The comment about the overall editing seems harsh. The first portion of the film is admittedly not the best editing, but after that it is bordering on great. One scene in particular is worth looking at again and again. The film has the feel of two different editors and in fact that is what happened. This film is one of my all time favourites. It evokes mood and place and emotion and passion and atmosphere. All the elements of exceptional visual story telling. The fact that it is based on a real man who followed a very disciplined life and belief system, and had the courage and desire to stand up to certain perils makes this film a standout on every level.


The 20'th century history of Central and South America can be compressed into the film "Romero". I'm not going to comment on why this part of the world has been so long plagued by such violence and repression; that's up to sociologists. Although things as they stand in 2007 are no where near as bad as they have been, there are still completely wild areas in the America's (parts of Columbia are in anarchy with rebel groups still fighting a very long war). Central America saw some of the most brutal and repressive civil wars and regimes. Guatamala and El Salvador saw exceptionally horrible levels of death and destruction. El Salvador, which this film depicts, was in the throes of yet another wave of civil disorder, pitting the large and very poor underclass against the small numbers of privileged upper class with predictable results. The army was used as a brutal and murderous machine, acting out the dark ideas of the right wing. The US aided the right wing because US foreign policy blindly labeled all rebellious groups in the America's as "Communist" insurgents and worked overtime to eliminate them. That's the backdrop to this film.

The murder of Archbishop Romero was but the beginning of a ten year civil war that saw over 50,000 deaths in El Salvador. The film is hard on the nerves to watch as all depictions of depravity and death are. The actors have put their best into this important film. Two of them are sadly no longer with us: Richard Jordan and Raul Julia. Jordan shone in this film (and even more in one of my favorites - Gettysburg). Julia probably gives his most memorable performance. He is by turns shy, sedate, stirred, outraged, shocked and broken down. His depiction shadows that of the real Romero and one gets a sense that Julia had more than enough raw material to work with and that the script and storyline would support strong acting. In short, by the tragic end, we are emotionally drained and very upset, as we should be. If there is ever to be justice in this world, and it's a big "if", then we can start by demanding that perpetrators of violence are dealt with appropriately and not allowed sanctuary and support. Of course the chances of this happening while you live in a client state of the US is slim. A sad, wrenching depiction of both Romero's short career as Archbishop and of the black hole that overcame El Salvadore. As grim as they come but important to watch and take note of.


Romero is easily one of the best films made in the 1980's. The film is astounding. It is in fact very depressing, but shows the cruel and unusual ways of the San Salvadorian government in the 1970's. The film is violent and sometimes disturbing. I showed this film to my freshman classes at school, and they were somewhat disturbed. The main reason this film is so good, is Raul Julia's performance. His role as Oscar Romero really gave light to the film, and also impressed many of my students. His assassination scene is handled very well. Great Film. You must see this wonderful adaptation of you are to get the truth of what happened in Oscar Romero's life.

Rated PG-13 for Strong Violence, Language, and some Sexual References.


A great movie about the prophetic conversion of the Archbishop of El Salvador. The movie details the life of Oscar Romero after being appointed Archbishop. Believed to be the quiet bookworm, a man that wouldn't stir up anything, Romero makes a conversion in order to save his people from the oppressive government. As a result, he is martyred for his beliefs. A great picture to watch and take in.


This film shows clearly how the great archbishop learned of the atrocities of his government and how he eventually came to side against them. Romero was not a Marxist or a member of the FMLN, he was a liberation theologist, which contained elements of Marxism but ultimately is not Marxism.

One user here wrote a comment that the film was a propaganda piece, completely ignoring communist atrocities. With the exception of FARC and shining path, the US's beloved right-wing dictatorships were responsible for the overwhelming majority of murders. 70,000 were killed in El Salvador, across the border in Guatemala 200,000 were killed. These are only two examples of many other in Latin America. If you want to understand the beginnings of what would become genocide in El Salvador in the 80s, or even just to see the commitment of a great man to the poor and actually carry out what Jesus asked then see this movie.

PS - Romero will not be canonized, the current Pope waged a virtual war against liberation theologists, almost eradicating them from the church. What would you expect from a Nazi youth?


This movie made me proud to be Catholic. While it's not totally successful on an artistic level, the story of Romero's conversion was inspiring and spiritually moving. I hope the church will keep him on the fast track to sainthood! Aside from that, as a film, it gets a little too didactic towards the end (it was more emotionally involving before his conversion than after); however, Raul Julia's performance is superb.


This film presents a completely one-sided and often false portrayal of the situation in El Salvador in the late 1970s and 1980s. It offers no context whatsoever, and like so much propaganda out of Hollywood, the movie completely ignores Marxist revolutionary violence in Central America at the time. One is reminded of the movie Outbreak, in which the US Army is portrayed as the villain by Hollywood, when in truth Army doctors saved people from a vicious virus outbreak, as Richard Preston documented in his excellent book, The Hot Zone. It was in fact communist guerrillas who said they would murder anyone found with voting stamp dye on their hands during the El Salvador elections portrayed in the movie. But in a truly heroic act of defiance El Salvadorans stood in long lines for hours to vote under the threat of death by the guerrillas -- not, as the movie would have you believe, the Savadoran army. Similarly, in 1990 Nicaraguans voted against the communist junta led by Daniel Ortega. After watching the movie Romero you would never know these things, but the facts can be easily verified in authoritative historical sources. Of course, as you might expect, the US is another villain in the movie like the brutal El Salvadoran army, and the communists are of course just trying to help the people in a terrible situation. The movie only hints at the role "Liberation Theology" played in the thinking of some Catholic theologians at the time. All in all, this movie is hardly worth the effort and only worth it as a study in propaganda, despite the overtly religious context of the movie. Unless you believe Central America would have been better off under communism, watch this movie with a great deal of skepticism.


I've been getting a little tired of the computer-enhanced extravaganzas that have been flung at viewers over the past few years. You know what I'm talking about--the movies that are short on plot, acting or both which are bolstered up by loud FX and revolutionary digital animation so that it becomes "special effects in search of a picture". I'm delighted to say that CALENDAR GIRLS has nothing of the kind. It's all about the plot, all about the women involved, and all about laughing so hard you cry--or maybe about being able to forget tears in deep laughter, if only for a moment.

The acting is superb. One hardly needs to mention Helen Mirren. I read one comment that pans her Yorkshire accent; well, I attended it with an Englishwoman who is very familiar with such an accent and she specifically told me that her accent never slipped, so I've no idea where that comment came from.

Having been involved with the world of cancer treatment recently (fortunately with a happier outcome for my mother, a survivor of breast cancer) this movie strikes close to home. It's completely accurate; it's not pretty and it's often degrading, no matter how much the oncological staff tries to make it easier. The movie is also accurate in the kind of sentiments it expresses about cancer. People who have been touched by that filthy disease will do ANYTHING to fight it. (I sat on a spin bike for twenty-four consecutive hours in aid of breast cancer less than two weeks ago, so I do know what I'm talking about.) Yes, a few liberties with the real story have been taken. So what? The result is a coherent progression that is more interested in human beings than plot details. And isn't that what it should be about?

I've heard this dismissed as a movie for "older people". I'm proud to be of that number--after all, at the age of thirty-five I'm ten years out of the target demographic at which Hollywood films are aimed. If by "older people" they mean people who want a movie to be about something important as opposed to the latest spectacular light show, I'm glad to be of that number. I'd recommend this to anyone who's interested in a movie that is both hysterically funny and deeply touching. It has re-inspired me in the battle against cancer, and if it does that to anyone else, it will have made a worthwhile difference.


Based on a true story. There is a Women's Institute in Yorkshire England, a tiny little town. The Institute decides to raise money for new furniture for a local hospital. They decide the only way to raise money is do a nude calendar with members. The problem is all the members are 50+! The calendar is done and is a roaring success. The film focuses on some of the women and how the calendar affects their families and personal lives.

Whimsical is the best way to describe this. It's one of those British comedies that has few laughs, but is very lighthearted and has some serious drama in it. I can't say I loved the movie--the script, while well-written, is scattershot and the light, low-key tone was TOO low-key for me. And some story lines are brought up (one of the women has a cheating husband) and are never resolved. Still, there were some good laughs in it and there is some just beautiful views of (I'm assuming) Yorkshire. Especially incredible is a view of the entire town from on top of a huge rock overlooking the area.

Also we have some wonderful British actresses playing in the lead roles. The two best were Helen Mirren (who's just great--again) and Julie Walters (who looks absolutely stunning). Also this is one of the few films that celebrates the sexuality of women who are 50+. How many movies do you you see like that nowadays? Of course this is a British film--Hollywood would NEVER tell a story like this. Also the film does have some fairly explicit glimpses of female nudity--but they're not sexual in context and ARE needed for the integrity of the story.

I'm giving this a 7.


Based on a true story, eleven members of a women's institute group decide to pose nude for a rather untraditional annual calendar to raise money for charity.

With an all star cast lead by Helen Mirren and Julie Walters, we go on a journey through the ridicule and resistance that the ladies had to endure to achieve this amazing feat, which ultimately raised millions.

Calendar Girls is brilliantly performed and directed, and it has many heart wrenching tales that lie beneath the main story, each pertaining to the girls own reasons and drives to fight for what eventually became a mammoth success.

Heart Warming, Funny, Charming and Entertaining, undoubtedly a winner on every level.

8/10


Greetings again from the darkness. Director Nigel Cole delivers a charming, touching, funny story with a message. Based on the true story of a few society women in England who decide to do a quasi-nude calendar to raise money for a cancer center. The well-known story itself holds few surprises, but the cast is so wonderful and the dialogue so crisp that one can't help but enjoy the film. Helen Mirren ("Gosford Park") and Julie Walters ("Educating Rita") lead the mostly female cast who bare it all ... sort of. As much as I liked the film, I do believe the two leads should have flipped roles to make this even more effective. Also, the pacing is true British, as many of the lines are missed due to U.S. audience out-loud laughter. Be forewarned if you see it in a full theatre ... you will miss a few lines. A wonderful movie for all ages and both sexes!


