I'm making my way through all of Lynch's films so I figured I'd start with his early short films and I am very pleased with them. I really liked Six Men Getting Sick and this one was great too. I will be commenting on the rest of them as well. The Alphabet is very ambiguous and let's you come up with your explanation of what's going on and I think that is great. David Lynch is a genius in so many ways. I think it's wonderful seeing where my favorite filmmaker started out and very inspiring. I am still trying to figure how he pulled some of the stuff in this film off and wondering how I could do something like this myself. I will continue to enjoy Lynch and be amazed by his work. I hope you can as well!


Not sure what attracted me to this film, which is really nothing more than, as David Lynch puts it on the DVD, an interpretation of someone else's dream through his own state of mind. But I really, really felt immersed in what Lynch was doing visually with the film. Obviously, it doesn't make a lick of sense if you're looking for it, but I loved the mixture of different elements within the medium. There's actual film shot of Lynch's wife Peggy going rather bonkers while in a bed. Then this is mixed around with animation treated on-TOP of the filmed footage. Then there is other mixed media, such as a filmed animated spot shook around with other pieces of color and light. There's even a quick shot of black falling down upon white, if that makes sense (which it doesn't). I was told by some others that this one was the weakest of the Lynch shorts, but that goes without saying that each one of his early works will divide viewers like in any good old art-school class. If one knows though the lengths to which the filmmaker is ready to portray his audio-visual interpretations on screen one might appreciate it a little more if they just happen to stumble upon it. On a personal level it's one of the best student works I've seen from the period of a promising talent.


This was set off the basic thematic elements of Lynch's oeuvre. Psychosubconscious horror imagery involving blood, sex, and rich textures of malaise. What's different about this is that it actually goes further, into a child's realm of disturbing imagery, which can be even more disturbing because thinking of Lynch dealing with children is kind of appalling--The Straight Story aside.

I think it's probably my favorite short of his, though, considering that it so well mixes everything in animation, stop motion, and real motion, and that overall it's quite adept at forcing you to think about all those children's shows that involve alphabet songs and alphabet animations dancing around, and how a lot of that stuff can be very disconcerting and bizarre if really looked at.

Furthermore, I believe it's probably one of his best uses of sound. Lynch is a genius at making sound affect imagery beyond levels that most directors use, and while the sound in this short are much more self-conscious and much more apparent than the underlying growling of most of his work, it's a lot more effective.

--PolarisDiB


David Lynch's "The Alphabet" is a short exploration into fear and dementia. Lynch, as was his stated intention when he began making films, creates a small world of moving paintings mixed with real action. The result is as an abstract nightmare where a girl is apparently tormented by the alphabet.


The best thing about a David Lynch films are the elements of abstractly. The Alphabet was the epitome of a great artful film, but it still manages to leave you thinking about it. Sadly to say, David didn't make many outlandish films like this, rather he used elements like this as an additive. If you enjoyed this short, you would love Eraserhead.

If you want to see an extraordinarily disturbing film, this would be one of my first suggestions. In the day of absurdly moronic slashers, and movies with the generic schizophrenic protagonist, I will always keep close to magnificent films like these.

If you liked this, Eraserhead would be my suggestion for your next watch.


Lynch's second film is a 4-minute mind-boggling trip into the subconscious. A dream Lynch's niece had while in school inspired it. She had a dream in which she recited the letters of the alphabet. And that pretty much summarizes what this film is about. The filmmaker used that simple idea as the basis of this fascinating short. If you are familiar with Lynch's work, you pretty much know what to expect. Nightmarish images are plentiful, and the film's atmosphere is strangely dense. I did not know what everything meant but it was fun to watch. Something I noticed here was the constant allusion to sex. Is it me or Lynch is a little too preoccupied with sex? The truth is that most of what I saw in the movie struck as being related to sex in one way or the other. It is possible that my mind was simply playing games on me. The fact is that only Lynch can make so much with so little. It is a true delight from beginning to end. If you are remotely interested in the director's work this is mandatory viewing.


I don't usually make a point to watch films this bad (predictable plot, laughable dialog, horrible music soundtrack, etc), but when I saw that my all-time favorite actor Jeremy Brett had a brief but memorable role in "Shameless" (originally titled "Mad Dogs and Englishmen"), I couldn't resist. It's a bizarre experience to witness an actor -- who so perfectly embodied the iconic Sherlock Holmes in the beloved Granada TV series -- appear in such an odd role of a drug-supplying sugar daddy. It's even odder to see a glimpse of him in a modern-day sexual scene with a young woman. Regardless, as usual, he stole the movie even if he was only barely in it. I only wished the director has used Brett to his fullest talents instead of as an aside eccentric.

A young Elizabeth Hurley makes a mediocre attempt to portray a bored little rich girl with drug problems and C. Thomas Howell does his best to seem sexy in a grunge biker kind of way. But Brett's booming voice, subtle expressions and dynamic presence wakes you up for just long enough to pay attention to his character. Once he disappears from the screen, you realize all too soon that the rest of the film is worthless. It takes a great actor to lift up a role from the muck, and I'm sorry to see that this was Brett's only chance to do a modern-day storyline from his usual historic epics before he passed away.

He briefly commented in an interview why he did the role, and soon realized the film was a disaster.

On "Mad Dogs and Englishmen" (1995)-- "I was mad to do it, but I wanted to show the world that I was still alive and I could do other things apart from Sherlock Holmes. I hope they don't release it..."


This film is worth seeing simply for its monumental crapness. In the first half an hour alone countless unsympathetic characters are introduced, some of whom proceed to perform random and inexplicable actions throughout. The plot is so disjointed and badly conceived, it requires considerable effort to maintain any idea of what's going on. Not that there's any reason to do so. Instead, viewers should marvel at some appallingly bad dialogue, a staggeringly inept piece of acting from Liz Hurley, and one of the most incomprehensible plotlines I've ever come across in a film. Worth watching, simply because it is SO bad.


Having never seen the sequel to The One-Armed Swordsman (1968), I was in for quite a shock. To put it simply, this is one of the best kung fu follow-ups I have ever seen. Knowing that the one-armed character is by this time firmly established (and a box office success), director Chang Cheh opts for full-blown action this time around. It is basically The Road Warrior (1981) to the first film's Mad Max (1979), pumping up the action quotient ten fold and rarely slowing down from beginning to end.

Sword fights come at you every five minutes or so, resulting in some amazingly bloody action. I had no idea that any kung fu film from the 60s was so bloody. This effect is remarkably enhanced by the use of palm squibs to send bloody flying and the heroes all white outfits. Another exciting aspect of the film (which would later become a Wang Yu staple) is the use of unorthodox weapons by the heavies. With eight super villains there is a lot of room for some creativity and Cheh and co. don't fail. My personal favorite is the sinister female demon that pulls any numbers of knives from under her flowing robe.

But it is not to say that the film abandons the dramatic aspects of the story. Cheh spends a decent amount of time focusing on Fang Gang's reflection of his violent ways, both past and present. Fang essentially wants to be left alone with his wife but, to employ an overused quote, every time he thinks he is out, they pull him back in. He is a complex character and it is good to his emotional complications played out on screen, especially after the final battle during a celebration. The relationship between Fang and his wife is also highlighted, with both Wang Yu and Chiao Chiao performing well.


After watching the original One-Armed Swordsman, directed by Chang Cheh and starring Wang Yu in the title role, I knew I had to watch this direct sequel, as the others had David Chiang replacing Wang Yu as Fang Gang.

Continuing where the first movie left off, we see Fang Gang leading a life of a farmer, without a care of JiangHu politics. But as the saying goes, and in martial arts movie, so long as you're a reputable swordsman, trouble will always be looking for you. The emergence of the evil Eight Demon Swordsmen clan brought about chaos, with their issuing of forced challenges and a grand meeting amongst the swordsman clans. The senior members of various clans get annihilated or captured, and its down to the junior members to try and convince Fang Gang to come out of "retirement" to assist them in their quest of rescue, and getting rid of the Eight Demon Swordsmen.

It's also pretty cool to see the main villains being crafted with various deadly weapons and different personalities. Like the one with the deadly chain-attached sickle, or the mean looking knife-shield. How about a weapon which seemed to fire pellets of poison, and a sword with extensible blade? Perhaps the more interesting villain was the lady assassin, with her demure looks, and deadly hidden knives, giving a new meaning to back-stabbing! However, being villains, our hero and his gang of merry men, while on the way to the villains' fortress, get to dispatch them one by one in deadly, bloody fashion. Although by today's standards the blood is pretty fake looking, it's still quite a bloody affair with slashing, stabbings - knives through body, and squirting blood. But I must add that it did give a sense of cheesy nostalgia to how blood was created for the screen in those days.

Classic martial arts movie scenes like the bamboo forest also get featured in this movie, though the forest did look a bit sparse, since it was filmed in a sound stage. Added to the fight scenes was a demonstration of superb "qing-gong" (light-skill, fleet-footedness) by Fang Gang, though the wire work used was extremely elementary, and came across quite laughably. Back in those days, this sequence would have been da bomb though.

The story's nothing to shout about - it has almost every thematic element that you'd expect from a martial arts movie, and classic scene settings like forests and inns. But it sure is one heck of a fun ride - bigger, bolder, badder than the original, with a lot more disposable characters for the body count.

Code 3 DVD extras contains a pretty weak lineup of only the trailer (and trailers for other movies), colour stills, the poster, selected cast and crew biography and filmography, and a one screen production notes. The DVD for the original seemed better and more thorough.


I had seen the first film in this series, as well as the David Chiang movie "The New One-Armed Swordsman", and I wasn't particularly thrilled by either one, to be honest. I left this on the shelf, and that was a big mistake.

After finally viewing it, I was stunned. It's far better than the other two films, in every possible way.

Return Of The One-Armed Swordsman is everything a Chang Cheh Kung-fu movie should be, colorful, exciting, and full of fighting, fighting, fighting.

