When this film opened, I was a 17 year old fan of Diana Ross. I thought her fabulous and the film great. Funny how time can change perspective and viewpoint so completely. Shortly thereafter, a local newscast interviewed several musicians who had worked with Billie Holiday and were picketing the theatre where "Lady" had debuted. One said that the film was an insult to her memory, and her true life story was far more tragic than the film had suggested. More importantly, he said that Billie's music had suffered most in the attempt to film her life. He said that Miss Ross had failed to capture the essence of Billie's music, and that this film had reduced Miss Holiday's standing as the most important Jazz singer who'd ever lived to that of a mediocre pop vocalist. He implored everyone to check out the real Billie Holiday by purchasing some of her records. I had two immediate thoughts. One was, "Hmm, I thought the film was pretty good, but this guy seems to know what he's talking about". The other was, "Billie Holiday made records?" In fact, she made hundreds of records between 1935-59, but in over two hours of screen time, not one of them is even mentioned.

Prompted by the musician's suggestion and curiosity, I bought some Billie Holiday records and gave them a listen. That was the start of a life-long love of Jazz, and a complete reassessment of all that I knew and loved about popular music. As for the film, let's start with an early flaw. The opening credits are built around Diana Ross, as Billie Holiday, being arrested and booked for narcotics. The first thing we see is "New York City  1936" in large letters across the screen; as such, the writers managed to commit a factual error within the first five seconds of the screenplay! Billie was first arrested in 1949, for which she spent one year in jail. In 1936, she was still playing small clubs in Harlem, and it is generally believed that she didn't touch heroin until the early 1940's. The film continues with so many factual mistakes that I could spend all the space allotted here just listing them, but what is most alarming to me today is the disproportionate importance that Louis McKay occupies in this piece of total fiction. McKay was Billie's second or possibly third husband. Her biographers agree that, had she lived, she most certainly would have divorced McKay and removed him from her life completely. He was an opportunist and a user, and was probably abusive. One of the ironies of her life is that, in a gross miscarriage of justice, McKay not only received the bulk of music royalties that went to her estate, he was allowed as "special consultant" to this film to nourish a portrait of himself that was overly flattering and historically ridiculous. His actual place in her life was merely as one in a long list of men who'd contributed to the misery that was her later life. In the autobiography for which the film was named, Billie describes her first encounter with McKay. She said she found him literally lying in the gutter, and rescued him from a prostitute who was attempting to pick his pocket. Their paths did not cross again until many years later, when he wormed his way back into her life, and took charge of her affairs when she was most vulnerable. In short, he was not the glamorous and gallant figure depicted in the film, nor was she chronically defenseless. Popular legend has it that Billie Holiday once single-handedly beat up two redneck sailors who dared to tangle with her in a Harlem speakeasy - hardly the sniffling crybaby who lay crumpled in a corner waiting for Louis to rescue her, as portrayed in this film.

The film would have you believe that Billie started shooting heroin because she witnessed a lynching; one of the dramatic highpoints depicts Billie on the tour bus reflecting on the horrors of lynching while we hear snatches of her most famous song, Strange Fruit. For years after my first viewing of the movie I wondered why that song didn't have a bigger impact for me the first time I saw it. Now that I have acquired the DVD I know why  Billie's best song has been gutted. We hear the opening lines and the ending, but the middle verses have been eliminated. Gone is the most powerful imagery - "Black bodies swinging in the Southern breeze, strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees. Pastoral scene of the gallant South; the bulging eyes and the twisted mouththen the sudden smell of burning flesh"  these words are simply not there. No wonder I hardly noticed the song when I first saw the film.

This picture was made only 13 years after Lady Day's death. How could everybody associated with this film have totally forgotten what she stood for? Billie Holiday literally changed the way popular songs are sung, and therefore influenced every singer that came after her. I do not make this statement lightly. Many music critics and students agree that, before Billie, popular singers approached songs the same way that classical and opera singers always had; they sang the notes exactly as written, with no deviation from the written melody, no improvisation and, consequently, with little emotion or emphasis on feeling. Billie changed all that  which is why Frank Sinatra (for one) readily admitted that he'd learned everything he knew about phrasing from listening to Billie's records. It is difficult in hindsight to appreciate Billie's impact on vocal style simply because she so totally changed the way songs are sung, and every singer who came after her, whether they realize it or not, has been influenced by her on some level. She made far too important a contribution to music to receive the careless historical rendering and empty dramatics proffered by this film.


There is no question that no matter how extreme in the past or future Miss. Ross has been or will be (tantrums, bad albums, phoniness, bad publicity, touch me, don't touch me), she will always have this performance to look back on as a moment where everything worked perfectly.

The film is imperfect. Flawed. It could have been more realistic, more harrowing, and less hollywood-fied. Had it been, and had Motown not been so intent on proving itself as a major film force, she would have won the Oscar without question. The rumor had always been that in terms of voting it was "this close" as they say.

Even though she did not win, we are still left with a performance of depth, passion and layers that could only be described as magnificent in an experienced actress. In a neophyte, as Miss. Ross was at the time, it is stunning.

As a singer, She never before or since has sounded as good. The voice, while not really like Billie Holiday, just glows. Her musicality, intonation and idiomatic phrasing indicated a whole type of music she could have sung had she chosen too.

Watch it for her. It will make you think more kindly towards her the next time she, well, acts like Miss. Ross!


This was a wonderful star-making vehicle for Diana Ross but the worst thing that could have happened to the legend of Billie Holiday. Billie was big, bold, gutsy and full of life. Diana Ross plays her as a sweet aenimic victim. The look is great and the music, not bad, considering. But it has zero to do with Billie Holiday and it takes a lot of nerve to try and improve on the original.


Billie Holliday made some lovely records with the Teddy Wilson Orchestra in the 1930s.She made some good records for jazz impresario Norman Granz towards the end of her career,their merit largely due to her accompanying musicians as her voice was shot to pieces by then.What happened in between is the area covered by Sidney Furie's "Lady sings the blues"which uses the title if not much else of her 1958 ghosted autobiography.Like fellow 50s icons James Dean and Marilyn Monroe,Miss Holliday has achieved a post mortem fame far exceeding that she enjoyed whilst she was alive.She is repeatedly presented as a proto-lesbian,proto-bisexual,proto-feminist,proto-strong black woman or whatever label people who think it empowers them to attribute their beliefs to a dead person who is consequently unable to refute them choose to stick on her. My interest in Miss Holliday is strictly musical.In my opinion she was a considerable artist despite her lifestyle,not because of it. She clearly had some unsuitable male friends,but she wasn't a "victim". If she enjoyed the company of people in "The Life",well,she was all grown up,it was her business and her decision. Playing Miss Holliday in the film,Miss Diana Ross does not try to imitate her,nor does she resemble her in any way.She sings songs associated with her quite competently,and performs rather than acts,as top class singers(Frank Sinatra,Peggy Lee)tended to do.She is clearly a charismatic performer,and that shows on the screen.Unfortunately she does not share Miss Holliday's talent for turning dross into gold,for dross is what "Lady sings the blues" quite evidently is. Sensationalist and exploitative,it concentrates on the subject's sex life and drug addiction,a particularly unpleasant shot of Miss Ross sprawled unconscious over the toilet is my defining image of the film. Clearly Mr Furie was aiming high. If you want to get a more realistic view of Miss Holliday's life read "Wishing on the Moon" by Donald Clarke.Her early recordings are available (now out of copyright) on a multitude of labels,generally the only difference being the packaging.Listen to the freshness and innocence of "I wished on the moon" and forget that this terrible film was ever made.


The first question that would run across the mind of anyone who'd watch this movie is: "Can Diana Ross act?" The answer, I'm glad to say, is an unequivocal "Yes." And I think that's what the director wanted to clear up right from the very first scene, with a flash forward to Billie Holiday's drug bust while the credits were still on. Ms. Ross, devoid of make-up and with "crazy hair," put on an extremely convincing performance of heroin (or coke) withdrawal, replete with howling.

Her performance is the highlight of the movie, which unfortunately felt like it ran way too long, and I found myself constantly checking the run time. It wasn't bad as a musical. As I had read previously, Ms. Ross didn't seek to imitate Billie Holiday's style, and instead created a distinct and appropriate - yet similar - jazz style of her own just for the movie (check out "Good Morning Heartache"), and I, being a fan, didn't mind the song interludes.

What dragged the movie was the constant focus on Holiday's drug addiction (to showcase more of Ms. Ross's acting?). It felt like there was scene after scene of her being drug-addled, whining, and screaming, which began to abrade after a while. It's too bad, since with better direction and screenplay, coupled with Ms. Ross's capable acting and singing, this could've been one of the truly great musical biopics.


This is botched in a hundred ways. Factual errors aren't the point - all biopics play with the truth for dramatic reasons, but the story here is inept. The story starts and ends nowhere, investing none of the events with significance. There's no sense of drama, no building of tension, no interesting characters, nothing but Diana Ross bumbling around the sets looking awkward and projecting little personality. How does one re-create a 1920's Harlem whorehouse and manage to make it look as interesting as a Motel 6?

And the singing - there's no doubt Diana Ross has a voice, but she doesn't display the slightest connection with the material. No one could imitate Billie, but one would hope for some kind of interesting interpretation to help pull off the impersonation. But Ross phones in the tunes, with little feeling or style.

Most of the other characters are cardboard, with Richard Pryor doing the weirdest role of his life as a timid, comical piano player.

Absolutely unwatchable for anyone but die-hard Diana Ross fans, and for Billie Holiday lovers and movie buffs, sheer torture.


A young 28 year old Diana Ross earned an Oscar nomination for this 1972 movie about Billie Holiday. "Lady Sings the Blues" is a song written by jazz singer Billie Holiday, and jazz pianist Herbie Nichols. It is the title song to her 1956 album. In my opinion I thought Diana Ross did an OK job at portraying the troubled Billie Holiday. The many ups and downs of this famous singer are brought to life with Diana's performance. A co-star in the movie who I thought did a great job was 32 year old Richard Pryor. Pryor came through really well as someone who offered much support to Billie Holiday from very early on. Although there is some doubt of the accuracy of the book in which this movie is based, I still found it enjoyable enough to watch.