This delightful female cast, brings back to the screen an excellent, entertaining, funny, and dramatic wicked elegance of The Full Monty phenomenon with a feminine twist. Julie Waters in a Supporting Actress Oscar performance together with Helen Mirren easily capture the British wry humor and the typical stuck-up attitude of old English propriety its predecessor. There are great moments of laughter and sobering moments of reality and realization of sacrifice, loss, betrayal. One of the best movies of the year. Nine out of ten stars.


Like many people I know, I look forward to the weekend as a chance to unwind and escape, especially when there's a new movie to rent - and sometimes, the latest zombie flick or murder mystery just won't do. When you're in the mood for something that will warm your heart, make you laugh, appeal to emotions that we all share, and generally restore your faith in humankind, "Calendar Girls" is just the ticket.

"Calendar Girls" is the story of two best friends, Annie and Chris (both expertly cast), who set out to raise money for the local hospital after Annie's husband is stricken with terminal cancer. The snappy and idealistic Chris comes up with the idea of creating a tasteful "nudie" calendar using the middle-aged, seemingly prude members of their local womens' group as models. What happens next is beyond Annie's wildest imagination; their goal to raise money for charity is smashingly successful, and the calendar girls become overnight celebrities in their modest little community.

Without the right casting and screenwriting this story could have ended there, in an overly simplistic and predictable manner. However, "Calendar Girls" goes so much further, forcing the girls' attention back to the joys and hardships of their personal lives, as well as facing the tough questions and realities about their original goal and what they have done to accomplish it. It plays on the common emotions that we all have experienced: fear, grief, loss, idealism, success, arrogance, failure and ultimately reflection. You can read the alternating pain and elatement on the faces of every character, and you can't help but feel for them.

Critics of this movie have focused mainly on its similarity to "The Full Monty"; however, unless you watch "Calendar Girls" with this idea firmly planted in your mind, you will probably not be bothered by any similarities between the two films. "The Full Monty" was an excellent movie in its own right, but while "Calendar Girls" captures the same humor and realness, it adds a little something more: heart.

Life is painful and hard, a fact that "Calendar Girls" addresses with grace and tact. Sometimes it's nice to relax with a beautiful movie that will make you feel good. I could not recommend this movie more highly.


Tears of joy and tears of anguish.

You'll have both with this movie as it takes you on a roller coaster of emotional highs and lows.

Rent the DVD and you will be enthralled with scenes of the original Calendar Girls who made the whole thing possible.

The Yorkshire scenery is very beautiful, they don't show quite as much rain as you'd get in Yorkshire, but that's movies for you!

While Julie Walters and Helen Mirren play the two 'title roles' I hope you join me in enjoying the pianist who has obviously had a chequered past and is a hoot.

I hope this movie spawns many more 'calendars' that will help cancer research. What a great epitaph for John, the cancer victim in this movie who's humor inspired the ladies to do what they did.

Best movie for ages.

JP


As someone who was fortunate enough to be at the world premiere of Calendar Girls in September last year, and to have met Angela Baker (the inspiration for Julie Walters' character) on several occasions, I would like to say that this is an amazing true story beautifully realised on film.

In real life the "Girls" are just as inspiring, funny and brave as you expect them to be. I think that it is important to remember that there is a very serious message underlying this film - the devastation that a disease like leukaemia (or lymphoma, which Angela's husband died from in real life) can wreak on a family.

The charity that the original Calendar Girls donated to is the Leukaemia Research Fund, and I would encourage anyone who was moved by the film to seek them out and make a donation at www.lrf.org.uk. So far the girls have raised just over £1 million, but there is still so much to do to fight these deadly diseases.


Ah the British and their desires to get naked. First with Full Monty and now with Calendar Girls. Calendar Girls is a movie that delivers what it says it's going to deliver. This is simply a movie about a women's group that wants to make a nude calendar and donate all the money to a charity. That's the premise and that's the movie. There's anything fancy, nothing shocking or out of the ordinary. It's a funny, simple flowing movie that does what you expect and that's not bad.

Two things I had an issue with and I emphasize here that these things are problems "I" had and may not be something that would concern you. The first is I watched this movie on DVD and found myself needing the subtitles and after I put them on I found myself enjoying the movie more. I can't really explain it, it was just easier to watch. The other issue I had was the situation regarding 'naked' calendar. (Slight spoiler) One scene in the movies had the woman comparing a naked calendar to the statue 'David'. That a naked calendar is art the same way 'David' is art. I'm not about to debate that, but it leaves me to the following question: Why if a naked calendar is art the same way 'David' is art, then how come no one was exposed in the calendar? 'David' is not hidden beyond fruit or buns or quilts or anything like that. The fact that the women were covered up or hidden left me kind of disappointed. I'm not saying I want to see 50+ year old women naked, not at all, please, but when the issue of nudity is fundamental to the whole story line, I think you need to deliver. When you have finished watching the movie, watch it again with your parents, you will enjoy them enjoying it.


As I mentioned (ad nauseum) in my comments for "Greenfingers", the British can take a plot that, in lesser hands, would be over-sentimentalized and make it a pleasant comedy about people who are not exactly mainstream but make you care about them and wish them a victory or two in life. In "The Full Monty" it was out-of-work steel workers. In "Brassed Off" it was out-of-work miners. In "Saving Grace", it was a widowed gardener. In "Greenfingers", it was criminals who ended up having a green thumb. If this qualifies as a genre, then I for one am only too happy to see and love them all, as I love all the movies I mentioned very much.

Now I love "Calendar Girls" too. Middle-aged women creating a calendar which depicts them as semi-nude to raise money for a sofa for the local hospital lounge may not sound like enough to make an entire movie, but it is. Along with their initial hesitation, they need permission from the Womens Institute they belong to. The head of the local is against the idea and two of the women have to appeal to the national chairperson. Their families are outraged but some are supportive.

Anyway, the calendar is an overwhelming success, but with that comes a downside. Family gets neglected, the true and original vision gets forgotten, and the press can be a real son of a ----- when they don't represent themselves properly.

The fact that this is a true story makes it very special, more special than it would have been. 8/10.


UK does not produce a lot of films, but what it makes, it is well

made. The photography of this film is stunning, the scenery of

Yorkshire Dales is beyond believe, it is like oil painting. All of the

scenery shots are well composed, well balanced. Although I must say,

they must have waited for years for the lovely weather to turn up, as

usually that part of UK is dull and wet, even in summer. The still

photos of the ladies, although they are not the originals,are very

artistic and well made. The story line is simple, yet moving. The

whole package is a pleasing moving which I could recommend to anyone.


The beauty of this masterpiece is that it's not only the simple, delightful and true story of middle aged women showing that they have the courage to step out and do something remarkable and ground-breaking, but also they could make it into a huge success.

This tale of dedication to a cause illustrates the need by these women to achieve a charitable goal and prove to themselves that they are not `past it'. Brought to us by some of the most seasoned British actors and actresses, under the polished direction of Nigel Cole, it covers every emotion from grief to the joy of success and all are performed with such conviction by the amazing cast. Although Helen Mirren has the largest part, I do not believe that there were any `leads' within the female characters as such and that the support came from the male characters who had to stand by and watch their wives/mothers go from strength to strength in their battle to achieve their aim of producing a calendar for the W.I.

A few memorable one-liners, a remarkable cast, a beautiful back-drop and many memorable moments make this film one to watch again and again and again.


Millions of dollars for charity, a spot on Jay Leno, all over the news, and I never heard of the Knapely W.I. calendar girls. Just as well. The story of what the women went through (a seminar on broccoli?!?), has the right brand of lighthearted humor to make 'Calendar Girls' a hit.

A dear husband dies of leukemia and the perfect way to honor him, in the eyes of the ladies, is to pose nude for a calendar to raise money for the hospital.

True story of the calendar girls is well told and the casting, in my eyes, is right on the money. The movie feels a little bit longer than it should be, and when they arrive in Hollywood, some parts are unnecessary (the washing powder scene). Overall, 'Calendar Girls' is a good movie to watch.


Yet again the Brits show that you don't need a big budget in order to make a good movie.

The movie has an high fun level supported by the great middle aged female cast. It's a shame that later on in the movie the movie falls into some obvious and dramatic cliche's.

The true power of the movie is all in the acting by the ladies who are all very real and warm in their performances. They are very British and yes that is a compliment. Also the rest of the movie is typically British including the wonderful humor.

I also quite enjoyed Ciarán Hinds in a role you won't often see him in, that of a perfectly normal sweet guy. It was great to see a good male performance by an actor in a movie in which the majority is female.

A nice little warm and fun movie.

7/10


This unpretentious movie offers some joys,I watched it because I wanted to see Mrs. Mirren and Mrs. Julie Walters,as I think they are gorgeous. It is a piece of exploitation.

Its acknowledged premise is that this is an earthly naturalistic comedy, unashamed and unassuming. Beyond this, the reality of the movie is quite different.

Is it morbid, perverted? Of course it is, though it strives not to be. It pretends to be a joyful naturalistic movie, but it bets on the very unhealthy joys it offers to its fans (or is it too much to believe this comedy has fans?). It is indecent and deliberately perverted. On the other hand,it is wholly indifferent as cinema, the directing is banal.


"Calendar Girls" just opened in New York and I was at one of the first showings. A rare experience was being one of no more than a half dozen males in a packed theater with the overwhelming majority of the women north of age 50, quite a few FAR north.

Comedy and drama combine in a movie that stems from a true story. England, for better or for worse, has a national organization of Women's Institutes, clubs for older women where they meet to explore various and sundry subjects, most - if you believe the film - tied to appreciating domestic pursuits.

Here the women of a chapter in a small rural town set (and beautifully filmed) in Yorkshire learn about the glories of broccoli and the never ending adventure of collecting tea towels. Helen Mirren is Chris Harper, happily married with a teenage son. Also happily married is Annie Clarke, played with a power equaling Mirren's, by Julie Walters.

Annie's husband succumbs to leukemia. The two women want to donate a comfortable couch to the local hospital's lounge for relatives awaiting news of the condition, indeed fate, of their loved ones.