They use all kinds of weapons in this one, from bamboo sticks to daggers, from swords to bladed disks....and there's even one bad guy who has a magic sword that shoots bullets (or something like them) out of the end of the blade. So cool! If all that weren't enough, this film has an evil femme fatale, who loves men's guts...or stabbing them, anyway.

Unfortunately, my copy of the DVD is in Chinese, with Cantonese subtitles that won't change to English, so I guess that it's defective, however I'm keeping it anyway. Even if I don't know who is who and what is what, the action sequences are worth it.

If you love Kung-fu movies, you'll love this one.


After my somewhat lackluster experience with the first One Armed Swordsman movie, I was very happy to find that the sequel far out shined the original movie.

The movie begins with our hero Fang Gang awkwardly practicing his left handed farming technique, when a pair of visitors ask him to attend a sword fighting competition. He demurs, only to be visited later by an old man who fills him in on the whole situation. Apparently an octet of evil villains have set up shop and are attempting to crown themselves kings of swordsmen in the local area. Faithfully keeping his promise to his wife to stay out of the martial arts world Fang Gang says he will not go. The old man sets out to the competition but not before instructing his sons that should this be a trap, and they will need to seek revenge, to unite with other schools in their plot, and most importantly to seek out Fang Gang's help. The competition, as predicted, is really a trap, and as the invited martial artists attempt to leave the contest, they are hunted down by the evil octet, each employing unique martial arts styles and weapons.

The remaining students are then sent letters by the villains instructing them to cut off their right arm so that their fathers and teachers may be released. The students instead seek Fang Gang for advice, and after some soul searching, our hero takes on the mantle that will later be carried by the likes of Louis Gosset Jr. in the Iron Eagle series, and helps the youngsters in their quest.

From this point on the movie becomes virtually a non stop cavalcade of action full of fights, ambushes, betrayals, and much butt kicking.

This is a really fun movie to watch, full of interesting characters and original fighting styles and weapons. A very good Shaw Brothers production that is highly recommended for fans of the genre.


Creating a Hollywood-quality film from a potentially political and sticky subject is no easy task. I believe politics calls this 'diplomacy.' Following, this film has as one of its main strengths the ability to reveal the realities of both sides of an issue without provoking offense or anger. Instead, it very skillfully provokes thought as it unfolds the story and experiences of both sides of a heated issue that is at the very core of this film. This is what impressed me most. Secondly, I was impressed by the Hollywood quality of the film, the plot, the actors and filmography. This is no third-rate film. The writers and producers are obvious professionals. The film description mentions a surprise ending, but you still won't be prepared for it; it will leave you thinking about the ramifications of this issue long after the screen goes black. Thirdly, I was impressed by the fact that I don't believe a film of this type has ever been created or attempted. It is purpose-driven, and yet, it neither condemns nor judges anyone. The movie inspired me to sport some related bumper stickers on my car, and to tell others to see it and to make them think about this most important issue. Really, is just three inches the only difference between murder and legality?? We are all to be held accountable for our actions, yet, God can forgive anyone who sincerely asks. My only wish? I wish it were longer! I would like to know where the film will be available and will it available on the big screen soon, or only through stores? I hope that more thought-provocative yet diplomatic films like this one will be created in the future to cause humanity to think about its actions and how far it has gone with the right-to-this and the right-to-that to justify them. Some decisions are just beyond personal rights. The film, by nature, invites one to see it for themselves, analyze the subject content and draw their own conclusions. So see it for yourself, examine the current legal system and find your voice at the end of this moral journey. The Thunder may be closer than you think ..


I recommend seeing this film, it's sure to raise many ethical and moral debates. It deals with something not many people are aware of, but should be. And it deals with it in a way that doesn't seem forced or in your face. Any film that inspires communication and conversation is worthy of attention, it's one of the things good movies are supposed to do. And the best part: it's thrilling and exciting while it's doing it! Also, for a small film, it contains great cinematography and very effective special effects. Good performances by the two main leads is an added bonus. I would also recommend seeing it with a group of people, because it's very interesting to gauge everyone's different reaction right after viewing the film, there's sure to be opinions ranging from emphatic agreement to stern disapproval, but that's what's great about it. Be sure to check it out wherever you can.


A Distant Thunder uses fiction to portray the very real problem that our society seems to accept as normal, partial-birth abortion, Dilation and Extraction (D & X.) I recommend this short film for all and especially for youth groups, but suggest it be previewed by leaders before group showings in order to develop responses to questions that your audiences will have. The Bonus Tracks, interviews with Principal members of the production, may be necessary to resolve questions of your own and will assist in leading discussion about A Distant Thunder.

Because of the powerful theme of this movie, I suggest that it not be shown to unsupervised children or youth.


This film is presented as professionally as any block busters out of Hollywood. For being a short film it will keep you thinking about the subject and message for days after watching.

I would recommend it to anyone who has ever agreed with the opinion of a "Womans Choice"! This film will provoke you to reconsider.

Even though most of the actors have only been in a few films, you will wonder why they have not been cast more often.

If you watch this film and are not challenged by its thought provoking message, you need to watch it again because you did not pay attention the first time.


I don't watch supernatural thrillers...ever. But at our camp over the summer we were given the choice of watching 'A Distant Thunder' or 'Robots', basically the whole camp watched 'A Distant Thunder' because abortion had been a hot topic of the week. We ended up watching the film 3 times with various bits being explained to us and some of the leaders had seen it 6 times and were still noticing more about it. The film is perfectly made, cleverly written and wonderfully acted. It is perfect for groups who are exploring abortion or if you want to stir up a youth group. I should also say that a group of 20 16-17 year olds watched it and we had 4 girls up for most of the night as the film seemed a little scary but the DVD comes with a cut version which may be more appropriate. A must see for anyone! I'd highly recommend it.


It has a real Hollywood psychological thriller feel to it, which will appeal to younger generations used to scary, shocker-flashback movies with surreal, supernatural twists.

Though the main character's "dream" sequences were gripping and sometimes harrowing, they weren't too much for me to take (and I hate scary movies) nor were they at all graphic, violent or gory. Those "visions" were frightening in what they implied, and most only pieced together in my mind afterward.

There is one heck of a twist at the end in the courtroom. Critics and reviewers are saying this movie meets its stated goals: educating while gripping the audience, not being preachy or propaganda, just telling it like it is. I agree.


I found this a profound and touching film, with echoes of The Butterfly Effect. I did not think it was propaganda, but used a fairly common medical procedure as the jumping off point for the supernatural premise. The topic is one that people need to understand, and hopefully this film will help educate them as well as providing spooky and unsettling entertainment. I thought the actors were professional and very true to life. I especially liked the heroine's boss, with his aura of calm, protection and healing.

It was frightening in spots, and I would not let anyone under 14 watch it due to the nightmare potential.


Before I saw this movie, I was a person that would always argue pro-choice. After I watched this movie with my religion class, I was forced to rethink my position. Though I would say I am pro-choice still, this movie educated me in the horrors of partial-birth abortion. Never have I seen a movie that made me think this hard about where I stand on an issue.

That being said, I am shocked at all the rave reviews the actors are receiving. I personally though the acting, especially from the lead actress, was atrocious. The defense attorney was decent, and the judge had little else to say but "sustatined", but the main character was played by someone with the skill of a mediocre high school play actress.

As for the twist at the end, it was a good one, and it shocked most of the people I watched this movie with. Unfortunately, there were a few of us, myself included, that could see it coming from a mile away. The movie dropped a few too many hints as to what was coming.


I've told many of my friends and co-workers to watch this movie, but only tell them it is a courtroom thriller about a botched medical procedure. The film makes a subtle and brilliantly presented point while interesting to watch.

I had the privilege of running into Jonathan Flora when he was touring in Ohio. He's quite an impressive guy and his wife, Deborah (Ann Brown) is a genuine sweetheart. I was equally impressed with the premium quality of production in this film from a very limited budget. For that point alone, if I were a producer, I would hire Flora on the spot. Buy this movie and share it with your friends and family.


Be forewarned! This is a propaganda piece against abortion. My uncle sends me a link to this movie in every email he sends me. Now mind you, I'm not in the market to have an abortion but I'm not sure that a bunch of strangers should be regulating what I do with my body. The movie is well made; you can tell they've spent a lot of money on the aesthetic. And the actors all seem well-qualified and committed to what they are doing...as actors and not just as mouth pieces for a specific agenda. If you are intrigued about this movie...then you should see it. I just don't think people should get suckered into sitting through something so heavy-handed.


I'm glad someone did this before it was too late. In some ways it really *was* too late, as some of the old-timers were already gone by the time this was filmed. This is an objective, even sympathetic, document of pre-abduction contactees.

The Aetherians, including George King (aka "Aetherius") are here. There's some great B&W footage of King channeling the Space Brothers, and some more recent footage of his followers in Hollywood charging the psychic battery. Watch for King in his regalia, talking about Jesus. It doesn't get any better!

Howard and Connie Metzger are here, talking about the good old days of contacteeism (including Giant Rock), plunking on the piano, telling jokes, ridiculing more recent abductees. He shows us the model in his garage, too. She really loves him. You tell 'em, Howard!

The Giant Rock footage includes film of the great George Adamski himself. He died long before this film was made. I'm glad some old footage of him made it into the film.

Dan Fry is here. He doesn't say much... just sits on the nursing home porch, rocking and laughing to himself at something unseen. At the joke he pulled on all of us, perhaps?

There are others: Rev. Frank Stranges, the Unarians, the Blue Rose Ministries, and others who I've forgotten for the moment. All are worth the price of admission.

If you have *any* interest in what the early UFO movement was like, pick up a copy of this one-of-a-kind film. You'll be glad you did.