Even with little knowledge about Billie Holiday's life, watching this movie one soon begins to realize, that it is not a biopic about one of the greatest jazz singers of all times. They obviously just used her name to gain more attention.

If you can forget that, you see a story about the life of a fictional jazz singer in the 40s. There are some similarities to Billie's life: the prostitution and the drug abuse and a bit of racism. But everything is smoothed down and the core of the movie is the love story between the singer and her husband, the love of her life. It even has a happy ending: the successful concert in Carnegie Hall with the audience applauding and the singer happy, her husband proud and the manager smelling the dollars.

As a drama/romance for the mass(or Oscar) market, the movie works well and Diana Ross' performance is surprisingly good and in the more tragic scenes she even managed to give it some deepness. Billy Dee Williams looks sharp and plays his part as the caring husband convincingly. Richard Pryor unfortunately tried to improvise his role and failed.

Drama/romance fans might enjoy but Billie fans better buy a book.


A beautiful teacher Miss Panor has six students.They decide to play a cruel prank on Ms.Panor and her reputation is ruined.The teacher then turns to black magic to exact gruesome revenge."Art of the Devil 2" is a gore-soaked horror film which was directed by a team of seven filmmakers known as the Ronin Team.The direction is solid,the cast is pretty good,but the storyline is hardly dynamic.When the gore appears it is unrelenting and disgusting.Miss Panor is an great villain and truly remorseless killer.The gore is rather hard to stomach for example toenails are torn out,teeth are plucked,live geckos burst out of a boy's back,one hapless girl gouges her own eyes out and the skin on man's legs is burned by a blow-torch.Overall,I enjoyed "Art of the Devil 2" more than its predecessor.Give it a look.


Some of you will be familiar with this film because it was very successful in Thailand and its buzz reached our shores. It is a name-only sequel to the solid yet way tamer Art of The Devil.

Long Khong shows that American slasher films have made their mark on the world--feels a lot like a late '90s slasher entry...In other words, the film has a heavy Western influence in style and storytelling. It even has strong gory deaths like those in some contemporary Western movies such as Hostel, Aja's Hills, and Torched (not that it's a ripoff or anything, just pointing out a similarity). It also was interesting to see a film from Thailand with Thais as sorcerers as this is a common trait of '80s Hong Kong horror flicks that I enjoy--e.g., Seeding of a Ghost and The Devil. It also owes those films a nod for using their gimmicks--gory curses, animal body horror, eating of sick sh!t/puking, et al.

The first forty minutes or so of this movie coulda gone by a lot quicker. The background story is that a teenage boy with a wicked stepmom tries to catch the beautiful bitch in the act of an affair. This backfires and leads to stepmamasan's extramarital lover terrorizing them--the kid and his snoopy friends--with a gun. They get away and then the brats decide to go to a sorcerer to cast a spell for revenge. Next thing ya know, lover boy has an attack of fish-hooks-erupting-through-the-skinitis and the ol' lady starts going off her nut and they see 'er stickin' 'erself in the leg and then she just sort of goes into the background for a li'l while.

Later down the line (months, possibly years), the group of kids has a reunion at their friend-with-the-f'ed-up-stepmother's house and, conveniently, stepmom's still hanging around--though she seems pleasant enough. But guess what? She is way into black magic and wants some revenge for herself. Gory set-pieces include some cool torture scenes (boiling kettle of water poured into the agape mouth of a young man with drug-induced paralysis and the use of a blowtorch on his shins and their subsequent skinning) and some nice and gruesome body curses (the aforementioned fish hooks, lizard's burrowing out of a man's back, a girl who claws her eyes out and has her face boiled off). There is also an Asian ghost story spin to the whole thing to get it just a little more complicated.

As a horror movie, Art of the Devil 2 is not very original and its pacing in the beginning could've been a lot faster. One of the things that made it hard to follow (especially being as there were no subtitles on this bitch) was the fact that too many times flashbacks were used as exposition--gimme a break, man, I'm an American...Just keep it simple, will ya? Also, even though this movie didn't exactly scream for nudity, it would've elevated my grading of it by a point.

It was entertaining enough as a horror film though and the bloody-as-hell ultra-violence on display in the second half of the film makes up for the deficiencies of the rest of this thing, in my opinion. For fans of hard gore and torture, this is pretty much a must-see...if you weren't already aware of the hype. Give it a look--8/10.


I love horror movies and among all the horror movies I have seen,this one is definitely one of the most scary ones.OK,its about thai voodoo,people cursing each other and getting revenged,the plot is ordinary,but how they torture each other in the movie is what its really about and the scariest part is it doesn't seem surreal at all,it seems like something it might actually just happen to you if you mess with the wrong people.

I still remember after seeing the movie I was shivering all over,and couldn't get the crazy scene out of my head~it was like the first time i felt that way after seeing a horror movie,kind of cool in a way!For those horror-movie lovers out there,I'd say this one is a must see!


This is a Thai horror film that was simply fun to watch. A group of friends visit an old teacher of theirs who lives in the jungle. We see through flash backs that terrible things happened to them in the past at their school. Their beautiful teacher seems to have become a homicidal devil worshiping witch. Not only is she able to conjure the dead and cast spells that will make your stomach turn (think fish hooks and reptiles + soft human flesh); but she also seems to have a predilection for torture using a blow torch. Let the mayhem begin!

If you can find it online, download the trailer of the movie and watch it...its one of the best horror trailers you will see. And the movie itself is just as fun. What else can I say about this movie? Interesting and unpredictable storyline. Beautiful jungle scenery. Hot (but evil) Thai babes. Gratuitous gore. What's not to like guys? Watch this one and have a blast!


ART OF THE DEVIL 2 is another one that I had to watch as an import VCD with no subs/dubs as the U.S. release doesn't hit til next month - so anything I say about the film is based strictly on what I "saw" - as I have no idea what anyone was saying. Also, this is about as "name only" for a sequel as it gets - as far as I can tell, this film has nothing in common storywise with the original ART OF THE DEVIL, other than the title...

The story centers around a group of kids who have a sorcerer cast a spell on some guy cuz he's a dick to them. When homeboy starts pushin' fish-hooks through his skin, his ol' lady decides to get even by casting some spells of her own. The kids take a little vacation to a shack on the waterfront - and this is where the "action" happens. There's a decent amount of gore, including the previously mentioned fish-hook death, and a particularly decent leg-blowtorching-to-flesh-removal that is pretty choice. There also seemed to be some sort of "twist" to the ending that I didn't understand...

Overall, AOTD 2 seems to be a pretty decent film, similar in vein to the 80's era Hong Kong sorcery-horror joints, but WAY better. There seemed to be a few genuinely creepy moments, and the gore was pretty heavy, though not as much of an all-out bloodbath as I was expecting from the trailer. I'll be interested to pick this one up when the U.S. release hits to see if the storyline measures up to my expectations...8/10


Remember that movie about the guy who wanted revenge for the death of his son and had a monster unleashed that he could not control? I can't remember the name, but the warning is the same. Dabble in black magic and it could come back to bite you.

That's all I can say about this movie. Thai Black magic and some really gory stuff. The problem is that it takes a lifetime to get there, and the trip is very painful. Painful in the sense that there wasn't anyone in this film that resembled an actor.

If it's blood you are fishing for, then you'll catch it, but at what cost?


Before watching this film,I was thinking in this:''Another Asian horror movie.I think there will be the female ghost with a long black hair''.Long Khong uses that but its narrative took different ways for telling the story,which may not be too original,but at least,they are different than a lot of Asian horror films.That thing made me enjoy the film pretty much because that helps for creating an exotic tone which makes the movie really unpredictable.This film has some fails,like some scenes which are a little boring.Also,the ending was forced.But,in spite of that,Long Khong is ingenious,fun,unpredictable and very gory.And I really appreciated that.


Cheesing heading for a review, yes I know but it was the scarification or bloody cuts on the womans back, on the DVD cover. I was going to give this movie an 8 due to it being a good movie of it's kind but now that I've just seen the whole story it's a sure 10.

As with most Asian language-edited cinema, the acting seems corny but if you can by pass that, you'd see a great story. Of course there's gore but the thing is, that it's not senseless just for schock value. If you follow the story completely to the end you'll see everything has its place.

I'm lucky to have picked this movie because with a franchise like _________________________ (insert corporate video franchise of your choice), you'd never know.

By the way, Mr. Panor is so devilishly beautiful that it's a trip to see how cold and heartless she is.


Art of the Devil 2 tries to insert some quality into this horror genre but it mostly falls flat. Uneven and confusing editing, low-budget effects, and the typical (but with slight twist) ending provide for a sometimes dull and ineffective gross out experience with glimmers of sophistication. There are a few flashes of humanity and the voice over is actually some of the best qualities of the movie. But the quality production is missing. The jerky shots and unnatural performances (reflecting the older-style Asian acting) distract from the flow of the movie. The transformation of the teacher during the movie isn't handled smoothly nor sympathetically. The English-dubbed Thai movie makes does not make the transition into American film market easily. The end result is more confusing than clarified terror. The demise of the first of the six students is also strikingly sudden and somehow out of character. At times, the movie does exhibit a terror-filled tense background and their are subtle nice flourishes of horror touches inserted throughout the movie, but they are unable to make up for the rest of the jumble of weaknesses that pervade this movie. Four out of Ten Stars.


Common wisdom has it that Claude Chabrol's been trading water since the superb La Ceremonie, and decidedly minor efforts like La Fleur du Mal, Rien ne va Plus and Merci Pour le Chocolat certainly do little to change that view, but the surprisingly excellent Au Coeur du Mensonge aka The Heart of the Lie/The Color of Lies is easily one of his very best.

