relationships. An incommunicability that here is taken to the extreme limits. all the characters exchange only a few words during the movie, dialogues are nearly absent, and when some words are spoken they're often weak and empty, far away from describing people's real feelings. So, the progression of the story, the revelation of character's feelings is developed (brilliant idea!) by the musical digressions, only apparently meaningless, that speckle the movie. The proceeding of the sentimental event, and the drama of female protagonist, lead us to a splendid ending, heavily symbolic. A movie totally different from the usual, a clever realization by a great-talented director. PS. Forgive me for my bad grammar!!


In the middle of The Hole I e-mailed a friend of mine to summarize it. Not sure if the film would break down into a series of submissive gestures, I felt a little un-easy recommending it, but then I saw the ending. It's perfect. I've been living in Korea for 6 months, and this film could just as easily summarize the strange ennui and frustration of any Asian metropolis as it takes on Taiwin here. It uses the myth of Hong Kong musicals the same way Godard or Hartley use Western musicals, but takes it to an extreme, it's gritty world and occasionally Kafka-esquire logic make it all the better. I really feel like The Hole's closest comparison is Hal Hartley's Surviving Desire, but have a kinda bleak edge to what are ultimately hopefully and strangely metaphorical films. Anyway, this is what I wrote to Esther. Hope you like The Hole too.

Hey,

watching a move called the hole. Taiwanese I think seems a bit to weird for china unless it's hong Kong. it's worth seeing so far. it's about a guy and a girl in an apartment complex. the guy's ceiling caves in and the girl starts to get annoyed and well it's kinda a weird metaphor for the simultaneous pleasure ,degregation, and pain of a rather intense crush. there's also a kinda zombie-virus-sub-plot too and a lot of weird little scenes where the girl acts out her desires through rather innocent and kinda fun 50's doo-wop sequences. worth a look.


The whole world is falling prey to a lethal disease, and rain never stops pouring down : nevertheless, in this atmosphere of nightmare, a man and a woman discover that they are neighbors, thanks to a hole in the floor of the man's apartment. They fall in love : at least, all would not have been lost. Although this wonderful film expresses the loneliness and the weakness of human being, there is also some room for hope, in the shiny singing scenes.


This film is like a dirge. UNTIL it gets to musical numbers which are like MIND F*CK, but gentler, like a mind caress. MIND FOREPLAY. The depressing vibe given from the speed & desperateness of the characters can be pretty Kill-Yourself-Awesome UNTIL you get to the musical numbers. It's a great film. Optimistic. Weird. Manic-depressive(Bipolar). That's it! THIS MOVIE IS BIPOLAR. anyway see it. IT'S A MUSICAL!!! WITH DEPTH!!!! If you like the existential dross like The Stranger, or Waiting for Godot, Then your probably get a real kick out of this one. I had to get the DVD through Amazon.com for like 12$. OH & the songs rock. well they rock but they aren't rock, there like calypso, jazz, Broadway, but by Grace Chung, & I can't find the soundtrack NOWHERE< but i wanna the songs are great, & the dances are so fun.


Compared to this, Tarkovsky is a speed freak.

Compared to this, Bela Tarr is MTV.

Compared to this, the movie "Russian Ark" is a roller-coaster ride.

I've just described 3 of the sllllowwwwwesssstttt experiences I've ever known, and this one tops them all. But that's not saying it's bad. On the contrary, I really liked it. But it was a chore.

I won't describe the plot, because you can easily find that elsewhere. Suffice it to say that the plot is INSANE. It's one of the most creative and bizarre ideas since "Becoming John Malkovich". I believe the interesting plot is the main reason I kept from nodding off (also, the humour was nice. That's something we rarely see in slow, artsy films).

Here we see a bizarre reversal of the norm. Most movies have little plot & little substance; yet they fill 90 mins with a lot of eyecatching images to keep us enthralled. But "The Hole" has 100% plot/theme without much to please the eyes. In that respect, I suppose it's a truly intellectual experience, much like reading a painfully verbose novel like Thackaray's "Vanity Fair" (which I've NEVER been able to finish!).

If you have a tremendous attention span, I think you'll really like this film. Despite its molassessy pace, it's highly creative and imaginative. It's like Jean-Pierre Jeunet on quaaludes and with a drab, dusty camera lens. Best of luck.


This is a painfully slow story about the last days of 1999 when a strange disease breaks out and... I stopped caring. This is suppose to be about two people who live over or under each other in an apartment complex. There's a leak and a plumber put a hole in the man's floor so you can see into the woman's below apartment. Also since there is a crisis going on much of the dialog is actually news reports...

Sounds promising?

Not really.

I became distracted and started doing other things which is deadly in a subtitled film. Basically I started not watching, which made events seem even more surreal when I did look up.

It may work for you, it didn't for me.


The film was shot at Ibsley (now no longer in existence either as a base or a beacon, though you can see the remnants) which was in Hampshire, and in 1942 an active fighter station. The group of airmen listening to David Niven recounting the story of Mitchell were real RAF airmen. The filming did not stop for the war. If the bell went to scramble, filming would temporarily be halted while those airmen would run to their spitfires, go off and fight the war, before returning and carry on filming as though nothing had happened. At the end, Niven was so impressed with those heroes that he sent them off to The Savoy in London for the weekend, ringing the manager with instructions to give them whatever they wanted: women, drink, food, making sure the bill was sent direct to him. Difficult to imagine our pampered "stars" doing likewise these days! How do I know so much? One of those unsung heroes was my adored uncle Peter Howard-Williams, who had been in 19 Squadron flying out of Duxford during the Battle of Britain, but happened to be at Ibsley when the station was chosen for the film.


This film could be unique in that the aircrew "extras" in the film who "Scrambled" during the Battle of Britain scenes were all pilots who had actually flown in the Battle of Britain.

I know this because at the end of 1941 I was stationed at 61 (Spitfire) Operational Training Unit at Heston (now part of Heathrow airport) and was billeted in Meadow Way Heston. My roommate was a Flight Sergeant I Hutchinson who was on "rest" from operational flying as the Maintenance Wing test pilot and was one of the "extras" in the film.

My recollection is that he had to be up at crack of dawn and was seldom free before about 2200 hours. On the other hand, his base was the Savoy Hotel!

To be a Flight Sergeant in 1941 meant you had been an airman pilot for quite some time and consequently had a lot of experience. I see from the Battle of Britain Roll of Honour that, thankfully, F Sgt Hutchinson survived the war.

He gave me my one and only flight in a single engined monoplane - a Miles Master - and I still recall that experience with great pleasure.

FAG KAY 33 Marchmont Rd Richmond Surrey TW10 6HQ


'The First of the Few' shows Leslie Howard at his most reflective, almost to the point of diffidence. His only show of assertiveness is when he informs the haughty bigwigs of 'Supermarine'that he will design aeroplanes HIS way, despite David Horne's salutary warning that he will 'come an almighty cropper'. Howard plays R.J. Mitchell, legendary designer of the Spitfire, the revolutionary fighter plane that was to take centre stage in the Battle of Britain.

Throughout the film it is Howard himself who takes centre stage and never really leaves it, his star quality and charisma embracing all manner of scenes, from cheeky one - liners, 'you're not a bird, but you can fly', as a retort to Tonie Edgar - Bruce's mercurial Lady Houston, or modestly basking in the reflected glory of yet another Schneider Trophy triumph (the annual seaplane contest between Great Britain, USA and Italy which has now passed into folklore). Perhaps he is even more compelling in the touching solo scenes, with little or no dialogue, where, to William Walton's evocative music, he is found by his colleagues overworking himself deep into the night, trying to design the Spitfire before the imminent spread of Germanic imperialism, or, later on, close to death, scanning the skies for a sign of David Niven leading the way on the famous fighter plane.

An impressive cast of character actors give him great support, including Roland Culver as the supportive and insightful head of Supermarine, Anne Firth as a petite but highly efficient secretary, and future film maker Filippo Del Giudice as a foppish, hilarious Bertorelli, the high ranking Italian official who relays the message from 'Il duce' Mussolini, to the effect that the winning British Schneider Trophy entry could only have achieved such a feat 'in our glorious Italian sky'.