Chris, already a bit of an iconoclast in the Women's Institute whose ideas have not always worked, for example a vodka tasting evening, comes up with the idea of a calendar in which her friends, all in their fifth or sixth decades, will pose in the buff. Their previous calendar featuring local scenes didn't sell well and Chris is sure she has a winner with this novel approach.

What follows is an always funny, sometimes moving crusade by Chris and Annie to sign up models and locate a willing but not weird photographer. On the way they encounter opposition from some husbands and certainly from their prim chapter head. Many of these folks are very recognizable because they've been the staple of English comedy since Shakespeare. Well, definitely since the early cinema and the telly.

The scenes in which the women reveal all are hilarious but also tasteful.

Chris and Annie's project takes off and acquires a life of its own which puts a strain on the women's relationship. Is Chris carried away with the calendar's skyrocketing sales? Does she fall for the faux Hollywood to which some of the women are transported to appear in a commercial and on the Jay Leno Show (yeah, he's in the movie)? Will Annie become the Dear Abby of cancer victims' spouses?

Some predictable developments unfold. The very able cast is secondary to the interaction between Helen Mirren and Julie Walters. Mirren is almost over the top but she's anchored by Walters's affecting portrayal which holds viewers sympathy throughout the movie.

I wonder if there's an American equivalent to the English Women's Institute. These gals begin each meeting by singing Sir Hubert Parry's "Jerusalem," perhaps the greatest tribute in song to a now vanished empire. They're not stuck in the past but they're not free of it either.

Director Nigel Cole brought Yorkshire and its women to life and the screenplay by Tim Firth and Juliette Towhidi is lively.

Composer Patrick Doyle, who does everything well, deserves credit for a nice score that complements the story rather than overpowering it as so often is the case.

Not a chick flick for seniors. Anyone with a heart will appreciate this story of women taking an unusual and amusing path to fighting cancer. And the basic story is true.

8/10.


After seeing the previews I already had my suspicions. After seeing it, these were only confirmed. A lot like love from the same director Nigel Cole and this have something in common: A style that can best be described as lingering, setting some atmosphere without being very much to-the-point. I guess you have to like this but I'm more a fan of directors who do not spoil a frame or my time. Especially in the first half the whole story revolves around one joke: that it is inappropriate for civilized ladies to pose naked.(And that joke is only mildly interesting for those living in less puritan environments.) Although the sketchy way the death of John is handled is interesting that's about all there is in the beginning. Later more themes are thrown in: family problems, downsides of success, group tensions, contrast between parochialism and Hollywood.

The small-town mentality is well portrayed and acting (especially Helen Mirren) is certainly a cut above average. But this is so targeted at a certain demographic and age group that everyone else seems to be forgotten in the script. Even the problems of Jem are mostly viewed from an older perspective.


"Calendar Girls" tells of the exploits of 11 British women - all fifty-something-and-up members of a Women's Club - who decide to pose in the nude for a calendar to raise money for a local charity following the death of one of their spouses. The result is a media feeding frenzy which reaches all the way to Hollywood and The Tonight Show. A warm and fuzzy flick with an up-beat attitude about life (and death), "Calendar Girls" is a fun frolic which conjures moments of pathos and poignancy, sentiment and sass as the women grapple with the repercussions of their escapade. This British comedy romp should play best with females and more mature males. (B)


I've been dragged to this movie by my friends and i must say that i hated every minute of this movie! it was like PLEEEASE MAKE IT STOP! Just the idea of making a movie out of a story like that puts me off. The english cinema has great movies, but this one is not one of them 4 sure! Highly overrated! And i wish the european cinema in general would get rid of this "realism"...


"Calendar Girls" is an amusing comedy of the sort that the British have done very well during the past 50 years. Helen Mirren (Chris) and Julie Waters (Annie) are excellent as the two best friends who execute Chris' idea of a nude calendar to raise funds for the leukemia wing of the hospital where Annie's husband died. Like many British films centered on areas outside London, it brings in accents that are difficult for these American ears. I've often wished that the British would add subtitles at some points so that I'd know what's being said. That may sound ridiculous but the PBS News Hour and occasionally CNN do it regularly when Iraqis or Pakistanis or Afghans, for example, are being interviewed in English that is hard for viewers to understand. Although the story is easy to follow, there were some scenes where my wife and I lost lines of dialog because of impenetrable accents. Even though I've spent a fair amount of time in England, I confess that I'm often baffled by North Country and Midlands accents. Perhaps in exchange we could provide British audiences with subtitles for regional accents in the U.S.


This film is complete rubbish and just an excuse for a bunch of old actresses to strip off. Helen Mirren is an exhibitionist and just loves stripping off. She used to look quite sexy, but she's now too old for it.

Okay, so it's a real story and supposed to be a serious film. But, at the end of the day, it's about the exhibitionism of a bunch of old women. It got so tedious in the end that I upped the DVD to x16 to get it over with as soon as possible.

The old women should stick to something they're good at: baking cakes.


This is a comedy drama based on a true story, the nudity obviously is quite essential to the story, but there isn't a complete comparison to The Full Monty. It is 1999, and Chris Harper (Golden Globe nominated Dame Helen Mirren) and Annie Clarke (Julie Walters) are members of the Knapely (Yorkshire, England) Women's Institute, and every year they produce a calendar based on the local scenes. After Annie's husband John (John Alderton) dies of leukemia, Chris comes up with an idea that also relates to John's love of sunflowers, and expressing yourself (or whatever), to pose for a nude calendar. Each individual member poses hiding their breasts behind something, or facing away showing their bottoms. Soon enough they get the pictures printed onto proper calendars, and all they need is permission from the Women's Institute board, but really it's their local president Marie (Little Britain's Geraldine James), who says OK, well actually "Oh, sod it. Go on then." Chris and Annie weren't expecting the calendars to sell out so quickly, but they also weren't expecting to go to Hollywood! In the end, after their American promotion, and a bit of banter they return of England, and it says that they have raised a lot of money for a leukemia charity, and to buy a sofa dedicated to John. Also starring Shaun of the Dead's Penelope Wilton as Ruth Reynoldson, One Foot in the Grave's Annette Crosbie as Jessie, Celia Imrie as Celia, Linda Bassett as Cora, Georgie Glen as Kathy, Angela Curran as May Wilkinson, Rosalind March as Trudy, Ciaran Hinds as Rod Harper, EastEnders' Gillian Wright as Eddie's Woman and Jay Leno. It won the British Comedy Award for Best Comedy Film. Dame Helen Mirren was number 7, and Julie Walters number 5 on The 50 Greatest British Actresses, Mirren was number 5, and Walters number 2 on Britain's Finest Actresses. Very good!


(Sing along to the classic song "Calendar Girls")

I did not like, I did not like those "Calendar Girls" I did not like, I did not like those "Calendar Girls" It is so boring this film called the "Calendar Girls" It is the most overrated film in the 2003 world Do not watch it any day of the year

The film stars Helen Mirren as an old girl who gets her geriatric peeps to nude it out in front of the world so they can raise some funds for a couch memorial in a hospital vestibule but what we get is dreary story that quickly rans out of fuel Stay Away, Stay Away cause this is too weird

That's why I did not like the film "Calendar Girls" That's why I was turned off by the "Calendar Girls" And if you did like "Calendar Girls" then you should be sent to a place where crazy people swirl Every day, Every Day of the year

** Needs Improvement


The first time I watched this movie was on a flight to the States, watching on a very small screen. I still got the lovely story that was beautifully acted. It was not until I bought my own copy of this movie did I fully experience the wonderful scenery and the real feelgood factor of this movie.

I seem to want to use words like quaint, nice and warm to describe this film but feel that is doing it an injustice as the ladies of the Womans Institute do have a battle to achieve their goal and the love lives and complications of family all add up to a very good story well told against a wonderful backdrop. It must be remembered that the idea for the calender that sparked the imagination of the public and film makers alike was that of real women in a real Womens Institute group who bared their all to raise money for charity, and it was their idea and bravery that deserves the greatest applause. It shows that real women of all ages are beautiful. Gives me hope that I'm not passed it.


Perhaps one of the toughest moments that anyone could have to face is the loss of a loved one-especially when it is due to cancer. But what if the loss of that person's life can be recognized, and the future for others in the same situation can be bettered. It is what the women of Yorkshire, England believed when one of their beloved persons was lost. `Calendar Girls' is a fresh comedy about a group of twelve women who want to raise money for a local hospital to help fight leukemia. But their manner of doing it is quite unorthodox, especially considering their age. They will pose nude for a calendar. Do not get the impression that their nudity will be any form of pornography-these are ladies and deserve to be treated as such. Their pictures will be taken behind cooking utensils, potted plants, menus and various forms of food as a reflection of their Women's Institute principles. The end result is a delightful blend of comedy and a perfect amount of sentimentality to create a film that touches all of our hearts.

	Based on a true story, `Calendar Girls' tells the tale of Annie (Julie Walters), whose husband John (John Alderton) has recently died due to cancer. Feeling that his death was in vain and seeing how her Women's Institute is planning on raising money for a charitable cause, Annie and her friend Chris (Helen Mirren) decide to pose nude for a calendar. Naturally there is scrutiny among the women asked to pose, as well as the chairperson of the club. But after seeking unanimous approval, they embark on doing the calendar. When all is said and done, the women become an instant success not only in England, but are recognized across the world for their noble cause.

But with their fame comes tabloid mania and family problems. Annie wonders if all the excess attention and advertising is necessary to remember John. As for Chris, her husband unwittingly tells a tabloid journalist that his wife has not made love to him in weeks because of the constant attention she receives from the calendar. Furthermore, her son feels embarrassed that his nearly middle-aged mother is posing nude. It becomes necessary for the women to realize the real purpose of the calendar-to raise money for a great man who loved them as much as they loved him. There is a line spoken by John prior to his death in which he reads his wife a speech he wrote. He says, `The women of Yorkshire are like the flowers of Yorkshire. With each passing stage, the more beautiful they become, with their final stage being the most beautiful.' It is a touching sentiment and hits the nail right on the nose about how remarkable the women were. They cared for a cause, and for the people involved. They would face possible humiliation and certain adversity, but would come out on top.