If Errol Morris, the wonderfully unconventional auteur responsible for such disarmingly offbeat documentaries as "Gates of Heaven," "Vernon, Florida," and "A Brief History of Time," decided to make a deceptively ordinary "average people who've been abducted by aliens and thoroughly examined by them relate their experiences on film" type of speculative UFO documentary it would probably be a lot like this engagingly quirky little winner. This movie focuses on the Aetherius Society, a group of devout and passionate UFO buffs who call themselves "contactees" and have been preaching salvation from outer space since the tense and clammy Cold War era 50's. Several members of the cult are interviewed; they make strikingly cogent remarks about the human race's self-destructive war-like nature, petty religious squabbles, the appalling lack of civility and communication in our society, the infamous Roswell incident, the American government's cover-up of information concerning the existence of UFOs, and their desire to educate the ignorant public about what's really going down. The contactees don't seem remotely like the naive, wide-eyed, day-dreaming out of touch with reality raving fruitcakes the media frequently presents to the masses. Instead they come across as regular, rationale and intelligent individuals whose uncommon beliefs and philosophies are not consonant with mainstream society.

Director/producer/editor/cinematographer Robert Stone made this obvious labor of love with a sharp eye, an open mind, a great deal of heart-warming compassion, and a refreshingly low-key, down-to-earth, unaffected style, mixing black and white newsreel footage (mostly showing the army's ludicrous efforts at dispelling theories about UFOs with phony scientific explanations), film clips (including "Santa Claus Conquers the Martians"!), golden oldie songs, and an intriguing believers vs. nonbelievers subtext into a unique, compelling and provocative whole. An unexpected and truly remarkable treat, this lovely jewel is tons better than most UFO documentaries because it steadfastly avoids the middle of the road and treads down some fascinatingly novel and unfamiliar paths that are an absolute joy to behold. A sweet and sparkling unsung gem.


This is a truly great film -- if you get a chance, be sure to see it. It's a documentary-style look at a group of UFO-worshipping weirdos.


I am very interested in Giant Rock and the Contactees, but found this film very boring. Rev. Robert Short, who is in this film, produced his own video titled "UFO'S - The Giant Rock Story", which is far better.


I was surprised to discover this was really a horror film. I don't know if it's labeled that, but that's what it should be called. It's spooky and creepy and just plain weird. With Jennifer Jason Leigh in the lead, I'm not surprised. She is pretty good at playing disturbed people as she showed later in "Single White Female."

For me, however, the best part of this film was the color. This film had a color palette that was fascinating at times. and the audio was good, too, with creepy sounds to go with the colorfully-painted nightclub/house interiors.

Some of the story left a bad taste in my mouth, just a bit too sordid in spots. With the exception of the social worker, there are no likable, trusting characters in this film. The one who is hardest to figure out is the one played by Peter Coyote.

Yet, despite this not being a particularly attractive story, the haunting audio and visuals keep sucking me back every 5-8 years into this bizarre tale.


Heart of Midnight is a very strange movie, and I mean that in a good way. Broadly speaking I guess it falls within the horror genre, but it draws upon elements from many different subgenres and works on many levels. You can take it as a haunted-house movie, a ghost story, a psychological thriller and a character study rolled into one.

Jennifer Jason Leigh gives a superb performance as Carol Rivers, a fragile and sensitive young woman recovering from a nervous breakdown. When her estranged uncle dies of AIDS, she mysteriously inherits his deserted nightclub and, upon moving in, discovers its seedy past as a "massage parlour". From here on in, the story gets darker and more twisted, but suffice it to say that it contains many of the ingredients of full-bore horror: moaning voices in the night, taps dripping blood, secret passageways, beheaded rats, apples that ooze maggots and so on. For much of the film, we're kept in the dark as to whether Carol is privy to hallucinations and sinking into another nervous breakdown, or whether there is actually a dark force living in the empty nightclub with her.

Heart of Midnight is not a perfect film. There are some plot loopholes and the usual budget limitations of a B movie, including a pesky boom mic that dips into the frame a few times. But it makes up for its flaws with a strong visual style and a convincingly claustrophobic atmosphere so thick you could cut it with a knife. Along the way there are several recognizable nods to films like Peeping Tom, Suspiria, The Shining and two Roman Polanski classics - Repulsion and The Tenant.

Jennifer Jason Leigh really gives it her all in the lead role as Carol. She is an exceptionally talented and striking actress, and Heart of Midnight provides the then 25-year-old with a strong early showcase for her talent. Her portrayal of the frail but determined Carol is passionate, believable and always sympathetic. She's a horror-movie heroine of unusual strength and intelligence, which means we really root for her during this often harrowing nightmare. Peter Coyote, Frank Stallone and Brenda Vaccaro all lend decent support, but it's Leigh who makes this dark journey worth taking.


Really fanatical film buffs have long considered Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance in "Heart of Midnight" deserving of 1989's Best Actress Oscar. She was at least as good as runner-up Isabelle Adjani ("Camille Chaudel") and clearly superior to winner Jessica Tandy ("Driving Miss Daisy"). While ironic that Leigh's best performance was in her least seen film, it is understandable considering the subject matter and almost expressionistic style of "Heart of Midnight", which needs at least two viewings to be properly appreciated.

The film, which is better directed than it is written, should be seen simply for Leigh's performance but is also a stylish little horror film with a few genuinely scary moments. Leigh plays Carol Rivers and the story (which includes a number of flashbacks) is told from her point of view. Carol seems to have an innate distaste for physical contact and a history of psychological problems of unknown origin. It is slowly revealed in the film that she was abused as a child. Leigh researched the role extensively, speaking with women who had been abused as children and experts in the field.

"Heart of Midnight", an odd mix of "Repulsion", "The Tenant", "Exotica", and "The Story of Adele H"; is about Carol's descent into madness. It was probably inspired by the two Polanski films; and Catherine Deneuve's "Repulsion" character was also named Carol. The twist being that this time it is actually a voluntary descent into insanity. For most of the film Carol grapples with why she does not like herself. Once she discovers the reason for this, madness becomes preferable to existing with that knowledge.

Although Carol's conduct throughout the film seems bizarre, once you understand her background everything is logical. But it is only predictable in retrospect so many viewers will find the film uncomfortable viewing. Carol is often forced to retreat but admirably forces herself to confront her fears. Leigh has a real gift for communicating the depth of her character's fear and pain.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.


Jennifer Jason Leigh plays a psychologically devastated young woman who has inherited an adult club from her recently deceased uncle. She initially remembers only his kindness to her, and wants nothing to do with his past business life. Her goal is to transform the closed building into a dance club and to try to make it on her own. She sets up housekeeping in her uncle's former living quarters, and pays a contractor to oversee the renovation. The film contains some graphic sexual content, but it adds to the horror rather than plays a purely exploitive role. The story is about the irreparable harm caused by abuse and it is a powerful celluloid indictment of sexual predators who leave few obvious physical scars on their victims.

The movie died a quick box office death. It was not designed for the fans of X-rated fun & games, and it was too dark and unsettling for most regular viewers looking for a pleasant night out. Leigh's character is the only role fully developed. Most of the other acting is B-movie quality at best and the dialogue is often wooden. Nonetheless, her performance and the story are good enough to carry the picture.

The story functions best as a psychological horror story and the cinematography contains some truly frightening visual images of things she sees or thinks she sees. These elements work well to underline her insecurity and instability. They also highlight her courage in trying to make it on her own in a world ready to accept that she is merely weak-minded and unable to cope. The script is not at the same level as that of "Spoorlos" or "Sixth Sense," but it is as good as many quality thrillers. There are very few pictures that deal with this subject area in more than an oblique way and rarely from the perspective of the abused. Give this movie a chance to work. Realism in cinema is hard to find, and this is an imperfect but realistic exploration of a difficult topic.


I have seen this movie many times over the years. It's just the right genre of creepy for me, interesting old place the girl inherits full of old clothes, etc., it has that grandma's attic feeling about it. A little Psycho, a little sixties scary-movie feel. Then the psychological twist gets folded in, along with a nice little romance and good acting. This movie is not formulaic overall, when you consider that it's almost impossible to make a scary movie of any kind that hasn't been done before. Sure, familiar elements are there, but even though the setting is modern for the period, it has a bit of a Gothic feel to it. If you like suspense and a creepy plot without the gore, this is for you.


Like another reviewer I, too, don't understand the low ratings given this film. Granted, it probably won't be everyone's cup of tea. I saw this film first soon after it came to cable and before I knew much about Jennifer Jason-Leigh or had come to appreciate the power this amazing young actress can exude in the careful and often understated nuances she brings to her craft. She was as good then as she is now. Credit should be given, also, to the set design with it's seedy candy apple red painted cinder block walls, stark bare light switches and yards of metal conduit lining long hallways off of which open rows of cribs which we come to realize housed all sorts of perversions. We learn that her uncle not only pandered to and reveled in those same perversions but was also willingly sacrificed his own life by enslavement to those same twisted desires and actions. This was a timely and bold film, also, because it dealt squarely with the oncoming invasion of the heterosexual world by AIDS at a time when most straight folk still believed themselves immune. The suspense and terror builds credibly and effectively and manages to take the worn out "damsel in the old dark house" plot and not just dress it up but actually transform it into something new and original. But, you've got to see it at least twice...once to let your head adjust to the oddness of the story and then a second time to really experience the multiple levels of terror present in this film, both real and imagined, the most palpable being that lying buried in the human soul.