As usual he's not interested in the thriller mechanics of the film's murder mystery, preferring to focus on the effects on the marriage of the small-town art teacher who becomes the favourite suspect for locals and police alike. At once a subtle play on the nature of lies, floating the notion that when everybody's lying there are no more lies, and another of his portraits of small town petit bourgeois suspicion ("You never really know who you live with."), it benefits from superb performances from a surprisingly likable Sandrine Bonnaire and a convincingly tortured Jacques Gamblin as the couple in the eye of the quiet storm, as well as good supporting turns from Antoine de Caunes as a smug overachieving author and local celebrity and Bernard Verley as an easygoing but quietly perceptive local cop that are more than good enough to make you overlook a horribly flat performance by Valeria Bruni Tedeschi as the detective in charge of the case. She's one of the only two real bum notes in the film. The other? Well, just for once couldn't Chabrol hire someone other than his son to write the score? Matthieu Chabrol turns out another of his identikit numbers - start off classical piano, add a bit of dissonance, then a bit of pseudo-comic artful jauntiness before collapsing back into classical piano mode - that adds nothing but tedious familiarity to the proceedings. But this is still more than good enough to overcome those obstacles.

Kino's Region 1 DVD is an acceptable standards conversion from Pal that could be better, but it does at least feature the trailer, a subtitled introduction and 25-minute making of.


Although Claude Chabrol has worked predominantly in the crime genre, and adapted much mystery fiction, very few of his films are straight whodunits. Crimes may be the central feature of these films, or the catalyst at least, and investigations may shape these narratives and bring them to their conclusion, if not resolution. But Chabrol is usually more interested in focusing on point-of-view, of the killer, the victims, the suspects, the community, than in any who's-the-killer games. So 'Au coeur du mensonge' belongs to a relatively marginalised (and recent) position in Chabrol's filmography; its most famous predecessors are 'Cop au vin' and 'Inspecteur Lavardin' (although there are important echoes of earlier Chabrol classics like 'Que le bete meure' and 'Le Boucher').

However, just because we don't know who committed the two murders until the end, this doesn't mean Chabrol is only interested in artifical games. The limits of the whodunit paradoxically give Chabrol the freedom from delineating the psychology of the criminal, to something much more interesting to him; in other words, the unknowability of other people, especially those we love, live with and think we know best.

Chabrol's films are so self-contained and remote, that it's rare to find him concentrating on 'topical' issues. Here the subject is the all-too-familiar paedophile rape and murder of a young girl in the woods. She was last seen at a lesson with her art teacher, Rene, and suspicion immediately falls on him, in one of those oppressive small towns where the Internet will never outpace malicious gossip. If we didn't know whodunits, we might think so too - he is lame, shifty looking, whiny, and a failed artist experiencing mental breakdown who thinks his masseuse wife, Vivianne, is having an affair with a slick media personality, G.R.

There are other suspects: G.R. himself, his criminal go-between, and Rene's friend, Regis, even, as the coroner cheerfully suggests, a woman with strong hands and gloves - an exact description of Vivianne earlier. But it is Rene everyone suspects, especially the new Chief Inspector, Lesage, whose personal stake in the case (she has a daughter of the same age as the dead girl) makes her determined to bring him to justice.

'Mensonge' is a psychological study in the guise of a mystery thriller. We are asked to follow Rene's reactions to the murder, social ostracism, artistic failure etc., and yet we're not told whether he's the murderer or not, or any of the other characters, which would surely be a crucial element in anyone's psychology! so these two impulses - towards psychological truth and towards a mystery story which necessarily precludes the audience having any access to the character's psychology, puts it with the same level of knowledge of characters as the other characters, making for an effectively tense film, which, beyond its mystery trappings, asks whether we can ever know anyone, when trust, or self-confidence, or faith in 'reality' is gone.

The film links the idea of lies (characters concealing truths, making realities out of lies), with art (painting - Jacques revels in panoramas and trompes d'oeil; the second murder is 'composed' like a painting). Throughout, various media for the diffusion of truth - painting, TV, books, recitals - as well as the police investigation, with its need for artistic resolution, are highlighted, interrogated and undermined (even a last minute confession is suspect, and the denouement, appropriately, takes place in a deep mist). Chabrol's blithely elliptical narrative style further compounds our uncertainty. As with every Chabrol, the surface every character sees, or creates, is as treacherous as a trompe d'oeil. As the child-murder in the forest, echoing 'Diary of a Chambermaid', suggests, Chabrol is letting out the closet Surrealist in him.


***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** One of Claude Chabrol's poorest offerings,this movie is near plagiarism:it sometimes recalls Edouard Molinaro's "La mort de Belle" from George Simenon.The teacher unfairly suspected of a crime who commits another crime :it's all there in Molinaro's 1963 movie featuring the great Jean Desailly.So why bother?Chabrol even copies himself:the ending looks like that of "juste avant la nuit" (1971).

"Juste avant la nuit" ,though inferior to "la femme infidèle" "que la bête meure","le boucher" or "la rupture" boasted a wonderful cast:Bouquet and Audran.Here,what have we?Sandrine Bonnaire,totally incredible as a doctor,Bulle Ogier,a grotesque matron,and Antoine de Caunes ,an "actor" generally cast in some ponderous French comedies.Fortunately,he dies half an hour before the end,what a relief! The actress playing the cop should enter the Guiness book of Records as the worst performer of a police officer in history:how lucky they are,the ones who see the movie dubbed in English.Her voice and her swagger are comic at best,unbearable in the long run.I really wonder how she passed the audition.

Along with this one ,some of Chabrol's films to avoid at any cost:"folies bourgeoises" ,"les magiciens","les innocents aux mains sales";and the ones that should be restored to favor:"l'enfer" and "masques".


For Claude Chabrol,a cinéaste who has made over 50 films,this film must be like one of his loving children.However,his admirers might view it in a different light as it might appear as a minor work for them but many serious viewers would nevertheless feel that there are some nice things to observe in this film.Au coeur du mensonge is a film about people who are grappling with truths and lies in their lives.This film is more of a character study even though it is true that there are two crimes depicted in the film.These vile acts are merely a pretext for small town people to talk of pretentiousness and infidelity.Au coeur du mensonge is also a story about two artists;one of them is a fake and other one is not so sure of his inherent abilities.There is also a woman in their midst who is torn between these two men.The message of this film is simple:To understand a lie,one has to go to its heart.When we watch Sandrine Bonnaire and Jacques Gamblin, we realize that the truth is not so complicated as it is always visible on surface level.


French movies are used to investigating human thoughts, behaviors. Chabrol makes it perfectly. As you might know, he is a typical french director, sometimes boring but specially relevant and with accurate analysis in this film. The feeling of jealousy and suspicion is perfectly described, Jacques Gamblin as a tortured painter is, as always, amazing and touching. The well known humorist for his Euro Trash show, Antoine De Caunes, is scheming and surprisingly good enough. It's true that Sandrine Bonnaire and Valeria Tedeschi are kind of insipid and correspond to the cold french girl stereotype I hate. Anyway, the film is perfectly directed as a french thriller, which actually helps to know a bit more about the birth of jealousy.


The hypothesis of Chabrol: that life in society is only possible if it is based on lies, in the film, is a total lie! Also, it's interesting that the narrator at the actual time of these problems: pedophilia, unemployment, female cops (on television), was neurotic. It seems contrived in many situations: the infidelity of Vivianne (the nude painting of her), the assassin (the photo that was found in the assassin's bag).


Claude Chabrol had directed about 50 movies since 1957. Sometimes, he's very good, but when he's bad, he's really boring. This movie is boring, despite the good efforts of asking the spectators who had killing the little girl and the writer. It's too long, too low key. But the biggest problem of the movie is Valeria Bruni Tedeschi. I never saw such a weak actress. She don't have any credibility in the role of the police inspector. She's inexpressive and had an horrible voice. She can't articulate and most of the time, we don't understand or hear what's she's saying! Sandrine Bonnaire seems to be anywhere except in her role, but Jacques Gamblin is good. Too bad for Chabrol's fans!


It was only at the beginning of this year, that my parent's came into the living room, saying 'Guess what..? Were going to see The Island!'. I thought that they meant we were going to get onto a plane and just look at a boring island off the coast of Perth. Then, I turned on the Comedy Channel to find The Island was a comedy act with the famous Lano and Woodley. Personally, I love their show.

As we watched the show, I couldn't hold on. When I mean hold on, I mean my bladder. I was laughing too much. I loved the part where Frank ask's the neighbour to feed their cat when they were away, only to come back to the neighbour, moment's later, to tell her that they don't have a cat. Then, on the last visit, he ask's her "Can you buy us a cat while we are away and feed that? Okay, thanks!" And the judge! He rocked my socks! I loved the part "I shouldn't be a judge... I should have been a vanquilaqist!" And saying the second part, with his mouth closed.

And what about 'Salt' (Da! Da da!). Even that little music number with Frank playing the ukalea or Colin singing the song 'I Love Me!'.

Out of all the comedy act's I've seen, this was the one that got my boot knock, and the audience alway's getting a laughter and shock!


This was on the Comedy Channel a few months ago, and I loved it. I thought it was the most hilarious show I have ever seen. I saw Lano and Woodley live once a couple of years ago in Mount Gambier (where I live, and they were so funny then as well.

I saw The Island from about a quarter of the way through, and I don't think I stopped laughing through the whole thing. When Woodley grabbed the fire extinguisher from behind the stage, and Lano is like, "You can't use that. It belongs to the theater. We're trapped on a desert island!" I laughed so hard I almost cried. And when Woodley just ignores him and puts the fire extinguisher on various parts of Colin's body, going, "I'm going to freeze your back-knees, and then I'm going to freeze your right eye, so when you walk down the street, everyone will look at you and say 'oh, look at him. He can only move one eye because the other one was frozen with a fire extinguisher'," and so on and so forth. He just keeps rambling on about freezing him, and then it turns out that the fire extinguisher is empty, because Colin had been mucking around with it before the show.

Anyone who has seen this show will know what I say when I say, I loved the stage hand Clem. Also, how Woodley just changes the end of the storyline so that they get off the island safely. AND, when Woodley says, "Oh, I was just worried you'd fall off the stage and land on your cock." For those of you who don't know, there was a fake chicken on a wire attached to Colin's pants.