There is an important point to be made with this film-the element of beauty at any age. Yes these women are middle-aged and the general thought behind any form of nudity is that it should focus on youth and vitality. But these women are every bit as beautiful as younger models, and probably more vivacious. This film does not try to be anything it is not. It does not want to humor us with slapstick humor, or distasteful sexual remarks. It is a pure movie that any audience can enjoy and will walk away from feeling uplifted. ***


"Calendar Girls" is a mildly amusing film based upon actual events about a group of mature women in England who, in order to raise money, spice up the annual fund-raising calendar by appearing nude. Except for the script, a lot of effort went into this production. I would have swapped the two leads because Helen Mirren's strong suit is not comedy. There are funny scenes, but instead of being light, a soap opera sub-plot is tossed in mid-way. What should have been a gem, becomes a rock.

GRADE = "C-"


It is not a laugh a minute comedy there are some funny moments but the film really is about ordinary women in their fifties trying to do some charity work by doing the extraordinary i.e. posing nude to sell calendars. The scenes where they stripped off was very tastefully executed and the actresses concerned are very attractive despite their mature years. It was interesting to watch the effects on their lives after the publicity and this is something which The Full Monty did not touch on.

I loved the film and want to buy it when it comes out on DVD. I gave it 9 out of 10 and would recommend my friends to go and see it.


First off, I am a bloke in my 20's so probably not the target age range, but forget that. This was an absolutely phenomenal film. I saw this back to back with Pirates of the Caribbean & there is no comparisons- this is streets ahead.

I was even pleasantly surprised with how much female flesh you got to see given it was a '12'. And pleasantly surprised too how good some of the women still looked, infact better than some of the Hollywood's younger women that attempt to pass themselves off as actresses.

Everything you want is here, hilarious humour, great storyline, happiness, sadness the lot. The 6.7 rating is ridiculous, but that is with little over 100 voters. Everyone I know likes it, it was the first film I've seen since Notting Hill where you could sense the entire cinema were enjoying it (and people of all ages, colours, shapes and the like) and with a few more votes it should get some better marks & reviews.

I'd imagine the people who didn't laugh at this are the same mob who didn't laugh at any of the Full Monty or Four Weddings. Obviously the subtle dry wit is too complex & they prefer the sort of humour from we get from our friends across the pond, either with 3 blokes & 3 girls all living in the same penthouse apartment despite being unemployed & all in their 40's or failing that, jokes about penises in apple pies or people being sick in a frying pan then eating it.

Given the storyline it was never going to be a 10/10 film but it's a low 9/10.

Mark


OK, this is not high art - and there are no bombs or swordfights. There's no famous young American star and there's no spectacular car chase... but there is a great story, told by fabulously talented actors and mindblowingly beautiful cinematography. There's poignancy, wisdom and laugh-out-loud humour. If you're open to a great story and a celebration of maturity - go and enjoy this movie.


I'm going to start by confessing that I like this movie. Dubious accents aside (and with all due respect to the Yorkshire vocal style, the film is at least understandable this way...), the acting was of a high standard, the dialogue excellent and the key characterisations well drawn. Oh, and it really is funny, in a very unfussy way, as well as touching and occasionally pointed.

That said, neither the subject matter nor the direction particularly suits a cinema presentation; I strongly suspect that however strong the box-office returns, they will be comprehensively eclipsed by the video and DVD sales because this is a deliberately small-scale and intimate movie. Even the periodic, Yorkshire-Tourist-Board issue, panoramic landscape shots don't call for anything much more that a standard issue domestic TV; the film is dialogue and expression driven and frankly doesn't work hard to make you go "wow!" at the spectacle of it all. It does display humanity by the bucketload though and in a very un-Hollywood way, reveals the flaws as well as the strengths of the characters.

If you're looking for a Laugh-out-loud-the-whole-way-through movie, stay away. If you're after a glossy, American-style fable of women winning through despite insurmountable odds, look elsewhere. If you fancy a warm, witty and thoughtful film with actual acting in it, this may appeal. And no matter what, it's still a better use of a cinema screen than "Jackass: The Movie"...


You won't know who to root for, if anybody, in this Hitchcockian caper film, which seemingly pits Gayle Hunnicut and Michael Sarazin up against Hunnicut's Aunt in order to steal her fortune -- or does it? And what is it all really about anyway? The location camerawork in San Francisco is terrific. And, Linden Chiles scores highly in a key supporting role.


A very interesting plot.Is the hero of the plot in it for the money or is he really an ok person?I saw this film in my late teens and have overall seen it about five times enjoy it on every viewing.Like most films because it has some complexities and twists and turns keeping you guessing all the way the first viewing really stuck in my mind.Well worth a watch,unpredictable in my opinion.Again why is this film not available especially on DVD?


This is a solid TV movie look horror movie from Universal who specialized at the time in good strong B movies made in Technicolor and released into drive ins and crumbling weekly change houses. In Sydney at the Capitol Theatre 2500 seats were there each session. Often a film like LOST FLIGHT or THE KILLERS or ANGEL IN MY POCKET or COLOSSUS THE FORBIN PROJECT or THE LOVE GOD etc all like that mentioned above from Universal got a berth there for a week inbetween AIP Poe horrors and Paramount reissues. I saw EYE OF THE CAT as a double feature with the Carroll Baker thriller SWEET BODY OF DEBORAH... a terrible title for a good 'is my husband a killer' Euro ski lodge style thriller, very snazzy and in retro, a very good double feature. Today both these films would do very well if new and in multiplexes, then they just had a guest appearance for 6 days (closed Sunday) and off to some remote drive ins in the countryside... never on TV never on video and never heard of again. Read other comments for the excellent well informed reactions and storyline. Hey, what ever happened to Michael Sarrazin? He even was a 70s Streisand leading man in FOR PETE'S SAKE and a great Margo Kidder thriller dude THE REINCARNATION OF PETER PROUD.


I absolutely love this movie, but am unable to find it anywhere on VHS or DVD. I watched this movie years ago. It had two endings. The first ending has the people at the end being attacked by the Aunt's cats. They knew the bad intentions of the evil nephew. I love cats, horror, and this movie. It is suspenseful all the way through it.

Great movie for us oldies who love suspense and horror. Today's scary movies are all blood and guts, and repetitive. In the old days, one movie stood out from others-like this one. My hope is that I can find a station that is willing to show this movie again.

Great, great, great.


Remarkable chemistry between leads Michael Sarrazin and Gayle Hunnicut pinctuates this cat-and-mouse thriller. And the camera work is nothing more than breathtaking, setting standards that have since become cliches.


Lassiter stars Tom Selleck and Bond-girl Jane Seymour. Lassiter, like Bond gets into similar situations and in the end triumphs over the enemy. Lassiter has action, beautiful stars, acting, and enough plot to keep it going. It's not perfect, nor a hidden gem, but it should not be forgotten either. It's worth an evening and a bag of popcorn.


What more could you ask for than a handsome thief, two gorgeous women, a wimp of an FBI man, a bully of British cop, a super black Mercedes Coupe, a vintage motor cycle, gambling, a murder, bumbling Gestapo thugs and supporting actors that truly support the play that is in progress! Well written, directed and acted, progress keeps things moving (even flying through the air on a wire!) at a good pace that won't leave you behind, but will get you to the end. There are even street scenes with costumes and vehicles galore! In other words, the sets are good as well! Enjoyable!


Good cloak and dagger action drama set in London 1939.Has very good sets and story but could have been a classic if it had better directing and script/screenplay.The director had a little difficulty finding a good balance between being edgy or watered down in a more Hollywood way.Great entertainment though for cloak and dagger fans and big fans of the lead stars.Selleck looks really good here.....


For me, the best part of this movie was Lauren as the assassin, as her character killed the G-man while she was having sex with him. I loved seeing that while he was dying, that she held him in his arms, showing the right combination of power, sexual excitement, strength, and even a touch of compassion.

I seem to love this scene more than any other. No wonder I sort of have a soft, hot spot for Lauren, and this scene gave me a love for the black widow roles in the movies.

Thank you, Lauren. You helped establish my first guilty pleasure, as the beautiful killer Kari Von Fursten. You were wonderful.

You made your role as Kari Von Fursten, and this scene, very special, very deadly, and very sexy.


This is my favorite Tom Selleck movie!! Plain and simply, when are they going to put it on DVD?

Now the site tells me I have to write more than one line...so...

It has been too long since I have seen it! I don't have a working VCR anymore and I wouldn't invest in one, anyway. I remember that Tom Selleck is great in this movie and along with Jane Seymour, they have a great on-screen chemistry. The movie reminds me of the cat-burglary of "To Catch A Thief", but the period is WWII Europe and Tom Selleck must break into an embassy to try to avoid prison, much like Sean Connery did in "The Rock". It has many twists and turns and a surprise ending to equal "The Sting"!

This movie has it all!


I grew up watching this stuff as a Saturday afternoon matinee 30 years ago & now, it's still as much fun to watch.

Hercules, now married to Ioli, is returning to Thebes to help sort out a dispute over who has the rights to the throne of Thebes. Along the way, Hercules loses his memory & is seduced by the evil Amphale who goes through husbands like Elizabeth Taylor, however, Amphale is something of a black widow & uses a few Egyptians to preserve her ex-husbands in the family crypt.

However, one look at the rugged carved from granite Steve Reeves & all her black widow tendencies fly out the window, but she still wants him for good.

Of course it all ends up in a good ruckus with sword fights, chariot duels, Hercules throwing tables & coffins at rushing troops, 2 insane brothers with a hatred for each other (& their father) & inevitably the faithful sidekick who chimes in with a few vital day-saving moments.

Clint Eastwood may have been the king of the Spaghetti Western, but Steve Reeves was the king of the Spaghetti Swords & Sandals. So if that's your cup of tea, I recommend this movie as an excellent addition to your collection.


Hercules becomes amnesiac after drinking from the waters of Lethe. For years, the beautiful queen Omphale has been abducting warrior men who become amnesiacs off to her exotic paradise island where they give themselves up to sexual pleasures until the day she tires of them. That's the day they die, only to be immortalized as statuary in her garden of conquests. Hercules soon finds himself abducted and like all the others he is her completely willing slave.