Howard's introverted Mitchell is in contrast to David Niven's jaunty, red blooded senior pilot, who demonstrates in this film just why he will go on to be the top British star in Hollywood, his easy acting style and unbridled optimism making Crisp a lovable character without ever seeming arrogant. Perhaps his inexplicable crash in one of the Schneider Trophy contests has the effect of 'bringing him down to earth', both literally and in character.

The only downside of the film is an oddly mechanical performance from Rosamund John, as Mitchell's wife. Obviously she could not come over as a dominant figure to Howard's subtle Mitchell, but the attempt to make her appear even more introverted than the star produces an uncharacteristically robotic outcome from this fine actress.

Both Mitchell and Howard were soon to pass beyond earthly constraints into immortality, the latter disappearing in mysterious circumstances, ironically, in a plane, over Portugal, in June, 1943. There is no finer epitaph to both of them, than 'The First of the Few', Mitchell as the genius aeroplane designer, and Howard as the first English actor (albeit of Hungarian parents) to make it big in Hollywood. In this respect, Niven may be regarded as 'the second of the few'. A gem of a film, whose great star never shone more brightly than here.


My father was one of the fighter pilots featured in this film (speaking part and "action " shots ) This film was part of his "war" ,if you like. To me ,this film represents the very best of British cinematography of its day and genre.I have some "stills " of the film and also quite a few w action shots (no pun intended !)on the open air set at RAF Ibsley in 1942. The soundtrack on most broadcast copies is rather poor,but the quality of the music score is beyond question.The composer ,william Walton was commissioned at the time but his music was not thought particularly noteworthy .It was not until the 1960's his music was accredited rightly in my view as a work of sheer brilliance. I agree with everything anthony Inglis has said in his commentary


One of my biggest loves in this world is the Spitfire fighter aeroplane. A wonder of aviation and an engineering masterpiece, its speed and versatility, (not to mention the brave boys who flew them) were the sole reason why Britain remained in the fight and fought of the foul invasion force throughout the dark days of 1940.

Although now old and obsolete, no other aeroplane has as much right or privilege to fly over our green and pleasant land.

Here the Spitfire is given top billing in a biopic of it's creator R.J. Mitchell.

The great Leslie Howard plays the genius designer, in what was to be his last 'appearance' before the camera. Mitchell was an aircraft designer of noted repute having invented several of the Supermarine seaplanes which secured the Schneider Trophy for Britain throughout the 1920's and 1930's.

He was one of the few people in Britain to have heard the snarls and threats of Nazi Germany and was an open campaigner for rearmament, a policy not at all popular with the British Government of the time. Yet despite opposition he fought against not only the bureaucrats but a serious and life-threatening illness to design and build, what has been regarded since as the greatest fighter aircraft of all time, in preparation for a war he knew was coming and a crisis the rest of Britain chose to ignore.

David Niven plays Geoffrey Crisp, Mitchells friend and test pilot, who's affable and likable performance is hampered slightly from the fact that his character is completely fictional. Geoffrey Crisp, whoever he was, was never a Schneider trophy winner for Britain.

The true facts for anyone interested are that H.C.Biard won the title for us in 1922, followed by S.N.Webster, H.R.D.Waghorn and J.N.Boothman in 1927, 1929 and 1931 respectively, the last three flying Mitchell's Spitfire forerunners the Supermarine S5, S6 and S6B.

Also Geoffrey Crisp was not the test pilot of the very first Spitfire. That high honour goes to Joseph 'Mutt' Summers, who took off from Eastliegh airport on 5th March 1936. Summers became the chief test pilot for Vickers and was also the man who dropped the very first life size prototype of the bouncing bomb over Chesil Beach, Weymouth in 1943.

This is a great movie, and one which makes all Englishmen grateful and proud, but with all historic based movie stories, there is always something that has been changed, omitted or hushed up, especially in a film made during the war at the height of it's 'keep mum' propaganda battle.

Enjoy it like I did, but if there are any R.A.F or aviation buffs out there and would like to know more about the Spitfire and it's history, the glory of the air racing days of the 20's and 30's or just more factual information about the great man himself, then I suggest you visit www.rjmitchell-spitfire.co.uk


'The First of the Few' relates the story of the development of the Supermarine Spitfire by R.J.Mitchell, although as almost anyone who knows anything about the 'Battle of Britain' will tell you, around 70% of the Royal Air Force's front line fighters were Hawker Hurricanes. Slower, but a more stable and resilient gun platform than the Spitfire. In the Battle of Britain (fought in the summer of 1940) the Royal Air Force deployed the Hurricanes against bombers, while the more agile Spitfires engaged their fighter escorts. The Hurricane was designed by Sydney Camm (1893-1966) who designed many post-war jet aircraft including the Hawker Hunter - maybe someone should make a film of his life. An uncle of mine was an ace with 6 kills to his credit, flying a Hurricane from Malta. His aircraft was short down by British anti-aircraft fire on 29-12-1941. No, there's nothing new about friendly fire. William Walton's music also makes a great contribution to the film, and is now rightly (popular as the 'Spitfire Prelude and Fugue')in the concert hall.


A fine movie biography about the designer of the World War II Spitfire. Strong performances are given by Mr. Howard and David Niven. Although it seems dated particularly with the black and white film, it is none the less worth your time to preview this movie. Leslie Howard was killed in an airplane crash shortly after finishing this film.


Propaganda, yes, but what else would one expect in wartime. On the other hand if we must have propaganda let it be as sincere and well meant as this. Though it's largely irrelevant I confess to being a little bemused by the large number of posters who think that Leslie Howard was English when he was in fact Hungarian. Having said that there is no question of his genuine feeling for his adopted country especially as manifested here in a film he directed as well as playing the leading role. David Niven offers strong support albeit more or less playing himself and Rosamund John is effective in the somewhat thankless role of Mitchell's wife. Given both the limitations of the time and the fact that it was shot on a genuine aerodrome whilst the war was in full swing the aeriel sequences are as well as can be expected. As a time-capsule it's well worth a look.


Produced during WW2, I guess this film can be excused for its romanticised account of the story of the development of the Spitfire. The basic details are current: development from the Supermarine seaplanes, Mitchell dying of cancer, etc - but the development was nowhere near as smooth as depicted!

The William Walton score (now known as the "Spitfire Prelude and Fugue") works particularly well.


David Niven is definitely channelling old friend Errol Flynn here, in the role of the irrepressible Geoffrey Crisp! One assumes the part was created to afford a little feminine light relief, since the central character is -- inconveniently for the standard narrative curve -- already happily married as a young man when we first meet him, and omits to look elsewhere... At any rate, Niven-as-narrator is a charming scamp, and refreshingly the plot refrains from taking the obvious path of marrying him off to his 'snapdragon', R.J.Mitchell's formidable secretary Miss Harper. The relationship between the two eventually softens in their mutual affection for Mitchell, but never becomes romantic.

But it is Leslie Howard in the central role who undoubtedly owns the film; perhaps unsurprisingly, given that he is credited as both director and producer, but it is a typical 'quiet' performance that effortlessly overshadows Niven's endearing antics. As one bemused company director remarks after an encounter with the character's unassuming forcefulness, "But I thought you said he was *shy*..?"

The decision to open the film with extended sequences of anti-British propaganda sourced from Britain's enemies -- from Goebbels to Lord Haw-Haw -- is a striking one, and more effective than any tendentious rhetoric on "The last Bastion of Liberty" in establishing the concept of an existential threat. The riposte is made chiefly by a montage of quintessentially English images; 'this is what we are fighting for'. And the context is set in the Battle of Britain, with an overworked handful of pilots and Spitfires flying again and again against vastly outnumbering waves of attackers.

It is not, however, really a 'war' picture. If anything it is a biography of the Spitfire as much as of its designer, and the story effectively ends pre-war in 1938, with the commissioning of the first planes. If it has a fault, it is that I felt the film was perhaps a little didactic, an instructional piece of history rather than an emotionally engaging human drama; we witness Mitchell's career frustrations and achievements (oddly, it is never made clear just why Crisp blacked out with almost fatal results in that early seaplane competition; one would assume it was from the hitherto unexpected g-forces produced by banking at such record speeds, but the issue, subsequently a well-known fighter pilot phenomenon, is simply dropped unexplained)... but it is only at the end of the story, where Mitchell in effect deliberately sacrifices his own chances of survival in order to get the Spitfire design finished, that we are actually drawn into the tensions of the tale rather than merely observing. The enclosing narrative device is clever in that Mitchell's fate is left carefully ambiguous at the start; since neither the contemporary audience nor modern viewers are likely to be familiar with the history of this 'back-room' figure, the ultimate outcome remains 'up for grabs', as it were, and the hero's choice an active one until the end.