Jennifer Jason Leigh is a consistently unsurprising actress. As the years go by, the virginal teenager she played in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" appears to be the anomaly on her resume. Specializing in characters on the proverbial brink, Leigh becomes rudderless in 'ordinary' roles, such as her corporate's assistant in "Backdraft". That said, Leigh fits right in with this cockeyed character study-cum-thriller about an unstable girl who inherits a nightclub with a shady past. The narrative is so gummy, at first I couldn't figure out if the building was also used as a hotel, or if Leigh's character was planning on living there full-time. A few jagged bits of delusion stand out; otherwise, the ingredients of this stew fail to come together cohesively. Leigh plows through all the silliness as if it really means something--as if her life depended on it--but her conviction in being the ultimate square peg says more about the actress than this character ever gets to express. * from ****


Can't see why this movie has gotten such low ratings. For a thriller movie, not my favorite genre, it was really good. Maybe watching it at 3 AM muddled my critical sensibilities, but from where I was sitting, Leigh nailed every line in the film, and she was totally convincing and sympathetic. Did anyone else out there appreciate the classic slight-of-hand approach to the "paranormal" the film took, as well as the serious issues it raised? In my opinion, a scary movie has to include something real to be scared about. Monsters and boogymen just don't do it for me. Not that that there weren't a few "aaaaaghh!" scares in this film, there were [the medicine cabinet scene scared the hell out of me!], but it was the movie itself, not any specific spooky part, that gave me the heebie-jeebies.

I don't know. Maybe my tastes aren't as exacting as they used to be, but I'm not afraid to say I think this was a damn good film. So there!


Those people like myself who think Jennifer Jason Leigh is one of the most exciting film actresses in the world have to see this film. And what a tour de force her performance is! She dominates nearly every frame, in a totally mesmerising study of a vulnerable and neurotic girl. But despite this wonderful job of acting, the film is truly horrible and disgusting. It does have the merit of not showing directly the pornography and sexual perversions which are integral to the story, and that is a merciful release. These are strongly suggested and glimpsed, but no more. That part is subtle. But otherwise, this is a 'weirdo horror flick' with nothing to redeem it other than the fact that Leigh is in it. And this brings us to whether stars should be appearing in things like this just because the acting parts are so meaty. I take the view that Jodie Foster and Anthony Hopkins should never have made 'Silence of the Lambs', because by doing so they polluted an already disturbed world. Similarly, Leigh should never have made this film, which can only make a lot of weirdos weirder. Can actors and actresses please restrain themselves from making the world a worse place despite the fact that there is a career advantage in it for them? This utterly revolting tale of sexual violence and perversion has no point. We can read about that sort of thing in the newspapers. Why do we need to waste good celluloid on such things? If people want to watch horror movies, then what is wrong with ghosts? Do we really have to have psychotic perverts in so many movies? Aren't there enough of them on the streets? These films should not be made, and actors and actresses should refuse to appear in them.


This is a film so perverted and completely unpleasant, it at times becomes a freak show. It's also hard to follow at times, and leaves a lot of loose ends. A beautiful but disturbed young woman inherits an abandoned whorehouse owned by her disgusting pervert uncle. As she uncovers the mostly gross secrets of her uncle's life and building, she begins to lose her mind under the strain, though someone in the background might be after her, as well. The characters are all messed up and impossible to really care about, and I found myself hoping that the building would blow up and kill most of the supporting characters. But one has to give credit where credit is due. Jennifer Jason Leigh gives an excellent performance as a young woman traumatized by some mysterious events in her childhood, even though no one will be surprised by what that trauma is when it's revealed. Leigh actually makes one feel for her character and root for her. Also helping somewhat is that the film has some style going for it, with slick cinematography and a few suspenseful scenes. It's just too bad these merits are wasted on a story that wasn't worth writing, let alone filming and charging admission for.


OK. In a nutshell (no spoilers i promise), the main character (Jennifer Jason Leigh) inherits this big old building that has a night club downstairs and living quarters upstairs. As soon as she moves in, strange things start happening. Things move around, crash.. feelings of being watched, etc. This guy, who gibes you the impression that he is some sort of City Official/Detective type, starts showing up trying to calm JJL down as she is scared witless due to the aforementioned abnormalities. Soon enough, she gains the strength to explore this dwelling and finds more rooms and doorways. OK, I gotta stop here. It gets weirder... and KINKY!!!


I LOVE Jennifer Jason Leigh, but I thought this was the worst movie she's ever done. It probably won awards in some universe, but not mine. She was the reason I bothered watching it to the end. The whole thing was disconcerting. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I saw this or something. The two redeeming qualities in this movie were Jennifer Jason Leigh and Steve Buscemi. I gave this film 2 stars, one for each of them. If I see it again and change my mind, I'll be sure to change my vote, but not before then.


There have been great Japanese disaster films like Submersion of Japan, and dreadful ones like Earthquake 7.9. This film falls between the best and worst in the good range.

A teenage boy wakes up on a train. He remembers traveling with his class somewhere when something happened, something terrible of which he is one of the few survivors. The first 40 minutes are set in a collapsed train tunnel where the survivors try to come to terms with their situation, both in the tunnel and in their heads. Its an odd way to start a film, but it works since it allows things to be set up and expectations to be dismantled.

After the 40 minutes the movie moves outside as the survivors struggle to travel across what is now a truly alien earth. What happened is not clear at least at first, but it was big and powerful and not over.

For the most part this film works in spades. Visually this film has set the bar to new end of the world films, and I can only imagine what a live action version of the manga and anime classic Akira would look like in the hands of these film makers. The acting is mostly fine with several eerie performances by several of the supporting cast. I also love the fact that this film is dealing with more than just destruction. There are ideas being battered about, as with the strange pair of kids who's father has removed that part of their brain that allows them to fear. Its trippy and creepy at the same time.

Unfortunately the film also has two serious, but not fatal problems. The first the film occasionally moves into cliché a couple of times, as in the crazed soldiers who hook up with our heroes. Why do we need this insanity, even if the film attempts to explain it? The other problem is the pacing is uneven. Sometimes sequences seem to go on a bit too long, while others are too speedy. It grated on this viewer and it felt longer than two hours. As I said its not fatal, but it is annoying because the film as a whole deserves better.

I liked this, especially its sense of the new world. 7 out of 10. See it if you get the chance.


Yes, the two leads are rather dull and the complete breakdown of society in about 48 hours, while explained by a few throwaway lines of dialog is a little hard to swallow. Still, Dragon Head is a success. A story where 2 high school kids emerge from what they think was an underground train wreck to find a natural disaster has decimated the entire countryside. Their immediate goal is to get to their homes in Tokyo. Along the way, the encounter the dregs of what remains of the populace, escaping death several times. The two youngsters also learn, that despite losing everything, in this new world, having each other is their most important possession. The ending is anti-climatic, but thanks to some nice special effects and upbeat music leaves off on a hopeful, if not positive note.


Well, if you're expecting a Hollywood blockbusting action style flick, you'll be sorely disappointed. It is based on a Japanese manga, but it's not one of the kill everything type of mangas. The vast majority of people are already dead.

The film loses something in its translation to English. It is based on a bleak view of how an apocalypse would affect Japan, or more particularly Tokyo. All I can say is that the characters reactions, psyches and the types of characters involved are typically Japanese in style. The extremities of some characters reactions seems unbelievable, but they are common extreme reactions found in Japanese mangas and other Japanese productions.


After sitting through predictable bore fests I finally get a disaster movie that is worth two hours of My life.

Dragon Head (based on a manga of the same name) starts off like Your run of the mill train wreck movie with two teenagers teaming up up to escape the carnage as well as a totally flipped out third teen only to discover the World that they knew has all but been wiped out by an horrific disaster leaving only an almost deserted waste land where even the Sun is blocked from view by volcanic ash actually raining down to Earth like thick snow.

Basically the movie centers around the two leads trying to make it back to Tokyo and their adventures along the way with a cast of unique and at times plain creepy characters showing up along the way, there are some flaws here and there but overall this is a great emotional, bleak, depressing yet in the end hopeful movie that I fully enjoyed and I personally thought the two lead actors did a superb job and at times the visuals and landscape were depressing yet stunning.

10/10


On the way home from a school trip to Kyoto, a tragic accident traps Teru Aoki's express train in a collapsed tunnel. the only other survivors of the catastrophe are his classmates, Ako Seto and Nobuo Takahashi. Teru resolves to escape to the surface, braving death, danger, and madness. But what awaits them outside is a desolate landscape of utter ruin as far as the eye can see. Battling insanity and starvation Teru and Ako search for a way to reach the only home either of them has even known, Tokyo. What could have caused such destruction? A natural disaster? A nuclear holocaust? A meteor? Encountering other survivors quickly changes from a blessing to a curse when it is revealed that a violent volcanic eruption has altered not only the landscape but the fragile electromagnetic field, that surrounds the earth, altering human brain chemistry causing some to slip into insanity to a staggering degree. This story is one of survival, pure and simple can love truly conquer all? That's the real question. In the vain of "The Day After Tomorrow" and "Armageddon" Doragon heddo(Dragon head) doesn't disappoint.


I really liked this movie. It is a "catastrophe" movie, even though it has nothing to do with the typical western idea of such a happening. It does not indulge in the process of reversing the trauma, it rather centers it's plot on surviving the drama. The characters are not typical western heroes, willing to sacrifice themselves for the sake of the collective. They are merely humans trying to survive in a world suddenly so different and hostile. It covers the bonds between the survivors, the human will to live, and the human will to just let go. An excellent movie, with some forms of dialogue typical for Japanese movies, and fond of human relations. It has great effects, but it's not a Hoolywood blockbuster movie with stupid plot. The disaster is just described, some ideas are given, but there is not detailed description of what happened. And there is no turning back.


I rented this expecting a little out of this movie (the movie's graphics are grade A regardless of the B-movie feel) and got what I wanted and then some. Subtitling was great.

SLIGHT SPOILERAGE BELOW ... nothing that explains the movie though Good premise. Along the lines of 28 days and The Thing with the way the people react to being put in a stressful situation.