But this time her soldiers bring back Hercules' traveling companion Ulysses, who has saved his life by pretending to be the hero's deaf-mute body servant. Ulysses continues in that role during Hercules' captivity and by keeping Hercules from drinking more of the magical water, restores his memory.

'I've been tricked by the gods.' is his summation of the situation. After all, he had been on an important mission of state with his wife the virtual hostage of a madman when all this happened. Of course he gets away, the first of Ompahle's slaves to escape her net. She statue-tizes herself over the lose and the movie moves on to its conclusion.

All Sons of Hercules movies have this same plot: Hercules falls under the sway of a powerful, beautiful and evil woman but comes to his senses and saves the day. At its core it is about sex and the taboo predilection of men to seek this enslavement. This plot is not fashionable any more. Too much sexual freedom in modern society has robbed it of its power. But it had power (over men) in the sixties, and this film exploited it expertly.


"Hercules Unchained," the sequel to Steve Reeves' mega-hit "Hercules," isn't quite what I remembered it to be. Reeves definitely has the look of Hercules, much more so than most of the bodybuilders who followed or imitated him in these movies, and he's actually not a bad actor, all things considered. Sylva Koscina, playing his wife, is absolutely breathtaking. She just radiates class, is spectacularly beautiful and has a body to die for. Sylvia Lopez, as Queen Oomphale, is another case altogether. Although she's quite leggy and has a great body, and thankfully doesn't mind showing it, she's frankly not all that attractive, looks to be wearing about 50 pounds of makeup and a gallon of lip gloss, and is, to be honest, not a very good actress. However, that doesn't matter much, as she has a whole slew of young, gorgeous, scantily clad servant girls prancing and slinking around, which is a pleasant distraction. The action scenes aren't as good as I recalled them--I saw it the other day for first time in probably 30 years and was actually quite disappointed. Hercules' fight with a tiger is laughable--almost as phony as Victor Mature's fight with the lion in "Samson and Delilah"--his clash with Oomphale's guards near the end of the picture is very badly done and the climactic battle between the forces of the two brothers is handled extremely poorly. There were more than enough extras to show a good battle scene, but for some reason the filmmakers focus mainly on close-ups or two-shots of a few individuals fighting each other, which makes no sense at all, and the battle consists mostly of a lot of guys running around raising dust and some chariots racing around, and that's pretty much it. Time apparently really does play tricks with your memory; I recalled this picture as having much more action in it than it really did, but other than Reeves' fight with Primo Carnera, pretty much nothing happens in the first half of the film, and the action that does occur in the second half is mostly perfunctory and, as noted, not very well done.

Still, Reeves is impressive to look at and does have a certain presence, you can't take your eyes of Sylva Koscina, the servant girls are a treat, the photography is nice for the most part and some of the sets are impressive. The dubbing is, of course, atrocious, but it always is in these pictures, so that's not news. You could do worse than rent this once. It's just really not worth seeing twice.


Hercules Unchained picks up right where Hercules (1958) left off. Hercules and his new bride, Iole, are headed to Thebes. A fight for the throne between two brothers puts a kink in Hercules' plans, so he decides to act as peacemaker. But before he can carry out his mission, he mistakenly drinks from the "waters of forgetfulness" and is taken prisoner by Queen Omphale. Unsure of his real identity, Hercules is at the Queen's mercy and is reduced to being her plaything. Meanwhile, Iole is caught between the warring brothers and faces death. Can Hercules come to his senses in time to save his wife and his beloved Thebes?

Hercules Unchained is one of those instances where I find the sequel superior to the original. First off, the movie is just more interesting. The original Hercules had a tendency to drag. While Hercules Unchained isn't a thrill-a-minute, there is certainly more action. Second, I think everyone involved from the actors to the director seemed more comfortable in their respective roles in the sequel. That's only natural. Finally, and probably most importantly, Mario Bava's influence is more pronounced and evident in Hercules Unchained. There are instances throughout the movie that show his touch. For example, when Hercules meets the old king in the cave, the use of colored gel lighting in the scene simply screams Bava. Take a look at that scene and compare it with what Bava would do in his on Hercules movie, Hercules in the Haunted World, and see if you don't agree.

A lot of different muscle-bound actors would play the role of Hercules in these Italian productions, but none would do it any better that Steve Reeves. In this instance, the original is still the best. Others cast in the role may have been better actors and some may have been more gifted physically, but few could combine the two into a single package as effectively as Reeves.

I realize that these Italian sword and sandal movies may not be for everyone, but I really get a kick out of most of them. For anyone new to these movies, Hercules Unchained would make an excellent jumping off point.


I saw "Ercole e la regina di Lidia" (called "Hercules Unchained" in the USA) on "Mystery Science Theater 3000". The movie itself is actually quite cool, but "MST3K" makes it even cooler. The movie basically has the muscle-bound - and often well-oiled - Greek hero (Steve Reeves) drinking water of forgetfulness and getting seduced by Queen Omphale (Sylvia Lopez). Mostly, it seems like an excuse to show scantily clad women. I guess that even ancient Greece was a male chauvinistic fantasy!

But seriously, the "MST3K" version is the one that you gotta see. You can probably guess what sorts of things Joel, Servo and Crow say. Specifically, they sneak in mentions of Uri Geller, Kim Cattrall and Ricky Nelson. How else to keep sane while watching these cheesy flicks sent by Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank?

Yes, you know what Hercules and the queen were doing when not on screen. Seriously, a buff hunk and a hot babe. How could they not do it?


This movie is so great!

Everything in this movie is perfect! The epic scope, humor, music, acting, heroes, locations, villains, pretty as I said, everything about this movie is perfect!


The quality of the film was much better than many of these that I've seen. Here are some observations. For some reason, every character is named after a Greek or Roman god. Ulysses is a dork. How could he have fought those battles with Hercules. During the brain freeze that takes up about half the movie, Hercules seems to be having a good time. What exactly caused the brain freeze? Did I miss something. There are a ton of fights. Armies attacking one man and losing, of course. Hercules is tempted but has an excuse in that he doesn't know who he is. As usual, there is an evil queen. Are there any of these movies that don't have an evil queen. I never quite got the whole thing with the two brothers and their fathers and the big conflict, other than they wanted to keep what they had. I must admit, I just couldn't get into it. I've had enough Hercules for a while.


Even as a Mystery Science Theater 3000 send-up, this one falls flat if you watch it more than once. The riffing of Joel and the bots is still entertaining, but it can't disguise the fact this film is pretty thin on usable plot and relies mostly on Steve Reeves rugged looks to sustain itself. Think Tom Cruise in "Days of Thunder" and you'll see what I mean. As painful as this movie is with their jokes, it would be completely intolerable without them. From cheesy costumes to badly dubbed dialogue to acting even high school drama teachers would turn their noses up at, this movie is like a 1970's kung-fu flick minus the saving grace of people getting their butts kicked. In fact for a so-called Hercules movie, it's long on bad dialogue and short on good action. If you're going to watch something called Hercules you'd actually be better off seeing the animated Disney film.


The sequel to the Steeve Reeves version of Hercules, Hercules Unchained starts where its prequel left off. Hercules, Ulyses, and his new wife, Iole, go on some mission to settle a dispute between two brothers who wants to rule Thebes. However, on the way, Hercules drinks the so called " Waters of Forgetfullness" and forgets who he is and is seduced by this queen,and she falls in love with Hercules. However, Ulyses helps Herc regain his memory and escapes the island where the queen subsides in (by the way, the queen commits suicide, but anyway). Meanwhile, Iole, Herc's wife, gets captured by one of the brothers and threatens to kill her. Hercules and his group finally save Iole in a battle to the death by both of the brother's sides. In the end, both brothers die, Herc is reunited with his wife, and they live happily ever after.Well not exactly, but they lived ever after.

This is the second and hopefully, I think, last sequel to the Hercules series. The movie felt like an eternity. It took so long for Herc to finally get off that island! In fact, Herc was on that island for 40 minutes, long for an 1 1/2 hour movie. The song. Oh god that was awful. And one last thing. It was boring. There wasn't much action, and when there was action, it didn't last long, and it was fake.Thank god MST3K was there to make it enjoyable! I want to thank all of the people who made this B- bomb possible. Steve Reeves, the Herc. The other cast members. Pietro Franscisi, the director. Mitchell Parish, the person who wrote that dreaded song. And the two producers, Feruccio De Martiono and Bruno Vailati. Thank you all! P.S. If you're thinking of making another sequel, heres a tip. Don't!


Yes, the lead here looks like Hercules and there are a lot of ladies prancing around in skimpy costumes, but that does not a good movie make. The story is a jumbled mess that really does not flow well, the actors are not the best of caliber, and of course it doesn't help that this Hercules movie does not have all that much action in it. In fact, most of the movie seemingly has Hercules sitting around on a chair and making it with a strange looking gal. Meanwhile, there is a war about to break out between two brothers I think, but can not be 100% positive. There is also a rather pointless scene where Hercules must fight some guy who always gets back up and laughs annoyingly. Herc has his companions and his wife to worry about as well, but for the most part you are going to want to drink those waters of forgetfulness that send the movie to the very long pointless subplot of Herc in the clutches of the very bizarre island girl and her many serving girls. All in all just not enough of a plot or action to get anyone's interest up.


Big, bronzed Steve Reeves is Hercules, Greek stupor hero who burns 50 brain cells per second. I guess these epics were big during the 50's, but watching them now is like seeing a documentary with nitrous. There's supposed to be a story, but the makers felt it better to emphasize action rather than plot. It doesn't work and you get a lot of choreographed fight scenes. Watch Herc hurl chocolate bunnies. Plenty of Greek guys in skirts. Must've been the fad back then. I thought Hercster could've made the movie a lot better by snapping Ulysses in half. Plus, he has an affair and still keeps his hotty bride Iole. The ending is a blockbuster fight scene with lots of people flying, horses dying, and audiences crying.

At least Steve Reeves is less annoying than Miles O' Keefe.