Rosamund John provides effective support as loyal wife Diana, despite the absence of conflict between them to provide a cheap motor for their scenes together (particularly memorable is a scene in the kitchen where Diana has to reinforce her husband's faltering resolution to maintain his integrity at the cost of his employment... while trying to get him to chop the parsley!) Scenes in pre-war Germany are handled with a light touch that distinguishes the German pilots and designers from the politicians responsible for their deployment, and with an ironic comedy that recalls "Pimpernel Smith", Leslie Howard's earlier potent propaganda vehicle. Script writer and ubiquitous character actor Miles Malleson can be glimpsed in a typical cameo role, and David Niven, while always entertaining, shades his character towards maturity while representing a whole generation of ex-WWI flyers who found themselves cast adrift at the end of hostilities. It was the ending, with his now-middleaged RAF officer taking to the air in person and then pursuing the German pilot who had shot down one of his squadron-mates. that I found a little trite.

But the final imagery, as the Spitfires fly away from the camera into an opening canyon of gilded cloud, is magical, aided by William Walton's soaring music.

Overall I enjoyed and would recommend the film, but felt it not to be entirely the dramatic equal of the other test-pilot picture with which I always confuse it, David Lean's 1952 "The Sound Barrier", nor of Howard's previous wartime excursion "Pimpernel Smith". It is undoubtedly a pity, however, that Leslie Howard's directorial career was cut short by enemy action; in his choice to serve his country in wartime cinema rather than pursue a Hollywood career, he proved himself to be a weapon of considerable effectiveness, and it is ironic in the context of this film that, as in the case of R.J.Mitchell, it proved to be a choice that may well have cost him his own life. As a swansong, the role is poignant but also appropriate.


Directed by Leslie Howard(who also played Mitchell)The First Of The Few tells his story from an idea he had one day watching the birds to the planes flying in the war.Made in 1942 a year after the Spifires helped win The Battle of Britain this is an uplifting film made I imagine for the sole purpose of building troop morale. R.J Mitchell(Leslie Howard)is a plane designer who's designs were deemed to revolutionary for the time.Along with his old friend Geoffrey Crisp(David Niven)who was a pilot in the First World War he sets out to build the plane. Geoffrey backs him up 100 percent and is the test pilot for Mitchells aircraft.However tragedy is just around the corner when (after working flat out without sleeping or eating)Mitchell feels unwell and consults a Dr who tells him if he does not stop he will die in just a year.Will Mitchell ignore the advice or heed it?well if you read about him you will know if you don't know the story then watch this wonderful film.David and Leslie have a great chemistry and play their parts well a must see film about an important part of British history.


I watched this movie a couple of years ago; I believe it was in Spanish with no subtitles, but that didn't really matter. What mattered was that it was fantastic! I know 95% of the world's population wouldn't agree with me, but I always had a thing for old sleaze/horror movies which seem to be made just because the director had nothing to do, had had a funny dream he wanted to realize, or that he just needed money.

As for this film, I couldn't understand why the title had anything to do with the action. I only remember some scenes with cloaked individuals walking slowly as though in some kind of procession. And there was a man (Antonio Mayans I believe) talking often to some girls, and there were scenes of various sexual intercourse; although I found the atmosphere in the film very serious and unpretentious.

There is one very interesting scene where a couple of girls are lying on the beach, and suddenly a meat cleaver flies through the air, thrown from a hotel window high above, and lands in the sand just beside them. I was intrigued by that scene, quite intimidating.

Only Franco (Oasis of the zombies) and D'Amato (Porno Holocaust, Erotic nights of the living dead) could make movies with this kind of enchanting atmosphere. A solemn, sombre echo from an era since long lost, which after the forgetful ravages of time still can like the bird of Phoenix rise from the ashes of oblivion to once again let its plumage shine with unprecedented respectability.


Apparently Jess Franco didn't think that Joe D'Amato's EROTIC NIGHTS OF THE LIVING DEAD was weird and tasteless enough, so he put his own two cents' worth in...

Four oversexed waitresses on holiday spend their vacation in the ugliest-looking hotel in screen history. They must not enjoy the surroundings any more than the audience does because they're soon amusing themselves with exhibitionism, nudity and sexual encounters with the manager and each other. The manager, meanwhile, keeps his skanky wife neck-chained to a wall with food just out of reach, in a situation copied from Franco's own BARBED WIRE DOLLS. Hold on, folks, it gets better! The hotel is next door to a monastery that served as a torture chamber during the Inquisition. Before you know it the sadistic zombie monks are back-homicidal and horny. One monk's face looks normal; most are skull-faced knock-offs of The Blind Dead; and the leader's face looks like an under-baked pizza. Several murders and two sex attacks by the undead ensueand leave it to Franco to make the rape of a busty blonde by zombie monks boring. There is a cute twist at the end if you can keep your eyes open that long.

Like most films by this director, MANSION OF THE LIVING DEAD is best watched first thing in the morning after the caffeine has just kicked in.


Well, first things first...

Jess Franco tries, bless him, he really does, but unfortunately the man hasn't had an original thought in his life nor would he know an erotic scenario if it bit him in the arse! (although you can be sure if that ever does happen he'll film it & stick it in a movie!). Before anyone thinks I'm just Franco bashing, I'm not, I've now seen over 60 of his movies so think I've seen enough to have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about, I even like some!

For anyone not very knowledgeable about his work, the Franco process of film-making seems to go something like this:

1) He sees someone else's film.

2) He quickly rehashes it, adds in some god-awful ugly sex scenes, all of which takes a couple of days and hey presto, a week later the film's released!

And that's about it. I've yet to see an erotic moment in any of his films (though the moments in this one are probably the least annoying of his I've seen) and most of the naked women he's used aren't all that attractive either (although again, to be fair the women in this movie are about the best I've seen in a Franco film), so no real reprieve there.

Personally I prefer it when he leaves out the sex altogether, but even then (as is the case with 'Mansion of the Living Dead') he's so ham fisted in his approach that he generally ruins any element of horror there might've been.

Having said all that, this is still one of my top 10 Franco films, which to be fair says a whole lot more about his other films than it does this one as it's at best only decidedly average!

As a side note, on the region 1 DVD release of this Mr Franco has some very derogatory comments to be made about a certain George A. Romero which I have to say are completely out of order, not to mention contradictory (his comments about them being slow!), especially when you consider the movie Franco was rehashing here was 'Tombs of the Blind Dead' - itself a (great) movie which would never have existed had Romero not redefined the zombie, moved it into modern times and made it into what it still is today! And that's without even getting into comparing the talent of the two men, which is never going to be in Franco's favour! It basically just sounds like sour grapes, as Romero had something which still eludes Franco today - an idea!

Shame on you Jesus!


Jesus Franco is a director who has made dozens of horror, soft-porn crossovers that all have in common that they are being really bad ones. If you ever wondered what sort of movies Ed Wood would be making, would he still be alive today, all you have to do is pick up any random Jesus Franco movie.

By credit this movie is a remake of the 1971 Spanish horror-classic "La noche del terror ciego" but quite frankly, this movie has very little or nothing to do with that movie. Seriously, don't watch this movie expecting an horror, for this movie is more all about its nudity and lesbian fondling than about any horror. As a matter of fact there aren't even scares or graphic killings in this movie. Just a couple of hooded men standing around and occasionally, not so graphically, raping a girl.

As always, the story is an absolute mess and very little in the movie is making sense. The way the entire movie is progressing is laughable and just very far from convincing. It has some really stupid characters in it, that you just don't ever care about. Jesus Franco doesn't seem to be able to see and fill up any gaping plot-holes, or he just simply doesn't care about it. Either way it's a bad thing.