My absolute favorite bit though, is when, at the very end, they are in Heaven and on wires and spinning around. When Wooodley bounces on the wire and makes the thing tilt and makes Lano bounce, and Lano is going, "Oh s**t," every time he does it, I was laughing so hard I almost wet myself.

The Island is hilarious. Hire the DVD, and I am sure you will be more than satisfied with what you get.

Here is a quote:

Colin- Okay, we're going to make two teams. Woodley- (putting his hand up and jumping up and down) Ooh, ooh, ooh! Colin- What? Woodley- Can I be on your team?

I give The Island 10/10 any day!!!


I have been a fan of Lano & Woodley for ages, but I only got to see The Island DVD recently. I absolutely loved it!

Its so hard to determine what is planned and what isn't. Eg. Setting the bag on fire?? Which, i think, makes it so brilliant.

Each of the comedians get their own chance to shine, Col's definitely having to be his song about falling head over heals in love with himself. Frank has quite a few great lines in this show and i have to give full credit to him for his chicken noises.

If you are already a fan of Lano & Woodley then you definitely wont be disappointed. If you haven't seen much of their material before then this would be a great place to start.


Having seen Lano and Woodley on Australian television and been impressed with their wit and humour I expected this DVD would be some of their best material but I found their TV performances to be at least as funny. A lot of this performance is funny and one bit at the end had me rolling in laughter but some of it is just plain silly and I was put off by their reliance on ad-libs, or faux ad-libs. They broke character and scene a lot to make light of their own stage play. The plot of the show has Lano and Woodley getting marooned on a desert island after a plane crash. It seems like they took this basic plot and collected every ad-lib along the way to form about two thirds of the show. I'm not saying that ad-libbing and straying from the plot isn't standard fare for comedians, but when the whole show is like this, when the "mistakes" are so deliberate, it becomes patronising. They went too far out of the context of the desert island for me with their interaction with the audience. I suppose the audience on the night may have enjoyed it, it was after all for them. If I was in the crowd I probably would have felt I had my money's worth. Alas, for me their legend has faded. They were more ad-libbers than comic talents.


"Frühling auf dem Eis" shows a large number of well known Austrian actors and the ensemble of the Vienna Ice Revue, world-famous at a time when I was young. I know well all the skaters from their appearances in the fifties, especially Eva Pawlik, starring in "Frühling auf dem Eis". I can well remember that she was not only a wonderful sportswoman and actress but also a doctor of philosophy. All Europe loved her in the fifties.


I love this movie because it shows Austria´s figure skating queen Eva Pawlik. I remember to have seen her in the programme of the Vienna Ice Revue in Brussels in 1961 when I was 5 years old. I dreamed the dream of being such a great show-star by myself. In "Frühling auf dem Eis" I saw her again when I was about twenty years old in a retrospective on TV. Although her skating style may look a bit old fashioned to us now she is still a strong personality on the ice and also as an actress in the frame story. It is worth mentioning that she is - as an actress - not worse than the "real" actors. It would have been impossible the other way round - for actors cannot learn how to skate within a few weeks. Besides, "Frühling auf dem Eis" is one of the few movies in the history of films in which an internationally successful skater (Pawlik was runner-up at the 1948 Olympics) plays the main role in a movie. I can only remember the legendary Sonja Henie from Norway who did so and the German couple Marika Kilius and Hans-Juergen Bäumler. Even the great Kati Witt only played a main role on the ice and not in the frame story of a movie.


I am 95 years old, so I have seen almost all figure skating stars of the twentieth century. I saw most ice shows in Vienna, especially those with Austrian World Champion Felix Kaspar, Austrian Olympic Champion Herma Szabo, Austrian double Olympic Champion Karl Schäfer and the Olympic runner-ups Ilse and Erik Pausin. After World War II there was again a lot of exhibition skating in Vienna, with double Olympic Champion Dick Button and Austrian Olympic runner-up Eva Pawlik who was entitled the "Pawlowa on the ice". When I watch the movie "Frühling auf dem Eis" with Eva Pawlik (who was also a good actress) all the marvellous figure skating impressions come back to my mind. I love this movie because it is part of Austria´s figure skating history that is unique in the world.


To me "Frühling auf dem Eis" showing the Vienna Ice Revue that was world-famous once is not only a historical figure skating document. As the female main role is played by my mother, Eva Pawlik (who died in 1983), and as my father Rudi Seeliger (who also died in 1983) is also presented as a skater, the movie is from the personal point of view by far more valuable to me than to any other person in the world. For everyone interested in the my parents´ figure skating career (especially in my mother´s) I write the following words:

As the 1948 Olympic Champion Barbara Ann Scott had turned pro Eva Pawlik was celebrated as the world´s highest ranking female amateur skater in the summer of 1948. Pawlik did a lot of exhibition skating in the US, where she was also asked to be the lead actress in a Hollywood movie by Gene Kelley who wanted to combine his dancing with her skating. She said no because turning pro would have exluded her from the following year´s championships. Pawlik was said to have the best chance to win the next European and World titles.

Though suffering from acute appendicitis, Eva Pawlik beat her competitor Alena Vrzanová both in school figures and in free-skating in Milan and became the 1949 European Champion. In Paris where the World Championship was held, she was second after school figures, but the difference in score between her and Vrzanová was rather small, so she still had good chances to win. But then one of her heels broke while she and her competitors were warming up. Sabotage was supposed but it could not be proved. The judges did not allow her to try the skates of a companion, so Pawlik had to give up and Vrzanová was able to win the 1949 World Championship without any dangerous competitor. Some weeks later, my mother decided to turn pro, although double Olympic Champion Karl Schäfer implored her to go on skating for one more year.

I don´t think that my mother´s decision to turn pro in 1949 was right. Being the star of the Vienna Ice Revue she showed a free programme that was compared to that of Vrzanová by European journalists and figure skating experts who said that my mother´s programme was both technically and artistically on a higher level. So Karl Schäfer had been right, of course, that she would have had the best chance to win the 1950 World title. But Pawlik wanted to give financial support to her parents whom she loved above all. That was the psychological reason why she turned pro in 1949.

My mother´s strength had always lain in the free skating, though she had had a solid school-figures training. The later Olympic Champion Jeanette Altwegg was not an excellent free skater but an outstanding school-figures skater. An excellent free skater representing a more modern style was Jacqueline du Bief. But she was still too young to be dangerous to my mother if my mother had taken part in the 1950 or 1951 World´s.

In 1947 when my mother probably already was the best European skater and at least the second best in the world, Austrian skaters were not admitted to the European and the World competitions. This exclusion (for political reasons arising out of World War II) prevented my mother from making a name for herself in 1947. Everyone who deals with figure skating knows that the judges are to some extent influenced by a skater´s international recognition. Therefore it is clear that she must have shown an outstanding program in 1948 to win three silver medals (at the European´s, the Olympics and the World´s) as a no-name skater. Although she was - at the first go - the best European skater, she did not win the European Gold in 1948 because non-Europeans were allowed to participate, again for political reasons.

It is good also to remember the conditions in which Austrian skaters developed their skills and competed in the 1930s and '40s. In the 1930s, Eva Pawlik had been considered a child prodigy, able to jump a single axel and do a large number of spins at the age of four. In her teens she would get up at 4 am daily to run to the Vienna ice rink (Wiener Eislaufverein) to practice her school figures before school -- and this at a time when Austrian skaters could practice only in the cold season as there were no indoor skating halls as there were in the US and Canada.

But Nazi Germany´s absorption of Austria in 1938 destroyed sportsmen´s careers and lives. Pawlik was ultimately unable to carry on the Austrian tradition of being world-famous both as a single and as a pairs skater. She should have participated at age 12 in the Olympic Winter Games scheduled to take place in Tokyo in 1940. My parents Eva Pawlik and Rudi Seeliger could take part only in German domestic competitions; they became German youth champions, each as a single skater and together as a couple (this was before Kekesy/Kiraly who went on to win the Olympic Silver Medal in 1948 and the 1949 World Championship). Drafted into the German army, my father was eventually captured and worked as a slave coal-miner in the Soviet Union, incommunicado, until he was allowed to go back to Austria in 1949.

In the end, my parents were lucky -- although my father was unable to restart an amateur career (my mother was already a professional, starring in the Vienna Ice Revue), as they soon became one of the world´s best professional couples. My mother´s lead role in both the ice skating and the frame story of a film featuring the Revue, Spring on the Ice` (Frühling auf dem Eis`, 1950), was what inspired the later Olympic double champion, Ludmilla Belousova, to take up skating. Morris Chalfen, the boss of the revue Holiday On Ice`, considered Pawlik Europe´s best show-star on the ice since Sonja Henie.

Some months before my birth in 1962, my mother ended her skating and became the first female sportscaster of the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation (ORF). In 1973 she began her third profession as a German and English teacher at a Viennese secondary school (pupils from 10 to 18). In 1954, she had earned her doctorate in German and English at the University of Vienna. My father was the manager of a public relations enterprise where he started in 1962.

In 1979 my mother became severely ill and died in 1983, four months after my father who had died from a sudden heart attack.


"Frühling auf dem Eis" ("Spring On the Ice") shows an ice revue with wonderful dancing scenes of the past. Recommended to figure-skating historians who want to analyze the skating style of the past on the one hand and to older people who want to look back on the other hand. The scenes that have mostly impressed me are the oriental scene with Eva Pawlik as a slave (the combination of skating and pantomime) and the Viennese Waltz at the end of the film. You can see how much the sport has developed within the last six decades. It is remarkable, however, that Pawlik's pirouettes actually were as fast as they are in the free programs of the present world's elite. The frame story is to some extent a sort of necessary evil of the whole movie. The figure skater Eva Pawlik, however, does her job well not only on the ice but also as an actress. In one of the commentaries on IMDb someone points out that it would have been more difficult for an actor or an actress to skate than it was for a artistically talented skater to act. I agree with that.


You can forget about most old movies, but you should not forget about "Frühling auf dem Eis". The special emphasis on the elements of art and entertainment in Eva Pawlik´s figure skating is what makes this document of European show business history that outstanding.