When I was growing up in the 60's I used to go matinées and watch Hercules and even the later TV series with Kevin Sorbo as Hercules.I read that Hercules is the son of Zeus and as the years passed into my later 40's I finally grew to accept there is only one God.The one who counts and God made it clear in His 1st Commandment Thou Shalt Not Have No Other gods Before Me.Zeus is a (false god) I used to think the Hercules films and TV show and even the cartoon were great,But after God wrote His Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai which I call The Capitol Of God's World was all I needed to know God is the only God,all other gods and goddesses are false and they go against God's 1st Commandment.So it was written by My Father.


I have to admit that i was always in to Transformers and He-man more than Thundercats but it didn't stop me from enjoying it every week after school on TV. Never bought any of the toys but i think it was because i was just slightly too old for it when the toys and TV show came out in the UK. One of the stupid things i noticed in it though was the mutants. They were the most useless bunch of bad guys ever, they always messed everything up from start to finish instead of just messing it up at the end (like most other villains do) and thank god for Mumm-ra who is a pretty decent bad guy. Thundercats is not as preachy as He-man either but it has its similarities with it. A great cartoon which is my 3rd best cartoon show from the 80's. Nice.


ThunderCats is the absolute best cartoon ever created. In a time when Anime was not yet that popular in the U.S., the creators of ThunderCats had the sensibility to try something new, to make ThunderCats stand apart by using Japanese cartoonists.

With the most talented voices of any cartoon, ThunderCats reached the top of the charts, an instant hit. It had sensational, original music which had a different theme for each character and the theme song was catchy and simple enough for kids to pick up and sing along.

It was truly original. In a time when heroes were macho beyond macho, Lion-O had the vulnerability of having the mind of a child trapped in the body of an adult, the result of his body aging while spending 10 Galacto years in a suspension capsule. As Tygra said in the second episode, he missed those important growing up years where a person matures into adulthood. He was truly relatable to kids.

Kids also related well to Wilykit and Wilykat, two kids on the team who had to deal with adults telling them what to do.

All the ThunderCats were superb characters, though I must say Tygra is my favorite. The cartoon blended three very important elements which helped it become a success: action/adventure storytelling, humor, and moral & ethical values. And that most kids love cats didn't hurt either.

Cartoons today stink, the 80's rocked for the best cartoons and ThunderCats were the best ever. This was my favorite cartoon as a kid and I find now watching them on DVD, I love them more than ever. It's a cartoon which both kids and adults can love.

ThunderCats Ho!


Opinion from the former USSR. My childhood has coincided with our Reorganization and disintegration of the USSR and then at us information freedom, which was not in the USSR, has begun, and has appeared a lot of western, especially American, films, cartoon films, music. I saw very many, much was pleasant to me were a favorite "Ninza Turtles", and from "ThunderCats" I then saw only one episode (about huge spiders), but they have sunk down to me in soul and later 20 years they (ThunderCats) is my favorite cartoon serial from serious (and from comic - "The Pink Panther") and I now try to extract a full serial on disks in the original (without a translation into Russian).


Like I had said many times, I was shocked, surprised and flabbergasted by the negativity I heard on Keyframe.com; I've watched this show, and frankly I find it AWESOME! Based on the characters created by Tobin "Ted" Wolf, the series is set in the far distant future (I don't know how far) and follows the adventures of a team of heroes: cat-like humanoid aliens from the planet of Thundera.

The series begins with the dying Thundera meeting its end, forcing the ThunderCats (a sort of like Thunderean nobility) to flee their homeworld. The fleet is attacked by the Thundereans' enemies, the Mutants from the planet Plun-Darr, who destroy all the starships in the "ThunderFleet," but spare the flagship hoping to capture the legendary Sword of Omens they believe is onboard. The sword holds the mystical Eye of Thundera, the source of the ThunderCats' power, embedded in the hilt. Though the Mutants damage the flagship, the power of the Eye drives them back, and Lion-O's elderly guardian, Jaga, pilots the ship to the safety of the world of "Third Earth;" however, he dies in the process, as there are insufficient cryo-stasis pods aboard the ship, and the journey to Third Earth takes several decades even with advanced interstellar spacecraft. The flagship contains the young Lord of the ThunderCats, Lion-O, as well as the ThunderCats - Cheetara, Panthro, Tygra, the ThunderKittens WilyKit and WilyKat, and Snarf. Upon reaching Third Earth, the ThunderCats made friends with various creatures of the planet and they designed a fortress. But Mumm-Ra the centuries-old embodiment of evil, along with the mutants that destroyed the rest of the Thunderans are a constant threat. But Lion-O, the new leader of the ThunderCats, now grown man due a malfunction in his cryo-stasis pod, with the Sword of Omens will help the ThunderCats to have a standing chance on their adopted home.

I love Cheetara,Tygra, the ThunderKittens WilyKit and WilyKat, and Snarf; OH! and Snarfer too. So all I could said is that this is one of the best animated series from one of my favorite animation studios - Rankin/Bass; with plenty of fantasy, adventure, humor and beautiful animation, I loved it. And one thing: Anyone who watched the episode "Dimension Doom" ever notice that near the end, Cheetara & Wizz-Ra took a moment to have a sentimental farewell; like anyone's thinking of doing a fan-shipping of the couple; I might.


This show followed the exploits of the Thundercats, a race of human cat people whose planet was destroyed so they were forced to relocate to another planet. Their future leader, Liono is but a child when they leave their planet, but thanks to a pod malfunction he ages to an adult while the others in the group essentially stay the same age. He is given the sword of omens and a cat claw and they start a new life on a planet filled with many perils including mutant men, pirates, and the evil creature Mummra. The cartoon was a pretty action packed, the dialog at times was corny and as the show progressed it got weaker, but that is really a lot of cartoon shows at the time. I have to admit, of all the cartoons there were this was probably the easiest one to collect all the toys for as they really did not add to many characters to the show as it went along. You basically had Liono, Panthro, Cheetara, the tiger dude (can't remember his name), Snarf and the two kid ones. The villains consisted of about three mutants, Mummra and a group of pirates that really did not have all that many episodes. There were another set of super berserker warriors and two or three more Thundercats introduced in later episodes, but I do not ever recall seeing them as toys. So all in all a good show, with the one story arc of Liono having to past these tests facing the other Thundercats as one of the highlight multiple part stories.


Thundercats was the so-called arch rival to He-man: Masters of the Universe. And yet I loved this more than He-man. The cartoon was a mixture of fantasy, sci-fi, action-adventure with a bit of humour thrown in as well. The Thundercats were made up of leader, the young but fearless Lion-O, who wielded the Sword of Omens and his compatriots, Tigra, Cheetara, Panthro and Wily Kit and Wily Kat, not to mention the lovable Snarf. Together they battled against the evil Mum-ra, of whom was the more convincing baddie, in stark contrast to Skeletor from He-man.

Thundercats deserves full marks for being original and for having the most inventive-yet interesting characters. The animation may have been a little dodgy at times, but design-wise, they were well drawn and created. The dialogue was at times a little corny to say the least but the show also had episodes where basic morals, values and ethics were highlighted and addressed within the series.

This was a great TV show to watch with an equally memorable theme tune to boot! Thundercats, ho!!


Some of the best things about Thundercats were the obvious battles between good and evil and the blend of the different genres like Science Fiction,Fantasy,Action,Myth,Magic,etc and of course such memorable and extremely well written episodes. My favourite episodes from the first half of Season 1 are:

Exodus: The origin episode,if you will.

The Unholy Alliance: The Mutants crash land on Third Earth and join forces with Mumm Ra.

Berbils: The first appearance of these robot/bear soon to be allies of the Thundercats and this episode is where Panthro builds the Thundertank too.

The Slaves Of Castle Plundaar: The Thundercats free a docile race of aliens known as Brutemen from the clutches of Slithe,Monkian and Jackalman.

Pumm Ra: This is an episode where Mumm Ra infiltrates the Thundercats Cats Lair and causes mayhem.

The Ghost Warrior: basically a Jaga VS Grune The Destroyer episode.

The Doomgaze: a good Mumm Ra episode.

The Spaceship Beneath The Sands: The Mutants combat the Thundercats with their own weaponry to no avail.

All That Glitters: Mumm Ra tricks Lion O and Tygra into fighting each other and The Sword Of Omens becomes shattered,so Lion O must get the Inflamer,a mercenary to reforge it for him.

Snarf Takes Up The Challenge: All the Thundercats except Snarf are captured by the Mutants and are held in Mumm Ra's pyramid,so it is up to Snarf to save them.

The problem with cartoons nowadays is they just are not interesting anymore and do not really have any morals to teach kids. Thundercats did just that and of course other great cartoons from the 1980's such as He-Man & The Masters Of The Universe,She-Ra and Transformers which all spawned toy lines and comic books like Thundercats did also.


Like all Thundercats fans I really loved this cartoon!! So much so, that 20 yrs since watching an episode when I saw the whole series on DVD for sale online I decided to order it. I was so excited when I received my package that I thought I'd have a Thundercats marathon with my older sister (who also loved it) about halfway through the first disc (there's about 14 discs all up) I couldn't remember why I loved this cartoon so much? Don't get me wrong, it was exactly how I remembered it but something was missing? Probably the fact that there was absolutely no opportunity of me ever becoming a Thundercat or cruising around 3rd Earth in the Thundertank, I guess it lost all of it's appeal. Oh and Liono, Lord of the Thundercats really annoyed me, he was more like Liono, Lord of stating the obvious! I guess when you're older you pick up their silly mistakes, such as when they introduced new characters (such as bengaly and pumara) the old characters (such as cheetara & tigra) disappeared off the face of 3rd earth. It wasn't a total waste of money though, I have a younger brother and sister who were born after the Thundercat era and have grown up on the "new" 3d cartoons (that have absolutely no morals or lesson to be learned) so seeing them watch the series was OK I guess!