And yes well, then there are some of the sex sequences that literally come out of nowhere often and show absolutely nothing. I don't even think that the lovers of soft-core porn flicks are going to get excited by anything that gets shown or done in this movie.

Again Jesus Franco uses his own wife Lina Romay in the movie as the main lead. Like all of the other girls she spends most of her time walking around naked in the movie. The girls in this movie are either being naked, having sex with each other, getting raped by a man, or talking each others head of, like a bunch of annoying, loud, naive, helpless, chicken.

I must say though that I still enjoy watching older Franco movies better than the newer ones, that he is still making this present day and age. At least these movies still had a bit of style over them and got shot at location instead of in a studio or in the garden of one of the cast-members.

Trademark bad Jesus Franco stuff.

3/10


"La Mansión De Los Muertos Vivientes" aka. "Mansion of the Living Dead" of 1985 is supposed to be cult director Jess Franco's take on Amando De Ossorio's GREAT 'Blind Dead' franchise (IMDb even lists it as a Remake of the original "La Noche Del Terror Ciego" aka. "Tomb of the Blind Dead" of 1970). However, this has about nada to do with De Ossorio's wonderful cycle which ranges among the most popular and influential Eurohorror Cult productions from the 70s. I am great fan of Jess Franco (especially of his earlier works), and had "Mansion of the Living Dead" been directed by someone else, it might not have its certain undeniable charm - then again, it is not really imaginable for anyone else to come up with an outrageously nonsensical production such as this one.

Four young women from Germany (one of them played by Franco's real-life wife, Lina Romay) come to a Spanish beach club for vacation. In typical Franco-manner they are all nymphomaniacs with strong exhibitionist and lesbian tendencies. After one hour of walking around naked and making out with each other, one of them disappears when going out to take photos... People who are not in favor of Jess Franco's cinema will probably think of this as the worst film ever made; however, the film's incredible weirdness and lack of any logic whatsoever are also the elements that make it fun (in addition to its primary quality, the constant sleaze and female nudity).

Basically, this film is about 90 per cent sleaze and soft porn, and 10 per cent weird and really, REALLY nonsensical Horror. Amando De Ossorio's original Blind Templars were among the creepiest creatures ever in Horror cinema; the villains in this sleazefest are a bunch of ridiculously looking monks, some of which have (extremely ridiculous) skull-faces. The original blind dead also drank their victims' blood in order to gain eternal life, whereas these guys are fans of gang-rape instead. In typical Franco-fashion, all women are naked for about 95 per cent of the screen time (one is for all her screen time, actually), which is especially welcome from the dark-skinned Elisa Vela (who goes by the name Jasmina Bell here) and Lina Romay (who has gotten a little chubbier). In typical Franco-fashion they are all bisexual nymphomaniacs who thrive for every man, and have non-stop sex with each other when there's no man available. Also in typical Franco-fashion, the film includes some seriously demented perversions. A guy keeps his wife on a leash in a room, and always brings her food, which he positions out of her reach in order to torture her, for example - and she actually gets sexually aroused by this treatment! Which director except for the weird mind of Jess Franco would come up with demented stuff like that? As in all Franco films, the cinematography is pretty well done.

Overall, the film is very amusing in the beginning, mainly due to the lack of any logic, and the fact that Jess Franco obviously doesn't give a crap about it. However, it gets pretty tiresome towards the end, and the conclusion is about the most senseless thing I've ever seen. This film may be enjoyed by my fellow Franco fans, and it is recommendable to anyone who wants to see 96 minutes of boobs and weirdness disguised as Horror. If you want to watch a GOOD film by Jess Franco, stick to older productions such as "The Awful Dr. Orloff", "The Diabolical Dr. Z" or "Venus in Furs". This film may well be described as utter crap; however, I cannot deny I somehow enjoyed it. No doubt Amando De Ossorio's Blind Templars would be ashamed for their sleazy descendants.


Four strippers are sent by their travel agent to a supposed paradise which turns out to be an empty, but gorgeous location with a hotel without guests and a creepy manager, Carlos(Antonio Mayans;a frequent Franco collaborator)who keeps a naked woman, Olivia(Eva León) chained in a room, tormenting her by keeping food just out of reach. He also has a loony gardener, Marleno(Albino Graziani)who likes to pester the girls, when he's not whistling or singing to his beautiful flowers outside the hotel. But, outside the hotel, the girls notice that there are no tourists. Just the oddball Carlos and his nutty gardener. But, the girls, one by one, will soon discover who awaits them not too far from the hotel, restless spirits of accursed Inquisition dressed in monk robes, chanting from within their abbey sacrificing each female soul to Lucifer, condemned to worship him thanks to the power of a witch, Irina burnt at the stake who cast a spell on them. One of the strippers, Candy(Lina Romay, who barely ever wears clothes, I don't think I've ever seen a more uninhibited woman in all my life)could very well be the reincarnated spirit of Irina and Carlos is actually a *limbotic* spirit, real and yet unreal. When he's within the abbey walls, he's seen in a rotted form(..his face is covered in a type of waxy substance)underneath his robe, watching as his brethren takes turns sexually molesting each female victim, serving their Prince of Darkness before plunging a dagger in them. Carlos believes that if Candy is in fact Irina, her kiss to him can set their souls free, no longer to serve their dark lord.

Well, that's what I got out this Franco flick. When he sets up the first scene as we see these "undead" monks chanting a rather harmonic tune, the wind ever present, you kind of get an idea that something within the atmosphere of this place in unstable. He is able to display this by showing the wind as it generates a type of rage, also arranging the furious sound of wind on the soundtrack. It only happens when the girls make the unfortunate mistake of nearing and entering the abbey. This is a place of unrest and, I felt, not of our realm. I was a bit miffed with the sub-plot regarding Olivia, but I think she's kept by Carlos as a reminder of what causes such discomfort, the desires of the flesh, and a longing for lustful embrace. Maybe, that's why he mistreats her. She's an outward expression of what torments him from the inside.I love the location and the desolation. Something about the absence of people creates a sense of foreboding. Where is everybody? Such a beautiful place remains so unoccupied. What gives? That worked well for me, as did the way Jess creates the atmosphere around the abbey. Many might find some of the Inquisition monks very similar to the Blind Dead Templars.There's lots of naked flesh, drooping breasts which hardly ever remain covered, and lesbian activity(Lina is a wild cat in this one, even proclaiming how she likes "tree-hugging", at one time spitting out a hair caught in her teeth).If you do not like Jess' camera work, or the way his female characters walk around naked desiring sex, stay far away.


Another underrated film, apparently a bit far off of the beaten path for most viewers. Like most Franco films this one has a good deal of atmosphere and some genuinely strange moments (and lots of nudity but not much gore). I also found the story to be well done and an interesting take on the older Blind Dead series. Franco also has some interesting things to say in the commentary on the Severin Films version, relating the dead monks in the film to his view of the Spanish Catholic church -- an insightful view, in fact, reflecting popular attitudes in Spanish Catholicism that define monks and priests as theoretically saintly figures that are also motivated by the needs and failings that drive ordinary men. I also agreed with Franco's commentaries on George Romero and his zombies (unlike a previous reviewer). I admire Night of the Living Dead for its innovative approaches, but I have always found the zombies to be very boring because in moral and intellectual terms they are complete ciphers. I've seen NotLD in at least four different decades -- and I will see it again I'm sure -- but I'm not a fan of the zombies. The living dead in Franco's film, although they could be more well-developed, are much more interesting. Kind of like the zombie "hero" in Jean Rollin's Zombie Lake who has some kind of moral sense despite his deadness.


I had been forewarned by those who have gone before into this unhallowed ground of what to expect, but I had no idea it would go as far as it did. There wasn't an ounce of credible acting to be had throughout the entire film. Thank God it came with English subtitles or I never would have caught on to the meager plot. If you're looking for genuinely scary, suspenseful horror, look elsewhere, because it won't be found here. What you WILL find are four women walking around a hotel naked for most of their screen time, and when they're not WALKING around naked, they're...err...hmmm...ummm...doing other things that people do when they're naked--more often than not, with each other. And the term "living dead" is horribly misused here--Mr. G. A. Romero should be able to sue them for libel. What we do see are white-robed men, most of whom are in skull-face masks, who are part of some cursed demonic cult that hangs out in an old monastery that three of the four "hotties" (their word, not mine) wander into one at a time. Upon arrival, they are branded whores and gang-raped--the third one, however, is allowed to "join them" and goes back to kill the fourth. Oh, yeah, then there's the poor girl on a chain in "the best room in the hotel". But that's another subplot that doesn't need much exposition. All in all, if you're looking for some lesbian porn, you came to the right place. But horror--nope, not here.