... above is my email address so as to enable you to contact me if you want to - I know a great deal about figure skating history because I have learned so many details during the time my mother was the first female figure skating sportscaster for the Austrian Broadcasting Corporation ORF. Besides, I wrote a book about the Vienna Ice Revue.


The quality of the ice-revue depends above all upon Eva Pawlik, who was four times Austrian Champion, European Champion and runner-up both at the World´s and the Olympics. She was not only a world-famous sportswoman, but also an outstanding show star and a good actress as to be seen in "Frühling auf dem Eis". The old-fashioned choreography fits in the early fifties. Pawlik´s spins are faster than those of many a European or World Champion of today. Her most difficult jumps are the double salchow and the double toe. The film earns a maximum of 10 points because it is one of the very few movies in which a European figure skating Champion also plays a main role in the frame story of a revue film. No one interested in ice shows should miss it!


The frame-story is the necessary evil of the movie. The only thing about the frame-story worth mentioning is that Eva Pawlik is also an excellent actress. The outstanding value of the film lies in the presentation of the ensemble of the Vienna Ice Revue with European Champion Eva Pawlik on top. Everyone interested in the history of figure skating has to have seen this document of art on the ice.


There are some similarities between the story of "Frühling auf dem Eis" and that of "Das Kind der Donau". But the ice dancing in "Frühling auf dem Eis", especially that of top star Eva Pawlik, is beyond all doubt more interesting that Marika Rökk´s dancing. Besides, Pawlik who was world-famous at that time, is a better actress.


The reason why 10 points are appropriate: Eva Pawlik is starring not only as a figure skater, but also as an actress. I have not known anything about Pawlik but my grand-parents told me about her extraordinarily marvellous appearances in the programmes of the Vienna Ice Revue that played for Berlin six weeks a year in the fifties and that was well-known all over the world at that time. I am a musician. So I saw Pawlik´s dancing in "Frühling auf dem Eis" from a musician´s point of view. Every spin, every slight moving is in perfect harmony with the music. Though I am not even twenty years of age, I can imagine that the audience was thrilled by Pawlik´s skating.


"Frühling auf dem Eis" is a must for everyone interested in the history of figure skating and ice-revues. The skaters open a dream world of colours and dance. Eva Pawlik, in the fifties Austria´s most popular figure skating queen, is shown in a large number of roles on the ice (as a doll as well as a ballerina) and also in the leading role in the movie´s frame story. It goes without saying that the skating style looks old-fashioned from the present point of view, but taking into account that the film is more than half a century old you can imagine that the style was very modern at that time, especially as compared with the Hollywood movies with Sonja Henie. So "Frühling auf dem Eis" with the ensemble of the legedary Vienna Ice Revue is from a certain point of view a historical cultural document. That is why it seems more valuable to me than other movies produced in 1950.


I love the old movies. Although the frame story is - beyond all doubt - not excellent, the movie is worth 10 points in my opinion because it shows the wonderful skaters of the legendary Vienna Ice Revue.

Austrian and European Champion Eva Pawlik who lost her Olympic Gold Medal only against Canada´s sweetheart Barbara Ann Scott is brilliant not only as a skater but also as an actress.

There is no doubt that the other actors having learned how to act on stage and in a movie are not really better. It would have been more difficult for them to skate...


The 1949 European Champion and 1948 Olympic runner-up Eva Pawlik from Austria is excellent both as the leading lady of the Vienna ice revue ensemble and as an actress. I have seen this movie about ten times and I must say it is worth watching even more often. I can strongly recommend this movie to everyone interested in the history of figure skating and of ice shows. I have seen many a movie with the legendary Sonja Henie from Norway, thrice Olympic Champion, but there was none among these films that was as charming as "Frühling auf dem Eis".


Fan-magazine equivalent of a biography, in this case a television-budget glimpse into the early life of actress and vocalist Judy Garland (née Frances Gumm). Director Jackie Cooper, who reminds us he befriended the real Judy during their years together at M-G-M, lays the pathos at our feet right from the start, with Broadway's Andrea McArdle belting out a lonesome "I'm Always Chasing Rainbows", followed by a reprise of the song fifteen minutes later! Cooper, and writer John McGreevey (working from a sub-standard book by Christopher Finch), perhaps were hoping to show us Judy's natural pluck and verve despite upheavals in the Gumm household--but, if so, somebody forgot to tell young McArdle. With her hangdog face, crooked mouth and watery eyes, she's about as far from plucky as a Garland substitute can be. Obviously chosen for the part due to her stage pipes as the original "Annie", McArdle has apparently studied Judy Garland but doesn't attempt an imitation (perhaps unwisely, considering the results we do get); with a trained voice so one-dimensional it is practically soulless, McArdle seems zombie-fied, metallic. Cooper stages innumerable scenes around the piano with McArdle in song--always surrounded by adults nodding to each other, pretending to find her adorable--but never gets at what was so unique about Judy Garland. She appears to us to be just another kid songbird. The Hollywood studio sequences are also underwhelming, with key details and conversations coming off as suspect (made worse by repetitive moments, poor editing and mediocre acting). One can only scoff at what amounts to be a woe-is-me look at a poor little rich girl, one who finds herself wondering aloud, "When will I be in the right place at the right time?" as she walks the lot of the biggest movie studio in the world.


This is one of the worst films on a famous person's childhood I have ever had the misfortune to watch: saccharine, vague, wooden performances all round but especially wooden is McArdle, a butch kewpie doll who is badly miscast in the lead. And her singing! Nothing like the nuance and subtleness of Garland's, just a strident noise to chill the blood. Blessed are the inventors of the remote, which meant I could mute the sound from the comfort of my sofa every time McArdle opened her mouth.

The thing I don't get is why child labour is frowned upon in every arena except that of entertainment, and the obscenity that is the Child Star. If you really want to know about Judy Garland's childhood, don't bother with this garbage, read Gerald Clarke's GET HAPPY: THE LIFE OF JUDY GARLAND. As a book it's fascinating, well-researched, and blessedly *silent*.


Judy Garland was incredibly talented and not in the least boring so how in the world this movie was made is beyond me. It was absolutely dreadful, boring beyond belief and in large part extremely poorly acted. The only character I managed to grow interested in was the father and they didn't develop him much.

Andrea McCardle's voice could crack windows - I had to mute the numerous songs to keep the dogs in the neighborhood from howling. She was in way over her head for this role and didn't sound a thing like Judy Garland. Her horrid singing was only eclipsed by her equally atrocious acting, all her dialogue delivered in a flat, monotone manner. Andrea was simply awful so I'm astonished at the numerous accolades by other reviewers.

It was free on OnDemand and this is definitely a case of you get what you pay for. Save yourself two hours and avoid this painfully embarrassing flick.


On a scale of 1 to 10, Andrea McArdle has to be rated a ten if only for the strength, clarity and beauty of her singing abilities. Add to that the fact that the girl can actually act. To see her in any movie would be a treat. To see her in a movie depicting Judy Garland, another showbiz "10" with a voice that overwhelms, is an unbelievable delight. "Rainbow" tells the story of the emotional triangle that proved to be a trap for Judy Garland. Wanting to please her parents, wanting to "make it big" in show business, and always longing to be a normal girl proved to be a conflict too large to overcome. The movie is bittersweet in that it shows the drive the mother infuses into young Judy Garland, the special relationship between Judy and her father, and the unbelievable talent inside this child, all the while reminding us that each of these facets took a toll on Judy Garland and eventually shaped her life both in positive ways and in ways that were painful.

A good movie. I really wish it would be released on DVD. It definitely would be a worthwhile addition to any collection.


Of course, in a made for TV movie, you aren't looking for the professionalism of the genre, but rather at the entertainment value. Well, this is one movie that delivers the entertainment by way of Andrea McArdle. She is a powerhouse and made such an impression on me with her voice as a young girl that I can still recall the lyrics to all of the Judy Garland songs she sang in this film.

The relationship portrayed with her father is a touching one and you get a sense of how this little girl was transformed into the media powerhouse that was ultimately her undoing. A must see movie - if it can ever be found released.


I saw this back in '78, and parts of the dialogue and music have stuck with me for the past 21 years. In fact, I had just quoted one of the songs at work the night before I discovered that this was running on my local cable "on demand" for free! The cast is excellent, and Andrea McArdle's voice is amazing.

Perhaps a few of the performances were a little "stiff" or "wooden," but I think that speaks more to the direction of the film, and the fact that people back in those days WERE more stiff and wooden (read: "proper") than they are now.

It doesn't have the production quality of a theatrical release, but keep in mind, this was a made-for-TV movie. I thought the entire production was brilliant, and am so happy to have been able to see it again after all these years!


Whatever anyone may say about Subhash Ghai's 'Pardes', I personally found it very entertaining, engaging and charming. The film may be slightly stereotypical, it may be a bit incorrect, but should it really matter to me as long as I enjoy it? The portrayal of the US may have been flawed, but the film's issue was in my opinion dealt with convincingly. Besides that, the story was very lovely and the film was according to me believable and moving due to the performances, the music and the overall writing.

The film is about a young Indian girl named Ganga who lives in a rural village in India with her extended family. Her father's best friend, Kisohrilal, who's been living in the US for over 20 years, comes to visit them. Kishorilal is immediately charmed by Ganga and wants her to marry his young son Rajiv. Ganga's father agrees to the proposal and soon comes Arjun, Kishorilal's faithful nephew, who is also a good friend of Rajiv, to organise the engagement before Rajiv, who's never been to India, comes to see his bride. Arjun and Ganga befriend each other, but the real trouble starts when Ganga is taken to LA to live with Kishorilal's huge NRI family before marriage. The social, cultural and economical gaps rise, and Ganga finds herself lonely in a world which is very distinct from hers, where no one except for Arjun seems to understand her. There also starts the realisation that Ganga and Arjun are actually in love.