If you get the chance, definitely pick it up for rental. As far as buying ... weak buy if you're into apocalypse movies (mainly because they only show what's going on in Japan and you don't know what's going on in the rest of the world ... no 'The Core', 'Day After Tomorrow' 'feel' where stuff is going on around the world). That turns into a moderate buy if you're into Anime and want to show some other anime lovers something different, but they would appreciate (especially because the main girl sounds exactly like one of the whiny characters out of Inuyasha or something). Turns into a high moderate buy if you want something for people to say they've never seen before - and you may not get it back.


This movie is hard to score because it excels at one thing while failing miserably at another. It's about the end of Earth, (something like that) and the following chaos that follows. I'm sure that some point was lost in it's translation, but the movie does not seem to have a goal or distinct message, except for survival, which may be the message. The two lead characters are VERY weak and seem to have no chemistry at all. They don't even seem like they could, or would fall in love. And any other characters you meet are not explored to any extent, and I don't know why not because in parts this movie seems to DRAG-ON for decades! It gets really slow, but if it added something to the story I would not mind but it's slow for SLOWNESS sake, as if to fill up the 1 1/2 with mindless banter. Well that's the bad, and now the good, the effects are the best catastrophe-movie effects I have ever seen BAR-NONE! They completely beat any inane American Movie of the genre, and probably for 10% of what Hollywood over-spends for effects. Everything looked pretty real, the Horizon was always ash-covered and the cities really looked bombed out, and the meteors towards the end looked REALLY good, blasting through buildings like they were mere paper. Actually, the effects are the only reason to watch the movie but it does impart a feeling of dispare and survival, but the story needed more work.


How anybody could rate this movie highly is beyond me. The acting is atrocious. As others have said, from the first scene on, the main character can't seem to stand and spend most of his time crawling around whining. In fact he's only able to stand long enough to yell at someone (usually the female lead) then falls down again. For those that don't speak Japanese, the dialog consists of either mindless blabbering or pathetic pissing and moaning (usually by the main character).

The whole point of these disaster movies is to put people in a tough (but interesting) situation and watch them deal with it. In this case the completely impotent main characters refuse to do anything at all and only get through each strange encounter by combination of sheer luck, clumbsiness and "movie magic." Honestly, this movie would be better if Hollywood redid it and put Mr. Bean in the lead.

Disaster movies do not always require a well-refined plot as they are often more about action and/or character dynamics but this film has absolutely NO PLOT. Nothing is explained at all. The other characters act completely randomly and there is no decent action thanks to the limp-wristed main characters.


This movie is what you come up with if you take Armaggedon and you mix it with Die Hard. You remove Bruce Willis and make the main character die even harder, but not save anyone. You add a little Lord of the Flies and make it Japanese. Voila!

This is a movie that could have been a little shorter. It felt really long at its two hours, however it was surprisingly good. It's a disaster movie where people act disastrously, as the calamity that occurred is affecting the human brain as well.

The effects were nice, the emotions in the movie were rather violent for my taste, and I blamed it on Japanese cinema, but it was the magnetic field's fault (or was it? :) ). The script was well done and I thought the actors played well.

It's worth a watch, it may surprise you. It was very close to an 8, but the accent put too strongly on human insanity and the length dropped it to 7.


While Japanese theater has reached a new height in the west, there are still some duds to be seen. The premise of "Dragonhead" is a great one, 3 students survive a train wreck in a tunnel on the way home from school. One of them decides to get out of the tunnel and get to the surface any way possible where they find Japan changed drastically. Total destruction as far as the eye can see from an unknown cause. This premise opens the door on LOTS of possibilities, but the film falls short of any real scares. The problem that I had was that the film has a feel of a society in months or years of disintegration, not days. There are kids that have had MAJOR brain surgery and fully recovered, fully degenerated people out to kill themselves and the students that find them, and a somewhat weak explanation of magnetic forces on the brain. Originality aside, this film fails to deliver what so many other Japanese films do well. Skip this one.


What is really disappointing about this movie is that the art direction is so fantastic, it makes the inane acting so upsetting to watch. Seriously, 3/4 of this movie focuses on the main character stumbling around, falling down, and then waddling around on the ground like an invalid. None of the characters act at all rational, and yet they are all surrounded by amazing sets and brilliantly realized visions of the apocalypse. If only the director could have things move faster, or have people stop falling over. I thought to myself, "if I took a drink every time someone falls down to the ground, I'd be dead." It might make a fun time at a party of with some friends, but if you're looking to enjoy a good movie, I would skip out on this tumbling mess.


Having watched a huge panorama of movies already, i was pleased to see Dragonhead. It is an Easter-Asian movie, and i decided to watch quite a few others after this one.

The special effects are just good, sometimes really good. It is a good approach to such a movie too, because you start to think it's a nuclear disaster at the beginning, and then you find out it's actually something a bit worse than that, when the crust of the earth moves, the Earth's balance shifts. That's true, but especially when the magnetic field gets messed up, our apocalypse will come, or rather will rain down on us without holding back the tears of destruction.

When you have a volcano popping up not far from you, and throwing up huge magma bricks at you, that is not nice, i wasn't surprised the humans, well at least the Japanese lost the will to fight for life. But then again, some people have to believe in the future, because there is always a future, no matter how grim things look like.

I put 10/10 for Dragonhead, because of its realism, Apocalypse is not about happiness, it is boring, and everyone just needs to find the will to fight on, against all odds. If you like something a bit different than big blockbusters, then this movie is so for you, because in Asia they approach everything from an objective point of view, that is what makes their quality.


Yes, the manga-inspired art direction is very fine. Too bad there's no plot, and it's paced slower than a Bergman film, and there's not a single actor in it who knows how to convey distress without shouting, whining and falling down. Literally, they spend most of the movie doing those three things, over and over and over, until you wonder why they don't all kill one another and drink one another's blood--not to survive, but just to shut everyone up. For a post- apocalyptic sci-fi type film, it's amazing how very little else happens in its very s- l-o-w two hours. And yet for all its ponderous and portentous stylings, it says nothing to us about survival or friendship or civilization or etc.--all the Big Issues this type of movie is supposed to have us ponder--that we don't get from airheaded Hollywood blockbusters like "Armageddon" and "War of the Worlds."


I am a sucker for post-apocalyptic event films, and will cut them a lot more slack than other Hollywood fare. However, Dragon Head has made me very wary of ever returning to the genre. What a waste of celluloid. No story, no character development, poor effects, and a male lead who wanders about clueless from start to finish. Most bad films leave you bored or listless; with Dragon Head, I was shouting at the TV screen, it was so mind-numbingly stupid.

Some kind of apocalyptic event has taken place while the protagonist was riding the train. What is this event? How did it come about? We are never told. How do the surviving male and female high school pupils come to terms with this event? They don't. How do they grow, mature and change through the film? They don't. They just wander from one bizarre scenario to the next (from a town where the youth have turned on their elders, to a bunker where everyone is eating drugged food) without any causal relationship between the stages of their journey or the events they encounter there. I suppose some kind of Lord of the Flies metaphor is implied by the boy-savage who menaces the leads in the first third, but without connecting this to WHY civilisation has ended and WHY people are reacting the way they are, the message goes nowhere.

A script as poor as this should never, ever have been made. Sayaka is a good actress, as she showed with a nuanced performance in the short film Bean Cake, but even she can't salvage this. This film has no saving graces. Not a single one.

It gets one star, because I am not allowed to give it zero.


"Hey, I've just been to Uzbekistan and found lots of places that would make a great post-apocalypse location shoot! Lets do it!" A film that seemingly exists just to show off the geography, and has no story of interest (2 people escape from a train wreck in tunnel, on reaching the surface they discover the world is ended, nobody knows why, there are a few survivors struggling for existence etc etc), and no characters of interest (a couple of dull teenagers, a sprinkling of nut cases, only some twins who have been operated on to have their fear removed spark any interest).

Its hard to believe this is based on a manga: who would read such a dull comic? Nothing happens: at the end, it feels like it was just a feature-length first episode of a mini-series. So what about this geography? Well, yes, its definitely desolate, colorless, cold, post-apocalyptic. But 2 hours of looking at people stumbling through it? No thanks.


Julian Morris is the best actor ever and Whirly girl is perfect movie to watch and especially if you're in love. From this movie I think lot of girls have learned that even if you are a stripper you still can find a perfect guy like is Julian Morris I have to say that the sex scene is so hot. (I wouldn't suggest anyone to watch this movie with kids).

I have a lot to say about this movie but I am going to keep it short,

I am currently in IRAQ and I think I needed something that really brings me to a real world and that was Whirly girl, It really make me forget the rockets for a little bit, actually they did shut a rocket while I was watching, didn't run to the bunker,(crazy ain't)

Julian Morris did a great job and the stripper .OMG she make the movie even better. Thanks for this movie and I wish I could meet Julian and the girl in person to thank for what a great job they've done.

(If, you, Mr. Morris or the girl read this comment please contact me at qari06@yahoo.com .(I don't think so) Thank you Thank you Thank you.


Its not a big production and we could see more nudity or more romantic scenes, but it is worth to see.

The story of a college boy with strong values such as responsibility who falls in love with a whirly girl. The girl made him forget the consequences and start doing some risky things for her, and actually his attitude changed this girls life who changed her meaningless live and finally found something worth in her life.

It's mainly a romantic story puts the reason and the principles of this boy against his feelings.

I really enjoyed.


Whirlygirl suffers primarily from a bad script and poor direction. The script lacks the closure of a third act; we are left hanging thinking there needed to be something more. There is a rescuer scene which I guess the director thought would be a climax but the movie has an episodic feel to it.

This film is based on a true story. Well the scriptwriter should have embellished it since true stories do not make compelling films. The lead actor Julian Morris does a decent job with the material but the rest of the cast performances are flat. In fact one of the students, who was acting like he was just waking up had a believability level of zero. Speaking of Morris, I had just watched him in Cry Wolf where he also plays a prep school student and his character seems to have walked out of that slasher movie into this one. Slasher movies can get by without any character development but a film like Whirlygirl requires it.