Though he tries to hide behind the pseudonym F.C. Perl, director R.L. Frost can't disguise his style in the nasty "A Climax of Blue Power." This adult film follows a security guard (Jason Carns) who's got some serious hang-ups about women. In his free time he masquerades as a cop--even going as far as converting his Ford LTD into a black & white police car--and "busts" prostitutes, offering to let them go in return for sexual favors and/or fulfilling his sadistic whims (the first victim is ordered to "crawl around in the mud like a dog!"). While bumming around the beach one day, Carns hears gunshots at a nearby house. Peeking through the windows, he witnesses a woman (Angela Carnon) murder her husband. Carnon quickly becomes the focal point of Carns' obsessions. Even a three-way in a massage parlor or watching a porno movie at home can't get her out of his mind. When he learns the murder is written off as a suicide, Carns decides the murderess shouldn't get off that easy.

"A Climax of Blue Power" is hostile and gritty, and without a trace of political correctness. It also plays like a real movie, with a plot, characters and believable acting. There's even a car chase. Carns is effective in his role, his physical attractiveness (he sort of looks like a young Kurt Russell) never overshadowing his creepiness. Carnon, who's made numerous softcore movies ("Drop-Out Wife," "Booby Trap"), is another standout. (Incidentally, Carnon's scenes in this movie all appear to be softcore; an obvious stand-in was used for the hardcore close-ups). Also appearing are Frost's frequent producing partner Wes Bishop, as a detective, and Uschi Digard in a non-sexual and, surprisingly, fully-clothed cameo.

Director Frost made some of the most stylish roughies of the 1960s ("The Pick-Up," "The Defilers," "Hot Spur"). "A Climax of Blue Power" essentially uses Frost's roughie template and repackages it in a hard-X format. Though the movie has a few shaky production and story issues at its beginning (like why does a hooker keep flagging down johns in front of a police car and an unconvincing day-for-night scene), this is a must for fans of Frost's work, as well as aficionados of rough sex.


By far one of the best hardcore thrillers ever made. Lee Frosts Climax is exactly what are hardcore thriller/cop movie should be. Very well acted and exceptionally well directed by genre hag Lee Frost(partner Bob Cresse can be seen in a cameo role as a massage parlor owner)Climax feels like an old Crown International flick, except much better made than any Crown International film ever was. The cast, consisting mainly of unknown actors and actresses for the most part perfectly fit their complex roles(special acknowledgment ought to go to Jason Carns, in the lead, for he is just as convincing as any Hollywood bag guy).Continuity wise there are a few holes and gaps, but they are so small and insignificant that they can be overlooked, and are even forgotten over the course of the entire film. It is a pity that society still looks down and snubs their noses at hardcore cinema, for if this cinematic medium were to ever be accepted,surly films like this would become recognized as the masterpieces they are.


Short, blandly handsome Jason Carns, a seemingly ordinary and unassuming nice guy next door type gone horribly bug crazy wrong, gives a frightfully plausible performance as lowly security guard Eddie, who gets his twisted deviant carnal kicks by pretending to be a Los Angeles police officer who joyfully browbeats, manhandles and elicits unpaid sexual favors from street hookers while wearing a fuzzball uniform and driving around in a phony cop car. One day Carns witnesses a housewife (bewitching brunette Linda Harris) in the act of killing her no-account husband; this in turn causes the already seriously nuts Carns to go further around the bend and succumb to depraved delusional fantasies in which he has his sadistic way with Harris.

From its shocking opening sequence depicting Carns cruelly taking advantage of a frightened prostitute to the electrifying final face-off between Carns and Harris (complete with jolting rape and an exciting last reel automobile chase), this harsh, aggressive, fiercely confrontational psycho sickie roughie porno from the late, great Lee Frost profoundly scares and unsettles, spewing forth 84 harrowing, brutality-ridden minutes that are jam-packed with plenty of nerve-jangling full-throttle dementia and perversity. Frost's blunt, no-nonsense direction, the eerie, ethereal score set to a pounding pseudo-disco beat (said score also boasts a haunting recurrent whistled theme), the flat, unpolished cinematography which adroitly captures the plain, plodding rhythms of mundane everyday life, the authentically lurid L.A. locations, several jarring visualizations of Carns' savage power trip fantasies, the mean, hard-hitting dialogue, the frequently quite startling all-out nasty rough sex tableaux, and the unusually strong and credible acting from a mostly no-name cast (the sole familiar faces are skinflick starlets Rene Bond and Uschi Digard as massage parlor girls, plus longtime Frost collaborator Wes Bishop as a detective and legendary exploitation producer Bob Cresse as the massage parlor owner) are all uniformly tops. Moreover, the film's hard, gritty, almost unbearably razor-sharp edge digs deep into the darkest, most base and disturbing wacko recesses of the human psyche. Hell, this unbeatable outing even possesses a commendably daring and provocative subtext: The flagrant abuse and mistreatment of power and authority, with especially revealing insights on role playing and how men use sex as a means to an end for totally controlling and dominating over women.


A CLIMAX OF BLUE POWER is a strong piece of 70s sleaze that is equal parts crime/drama and trashy porno. A solid entry in the lacking genre of story-driven grindhouse cinema - CLIMAX is one of the several drama/porn films that actually work on more than just an "arousal" level.

A disgruntled and scummy security guard illegally moonlights as a real police officer in order to fulfill his sexual desires with random hookers. When our "hero" accidentally witnesses a murder take place and begins fantasizing about the crime-scene, he decides to play private-dick (literally)...

A CLIMAX OF BLUE POWER is one of those rare 70s era porn films that actually relies on storyline and a bit of decent acting to carry the film, while still maintaing it's grimy porno atmosphere. A notable piece of drama/porn - CLIMAX works better than most similar genre entries. The porn scenes are pretty hot, while not really focusing on them as a way to validate the film. The bizarro ending is also worth noting in a weird and pretty much unexplained PSYCHO-ish turn of events (but with hardcore sex added in...). A gritty and rough piece of 70s exploit cinema - this one will be of interest to "classic" porn fans, and those that dig a whole lotta sleaze mixed in with their drama films...8.5/10


A Climax of Blue Power is an excellent roughie flick as it combines hardcore porn with a storyline that is actually interesting. The story is not exactly Shakespeare, of course, but naturally most people will be tuning in for the porn and the story helps to ensure that it actually has some point, rather than just being a collection of random sex scenes, and that does benefit the film immensely. The film is somewhere between a porn flick, a cop flick and a psycho flick and the lead character is a man named Eddie; a security guard who gets his kicks during his off-hours by posing as a police officer and picking up young prostitutes. After being given a run down of what will happen to them now that they've been caught, Eddie then offers to let the girls go if they'll agree to give him a free ride - which invariably leads to a torrent of abuse for the girls. This goes on for a while until one day, while out and about, Eddie witnesses a woman kill her husband. This has an effect on the "moral and upstanding" man and after mulling over what to do; he decides to deal out his own punishment...

The film was obviously cheaply made and naturally this has lead to a very gritty and downtrodden atmosphere, which bodes well with the hardcore sex. The sex definitely is hardcore and director Lee Frost (who previously directed odd porno-noir The Pick-Up and dismal Nazisploitation trash Love Camp 7) definitely leaves nothing to the imagination as we get to watch the lead character have his way with various female members of the cast. The sex is gritty just like the atmosphere though it well filmed and largely very erotic also. The acting does leave a lot to be desired, although Jason Carns is thoroughly convincing in the lead role. The film all boils down to the scenes at the end where we get to see the lead have his way with the murderess he witnessed earlier on and these are the best parts of the film. The film takes a bizarre turn and the sex scene towards the end is very brutal. Overall, A Climax of Blue Power certainly wont be everyone's cup of tea; but if you like your rough seventies porn with a story; this is probably one of the better examples. Recommended.