The film is according to me beautifully narrated and Subhash Ghai's direction is very good. Technically the film might have been better as the cinematography was not that good. I did not see 'Pardes' as a social film or anything of that sort, but more as a romantic drama, and in that genre it was very well-made. I don't think Ghai tried to show NRIs in a bad light, because such differences and difficulties are to be expected in any kind of transition from one country to another, particularly when moving from a conservative and traditionalistic society like that of India to a liberal country like USA. There were many great and touching moments in the film, my favourite being when Ganga talks to her father in India on the phone and feels very lonely and sad. The romance between Shahrukh Khan and Mahima was very well portrayed and the two had a wonderful chemistry.

While discussing Shahrukh Khan's best performances, many seem to overlook his work in 'Pardes', but this is according to me one of the finest performances of his career. As Arjun, he is kindhearted, and atypically subdued, sensitive and extremely vulnerable. Khan played his role with restraint, depth and sincerity rarely seen by actors of his bracket in those days. The film's brightest spot may be the gorgeous Mahima Chaudhary. She is not only one of the most beautiful actresses to have graced the Indian screen, she is also an extremely talented actress. Her smile lightens up the screen, and she is so compelling, moving and charming as the smart, sensible and no-nonsense Ganga that there seems to be nothing easier than to fall in love with her. This is a marvelous performance and easily one of the greatest debuts by an actress in Hindi cinema. Why she did not go on to reach any particular heights in her career is still mystifying. Another newcomer, Aproova Agnihotri, who plays Rajiv, fails to impress here and it was not a good idea to start a career playing an unsympathetic character. Amrish Puri is outstanding as Kishorilal, and the rest of the cast provide good support.

Nadeem-Shravan's soundtrack includes some very melodious tracks. I liked Kavita Krishnamurthy's rendition of "I Love My India". This film also marks the breakthrough of Sonu Nigam, who became a star with the song "Dil Deewana". A soulful, melancholic and very romantic song called "Zara Tasveer Se Tu (Meri Mehbooba)" was beautifully sung by Alka Yagnik and Kumar Sanu. To sum it up, 'Pardes' is a wonderful romantic drama and that is the reason it was appreciated upon release. I recommend 'Pardes', for its story, music and superb star cast, particularly Khan and Mahima.


I watched Pardes about 3 days ago. It was midnight and I had no wish to see a movie which was three hours long. I was going to only see about the first 30 minutes of it but this movie was so good that I watched it all the way through.

Many reviewers have said that this film is 'Anti-American' propaganda and 'stereotypes' NRIs. As an NRI myself, I must greatly DISAGREE with conclusions like these. This movie is nothing short of a masterpiece.

The exaggerations of Indian morals and of western vices are done for a reason, and a very good reason at that. The director shows the audience the best of India and the worst of America to make the viewer appreciate the Indian culture our parents try to impart to us. Granted, there are some lines that the American 'bad son' (Rajiv) says which are ridiculous and comical, such as:

---------------------------------------------------------------- Paul: We are going to India? To fight? Rajiv: Yes. Paul: But that is not right. Rajiv: Why? Paul: We are not bad people Rajiv, we are good Indians. Rajiv: (While shaking his head) But I am bad, Paul! -----------------------------------------------------------------

In all candor, I don't know of any Americans who speak like this (or of any other human beings for that matter). The movie has hyperbole like this throughout it. However, let us put all the cards on the table at this point.....

I know for a fact that many NRIs look upon their homeland with disdain. They won't even visit it, much less want to stay there. But guess what? This movie isn't aimed at that audience. It is aimed at Indians who have not forgotten that without the culture imparted by their motherland, they would never be as successful, nor have the extended families we take for granted. Basically, if you're an ABCD or an NRI who has lived in America for 10+ years, you won't enjoy this movie, probably because many immigrants adopt the ways of the denizens (just human nature to do so I suppose).

Lastly: I'm going to be starting medical school next year and I'll definitely be taking this movie with me. If I should forget who I am......what I am.....I know that I can watch this film and remember. A Hindustani.


The story of this movie is reminiscent of Dilwalle Dulhania Le Jayenge, but it have it own joyful line.

Pity that Shahrukh Khan isn't at his best performance, because Mahima Chawdary is fill the entire screen with her spell binding act. She laugh, she cry, she dance, she sings, and she always look convincing (and gorgeous). It's really a splendid performance for a debutante. It's seem to me that Shahrukh is subordinated by the stunning Mahima.

Anyhow, the movie is better than the other typical Hindi Movies. There's nothing to loose to watch this one, because it have charming plot, charming cast, charming view and charming memorable songs, that will make you on the edge of your seat.

8/10


Subhash Ghai always shows NRIs in bad light and Indians as too good

His carricatured NRIs in PARDES, TAAL are e.g.s of those

The film is just that,

The NRIs are shown as bad, while our Indians are shown as pure Ganga type

The film is typical, there are some good situations but the story isn't different nor is the treatment In fact surprisingly SRK played the role of getting a girl for someone else a lot in 1997, be it KOYLA, PARDES

Direction by Subhash Ghai is ordinary Music is good

In this film SRK is a pleasure, here he doesn't ham thankfully as he always does Here he is well directed and gives a restrained performance Mahima is decent, she looks gorgeous but sadly her career didn't' go ahead Apoorva is too awkward Amongst rest Amrish Puri excels as usual Alok Nath is stereotypical rest are okay


Of all the films of Shahrukh Khan which are available on DVD, I would say this is one of the least pleasing I've seen. Try just about any other one first. This tangled, jumbled mess of a film makes little if any sense at all. Any film with Alok Nath trying to slash someone to death with a sword is a bad one.


Many claim this movie as one of the best of 1990s Bollywood for its family values. Its family values are only true to a point. It hails Indian values, and makes a not so subtle statement that America is the home of debauchers and drunkards. It insinuates that wayward immigrants to America have to be "redeemed" by Indian virtue. It was so comically bad, hence, the 3 rating.


Pardes was a Hit movie from great director Subash Ghai. It tells the story of a girl from India, who has a arranged marriage with a guy from America. She gets engaged to him and travel to USA, and realises her fiancé is not a nice person. This is more of a woman's point of view based movie that stars Superstar Shahrukh Khan. He doesn't give a great performance as he usually does. This is mainly because the movie is more based on Mahima's life. Mahima looks very sexy and gives a fairly good performance. Her character is a little immature, which doesn't impress me. There is a scene where she is asked to sing a song in front of many people including her fiancé and in laws, but she see's Shahrukh, leaves the stage and runs toward him. She is suppose to be a village girl so it is acceptable. I'm sure not all village girls are this immature, not to understand, its bad manners and disrespectful to do this. Apoorva plays the Fiancé in a pathetic performance. His character has no realism, there is a scene where he starts a fight in the club with a American person. He starts talking to him in Hindi in a dreadful looking scene. Poor music and the movie does get a little slow at time. The ending looks rushed and unprofessional. Overall not such a bad film.


Pardes is a beautiful film. Shahrukh Khan is stunning as usual. Newcomer Mahima Choudhary was fantastic. Usually female newcomers overact like Aish is Aur Pyar Ho Gaya but then she proved in HDDCS that she can act. Apoorva Agnihotri was very good as a villain.

Kishorilal (Amrish Puri) is coming back from America to India to see his friend, Suraj Dev (Alok Nath). Suraj Dev has a daughter called Ganga (Mahima Chouhary). He likes her and he wants an Indian girl for his "westernised" son, Rajiv (Apoorva Agnihotri). Kishorilal has another son who is adopted and who is not so westernised, Arjun (Shahrukh Khan). Rajiv and Arjun go to India. Arjun and Ganga are immediately friends. Ganga and Rajiv get on well too. Rajiv says that he likes her and wishes for her to go to America with them and see what life will be like after marriage. Ganga goes with her aunt (Himani Shivpuri). When Ganga reaches there she gets a few surprises..........

This is a must see film. I like the way Ganga only felt comfortable with Arjun and not her fiancee. Ganga could feel that she can only to talk to Arjun. Whenever he was not around she would get bored and lonely. The song "I love India" is fantastic. The film deserves a 9/10.


Mahima Choudhary acted very well considering that it was her first film. Overall a good family movie without violence and sex for a change.


It's really no wonder because the portrayal of America and its culture is so one-sided in this movie. NRIs (Non-Resident Indians) who emigrated to the US many years ago are seen as being shallow and lacking morals, but their behavior is so exagerrated that it makes them hard to believe.

America is portayed as a drug-infested (only true if you live in the ghetto) land where strange men constantly approach women on the streets and try to get them to have sex with them, and which permits men to rape their fiancees before they marry. And of course the old movie cliche rears its ugly head here: if you are successful and ambitious you cannot be a moral person.

This would all be innocent enough as entertainment were it not for the fact that most people living in India get their information about America through movies such as these, and condemn the US as being immoral without ever having visited there or even met an American. These movies give the appearance of fact, when all they are is a thinly-disguised judgement.

To be fair, most Indians don't understand American culture, and fear it even while it is embraced in cities like Bombay. To them, I'm sure it does appear to be a strange world indeed.

Oh, and the movie itself? Anything with Shahrukh Khan in it sucks, in my opinion. Amrish Puri is the only one who comes across as having any depth here.


How do I start? I love this film! It has a great plot line and incredible music. It is a fun musical that makes you want to get up and dance.

Grease is the story of Danny Zucko and Sandy Olsen (or Dumbruski) two high school seniors who fall in love over the summer. They have a wonderful summer together and are sad to see it end. The first day of school arrives and little does Danny know him and Sandy would soon be reunited. But Sandy is shocked to find the nice guy she meet at the beach is the leader of a greaser gang called 'The T'birds' Meanwhile Sandy is trying to fit in with her new "friends" the T'birds female counterparts The Pink Ladies. Will Sandy and Danny ever be together again? Along with this plot comes song that will be stuck in your head for centuries. Such songs include Summer Nights, Beauty School Dropout and the now famous song Greased Lightining. Grease is a timeless classic that will have you singing and dancing by the end of the movie.