Just a quick note for those who haven't caught it already, the Unholy alliance episode is totally missing all the background music. I was doing a little hunting around and everything I've run across talks about replacement discs being available but I haven't found anything yet. If anybody out there has any info on this I'd appreciate it as I'm sure everybody else will, otherwise I'll update this myself if anything comes to light. It seems like too many companies are getting in that rush to deliver these releases and they never bother to spend the time double checking the final product. I've had three individual titles that I've had to send back to Warner Bros. alone just trying to get a product that delivers the way it should. Usual story Quantity over quality.

"Snarf snarf"


I loved Thundercats just as much as any other child of the 80s, I had the toys: the regular 6", the little 1" high ones, a giant Lion-O that lit up...of course they're all lost now.

But watching the episodes on DVD now is almost painful for how terrible and cheesy the shows are. The animation is cheap, though still not half as bad as shows like Pokemon. But the dialogue and voice acting are horribly overdone, the music is repeated ad nauseum...

I realize it's a kid's show, but look at shows like Dexter's Laboratory or Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends for well-done kid's shows with high production values. Let's not kid ourselves here, Thundercats was a very cheaply done kids' show with very imaginative and great characters, which serve its purpose of selling toys.

Rest assured, though, if they ever made a Thundercats movie with feature-quality animation, I'd be first in line...


"The Bad and the Beautiful" takes a look at Hollywood. This incisive take about how movies are made, directed by Vincente Minnelli, dares to go behind the scenes to show what goes on in the way the film industry operates. The film adaptation by Charles Schnee gives us a good idea of that unreal world of fantasy and hype.

At the center of the story is Jonathan Shields, a young man with connections to the industry. He wants to follow his father's footsteps and goes at it vigorously, making friends and enemies along the way. Jonathan discovers he can be ruthless whenever he wants. His first victim is Fred Amiel, the talented director who Jonathan bypasses in favor of a more established one. Jonathan quickly forgets the friendship Fred and his wife showed him before becoming a big producer.

Then there is there is Georgia Larrion, the boozy daughter of a famous actor. Jonathan shows how he wants Georgia to succeed in the business, personally taking care of selling her to star in his big project, only to betray her with another woman, a glamorous bit player. When Georgia discovers the truth, she flees Jonathan's mansion in a clear night that suddenly turns into a torrential downpour and loses control of the car, but she doesn't suffer a scratch!

The last victim of Mr. Shields is the Pulitzer prize winner, James Lee Bartlow, who Jonathan coaxes into leaving his academic life to adapt his own novel for the movies. James is married to the flighty Rosemary, in whom Jonathan discovers a weak link that will do anything to hobnob with the celebrities. Jonathan makes it easy for Rosemary to fall into an affair with the star of Shields' film.

When we first watched this film, it seemed much better, than on this viewing where a lot of things surface to make some of the story much weaker than before. Some viewers have compared this film with the fate of Orson Welles in Hollywood, and there are a couple of references that could be interpreted that way. Whether it was so, or not, it's up to the viewer to guess where the truth lies.

Kirk Douglas gave a strong performance as Jonathan Shields. Mr. Douglas showed he clearly understood who this man was. He runs away with the film, in our humble opinion. Lana Turner, a beautiful presence in any movie, is good, but at times she appears to be overwhelmed by the range of emotions she has to project, especially with that phony car scene.

Dick Powell and Gloria Graham put in an excellent appearance as the Bartlows. Barry Sullivan disappears after Lana shows up, not to be seen until the end. Walter Pigeon is effective as the studio head. Gilbert Roland is perfect as Gaucho, the Latin actor with a lot of charisma.

Mr. Minnelli shows he wasn't afraid to portray the industry the way we see it in the film, not a small accomplishment, knowing well how it could have backfired on him. Hollywood is not forgiving to those who dare to show its ugly side and that's when the parallel with Orson Welles problems with the system and eventual exile can be drawn.


Glossy MGM soaper has many things to recommend it, not the least of which is a surprisingly grounded, natural Lana Turner (looking great, even in ordinary jammies) playing a successful movie actress who, along with a top screenwriter and director, help producer-on-the-skids Kirk Douglas stage a comeback. Not especially revealing about Hollywood, which at this stage wasn't quite ready to unmask itself, but still engaging and intriguing. Douglas is well-cast (he spits out his lines with a terse jaw--nothing new--but he's right for this part and is commendable). Turner is a revelation and deserved at the very least an Oscar nomination for her work. Sharp dialogue and gleaming photography are the other major assets. Gets less attention than something like "All About Eve", but it's actually more entertaining. *** from ****


In the opening sequences of the film, we see three Hollywood big-shots; one, an actress, the other a director, and the third, a writer. All three very successful at what they do. The trio are in different ways connected to Johnathan Shields, who at the present time is trying to get the three to be a part of his comeback. The three are in no way anxious to work with him once again. Johnathan, a big time Hollywood producer, ran his career into the ground by pushing away people, who in the end could of prolonged his at one time successful profession. The three go on to tell their own intriguing stories how they met Shields, explaining how they grew to resent him.

Georgia, (played wonderfully by Lana Turner) now a popular actress began as a bit player in one of Shields films. Shield's in time, casts her as a lead in one of his pictures. Her anxiety's of ruining her big break almost lead her to miss her fortunate opportunity. The film becomes a success, solidifying Georgia as a respected actress. She soon discovers Johnathan romancing another woman, leading her to walk away from her contract with Shields, finding success elsewhere with another studio.

Jim, a writer, has his novel purchased by Shields to be turned into a motion picture. At Shields request, he approaches Jim to write the screenplay to the film. Jim dislikes Johnathan at first, in time, seeing him as something better. The two travel to the countryside to finish the screenplay. Before-hand, Johnathan asks an actor to keep Jim's clingy wife away for a while. His wife Rosemary, and the actor have a misfortunate accident and are killed in plane crash. Unknowingly, Johnathan reveals to Jim, that he had a hand in his wife's accidental death, marking the end of their friendship.

Then there's Fred, the hopeful and aspiring director, who of all places meets Shields at the man's fathers funeral. In time, the two become partners and make a few films together, mostly mediocre pictures. Fred recommends to Johnathan, that the two do a picture that is at first deemed impossible. After it gets the green-light, out of nowhere, Johnathan doesn't name Fred the picture's director, ironically, saying he wasn't experienced enough. Obviously feeling betrayed Fred walks away like Georgia did and acquires prosperity as a director, on his own.

The reasons for all of Johnathan's bizarre doings, is for the most part, because of his own need to live up to his father's name, who founded 'Shields Productions', and became a big player in the industry. In the process he estranges himself from everyone who means something to him. The phrase, "what goes around, comes around" really comes into play, in the films climax. One of definite greats of the 1950's. Easily one of my Top 20 of all time.


Producer Jonathan Shields is in big trouble on a production and reaches out to three people he's befriended and betrayed in the past for help. All three are brought to Harry Pebbel's office where he makes a pitch for the help of each one. And we're told in flashback the dynamics of the relationships between Shields and each one.

One thing about Tinseltown, they've never been afraid to show the seamier side of movie-making. Kirk Douglas's Jonathan Shields is a not too thinly disguised version of David O. Selznick. The same drive, the same ambition, the same overwhelming ego that Selznick was legendary for is a part that was tailor made for Kirk Douglas.

The three betrayed people, director Fred Amiel(Barry Sullivan), star Georgia Lorrison(Lana Turner), and screenwriter James Lee Barlow(Dick Powell)all ring very true. One of the things I like about this film is that all three stories, each in itself, could be expanded into a film all it's own.

Lana Turner's role as the ersatz Diana Barrymore is not to hard to spot either. It's so much better here than the film based on her own book Too Much Too Soon. If that voice of Turner's actor father on those 78 rpms she's playing sounds familiar, it's that of Louis Calhern. Turner's was a life lived out all too well in the tabloids and she brings all of it to bear in playing Gerogia Lorrison.

Dick Powell, who was offered the lead as Jonathan Shields, opted to play tweedy professor turned screenwriter James Lee Barlow. This was Powell's next to last feature picture as an actor, it should have been the one he went out on. Powell was always ahead of the industry's cutting edge and he decided to concentrate more on directing and acting for the small screen.

Powell's segment includes Gloria Grahame as his flirty wife. Post World War II Hollywood, whenever it had a part for a tramp, first call Gloria Grahame. Here she responds with an Academy Award winning performance. She hasn't many scenes, but as was said in another MGM picture around that time, what there is is cherce.

I don't think there's ever been an actor who can go from zero to sixty on the emotional scale as quickly as Kirk Douglas. Check the scene when Lana Turner discovers how Douglas betrayed her. The intensity of his reaction alone is frightening and real. Douglas was also up for an Oscar, but it went that year to laconic Gary Cooper in High Noon.

Vincente Minelli put all the pieces together just right and it comes out great entertainment.


That one line summary makes me sound like I'm calling the Bad and the Beautiful a case in 'tough love', where director Vincente Minnelli wags his finger at what happens to some people (cough, David O. Selznick, cough), while also showing too the joys of working in the business. But it's a business at its most booming time, coming out of the 40s where the producer was king, and the director had to vie for room at times to really get his vision in. Here the producer Jonathan Shields is played by Kirk Douglas as someone with big ideas at first- he even has an idea to help make a scary movie about cats even more frightening by not showing the cats (echoes of Val Lewton). Soon he rises the ranks and becomes big enough to really call the shots all he wants, but it also gets in the way of personal relationships, severs ties, and sometimes even makes him out to be monstrous (there's one shot I remember all the time where Douglas, in a big fit of anger against Lana Turner's character, seems like he's a whole foot taller with the ego almost manifested). The narrative of the film is a retelling by people who knew him, a sexy but soon disillusioned actress, a director who once worked with Shields but then got cut off from him, and a writer played by Dick Powell. Rashomon or Citizen Kane it is not in trying to reveal more grandiose and amazing things about human nature, but rather a supreme rumination on the good times and the bad times, possibly more of the latter. What's great about Douglas's portrayal is that through the stories from the three ex-friends and co-workers and lovers, he becomes a very well-rounded character. At the core, of course, is the producer who at the time had as more creative say than anyone else on the set. This brings some of the great scenes ever shown about movie-making, such as the moment when Amiel, the director, tries to put Jonathan in his place about how a scene should be shot, "in order to direct a picture you need humility". Another comes with the moment when Jonathan and his soon to be 'asistant to the producer' has to object out of just being stunned. But more than Douglas, it's also tremendous, memorable screen time for Lana Turner, perhaps in her most successful performance in just sheer acting terms (not necessarily just in presence or style like in other pictures), and for Dick Powell, who with this and Murder My Sweet has two defining roles outside of his usual niche. With many sweet camera moves, a script that crackles with the kind of scenes and dialog that makes one wish for the glory times of Hollywood's Golden Age, and at least four or five really excellent performances, The Bad and the Beautiful might not be as astounding and near-perfect as 8 1/2 or as funny as Bowfinger, but it ranks up there with the best movies about movie-making, and can make for some fine entertainment even for those who aren't really interested in how movies are made.