Hats off to DP Christo Bakalov for delivering some great images to such a hollow story.


When i first saw this movie i thought it was going to suck. but i was actually surprised at the effort that the people put into making this movie. although it wasn't a very popular nor original film i still liked it. another thing i liked is how it was filmed at my school Avon Old Farms. when i was watching it, i was in my common room where one of the scened was filmed in, it was cool to see the common room being used by other people besides the school kids. this movie was a lot like "the girl next door" when i say this i mean that it had the plot involving 2 kids, a rebel teenage girl and a not-so-rebel teenage boy. the plot pretty much consists of the girl turning the boy into a rebel and the bay turning the girl into a not-so-rebel girl. like i said, it was a lot like "the girl next door" just not casted with famous people. overall its a good film, i suggest anyone who reads this should see it.


Wow, this was really terrible.

I don't care if they say it was based on a true story, this honestly, and I'm serious, honestly, was the worst movie I have ever seen. The actors were OK, but the story line was just plain stupid. It's about a stripper/escort who honestly looks 10 years older than the main character and his obsession with her, amongst the other 2 or 3 nutballs involved in her life. She out weighs him by at least 20 pounds and he thinks he can go busting into homes/apts in New York like he's freakin spiderman or something. At least in the end he gets a grip...oh my I seriously would never recommend this movie to anyone. What a waste of time.


Me and my friend who goes to Avon Old Farms (the school where this was filmed) decided to watch this movie last night. I thought since he goes there and i spent so much time there it might be cool to see it in movie.

B.S.

This movie had the fakest feel to it. It took forever to come out first of all, it was filmed when my friends brother, who just graduated, was a freshman there, and it just came out in 2006, and the quality is pretty bad. The acting was third rate, and the emotion, forced.

It was funny to watch though. I think the name Walden Academy sounds like a joke, and the people attending "Walden" are nothing like the actual prep school students who attend AOF. I would watch it again just to see AOF's debut, but i regret paying 3.99 for it on demand.

Word of advice. If you don't go to AOF, don't watch it. If you do go to AOF, then that means you're paying at least 24 grand a year to Mr. LaRoque. You can afford a better movie.


Whirlygirl was premiered two nights ago at the New Haven Film Festival. The film was shot largely in New Haven, especially the New York scenes. The bulk of director Jim Wilson's film experience has come from producing 6 Kevin Costner films: Revenge, Dances With Wolves, The Bodyguard, Wyatt Earp, The Postman, and Message in a Bottle. So perhaps we shouldn't be surprised to find wooden acting and poor writing in this film, even though Mr. Costner is nowhere to be found. Monet Mazur is certainly beautiful, but her performance is embarrassingly hammy; and the script is, in places, just terrible. But the guys aren't bad, and the scenes in the boys' school are fun. And Fran Kranz is always enjoyable to watch.


What else would you give your own personal story...

This film is probably a coincidence but 9 out of the 10 things that happened in this movie are about me...

I attended Avon Old Farms (Where the movie was filmed)

I played Hockey there (The lead actor Plays Hockey)

The 2nd weekend there I got caught with a girl off campus and was about to get kicked out when...(Don't want to spoil the ending)

The Boardroom scene was verbatim.

The Teachers were identical.

The only thing they left out was my name....

I'm very interested in meeting the writer considering the DVD says based on a true story...

Yours Truly,

The Legend of Avon Old Farms...Todd Johnson

P.S. Looks like getting kicked out of AOF 22 years ago was finally worth it.


Having lived many years in Acadiana, I can tell you that this is a beautiful depiction of the immense grace of the area during the forties. The film is not great drama, but the mystery and immense beauty of the bayou is authentic. Joseph Boudreaux, the boy in the movie will melt your heart with his lovely presence and Cajun ways.

Thankfully, this film was placed in the archives of the National Library of Congress in the nineties. The restoration is exquisite! I, for one, am thankful that this monumental tribute to the true Cajun people, as they once were, has been resurrected.

Much of what you will see in this film is, sadly, gone forever. There will never be another tribute to Acadiana like Louisiana Story!


If you appreciate black and white cinematography, then you will delight in seeing the restored version of this movie on DVD. Cinematographer Richard Leacock and director Flaherty have teamed up to be the Ansel Adams of the film world. This is one of the most cinematic of films - its power and magic lie in the poetry of the images. The score by Virgil Thomson deserved its Pulitzer Prize for music in 1949; it receives a first class performance here by the Philadelphia Orchestra under Eugene Ormandy.

Some have commented on the weak story, but I rather enjoyed it - it could be billed as "Huckleberry Finn meets Standard Oil." The story is told through the eyes of a young Cajun who lives with his grandfather and mother in a simple cabin in the Louisiana marshland. In the opening shots we see the boy exploring the bayous in his canoe with his pet raccoon. He has an elemental bond with his natural environment that made me jealous. The boy's grandfather signs a lease allowing Humble Oil to drill a wildcat well on the bayou near his cabin. We share the boy's wonder at seeing the oil derrick being floated into position and his excitement in being invited onto the rig to follow the drilling up close.

From the viewpoint of a more environmentally conscious time some sixty years later, the benevolent portrayal of the oil industry seems a bit quaint, but that a young boy should be fascinated by the process seems genuine, in any era. In fact I found the details on the drilling captivating, particularly the way those scenes were filmed as a ballet with the roustabouts moving to the rhythms of their work accompanied by the clanking of pipes and chugging of engines.

I had a problem with how delighted the grandfather and mother were at being able just to buy a few gifts from the profits of oil having been struck on their land. While the company to whom they had leased their land was making mucho bucks, it looks like the family got a few hundred dollars. Given the fact that this movie was commissioned by Standard Oil, I am sure that it was not the intent to make the company appear so greedy, but maybe that's one thing that hasn't changed in sixty years.

Joseph Boudreaux as the young boy is endearing and Lionel Le Blanc is believable as the crusty grandfather. All the actors appear to be locals - this adds authenticity, but also presents a problem in that they are not greatly skilled when it comes to delivering their lines. But there is minimal dialog and what there is is hardly necessary as the music and images carry you along.

The DVD has several interesting extras, one of them being a reading of some letters from Richard Leacock (postmarked from Abbeville, Louisiana) to his wife during the long filming. In one letter he says that they ran across the twelve-year-old Boudreaux in a café in Cameron, Louisiana. He had an Acadian accent, had trapped with his father, could handle a Cajun pirogue, and had an infectious smile. They figured he was perfect for the part but, since he was born out of wedlock and under-aged, there were significant difficulties under Louisiana law to be worked out before he could be signed on. Leacock's letters are quite frank. In one he notes that there was buzz about the visit from the director of all Standard Oil public relations and that Flaherty did not like him, referring to him as "the old bastard."

This is a wonderful film in the literal sense of the word wonderful.


Under the heading "Louisiana" I checked this documentary called Louisiana Story by Robert J. Flaherty out of curiosity from my local East Baton Rouge Parish Library. Beautiful views of the state swamps as well as fascinating scenes of the oil rig that inhabits them dominates the film which depicts the adventures of a Cajun boy on a boat fishing and hunting alligators with his pet raccoon. His father occasionally comes along for the ride and they both have friendly relations with the workers of the oil well. There are some scenes of the mother as well. Great Pulitzer Prize-winning music scored by Virgil Thomson is beautifully performed by The Philadelphia Symphony Orchestra as conducted by Eugene Ormandy. Wonderful cinematography by Richard Leacock. Worth checking out as a depiction of late '40s Louisiana as well as the final film of Mr. Flaherty before his death in 1951. Update-4/29/07: The Cajun boy that starred in this film, J.C. Boudreaux, is now 73 and lives with his wife of 55 years, Regina, in a FEMA trailer in the town of Sweet Lake which is south of Lake Charles. They moved there after Hurricane Rita destroyed their home in Cameron. They had seven children who have provided them numerous grand-and great-grandchildren. Boudreaux still loves fishing. I found this out reading this morning's The (Baton Rouge) Advocate.


Robert Flaherty was the great American documentary filmmaker from Nanook of the North to Louisiana Story. Funded by the oil industry, nonetheless, the great visuals from a director -cinematographer make this film a joy. Forget the story and "see" the film!


Robert Flaherty had a great eye for the interesting shots. Never more so than this oil company funded film about a young boy seeing the oil rig come to his Louisiana bayou. Although there is not much of a story the shots of the oil rig, life in the bayou, and the moods that Flaherty captures make it a film well worth seeing. If you see "Man of Aran" or "Nannok of the North" remember it was the same great documentary filmmaker. I've seen it twice and probably will see it again someday.


Robert J. Flaherty was known for his documentaries, but this - which seems to be his most revered - is fictional.

This movie was shot on location in Petit Anse Bayou, Louisiana - mostly in the swamps nearby. The three lead parts were played by locals. Steven Soderbergh did the same thing for his film BUBBLE (2005), which showcased mostly non-actors from the Wood County, West Virginia area - where it was shot.

This is film has its problems. The plot of the story, while easy enough to understand, is too thin - there isn't any conflict. Dialogue is scarce. Flaherty is very learned in the art of the documentary; the art of the drama is not the same.