James Cagney pulled off one of his greatest gangster roles fairly late in his career in 1949's White Heat. You could see he was starting to get a little pudgy in the midsection and gray around the temples for that kind of role, but he still pulled it off.....big-time. What a lot of people don't remember is that he did it one more time - with this film, the following year.

Yup, "Cody Jarrett" was in business for one more tough-guy gangster character. Here, he plays "Ralph Cotter," and he is one nasty dude. It's great to watch Jimmy doing his cocky-thug routine. I wish he could have gone on forever.

The supporting cast, led by Ward Bond, was very good in this film and worth noting. It isn't just all Cagney. Barbara Peyton is realistic as the tough blonde and Helena Carter as the spoiled rich man's daughter. Both are decent at heart and vie for Cagney's affections.

Included in here are crooked cops, a crooked lawyer and other assorted characters. It's a rough movie. Nobody is trustworthy in this story, which is interesting all the way. It should be better known.


I've seen just about everything there is to see in the world of Cinema. I've seen Rouben Mamoulian, 68years ago, create the definitive monster movie, I've seen Pekinpah's Wild Bunch go out in slo mo glory, I've seen Chow Yun Fat bleed his way through two hours, I've seen Cagney go out in a white heat at the top of the world, I've seen Belafonte lay Odds Against Tomorrow. I had honestly thought I had run out of surprises, I had seen everything worth seeing.

I was wrong.

I picked up, pretty much because of reviews I read here, this movie KISS TOMORROW GOODBYE. A little nothing, throwaway flick, that was done on the heels of Cagney's wildly popular WHITE HEAT, and was pretty much ignored upon release. It's said Cagney disliked the idea of doing another gangster picture. Thank goodness he decided to do it anyway, because this movie... out and out floored me!

It's hard to call a movie from 50years ago brutal, and justify it. However that's just what this movie is, deep in the bone, teeth rattling, brutal. In a world of Scorcese and Coppola Gangster riffs, Hong Kong Cinema, Slasher movies, and the nightly news it's hard to account for this movies impact.

There's nothing tangible in this movie, in a world of shock cinema, that one could call shocking. But yet... this movie has power, and energy, and yes a sense of brutality that blows away any dozen modern movies full of blood, or body parts.

This movies appeal is difficult to explain, but I guess if you had to sum it up in three words, it would be Cagney...CAGney...CAGNEY!!!

Today's movies for all their CGI brilliance lack the type of center, and ,if you like, romanticism that actors like Cagney and Bogart and Raft, and directors like Raoul Walsh, and in this case Gordon Douglass, brought to the table. Particularly in the hard-boiled flicks, a menace that was somehow felt, rather than seen, and therefore more powerful.

I could go on, but all you need to know is that this movie in a world that has forgotten it, outgrown it, outbled it, is the finest of its breed. Better than those that came before, superior to those that came after. It is the quintessential Gangster Pic. Highest Recommendation!

p.s. And I have to mention, I thought the courtroom scenes were well done and necessary, and everyone turned in great performances, especially the beautiful Holiday Carleton as Barbara Payton, who becomes Cagney's reluctant partner in crime. Cagney turning in his most ferocious and seductive performance, is matched by Holiday. Her tension, and wild lilting ferocity and fear, burning through the movie like a fuse, until it explodes! Mesmerizing!! A must see movie!


James Cagney shines, and at times even seems to glow in the dark in this rugged follow-up to White Heat, directed with great verve by Gordon Douglas. It's a somewhat neglected film, maybe because it's basically a gangster picture rather than a noir, and rather late in the day for such things. The supporting cast features Barbara Payton; Luther Adler, in a Howard Da Silva role, as an eccentric lawyer, and who almost steals the show from Cagney; Rhys Williams, effortlessly playing an American; William Frawley, for nostalgia; and Ward Bond, neanderthal as ever, as a dogged, corrupt plainclothesman. Good, fast-paced and at times surprisingly violent, this movie will not put you to sleep.


I can't believe that this film is not well known. Get rid of the terrible courtroom framing device, and you have a gangster masterpiece. Coming on the heels of Cagney's better known White Heat, this film takes violence and corruption to a new level. This film starts off with a brutal jail break and never slows down. The cold blooded violence portrayed is quite jaw dropping. Cagney was born to play this role. He is clearly relishing his cold blooded character. The freshness of this film is surprising. You are totally caught off guard. In this sense, it reminds me most of Kiss Me Deadly. For anyone with a passing interest in Cagney, or gangster films, or film-noir, or film violence, watch this film!!!!!!!


"Kiss Tomorrow Goodbye" is about a jail convict (James Cagney) who escapes from prison and goes on the run, relentlessly pursued. He eventually winds up in a small town where he gets a girl and starts a normal life, but begins to corrupt everyone around him.

The movie is not very well known and I'm not sure quite why. Although this movie might not be definitive film noir it surely carries certain elements of the genre, and of course it's got James Cagney in it, one of the ultimate veterans of the genre! Cagney delivers a really solid performance and comes across as both likable and despicable. We feel for him and those around him as his bad influence spreads and the tragic tale takes a turn for the worst.

Although it's a very clear moral tale and ends up exactly where we can expect, "Kiss Tomorrow Goodbye" is nevertheless a very good, underrated film whose virtually nonexistent reputation is as depressing as the film itself.


While this is not a great Cagney flick and it has a few silly plot elements, it is a surprisingly good film. This film immediately followed Cagney's best film (WHITE HEAT) and is a slight letdown because of this.

Mostly I like the movie because the plot, for a Noir film, takes so many odd and difficult to predict turns--it certainly is NOT like most of the other gangster films you've seen. Cagney isn't quite the total nut case he was in WHITE HEAT, but plays a Narcissistic Antisocial criminal. He has zero regard for others and is naturally drawn to the criminal life. BUT, because of his intense narcissism (i.e., self love), he cannot imagine his complex schemes and double-dealing NOT succeeding. He certainly BELIEVES in himself! At first, this makes him a very successful hood (which feeds his ego) and so he takes another risk (feeding his ego) and another and another until he ultimately destroys himself due to his arrogance.

So, I like the plot and interesting character study. The negative I noticed in the film is that some of the supporting cast really didn't seem like very good actors (particularly his blonde girlfriend). Maybe that's because Cagney IS the entire show.


The killer in this film is the treachery of the supporting actors. I'm not one to endorse crooked cops or domestic violence, but when you see these birds in action, you understand why Cagney rules his roost the way he does.VERY underrated,very fast and colorful. Post "White Heat" and Jimmy STILL has a fresh arsenal 1 year later. A must see with a great death scene.


It was a true labor to sit through this "movie". I believe after the MST3K folks scraped the bottom of the barrel to find films like "Manos: The Hands Of Fate", and "Mitchell", they took a peek under the barrel to find this piece of drivel lurking underneath. Basically a hair-helmeted, bespectacled nerd builds a time machine out of his airplane and old Commodore computer, and decides to sell it to some evil guy of some evil company. Wackiness and pain ensue. View at your own risk.


This backyard movie has it all: time travel, a heroic cleft chin, an evil corporation, and stocky men in pink suits. The plot revolves around a man who builds a time machine out of a Cessna. He seems like a pretty normal, loser-like guy, so he obviously won't be too concerned time traveling "in style" with a DeLorean like some charmingly eccentric mad scientist (well, he actually has no choice, he can't drive). He takes a reporter and a pink suit man along for a ride into TV static and, ultimately, the future.

"The Future" really has almost nothing special in its appearance, other than a food court, which actually looks pretty normal. The closest thing to a special effect is a sign on a building claiming that it was built entirely out of recycled material. When the evil corporation takes over the time machine and does some vaguely bad thing with it (it is suggested that some futuristic was brought into the present), Our hero finds out that the "future" has turned into a local slum populated by a few hobos with guns (not lasers or anything just normal guns). How cyberpunk.

The movie continues with our hero trying to stop said corporation, romancing the girl, "engulfing her" with his chin-butt, getting unpresentably filthy on many occasions, doing irreparable damage to the space-time continuum, dying while unpresentably filthy, and allowing his alternate temporal self to continue this tradition. A showdown occurs between him and the evil CEO during the American Revolution with a Turtledovesque twist an anachronistic Uzi. The movie ends happily with him getting the girl and averting the whole situation.