Still enjoyable after all these years. This is what Hollywood liked to think would pass for gritty expose' but was little more than a glossy, retelling of hoary industry myth. (For an update on the story see Altman's The Player) Kirk Douglas (at the absolute top of his game here) plays the S.O.B. producer, Lana Turner (in that brief moment between the baby fat and middle age that seemed to overtake her so swiftly) as the cynical, hard-drinking, vulnerable, showbiz outcast, near ex-actress, Barry Sullivan as the neophyte director looking for a break, Walter Pidgeon as the bottomline fixated studio head, and Dick Powell as the Pulitzer prize winning author and font of high quality original material. The supporting cast is chock full of quality types, Gloria Grahame has some nice moments as Powell's wife, Gilbert Roland as a Latin Horndog and the magnificent Elaine Stewart as the current object of his rutting interest. Douglas' Jonathan Shields is brilliant and ruthless, in fact, so brilliant that it's difficult to see how he came to be in such poor circumstances at the opening of the film. But he quickly surrounds himself with the components necessary to move smartly up the ladder and therein, of course, lies the rub. He sees those around him as little more than 'components' and they recognise the opportunity for great wealth and fame he offers them while they luxuriate in the comfortable fiction that their relationships to him are more than 'just business'. Hurt feelings and gnashing of teeth to follow but not before the Turner character has a career again, the Sullivan character has a resume, the Pidgeon character is awash in black ink and the Powell character has banked thousands of relative easy dollars and accumulated enough first-hand material for a blockbuster on Hollywood Babylon. Director Vincente Minnelli delivered a solid entertainment and it should be measured as just that. It is a well-made melodrama that exposes little about the 'real' Hollywood. It does not match the sophistication of All About Eve nor the mesmerising drama of Sunset Boulevard but it will hold your attention for the full running time and amuse you in the bargain.


One thing that I've always wondered is why no one looks at Hollywood more negatively than Hollywood itself. But whatever the reason, "The Bad and the Beautiful" pulls no punches in looking at its topic. The movie portrays some people explaining how they used to be friends of producer Jonathan Shields (Kirk Douglas) but have since turned against him. There's the director whom Shields promised a directing job but betrayed him, the writer who lost his wife to Shields's actions, and the actress whom Shields drove to madness.

I thought that one of the most effective scenes in the movie was Kirk Douglas holding Lana Turner in his arms. Here he is, this overbearing, hostile character forced to almost coddle his gorgeous female star; it might be showing how he may seemingly have exalted her, but he remains in a higher position and is merely using her and sending her into insanity. And the scene of her driving the car while completely upset elaborates on this idea.

And then, there's the writer. He and his wife move from Virginia hoping to get really big in Hollywood...until tragedy strikes. It all goes to show the disaster inherent in any industry (of course, Douglas's character exacerbates any problem). But anyway, this is a formidable part of cinema history; a precursor to movies like "The Player". Also starring Dick Powell, Walter Pidgeon and Gloria Grahame (who won Best Supporting Actress).


I watched it on the telly just this afternoon and it had been a while since I had seen TBATB. I loved it. Douglas is brilliant and so is the rest of the cast. Turner (a mediocre actress, at best)delivers her best performance. The story is wonderfully entertaining, if not ultra-realistic. The mood is not mean-spiritted, with enough room for humour. Catch this on a saturday or sunday afternoon and you'll be spending 2 hours in joy.

I give it a 9.


Hollywood insider films have been made since the movie colony came out to the west coast. The Hollywood community was aware that the public knew their patented make-believe was just that, and so they were willing to share the "truth" about Hollywood with the public fairly often.

But these films got darker in the late 1940s and early 1950s. In 1950 Billy Wilder's SUNSET BOULEVARD showed how the world had forgotten it's celebrities and stars of the late silent period a generation earlier. In 1951, although ostensibly a comedy, SINGING IN THE RAIN did show the disaster to so many silent careers (even the detestable Lila Lamont's) that sound brought in it's wake. Yet with all the viewing of the effect of the film industry's changes on the lives of actors, few tackled that of production people.

Vincent Minelli's 1952 THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL did just that, studying the career of a super film producer. It's use of organized series of flashbacks reminds of that this film's producer was John Houseman, once the partner of Orson Welles in his Mercury Theater. The constant comment that the anti-hero of the film, "Jonathan Shields" (Kirk Douglas) is dismissed as a "genius" is like the disparagement shown to boy-genius Welles when he showed up in Hollywood. But the basic model for the producer seems to be David O. Selznick, whose father was prominent in the 1920s, until forced out by rivals in the industry. Jonathan's father was also a big shot until he too was thrown out by his rivals.

Briefly the plot of the story is how Shields made a career out of the work of other people, several of whom he hurt by discarding as soon as he could. First is his co-producer/director Fred Amiel (Barry Sullivan), whose treatment plan for a major film is taken from him by Shields to sell the studio on backing it. Amiel hoped to direct it, but it is directed instead by Von Ellstein (Ivan Triesaut - a kind of clone of Josef Von Sternberg). Amiel breaks with Shields as a result, and never will work for him again. However, Amiel is able within a few years to be one of the most successful Hollywood directors anyway.

That incident was in 1936 (a film preview is shown at a theater showing ANNA KARENINA with Garbo and Fredric March - an MGM film, just like this one). In 1941 Shields is casting the leading role for a film to be shot by Harry Whitfield (Leo G. Carroll - possibly a clone of Alfred Hitchcock). He decides to hire "Georgia Lorison" (Lana Turner) for the female lead opposite "Gaucho" (Gilbert Roland). Lorison is the daughter of a classic leading actor of the past (his voice is heard - it is Louis Calhern's), who died impoverished and an alcoholic wreck (the father and daughter are supposed to be John and Diane Barrymore). Georgia is trying to keep off the sauce herself, and falls on the day shooting is to begin. Since Jonathan learns that Georgia loves him, he romances her. It is only when the film is in the can that he breaks it off, rather roughly. Georgia's performance makes her a success in Hollywood, but she never will work for Jonathan again.

Finally we have the story of novelist James Lee Barlow (Dick Powell) and his wife Rosemary (Gloria Grahame). Barlow is in Hollywood to write the screenplay version of his best selling novel of the deep south (he's a clone for William Faulkner and Thomas Wolfe, with some F.Scott Fitzgerald in). As Rosemary keeps James Lee from working, Jonathan tries to get the author into isolation to work, and preoccupies Rosemary with Gaucho (who had come onto her at a party). But Gaucho and Rosemary are killed in a plane crash. James Lee finishes the script, but an argument between Jonathan and Von Ellstein causes the latter to quit the film. Jonathan ruins the film because he has no talent as a director. Still he and James Lee might work on a new project together, but a stupid remark by Jonathan causes James Lee to realize that Gaucho and Rosemary were together on that ill-fated trip due to Jonathan. So he too leaves the producer. But subsequently he writes a novel about his wife, and wins a Pulitzer Prize.

Called together by Jonathan's financial head, Harry Pebble (Walter Pidgeon), the three victims of Shields refuse a new offer for just one final picture with him. But at the conclusion they all show curiosity on just what the new idea of his is.

THE BAD AND THE BEAUTIFUL had a wonderful script - it has many intricate bits in it that one has to catch on repeated viewings. Pebble (originally Shields' boss) dismisses him until he sees the treatment of the novel that Amiel wrote - he thinks it is Shields' ideas). He says in front of a seething Fred Amiel he always thought Shields a genius. Later, of course, he realizes it was not Jonathan's work. Similarly Von Ellstein congratulates Jonathan on being the first producer whose treatment of a book resembles the work of a director. Later he too realizes it was Fred's work, and ironically the collapse of Jonathan's position is begun when Von Ellstein lectures Jonathan on how you can't just stuff a film with a series of climaxes but have to build to one. Also the first time Georgia and James Lee discuss a film script they accidentally (by lack of knowledge on his part, and by temporary failure of memory on hers) hurt each other without realizing it. It becomes a rich tapestry of the industry and the various lives that get involved in it. As such it is one of the best films about movie making ever made.


This is one of favorite pictures and I view it often.

Minelli wanted to create a trio of movies about Hollywood. The Bad and the Beautiful was the first and Two Weeks In Another Town was the second. I believe a third was never made.

Bad is a terrific movie, right up there with Sunset Boulevard when it comes to movies about Hollywood. Kirk's performance is really so good, that I always wished that I could have been Jonathon Shields. The vision of him in his white dinner jacket, black tie untied, collar open, holding sleeping Lana Turner and then the camera moves back to show that it's the edge of the pool and then...he drops her in...it's a priceless scene. As is the scene in which he plays poker to get a job.

His argument with the director Von Elstein about interpretation and humility is very strong.

This is by far Lana's finest work...better than any performance she ever gave, including The Postman Always Rings Twice and Madame X. It's the most natural behavior and she looks sensational. I also always enjoy Barry Sullivan's performance.

The score by David Raksin beats his Laura score by miles...it's very modern...sinister at some points, melancholy at others...even upbeat and humorous at others.

Much of Minelli's tricks in this picture end up in the second...Two Weeks, including scenes from Bad and scoring from Bad.

I never miss a chance to see either film and those who are still around who were a part of it should be very proud of its enduring power.

The video is available and Rhino released the complete score including alternate theme takes.