This aside, I think this film is exquisitely shot. It's really very beautiful to look at. He and Leacock created the most beautiful alligator-ridden swamp in movie history.


another film from robert flaherty (nanook of the north and man of aran). the other two films i've seen from him are documentaries, whereas this one is pretty much a straight film (though it won an academy for best documentary). an argument could be made for man of aran as a documentary, but i don't think that this one qualifies. i think that flaherty works better within the documentary confines. perhaps this is because he needn't worry about developing a story or script - that comes naturally given the genre - and so he can focus more on the editing process and capturing the humanity of the characters. it's also possible that his venture into feature films came after he reached his peak. nanook of the north and man of aran had the similar theme of man's struggle to survive within nature. while they followed rather simple people using simple tools (harpoons and fish hooks mostly) this film introduces industry as man's tool in conquering nature. i must admit that this turned me off of the film a bit; it just didn't seem as pure. it's a beautiful film - the black and white photography really looks good (it was restored by the ucla film archive) and the shots are well composed. the story is told through the eyes of a young boy who wanders around the louisiana swamps on his canoe. he comes to admire the crew of the oil rig that has come to his part of the swamp to drill for oil as part of a deal his father has made with a business partner. the oil people's presence is given much more of a positive portrayal than i would have expected from flaherty. as i perused some of the dvd extras i discovered why this is...it turns out that standard oil commissioned the production and requested a film that showed the beauty of humanity and positive impact oil can have while being entertaining all the while. it's flaherty's best looking film and, again, the score is a highlight, but i think it's kind of a shame this had to be his final picture. B.


This just seems like something special. Grainy Black & White documentary-style presentation financed by The Standard Oil Company. A fictionalized story of a young boy(Joseph Boudreaux)and his pet raccoon playing in the alligator invested Louisiana bayous. Its a happy, peaceful life sustained by fishing and trapping. The young boy's father(Lionel Le Blanc)sells the rights to an oil company to drill for oil just behind their cabin home. The drillers make friends with the Cajuns, while off- camera the rig strikes a pocket of gas. Mission accomplished and the drillers leave the bayou environment as clean as they found it and the Cajun family is richer for it.

Of course, the story is purely fiction and does not deal with the state of Louisiana as a whole... one has to wonder if the project is not oil company propaganda. Beautiful cinematography shot by Richard Leacock. LOUISIANA STORY is directed, written, and produced by Robert J. Flaherty. Running time is 78 minutes and worthy of your time.


Let's face it, there really isn't much to this movie. It's a movie directed by Robert J. Flaherty, who was best known for his documentaries and his most famous and first movie "Nanook of the North", which wasn't even a real documentary. This movie also ain't no documentary and its something that is somewhat between a full length movie and a fake-documentary, like "Nanook of the North".

In all honesty because of its style and approach, the whole movie and its story was far from an interesting one. It's not really a movie in which a lot is happening and there is no drama to the story in terms of having something awful or shocking happen in it. It just tells the story of a little Cajun boy who enjoys living in the swampy Louisiana area, when suddenly an oil company shows up and starts building an oil derrick. You think that after this point his whole life will change and he'll do anything to prevent the oil company from drilling and destroying the territory he loves to play and hunt in. This movie however got actually produced by an oil company, so there is no such happening in this movie at all. Instead he makes friends with the oil people and just go on about his life as if nothing has drastically changed. This is why "Louisiana Story" just isn't that interesting or strong as movie, story-wise.

It's however still a very well directed one. Every shot got set up nicely and Robert J. Flaherty obviously had an eye for the environments and for creating some beautiful set up shots. The movie is also supported by a really nice musical score by Virgil Thomson. The editing at times is however really off and at times ruins some of the movie its pacing.

Not really a that interesting movie to watch but still perfectly watchable because of how fine it's all made.

7/10


"Columbo: Murder, a Self Portrait" was one of the Columbo movies that aired during the early 90's as a part a Saturday night rotation on ABC with "B.L. Stryker" with Burt Reynolds and Telly Savalas's revival of "Kojak". Most of the two-hour installments of "Columbo" tended to drag, in spots, but "A Self Portrait" moves at a brisk pace, benefiting from effective and inspired performances from guests Patrick Bauchau, Fionnula Flannagan, Shera Denese, George Coe, and Isabel Lorca. Falk's friend Vito Scotti makes one of his frequent appearances on the show, this time playing a bartender.

Written by Robert Sherman and directed by James Frawley, the film also sports a great Patrick Williams' score.

And even Columbo's pet "Dog" makes a brief, yet memorable, appearance.

One of the major highlights are the different "interpretations" of the dreams of the principals. Fascinating lighting, setting, and camera-work make this a "Columbo" to remember.


An artist with a wife and two female lovers. First, he's straight or too heterosexual if you ask me. Of course, Shera Danese who plays his wife is the real-life wife of COlumbo himself, Peter Falk. I like Fionnula Flanagan who has a supporting role. Yes, it's the same formula for Columbo. I am always amused by his embarrassment and his ignorance even in this episode. He always seems out of place and fascinated by the situation. Artists have been prime suspects before. He always has a wealthy, prominent, and celebrity prime suspects but he is always at the top of his game and he always catches his man or woman. I just love having him back but this is one of my personal favorites to watch again and again.


Patrick Bachau is wonderful as the tempermental artist who cannot accept the fact that his ex-wife has fallen in love with another man, a psychiatrist superbly played by George Coe. Falk's real-life wife, Shera Therese shines brilliantly as Bachau's current wife. And Vito Scotti and Isabella Garcia-Lorca are both superb in supporting roles. This is one of the 20 best Columbo movies ever made.


As a fan of "The Sopranos," I was perhaps a little reluctant to watch "Kingpin," since I felt that nothing could really surpass "The Sopranos" in my affections. Nonetheless, a friend had bought me the miniseries DVD for my birthday, so with no other excuse at hand, I watched it.

And I loved it. There are only six episodes, each an hour long, but it took me only 'til about the second before I was hooked. The acting is excellent, and I'm left wondering why I haven't heard of or seen these actors before. Each character was sympathetic and interesting; even the ones you're probably "supposed" to hate, and it was difficult deciding who exactly to root for. I especially liked the relationship between Miguel and his brother, Chato -- one of trust and closeness instead of the deceit and backstabbing that's all too common in shows along the same lines.

Agent Flores and Miguel's wife, Marlene, were also both very appealing, as strong, independent female characters who have their own complexities and motivations, rather than being overshadowed by the male characters. And I can't forget the particularly comic relationship between the doctor played by Benben, and his "thug" friend, Junie. The show provided a number of unexpected and unique twists on an old theme.

Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the show never took off. Maybe it was too expensive to produce, maybe it didn't get enough support from NBC, or maybe (and I hope this isn't the case), it slipped because it was not a predominantly white cast; most of the characters were Hispanic/Latino. That seems a particular shame, if it is the reason "Kingpin" never succeeded, since its cast was truly talented and I would have liked to see some of those actors get a definite career boost.

Still, at least it's available to rent, and I highly recommend giving it a shot. Even if you're a hardcore "Sopranos" lover, like I am, don't let the comparison deter you! They're similar in that they're about criminal families, but they each have a very different feel and flavor, and you'll only be robbing yourself of something new to enjoy.

I just wish there were /more/ of it to enjoy!


This show was the best show on tv. Too bad NBC didn't have the guts to keep it on tv. The show was great. The actors did an excellent job. The writers for the show came up with someone to keep you wanting to watch tv. This show is better than Sopranos. Yes it is a little edgy for network tv, but with the time slot that it was on made it ok. For the network tv they cut a lot out of the show that is shown on the DVD set. The DVD set shows how the producers wanted the show to be. Hopefully HBO will pick this show up and air it. Then it will have a network that won't be afraid to show it. For anyone that likes the Sopranos or Godfather will love this show and I highly recommend it. Miguel is cool and smart while Chato takes care of the dirty work.


After years of only finding good dramas on HBO and Showtime, I'm finally watching network TV and enjoying it thanks to this show. The show is both well written and acted. Sheryl Lee is a pleasant surprise - I think I've only seen her before as Laura Palmer on Twin Peaks and had no idea she was so talented. Brian Benben's morally conflicted plastic surgeon is equally intriguing. This is one miniseries that definitely needs to return for a full season!


this show has been type-casted as the Sopranos on daytime TV. But i think this show is as good or if not better than the Sopranos. Kingpin is much more stylish with the camera and music then the Sopranos is and Kingpin hardly eases up there is constant action going on on screen. This show was made to be aired on Cable for the drug and violent content and i do believe this show could of beat out the Sopranos if it was made into a regular T.V. series and if it wasn't so restricted on content, overall if you like the Sopranos then you are more than likely love kingpin and even if you don't like the Sopranos you should give it a try for the massive amount of raw energy put in this TV Show.


I can't believe that "Kingpin" is getting thumped in the ratings by the usual sludge that nets like Fox dumb us down with every night. I think "Kingpin" is simply too hip and too ethnic for the masses. Well, it's their loss. I think the show is riveting, intriguing and I'm really looking forward to the next episode, but I am disappointed that "Kingpin" is just a six episode miniseries as opposed to twelve or more. BTW, Marlene is somewhat of a babe, but I wish she'd quit giving Miguel advice because he is obviously the most cerebral and wise of all those competing for domination of the cartel. Since NBC owns Bravo now, maybe they'll continue new eps. of "Kingpin" on Bravo next season if the ratings merit it. That would definitely bring some life to a network that most certainly needs it.

Mark


It's been a long time since I've seen such a well enacted and so realistic TV Series.

It seems that the "narcotraficantes", some of whom I would call "NACOtraficantes" are just as real as the ones who vandalize and terrify Mexican life in the border as of today.

It is somehow awkward the mix of English and Spanish and I just wonder if this is the kind of language spoken in the US-Mexican border. I've been to Laredo/Nuevo Laredo once and indeed it seems to be like this.

It is also true that today the blood bath seems to be many times worse than when the movie was filmed.

It's a shame that the series has been shut down.

A friend of mine lent me the three DVDs and I couldn't stop until I saw all the episodes.


This is a hoot -- a Mexican drug family with few redeeming qualities, corrupt politicians, and fumbling DEA officers. If there's one problem it's that there's almost too much going on -- were it a series, the action would take longer to play out. Picture it as a drug cartel family soap opera. The first episode alone was hilarious --a wacko cousin of the Kingpin doesn't like it when Kingpin's wife shoots her mouth off, so he plans to tear off her blouse and whip her! And this is when he isn't feeding the body parts of his victims to his pet tiger! Needless to say, he gets it in the end because he's a threat to the family business. But there are lots of other nutso people running around, causing trouble. The only weak spot is Brian Benben as a plastic surgeon/drug dealer who's too goofy to take seriously. Overall, though, the whole thing is murder, mayhem and kitsch with a unique latin flair.