I hated this movie when I was a teenager and I'm so pissed at myself because of that. Looking at this movie now in my 20's I can appreciate what a fun-loving view of life this provides. All the songs are of at least decent quality but three of them in particular are just amazing. This is hands down one of the better musicals out there. The choreography can't be more well done than shown here. It's funny because I liked "Saturday Night Fever" better when I was younger but now I don't care for that movie and the exact opposite happened with this one...go figure. Olivia Newton-John is just gorgeous, why she didn't star in many movies afterward I'll never understand and god what a voice!!! John Travolta was great, and everyone else (especially Stockard Channing) were all fabulous. Oh and if you ever go to a Karaoke night make sure you do the "Grease Megamix" sometime throughout the night as it'll get the crowd pumped guaranteed.

Final Synopsis:

Movies : I did see this when I was in high school because it was re-released in the late 90's in theaters but stupid macho me back then didn't care for it. This is one you can view easily on the silver screen and enjoy it just as much for a lot cheaper.

DVD Purchase : Couldn't resist for only $9.

Rental : This could easily be a once a year habit.


Grease has to be the best musical off all the time. The wonderful actors and actress' give there characters all they've got and bring out a wonderful performance all the way through the movie especially John Travolta, Olivia Newton-John, Stockard Channing and Didi Conn. And, who can forget the music. Absolutely amazing. It's no wonder that the Grease soundtrack in the best selling musical soundrack ever. (It sure is brilliant.) Grease really is the word. It's fantastic. 10/10


I am a huge fan of Grease. I've seen the play and I've watched the movie at least 500 times. It captures everything high school is about. Even though it is set in the 50's, it seems to resonate even for today's generation. John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John are great in the movie as well as the rest of the cast. I met the girl of my dreams when I took her on a date to see the play, so this film has a special place in my heart.


You can hate me or you can love me all you want for this review. At the end of the day, all that should matter is your opinion.

Grease is not just a 70's fancy musical, it is a symbol to an era, an era when you could make a musical that had enough character to be great.

Today there is High School Musical, Rock Camp etc. I have been fortunate enough (sarcasm) to watch all of these musicals, and I can't even begin to explain how much I hate them. They lack of two basic things, originality and being fun. And what a coincidence! because those are both of the mayor elements that makes Grease such a great movie.

Released in 1978, Grease left a mayor print in the whole world. Well, there are many movies that have done that, so why does Grease stand out more? Honestly, because the film wasn't that good.

I mean think about it. What is the plot in this movie? a guy that spends his whole high school year trying to get back together with his summer love while doing annoying things along the way. Not much of a plot is it? And the moral? being a jerk who gets into fights, ignores his friends and doesn't do anything at school will help you turn your summer crush into a smoking cool girl who ends up with you in the end despite all the times you tried to get into her panties? Not a very great moral, in fact, most of High School based movies usually have the cool guys being the bad guys and in the end they lose.

So by now you might be saying, How can you say at that this movie is great and then trash its plot and moral? Well, if I may continue, I'd have to say that the greatest thing about this movie, is that you don't really care for the plot or the moral. You watch this movie, and you have FUN!

The songs are great, the dancing is great, the humour is great and you'd think that without a plot the movie could be impossible to watch, but no; you are so entertained while watching Grease that you wouldn't care if someone's child dies in the middle of the film. By the way, for all of you who haven't seen the movie, that doesn't happen.

Yes it's very corny, the actors that are suppose to be in their teen years look like they're thirty and the character development is not very deep. But I'll say it again, you WON'T CARE! and that is why this movie is considered to be one of the best musicals of all time. It manages to take the incredibly picky movie critics out of us and makes us sing and dance along with it, WITHOUT COMPLAINING!!

Nowadays, directors have tried to create a musical which has the same power as Grease. Most of them have failed miserably to try and hide the lack of plot or horrible acting, leaving them as cinema failures who only the eight year old girls will like. HSM and many others may have a great commercial success for kids, but its Grease which truly makes a cheesy school musical enjoyable for the whole family.

Grease was, is and shall always be the word

10/10


Although it is old, Grease is still loved and watching by adults and children alike. Once you watch Grease you just want to get up and dance! Grease is the story of bad-boy Danny and good-girl Sandy meeting each other over summer break then happen to returning to the same school. There's a great mix of kids, they all are very different and have one thing that separates them very much from each other. There's a great mix of songs too; slow and very fast. Also, the dancing is amazing. The end also blows your mind and just makes you so astonished, but in such a good way. The up-beat fun never stops and makes you want to watch the movie again and again. Grease is a definite must see for everyone!


The last REAL musical ever made. A timeless film that generations will love for ever. No other musical made since had can stand up to this type of quality. Though films such as Moulin Rouge and Chicago have been made since they are not the same type of musical as this. Greese is the last in the same category as the likes of 'On the Town', 'Hello Dolly', 'The Sound of Music', 'Kiss me Kate', 'Meet me in St Louis' etc. Grease encapsulates the change between era's of film/TV. This film will always remain as one of my all time favourites! Not only does the story line interest most generations but the music is catchy and helps tell the story. The scenes are spectacular, no film today actually uses entire casts to create a scene, we rely upon computer generated crowds and copies, and thankfully Grease has none.


This is one of a number of movies I saw back when they were first released, misguidedly enjoyed at the time, and now find I have major issues with. I suppose it's a mildly entertaining movie of generally brainless drivel (50's greaser stereotype rebellion), with a few catchy tunes. If it was merely that, okay, but this film gives its viewers (especially teenage ones) ALL the worst possible messages.

The plot revolves around "young love" (?) as experienced by the pretty, innocent young Australian girl, Sandy (Olivia Newton-John) who has a summer romance with Danny (John Travolta). In the fall she discovers that they attend the same school, Rydell High, and that Danny is the leader of a greaser gang called the T birds. Their different attitudes naturally bring conflict into their (immature) relationship. Sandy finally becomes convinced that she must turn herself into a tart in order to keep her man, and proceeds to do precisely that.

First, a few compliments to the movie. I'm a big fan of Olivia Newton-John and her (earlier) music, think she's lovely in this picture and a lovely lady still. Also, John Travolta is a guy with charisma galore; I loved him in Saturday Night Fever. In terms of the music, my favorite piece is "Hopelessly Devoted to You", a beautiful romantic song that deserved its Oscar. (Too bad Sandy feels pressured to have sex with the guy she's "hopelessly devoted" to.) But that's just about where my compliments end, and my rating of 4 is mainly from a sense of nostalgia.

Wrong messages, where to begin? First of all, Danny is the leader of a gang, whose purpose is rebellion (as though teenagers needed any encouragement there, Ha, ha) Well, the gang isn't really violent, you say? Maybe not, but even the Pink Ladies, its female counterpart, is at best quite an established clique. Teenagers have enough trouble dealing with peer pressure both then and today. Did they really need a film encouraging them to alter their persona to fit in with the crowd?

Sandy begins smoking in order to feel accepted by the Pink Ladies and especially Danny. Way to go, Sandy. I don't even need to start mentioning all the negative aspects here.

But worst, absolute worst...the very obvious message to all teenage girls watching, that virginity is just plain unacceptable...you can't possibly expect to keep your man unless you dress provocatively and presumably deliver the goods as well. You know what, Sandy, you were fine just the way you were at the start...young, sweet, and innocent. If Danny doesn't like you that way, tough; let him look elsewhere. YOU keep your self respect, girl, and find some other guy who WILL appreciate you as you are and not expect anything from you you're not prepared to give.

Enough lecturing, except to conclude...Yes, Grease is the word all right, if you want to send a teenager all the wrong messages, that is.


Grease definitely has a fun energy to it, and all of the cast has great chemistry. That's the main reason that this film, despite being nearly 30 years old and set 20 years earlier than that, still manages to appeal to young people of today who laugh and have fun with it, and of course, sing those timeless songs. So hats off to Grease for that.

Now that being said: the movie is incredibly stupid! It's basically a 90 minute episode of Happy Days or Saved By the Bell in which we follow various plot lines in a high school, strung together by the fun songs. We're treated to such stupid dialog as: "This year, I don't take no crap from nobody." "Yes, ma'am. No, ma'am." "Hey, it's Eugene!"

In one plot line, Frenchy (who's a memorable character but dumber than a bag of nails) becomes a beauty school drop out. However, aside from being an excuse for Frankie Avalon to sing that song, the plot line goes nowhere and she still magically graduates high school along side everyone else. Who knew it was so easy to drop out and get back in?

But then there's the main plot line: two youths named Danny and Sandy fall in love one summer, which is just fine in the real world, but once back in high school, they realize they're in different social cliques; he's a greaser and she's a goody-goody. Throughout the school year their relationship takes several turns, before arriving at an absurd ending in which all problems are magically solved by Sandy getting a makeover and becoming "cool." The message here is so superficial that it's actually funny: "Give in to peer pressure and be whatever kind of person you need to be to make your boyfriend or girlfriend happy." Considering Sandy has been celibate through all of the movie till now, I think it's implied Danny will get a nice surprise that night; a message to give to young girls, ha ha.

So, to wrap up this little review, Grease certainly has its moments, and IS a well-made movie musical, or else it wouldn't have the audience it does. It's a feel-good movie; it just has zero substance.


This is my all time favorite movie. I have seen many great movies but Grease will always be the best. Yes its corny, yes its a bit pointless but that is what makes it so good!! If it wasn't for Grease John Travolta would not be famous, he would not have millions of dollars. Grease made him who he is today. The first time i saw Grease i fell in love with the movie and i fell in love with John. Every time i watch it, it just keeps getting better and better!! Long live Grease!! They have made those ridiculous High School Musicals now and that annoys me because they are trying to match up to Grease, but Zac Efron and his Stupid "Crew" will never be able to beat Grease. Grease is the best musical of all time. "Go Greased Lighting you're burning up the quarter mile" Grease is the word...


I've seen three movies by Randal Kleiser and each time I have been impressed. As far as musicals go, Grease is in my top 5. Although I recently saw Bye Bye Birdie (made in the early 60s) and now can see where Grease got a lot of it's "style" from. Not a criticism at all, just an observation.

All in all, the direction, the choreography, the music and, of course, the cast all came together for a tight match.