The movie has a so-bad-it's-good quality that most older bad movies have, whereas new bad movies are just unwatchable. MST3K does a great sendup of it as well. The movie has its strengths such as some humor (especially in the shockingly accurate insight to a loser's lifestyle). It is also disturbingly prophetic in its vision of a future populated by kids who go everywhere with a cell-phone glued to their heads, oblivious to their surroundings.


Hey, it's not a time machine, it's a "time transport"! I don't care what they call it, it's still powered by a Comodore 64. I own a watch with more features and memory. Oh well, I still like this movie. It's no masterpiece and it doesn't pretend to be. It's funny(maybe unintentionally). I've seen it with and without Mike and the 'bots and it's fun either way. Nick Miller, played by Matthew Bruch, has little or none of the qualities generally associated with a hero. He's weak. His humor falls flat, and that chin. WOW!! I think it has it's own SSN. He is good at getting beaten down though, which happens in this movie a lot. His love interest is kind of pretty, kind of Julie from the Love Boatesque.

I must say that I admire the spirit that an independent film like this shows. A different subject might have been better on a limited budget. However, that being said, I think David Giancola showed some promise here. I hear he was 23 when he made this. I recall my occupation involving the culinary artistry of making and delivering pizzas when I was that age. I guess he has my act beat.

I recommend this film. Like I said it won't remind you of Back to the future(unless you see the cleverly placed poster in the movie) but you will laugh at and with it.

For Castleton!!!!!!!


And then filmed during each actors day off at their actual paying jobs? I have to wonder if each actor has a copy and if they crack it open every time they have company over to share in the pride that they once were in an actual movie. I am sure they meant well. I am positive that this movie was meant to be thrown into a well and drowned before someone had the brilliant idea to show the entire world a movie so badly created that a scene that depicts the actual time period that they "chased" to had to shown via dates on coins. High-Tech stuff. And why is it that every time that a "INTO THE FUTURE" movie is made...does anyone not die before they get to that point in time? My copy of this movie may come in handy during my future. I may need to level my dryer with it or I might use it as a coaster for a pitcher of beer as I enjoy watching the MST3k version of it. Huzzah!


All right, enough with the MST3K-ing, people. I of course saw this movie through the show, and I thought their treatment of it was hilarious. It's one of my favorite episodes. Surprisingly enough though, unlike many other movies ridiculed by Mike and the bots, this one is far from bad. Maybe it's just the sheer number of times that I've seen it that has made it grow on me like some kind of low-budget lichen.

Of course the acting is sub-par and at times could wilt flowers on the side of the road. I wouldn't expect stellar performances from a collection of actors coming out of rural Vermont. The whole time travel concept involving a small engine aircraft is laughable I'll admit. The portrayal of the future is hardly better than a shot of a present day main-street strip. There are a number of minor holes in the plot, one of which involves how Nick managed to get a gun after falling into a lake out of the plane. Another would be the way that the future was unaltered even though automatic weapons and the wreckage of a plane/time machine were left in Revolutionary War-era America.

Honestly though, I believe that these shortcomings were inevitable given the budgetary constraints of the film. The film was cut and edited well, which are aspects I believe to be important in a film of any budget. Take a look at the shoddy editing in some films with budgets over 100 million dollars and it's almost shameful by comparison. Corny by mainstream Hollywood standards, I believe that this film should be viewed for what it is: an impressive achievement by an unknown low-budget filmmaker. I think we should be asking ourselves, given a camera and a few thousand dollars to make a movie about time travel, "could we have done better?"


This disillusioning tale of time travel is more popularly known as Time Chasers. It is a tale of good vs evil, plaid vs pink and chin vs CEO. You'll laugh, you'll cry...but mostly you'll just cry.

As a standalone, without MST, this film is still one of the funniest things American cinema has left in a steaming pile on the sidewalk. The only moments that don't induce side-splitting laughter are the moments when our be-chinned hero makes an attempt at a joke. Then you just rub your temples and moan.

As for the cast, it's well-rounded on both sides. Our good guys consist of butt-chinned Nick Miller, the scientist cum action star who delights us with his hockey hair, frightens us with his strange face and tempts us with his partial nudity. The heroine, Lisa Henson, is apparently played by a robot. She displays no tinge of emotion so I can only assume the automaton in her role was not yet advanced enough to out-act the Commodore 64 in Nick's plane. Our comic relief is the broken down cousin of Bruce Springsteen. He's constantly asleep or spilling coffee, sometimes multitasking by doing both at the same time. Jim Carrey eat your heart out.

As for the bad guys, this is where the fun lies. A short fat man in a pink jacket just screams pure evil. He's the unwitting sidekick of the true mastermind from hell. Yes, J.K. Robertson is the epitome of villainy. His strange accent makes him not only hard to understand, but hard to take seriously. The muscle of Evil Co. is the assistant janitor who pounds the hell out of our hero before his girlfriend saves him with a gutter down pipe.

As for the plot, it's almost as befuddling as the mere spectacle of Nick's chin. Nick invents a time traveling plane and puts his science busting work onto 8 floppy disks. He proceeds to hand over his life's work to the CEO of a fortune 500 company for an undisclosed amount of money. According to Robertson, breaking the time barrier is worth "millions". Bill Gates made more by stealing the graphic user interface from Xerox. Wow, I think Nick got low-balled.

Back on track, Nick heads to the future, a bleak future where kids wear lime green tights and talk on an amazing invention known as the mobile cellular phone. Crazy. J.K. soon heads to the future with HIS new plane, where he somehow manages to single handedly cause the apocalypse. And you thought Y2K was bad. In a series of events, Nick and J.K fly back and forth through time trying to do something. Exactly what they are trying to do is beyond our imagination and beyond the budget of this film, so we never really find out.

In the end, the most horrible thing possible happens and we end up with 2 Nicks. God help us all.

Aside from a cameo by Noah Emmerich driving a cab and speaking like a mongoloid, the acting is either non-existent (Lisa) or overdone to the point of inducing nausea (Nick). I can't consciously recommend this film to anyone without the MST crew commenting. It gave me the trots.

Without MST this stinker gets a VERY generous 2/10, with MST it is my single favorite episode and pulls out a 9/10.


I've seen the MST3K version of this movie under the "Time Chasers" title, and I agree that it is NOT a good movie. In fact, it is barely watchable, and the leading man is not at all photogenic, and shows little-to-no charisma on film. He IS rather likable if you aren't looking for an Arnold or a Clint to carry your movie. I rather suspect with that strong chin and wedge shaped face that he is the type that looks much better in person than on film, which is the sad case for many otherwise decent actors.

However, it hardly deserves to be in the Bottom 100, ranked below sludge like "Space Mutiny","The Creeping Terror", or "Escape 2000". It comes off as some would-be auteur's attempt to tell a story he'd been thinking about for years, and it has some heart and some honesty to it that are missing from many of the films on the "Bottom 100". It is ten times more competent than "House of 1000 Corpses" or any of Coleman Francis' work.

The story attempts to be thought-provoking and amusing, sort of a sideways version of "The Man Who Folded Himself" or "And He Built A Crooked House", and no one in the film is as bad or corny as, say, the actors in "Werewolf" or Bo Derek in "Tarzan". What the movie is missing is good direction, or any real energy or compelling drive to hold the viewer's interest.

So yes, the movie is dull and boring, but it lacks the sleaziness, or contempt for its audience, or sheer incompetence that mark so many movies on the list.


Note: I've only seen the MST version of this film and the film's original trailer (which had a few extra scenes that were cut for time). Oh yea, and THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS! READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!

There we go. Now, to whine and moan about this movie. It hurts a lot. The actors are untalented and unappealing, the music was synthesized with someones BUTT and the plot is full of holes. Argh!