All I have to say is, that this is the best movie I have seen, a movie that actually reflects on what happens when politics are involved. This has nothing to do with Mexican or American, it's all politics people. The same thing takes place here in the United States, but we just don't know it, if it happens in Mexico, it happens in the US too. If the government really wanted to stop drugs from hitting our streets, they have the resources to do so, but why won't they do anything. Why destroy what puts food on there table, if the government stopped everything we wouldn't have the need for so many jobs to supposedly contain the issue. The governments point of view is to create jobs and there you have it, they have to turn a blind eye to keep the unemployed line down. This is my thought!


As you may know, HBO is replaying "The Sopranos" in its entirety (years one through four)at the rate of one episode per week each Sunday evening. Sunday, February 9th, marked the second episode of year one and in the most timely fashion, Yancey Arias (Miguel of "Kingpin" fame) makes a brief appearance as a gay car thief (Arnaz). He almost took a bullet, but was spared the indignation so he could star another day, apparently.

After having enjoyed the first two episodes of "Kingpin," I was a bit disappointed in the third installment of the series, although it had its moments, the canine shootings not being among them. Unbelievably, at least to me, "Kingpin" finished third in its timeslot, as it appears that the networks can continue to feed the masses predictably lame, tired and predictable programming and the herd will flock to it as if it were Aunt Bea's homemade apple pie. I'm expecting a very compelling fourth edition on Feb 11, which will serve as set up for the home stretch next week. If the last three episode are real strong, I think viewers will have found memories of "Kingpin," although daring to be different is not a guarantee of everlasting popularity.


This series deserves to become a regular next season or at least a regular mini-series. The great plot points for the family and extended relatives have all been laid out. There was a surprising amount of depth to the episodes, ranging from the thoughtful to the hilarious. One thoughful point was the class snobbery, prevalant in Mexico, played out between the Senator and Miguel Cadenas. There were some laugh out loud moments, from Jacob Vargas' entire character of Ernesto (killed too early) to Dr. Klein's (Brian Benben) realization that he had been mispronouncing Romolo's name all along. "It's not Romuulo, it's Rrrromolo!" The only negative can be that we're asked to root for a drug kingpin. I thought perhaps America was not ready for that, but after seeing the "admirable" qualities of the beloved Sopranos I now ask-Why not?


Kingpin is a great mini series. Most parts are very intense and it's full of family love. The only bad part is that there seems to be two different story going on at the same time. There doesn't seem to be any connection between the two (I miss the first episode, so I don't know if they have mentioned the connection, but from the 2nd episode to the 6th, there is nothing mentioning the connection between the 2 "story")


Although I'd like to some day, I have never seen "The Sopranos" and therefore cannot compare the two. Not having even regular cable or satelite has certainly limited what I can see on TV, which is not necessarily bad, either.

"Kingpin" struck me as something of a cross between "Traffic" and "The Godfather," with Miguel Cadena as the Michael Corleone character (soft-spoken, college-educated, etc.). The show certainly was a risky endeavor for NBC, as it focused mainly on characters with no apologies for what they do. And while this was no masterpiec of television entertainment, it was certainly, in my own opinion much more intriguing than Reality TV, and even some of the police dramas that are so popular on the Big Three (NBS, ABC, CBS).

As the title character, I sometimes thought that Miguel was perhaps too weak, not that Yancy Arias was not good in the role, but even Michael Corleone, in his calmness, killed two men, one of them a cop.

The editing seemed to usually convey the story well. While his character was not terribly important, Brian Benben's Dr. Klein offered some much-needed comic relief to an otherwise grim miniseries.

Marlene was certainly very tough and sexy, and Chato made the series interesting as Miguels older brother, who, sometimes quite surprisingly and inventively, took care of eliminating unwanteds.

As the series came to a close, however, I became less interested in the Cadena family, although both the scene where Chato killed the policemen who raped him, and the scene where their uncle strangled the senator with a garote were both very exciting. I became more and more interested in the DEA's part in the series, after Delia Flores got mixed up in the investigation into "Truck" Thompson and his narcotics officer cousin, Rolando Porter.

Unless there was enough of an audience to suggest this become a regular series, I think that in the end there seemed, somehow, to be a lack of closure for the characters.


I didn't want to watch it, but my husband insisted. I hate "The Sopranos" and all violent films/television. Why did I like this then, you ask? Because this was an exceptional production, and I hope they will do a series. The acting was incredible, big-screen quality. The child who played Cadenas' son was the best child actor I've seen.


This mini movie was riveting, I have never watched a mini movie that went on longer than one day, and i have watched every episode! Kingpin has kept my interest from beginging to end. I wish you guys would make this show into a series, I would watch every second of it.


I don't normally watch regular TV. Most of it, to me is boring and mundane. Besides, between digital cable, VHS and DVD rental possibilities and regular movies in theaters, why waste time with stuff full of advertisements and, for the most part, dumbed down? But as a fan of the Sopranos,I thought I would look at a ripoff of that show, for at least one episode. I wasn't sure then if I liked it, but watched the next couple of episodes, and by then I was hooked. It may be like the Sopranos in that it is about a modern crime family, but except for that is quite different.

Kingpin is well written, well acted, and unlike most movies or series, actually causes you to think about it after you've watched it. I certainly hope NBC picks it up as a regular series.


Kingpin is an excellent series, it is one of the best ones that I have seen in a long time. This is reality, this is what is happening in the drug world. The actors bring reality to their characters, every single actor plays his/her part very well. I was hoping it would become a regular on TV. Why is it that when there is a great series on TV, possibly a big movie screen version, someone decides to end it. I am 100% positive that a lot of viewers are going to be disappointed when this series ends on Tuesday.


David Mills has given us a fascinating look into a world that's completely unknown to most of us. He's filled this world with interesting, multi-layered characters. Yancey Arias' portrayal of Miguel Cadena is compelling and I truly believe that the character of Miguel has the potential to be one of the most memorable television characters ever created. I, particularly, like the strong female characters portrayed by Angela Alvarado Rosa and Sheryl Lee. Alvarado-Rosa's 'Delia Flores' is smart, dedicated and tough; a worthy adversary for Miguel. Marlene is equally smart, tough and determined to retain her current lifestyle. She's no Carmella Soprano. Not only is she fully aware of every aspect of the business; but as the family lawyer, she is an integral part of it. I sincerely hope this show becomes a regular series. Long may "Kingpin" reign!


This show is kind of like the Mexican version of The Sopranos. I would say this show is more like the Mexican version of The Godfather movies though. The main character is exactly like Al Pacino's character in The Godfather movies, Michael Corleone. Like Michael Corleone, the main character Miguel Cadena is patient, violent when he needs to be and donates money to the Catholic church. This is a extraordinary mini series. If you like Mafia movies or the hit televison series "The Sopranos" that airs on HBO, you'll love "Kingpin". The show is about a Mexican mobster, Miguel Cadena (Yancey Arias) who takes over the family business after he has the acting boss (Jacob Vargas - Traffic) shot up beyond recognition by guys with Uzis, and the original boss who was on the run, shot twice in the forehead by a .50 Desert Eagle automatic. The show also stars Sheryl Lee (John Carpenter's Vampires, Twin Peaks) as Miguel's coke-addict wife who aside from being his wife is also his and his other associate's lawyer. The mini-series also has the story from the D.E.A.'s point of view, including a young female D.E.A. agent who was severely wounded by a bullet she got from a crooked Mexican cop working for Miguel's old boss. This show is really entertaining, and really plays like an HBO series. Watch all six episodes on NBC which show on Sundays and Tuesdays at 9:00, untill February 18. Grade: A


well i live in the the area that parts of this show was filmed and i have seen how the drug world works....For some reason people think that this is bad.... wel the styriotypeing is not ,wel to me, styriotyping.... if seen people deal drugs and i have seen how thing go when something goes wrong..... and if some people that are hispanic and take offence with it then don't watch it. i don't see any itallien people getting upset because they are being steriotyped by the sopranos... i thought that this show was very accurate, but a little to graphic. but you know life is a little to graphic. you will see things in life that you wish you could have never scene.... but hey thats life.... but i hope that this shows comes back for another sesion...if thier are any mistakes then sorry but im only 17 and suck at spelling.


I really liked this show, I even bought the whole set on dvd I liked it so much. I think it was just as good, if not better than the sopranos,and it had a lot of twists and it was not predictable at all. Overall, I think this is one of the best shows I've ever watched.


Kingpin has some of the worst writing of this genre. The dialogue is insipid. How the critics compared this miniseries to the Sopranos or even Shakespeare is unbelievable. For a superior show watch The Shield. I hope they do not pick up this series and reward utter dreck. Obviously studio hacks are giving this show the great reviews.


Trash ! NBC has fallen to new lows....what garbage can did they find this in ?? No plot, no story, you can't understand the words spoken, no character development, just another day on TV...............

Have a nice day...................


I loved the story told in the TV series and felt each of the characters was interesting and believable. Sam Loggin was a super Lucy! I thought Gus was suitably sleazy, and Daniel was a decent guy with his true qualities not evident at first. The 3 girls at Lucy's flat were each definite characters with good story lines of their own and their interactions reminded me of some of my experiences with a roommate. The office life portrayed was realistic and very funny! Each character was a clear individual and well-portrayed by the actors. I saw the show before I read the book so for me this show IS Lucy Sullivan. I read the book afterward and noted a number of differences from the TV show but felt the show still stands as a brilliant entertainment in its own right. It remains one of my favourite TV series and I'd love to watch it again if someone airs it again or if it comes out on DVD.