John Travolta and Olivia Newton John headed up the very talented cast. They had a great chemistry together. I wondered why they didn't do many other movies together. The production design and the camera work were great too, mixing in a lot pleasant to look at colors. It was a visual candy bar.


Rated PG for Sexual Innuendos,Language and Teen Smoking/Drinking

Grease is a musical starring John Travolta and Olivia Newton John.I must say, im not really a big fan of the musical genre but there are a few that I enjoy.This is one of them.The songs are pretty catchy and the movie has a fairly good plot.Its a teen film set in the 1950's like American Graffiti and Lemon Popsicle only this is not as serious as those movies.The film is about two teenagers who meet and fall in love over the summer but the girl says she has to move back to Austrailia ending their relationship.But their family seems to have a change of plans and she ends up going to the same school.The only thing is, she's a goody goody girl and the boy she fell in love with is a member of a gang.Graese is a fairly entertaining film and even if you don't like musicals, but like teen films then you should check this one out.


Awesome movie, especially if you love musicals..you will enjoy this movie. This movie has everything you need if you seek comedy, high-school, musical, cars..it has absolutely everything it needs of a memorable high-school fun.

I have watched this movie over and over ever since i was a little girl and i still cant forget this movie, its so enjoyable. I remembered i

even acted as one of the Pink-Ladies at school..pretended to be one of them..it was so much fun. Me and my friends laughed and having fun, i cant forget those times. This is absolutely the best classic ever made and Olivia Newton John was so fantastic in this movie. She was like my idol in life before. And John Travolta was really sexy in this movie. i loved the comedy of the T-Birds and especially the teachers ..lol.

Greeat especially for family and teenagers:D


John Travolta is so hot in this movie. So was that guy who played Kinickie. I loved this movie, it was really good and seemed to take me back in time to that time when guys wore leather jackets and greased back their hair. I really love that era in time!


Grease was the first movie that I saw when I was a kid that caused me to go back and see it again and again. Then the re-release came out in 1998 and I saw it for old's time sake. I ended up seeing it three more times while it was still in theatres because it brought back the same feelings plus new ones from having watched the film from an adult perspective. On the one hand, it's easy for me to watch it so many times because it's a musical and when you find the tunes catchy you can't resist it. But it's not just that. Much to my surprise, I remembered every line of dialogue. What makes this movie a classic is that it is still great even if you cut out the songs. How many musicals can you say that about? The dialogue and one liners are so colorful and energetic and the movie works as a 50s comedy. It's funnier than I remembered and it is without a doubt the raunchiest PG movie ever made. Parents be forewarned, especially the Greased Lightning song. All in all, a film that should be re-released every twenty years so a new generation of children and teenagers can watch it, not just because it was one of the last great musicals but also because it truly captures the essence of what it was like to grow up in the 50s. This ranks just below Back to the Future (another 50s type movie) as my all time favorite.


Sorry, but I have to be partial on this movie. I was named after the lead character. My mother was a huge John Travolta fan and my father a huge Olivia Newton John fan. Then of course I had to be born in 1979. All that aside I love this movie. It has been a big part of my life growing up. The music is great. I love all the actors in it, besides Olivia and John. One of my favorite actresses is Stockard Channing.


I'm not a huge fan of musicals, but this afternoon Grease was on TBS, so I watched it. This is such a great movie. I love the songs especially "Summer Nights," "We Go Together," "Look at Me, I'm Sandra Dee," and "Grease Lightning." This movie is so great and John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John are so great in it. To that guy who said that this movie may have a little appeal to teenagers if their IQ is low enough: Excuse me! I'm am 15, and I took an IQ test and my IQ was above the national average. So this movie may have some appeal to us teenagers with higher IQ's. You probably don't understand Grease because you thought about it too much. So if you don't like it so much why don't you leave your comments to yourself and not make fun of people who may enjoy this movie.


I didn't really think that "Grease" was as good as people I know say it is, but it's okay. I mean, it's better than most movies I've seen before. It's fun to watch, and the chemistry between Danny and Sandy is all so innocent. It has really great musical numbers sung by Olivia Newton-John, John Travoltra, and the rest of the cast, and it became a cult classic film, which will live forever. Even today, the "Grease" legacy lives on! Not bad.


I saw Grease for the first time last summer because I was curious about the movie my mother loved so much.. Well, I loved that movie myself! The music is catchy, the actors are pretty good and the story behind the music is also entertaining..


This is my wife's favorite movie mostly because of John Travolta. But is also has a massive appeal in a lot of other areas.

Grease's charm lies mainly in the fact that it doesn't take itself too seriously. It is happy to be a goofy musical about a time that never really existed - it presents the 50's like a silly cartoon but makes it work and takes you along for the ride. Just sit back and enjoy.

Parents be warned - there is more vulgarity in this movie than its sugar-coated surface would let you believe. (Trivia - Sonny mumbles something at the principal in dialect Italian. Any guesses? He ain't complementing her perfume).

I love Grease - its ham-handed, corny, silly and 100% pure fun. ***1/2 out of ****.


I've seen this movie probably over 200 times by now. I used to watch it every week when I was at school and even now it's as much fun as it always was. John Travolta and Olivia Newton John are perfectly cast and the excellent songs like "Grease", "Hopelessly Devoted to you" and "Summer Nights" are extremely well staged and performed. It's also fun to see again in the cinema since its 1998 re-issue.


Of course it is! Twenty years on from its original release, good to see it doing the rounds at the cinemas again to rave reviews. I think that it was probably the last great musical that will ever be made, a thought which saddens me....but times, attitudes and financial considerations have changed. The cast of the film perform as one unit....the interplay between the various character parts is at times electric. The songs and dance routines are simply marvellous. All the ingredients of a cinema classic are there for all too see. It is my mother's favourite film, my favourite film and my childrens' favourite film. Three generations can't be wrong!


No question, it is the best film/musical ever!!! You can't beat a good Travolta film,!!!!


The best musical ever. A movie for all the family to watch and enjoy. John Travolta was perfect for the role of Danny and Olivia was just right for the sweet and innocent Sandy. The songs will live forever as will the movie.


GREASE is the best film musical I've ever known. As a JT fan, I think that all JT movies are excellent but GREASE is his funniest movie. AWOMP BAMMA LOOMA AWOMP BAMP BOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!


I saw this film just the other day, sitting underneath the stars in a park with loads of other people, watching the movie on a big screen. There is absolutely nothing like it in the world to be able to enjoy a movie with others. This film is amazing in the way that it can get everybody up and dancing; you should have seen and heard our rousing rendition of "You're the One That I Want", it was beautiful. I think that the casting in the film is superb, and the songs are great too.

We all know how successful "Grease" has been, it is a movie that has stood the test of time, and I love it. Sure, some parts do drag on a little bit, especially, "Hopelessly Devoted to You" which always gets on my nerves for some reason, but other than that, it's a great way to spend an evening. Although it does look dated, the story is timeless and will always be used in films. The dance routines, the songs, everything is amazing. My favourite scene has to be the finale, as it's a really uplifting song and a good old happy ending which makes you go away with a big smile on your face.


John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John star in this '70s version of the '50s. Olivia came from Australia and won the hearts of music fans. "You're The One That I Want" is the hot number from the film. The pair dress in black. "Tell me about it, stud!" she coos. Grease appeals to younger generations. Male/female duos perform Summer Nights to karaoke tracks. The film also exaggerates. There were no T-Birds or Pink Ladies in my school. Or maybe I was too young and naive to know what was happening. The cast of Grease was long out of high school, ranging in age from 19 to 35. Barry Gibb composed the title song. Oddly enough, it is closer to disco than to rock 'n' roll.


Two comments. First, some reviewers are taking the movie too seriously, it is supposed to be a caricature of the 50's. One earlier reviewer cited Sandra Dee and James Dean parallels, etc, no need to repeat it. While it had fun dance music and hits (although I am usually not a Bee Gees fan, even when I was younger) with several famous and soon to be famous actors, the reason I give it a 7 versus something higher is that it gets a little too serious regarding Sandra and Danny (inconsistent with the rest of the movie, even the possible pregnancy is taken less seriously) and it did not keep true to the original musical.

Second, the comments regarding sending bad messages was bit confusing. I don't see this message. One of the earlier reviewers talked about losing virginity as a must based on this movie. Well, to start this is inconsistent with the pregnancy issue where the character is mocked for being "knocked up" and even referred to as trash. The character tries to defend her actions by saying it's better than being an insincere flirt, but you can see she really regrets what she did inside. It also shows how virginity was still the vogue back then and that all the other provocative women were putting on a show. Next there are the comments about Sandy conforming to Danny's (and the T-birds/Pink Ladies) behavior, look etc in order to be accepted. The movies clearly shows that she was accepted before she made the alterations. One of the pink ladies befriends her, and Betty thanks her for her support. Danny letters in track and tries to change HIS LOOK for her in a mutual sign of affection. Sandy is not conforming to Danny as much as it may seem. She is mature in that she is kind to everyone and is responsible. However, she is immature because she lacks confidence in herself and how to deal with Danny. At the end she matures in that department by asserting herself and getting her man. She changes her dress, look and attitude not to conform but to get Danny's attention that she really wants him, and that she is the one in charge, not him. She now is asserting herself, showing confidence and at the same time saying she is willing to accept him for the way he is by "dressing up" for a day. It is interesting though that no one mentioned Danny putting on that awful sweater with the letter on to conform to his image of Sandy. Sandy knew that Danny's jacket, T-bird routine was just a ruse for whom he really was and she figured to play the ruse with him....

Lastly, several commented on the women's roles issue and minorities. It appeared to me that the women had the upper hand in these relationships and a woman was a principal of a school in the 50's, etc. As for minorities and their appearance in the 1950's Rydell was in California. Was there segregation in California? I wasn't aware of any. Secondly, anyone know the percentage of African Americans in a typical LA well to do high school in the 1950's (or the 1990's for that matter)? Let's just say it was really low. So, it was realistic. I do agree that it is not nostalgia for the 50's I feel in this movie, it mocks the 50's. It to me is more nostalgic of the 1970's and the actors who became the stars later on and the music that I heard when I was a kid.