Where shall we begin? Nick Miller, alias Butt Chin (he could use some Chinderwear, pronto!) invents a time machine in a plane. Okay, cliched already, but maybe it could still manage, right? WRONG. See, he calls the newspaper and a corporation called GenCorp and gets them to look at it. Turns out that Butt Chin's old girlfriend, Lisa, alias Lady in Plaid (yowza, get her a new wardrobe!) works at the paper and so their romance heats up again. Yes, thrill at the sizzling hot grocery store scene! Of course, since this movie was made during the early 90's, GenCorp is an Evil Corporation and they've managed to destroy the future. The set for the evil J.K. Robertson's office is a laugh-it looks like it's in the skyway of a mall or the center of a library. And good old J.K. has a really, really bad New England accent. Thus, you can thrill at an insanely stupid chase scene. Thrill as Butt Chin, who crashes a car while escaping a GenCorp truck (Note: Where did J.K. manage to get such an army, anyway?), hops on a bike...and the people in the truck GET OUT OF THE TRUCK and chase him on bikes too, despite the fact it would be FASTER if they just kept driving. No, nobody thinks in this film. And much is to be made of the sorry attempt to show the Revolutionary War. If the movie is so concerned with tangents, than wouldn't they have created one when J.K. started blowing away tons of American minutemen? What if they killed someone who turned out to play a key role to the American victory? Yes, J.K. is indeed armed and dangerous. Apparently, ISO 9001 certification is a license to kill. And finally, we have the biggest annoyance of all...why did Butt Chin still pull that fast one on J.K. and get poor Matt fired when all he had to do was time-travel back to before he gave the demo and tell his past self to never give it? It would have saved himself some problems.

Of course, this film can't stand enough to be painfully bad when it;'s being dramatic. It also tries to be "comedic", with such witty commentary as "What would MacGuyver do?" and "I never should have joined the Physics Club in high school." Ho ho. The "funniest" joke is, of course, involving the "sky diving grandmas."

This movie hurt me. I want to go back in time and stop it from being made so I could undo the hurt it caused. Oh yea, and I also want to burn Lady in Plaid's wardrobe.


This is without a doubt the worst movie I have EVER seen (accept, I have yet to see Manos).Could the plot (if any) be any worse? They should have the scale be a zero on this movie, because I would rather put that instead of a one (because it doesn't even amount to a one).

I think I probably have made my point pretty clear by now.

Thank you.


A good premise is wasted with bad dialog, wooden characters, and a hero that can't drive a car! It's true -- he commutes everywhere by bicycle. Our loser, err hero comes up with a time machine that runs off an old Apple IIe. He has to be fairly brilliant to have a time travelling program that can be condensed onto a couple of old 5 inch floppies!

Our heroine is a newspaper reporter tricked into seeing the loser's invention with a story about a parachuting grandma. Later, when she discovers her own dead body, her reaction is as wooden as that of a cigar store Indian (or Al Gore, take your pick).

The movie was shot in and around Rutland, Vermont. The local mall was used as the offices of the evil CEO, as well as the town's airport. At least the beautiful surroundings to take your mind off the bad movie. The Revolutionary War reenactors give the best performance.

If you're an Alpha Geek who wants to find a way to get a woman, use this movie as your guide. Otherwise, forget it.


I love this movie.

I mean, I know I only gave it a 1, but I love this movie.

I gave it a "1" because I don't think that if you follow the textbook example of movies, this doesn't really work out. However, I think that if we consider different alternatives to what movies can be, then this is definitely something worth watching.

It's kinda like a snapshot of the "old future", if you know what I mean. Well....no, you don't....but the thing is just filled with fun nostalgia and enjoyable situations. I'd love to see a sequel to this thing (and I hear one's in the works).


Time Chasers features big chinned, Castleton graduate NICK MILLER (QUE elevator music) and his trusty textured wardrobe wearing friend-to-be-girl-friend LISA (QUE ... nothing). It also features the evil library clerk, CEO dressed J.K. Robertson. Oh yeah, it also has a guy wearing a pink shirt found at the day of the shoot cause he forgot his outfit. The storyline goes from a plane to a grocery store. Plus, a few shots of a plane flying into a camera that's recording a computer screen at the director's house on his off-day. That's all I should say, because the only interesting part was watching the credits to laugh at the fact that this movie actually had people to credit.


Duet was a wonderful program. It was cute without being sappy or saccharine. Who could forget their first date with a married couple in the middle of an argument? The cause of their argument was about family life. In the middle of it all, the dates try to compose themselves while the other couple are ready for combat at each other. They try to compose some normal conversation. In the end of their first date, the younger couple sit in the first seat while the older couple reunite the passion. It was all about passion and discovering one another. It was better than Mad about You then and is now. Duet was Fox's first show about relationships. I loved the casting of Alison LaPlaca and Chris Lemmon (Jack Lemmon's son) as the arguing couple. Jodi Thelen has a great role as Mary Page Keller's sister in the series. Mary Page Keller and her co-star Matthew/Mitchell Lawrence (They're identical twins and actors). Lawrence plays a struggling writer while Keller plays a caterer. They meet at a wedding of course in the first episode. They had a great opening segment. It's a shame that shows do not have the quality it once had like it did then.


A charming romance for the first season and a half. The writing is superb and likeable actors made this a pleasant series to watch.

Mary Page Keller in particular was magnificent to help make up for a wooden Matthew Laurance as the other lead. The supporting cast of Chris Lemmon and Alison LaPlaca are even better actors than the leads and Jody Thelen and Eileen Sorkin were effectively cartoonish contributors.

The series takes a romantic stroll from Ben (Laurance) and Laura's (Keller) first meeting through the ups and downs of courtship. And this is a very delightful courtship indeed! Unfortunately near the end of the second season, the series veered completely away from the last sense of reality. Great stories and good laughs.

I wish I could get this series on video. When will Nick or TVLand start airing this wonderful program? (Please!)


I have to admit that after reading the users comments from "adyt23" and another terrible review, I went into it without any great expectations and with my finger on the erase button as it was recorded on my PVR(Tivo in the U S). But boy am I glad I didn't erase it and ended up watching the movie!! I don't post many reviews on IMDb as I only post them when I'm am very pleasantly surprised by a movie as I was with this one. I really don't know how anybody could call this a bad movie. I thought it was one of the more memorable movies I've seen in the past few months or so and I highly recommend it. Their were some familiar faces so it was not just a bunch of unknowns in a low budget flick, it may not have had a big budget, but what it did with the finances it did have was put together a really good somewhat suspenseful type drama that involves bookies, gambling, a bit of drugs and all the ingredients that makes these "under the radar" or lesser known types of movies worth watching. The story is about a man played by Etan Embry, who has a serious gambling addiction and the ordeals he goes through to try and make good on his marriage. The events leading up to the final scene in the movie are riveting and I couldn't stop watching as it kept me glued to my seat the entire time. This movie is a hidden gem and as I said earlier, I highly recommend it and it is great from start to finish and boy what an ending it has. It really takes you for a loop but I'll leave it at that.


Joey (Embry) has it all (good job, beautiful wife, good house, etc) including a gambling problem that effects everyone in his life.

Some people have the travel gene  they need to go everywhere; some people have the gambling gene  they need to put something on the line..they get a rush they say. And, some people don't understand those that have the travel and/or the gambling gene. Seems to me that once one has seen almost everything one might get tired of the things one must do to do all that traveling. Apparently not. They still go here and there at the drop of a hat.

And, one would also think that those who gamble and do not win as often as they would like would get the message that things are really not going to get better, and in fact they can get a lot worse. That's what this movie is all about.

However, if you are going to make a movie about the pitfalls of gambling, don't make the ending all nice like it was all worth it. It really is not worth it, and may give some gamblers false hope that all will be okay later on. That's my only beef with this movie, otherwise it is extremely good.

Violence: Yes. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: Yes


Player 5150 is a gem of a film. It is a nice break from all those splashy special effects used nowadays to entertain audiences. This was a good character driven story about a degenerate gambler that pushes it too far. Anyone that has been involved with the rush of sports betting can relate to the plot and characters. Ethan Embry delivers a stand out performance lead role JOEY. His delivery combined with facial expressions made him seem like a true everyman caught up in a bad situation. I felt for the guy even though it was only a film. Kathleen Roberston was amazing. I only knew her from her days on Beverly Hills 90210.

Bob Sapp makes a worthy cameo. Despite not being an actor he wasn't terrific or terrible. Overall I was entertained by Player 5150. Writer and Director David Michael O'Neil delivers a good film about the life of a gambler going out of control. If you enjoy character driven dramas give this one a chance.