Not sure which movie rstone and prake saw, but it couldn't have been the same one I did. To be fair this movie probably isn't everyone's cup of tea. It's not a 'Fast and the Furious' action film. It's not a 'Quantum of Solace' suspense film either. It's about a guy, Andy - played by Jay Baruchel, that has thrown his life away by getting hooked on gambling. Baruchel plays the part with the same desperation of addicts striving for one more fix, be it a drug, alcohol, or gambling. And he nails the way that his character seems to point the finger about the way his life turned out everywhere but at himself. It's also about the guy , Rueben - played by Quaid, that takes the job to kill him. I won't lie and tel you I came expecting anything other than am action suspense flick. What I found instead was a story that was marvelously crafted in the 78-odd minutes. I became immersed in it. I cared about the characters, the loser Andy and the rough breaks he had that really just came from his own actions and choices in life, and the solemn enforcer Rueben, tasked with killing someone he knows but determined to give him one chance to, in an hour or so, to make something good. You get some humor, some gun play, but instead of relying on the quick and cheap thrills to make his point, the director relies on the way you are invested in the story to make the film. And you do become invested in it. Maybe it's just that I lost my wife in Dec 2007 to a one car accident that makes me a little introspective when it comes to movies where impending death is the main theme and your choices or ability to choose what you do with your time left are integral to the story. I might not vote this one number one for 2008, but it would definitely be in my top ten. And it was definitely worth the watch.


I met Randy Quaid many years ago, when I was bartending at a bar in Toronto. I was surprised to see how very tall he was, and felt a little nervous around someone with so much physical presence. Truth is, he's a pussycat. But not in this film! Mr Quaid's presence is massive, and I mean that in the best way. His laconic Aussie is frightening from his first entry into this two-hander, and he ably sustains that looming, brooding character right through to the end of the film. Along with Jay Baruchel, another terrific actor born to play this role, the pressure begins with our initial encounter of hit-man and loser, and never lets up. I have to say that I'm glad that I saw this film, and the level of acting showcased - with major props to Jayne Eastwood, a Canadian acting legend, whom I've followed for decades - should be mandatory viewing for aspiring actors/actresses who want to see what a great actor can do with a great role, and the right acting chops. As an aside, the soundtrack of mainly Canadian musical stars of the 70's adds a melancholy, nostalgic feel to the experience. Amongst the musicians showcased are the Jive Five ("What Time is It?"); Abraham's Children ("Goodbye, Farewell"); LightHouse ("One Fine Morning); The Stampeders ("Sweet City Woman"); Chilliwack ("Fly by Night"); Trooper ("Two for the Show"); and The Tragically Hip ("Scared"). Also used to great effect are Nilssen's ("Without You") and a taste of Erik Satie's "Gymnopedies #1". This film will make you think. It may make you reconsider what 'luck' is. And it may make you see your world a little differently than it looked at the beginning of the day. To quote Ruben's character (Quaid); "Actually walking away at the right moment - how often do we do that?"


Maybe it's just because I like Dan Aykroyd: I have never seen a movie with him that I did not enjoy. I decided to put in a few lines of appreciation for this one, considering the bad reviews read here. It certainly is not the ultimate masterpiece of comedy but I found it thoroughly enjoyable, and despite the fact that I was very tired it kept watching it until 2am.


Picked this up at Hollywood Video for four obvious reasons: Aykroyd, Tomlin, Lemmon, and the always lovely Bonnie Hunt. But holy cow, what a waste of talent. Lemmon is given nothing to do, Hunt's role is superfluous, and Tomlin's role isn't funny. Aykroyd is in virtually every scene, but since the writers didn't bother coming up with anything funny for him, he becomes tiresome after about fifteen minutes.

I have no idea why this movie was made.


A true comedy if i've ever seen one is this picture. IT vill warm your hearth with warmth and joy. After seeing it 10 times it never gets bored, which is amazing to say the least.

Jack lemmon the bitter old sour lemmon that he is, was offcourse perfectly cast as the nazi-loving teacher.

The rest of the cast could easily been awarded with an award of some sorts. Maybe a golden trash can or something.

In case you were wondering : watching this crap will make your eyes bleed.

Have a nice day


Penny Marshall produced this?

Harvey Miller, who wrote "Private Benjamin," wrote this?

Lemmon, Aykroyd, Hunt, and the incomparable LILY TOMLIN agreed to work on it?

Tasteless, unfunny, painful to watch.

Whatever moral point they were trying to make, and whatever humor they were trying to achieve, this film just... just hurt. Hurt my eyes, and hurt the reputations of all involved.

I'm embarrassed for all involved, and chagrined that I felt I had to watch to the end, to justify writing a review to warn others. Fifteen minutes would have been more than enough.


I bought this movie for one reason and one reason only, Bonnie Hunt. I can not believe she sank so low! Her character is the only good thing about this film, and I hate to say it, her character isn't that great! This movie was the worst thing I had ever seen! Usually Lilly Tomlin is funny, she wasn't. and I was so suprised at Jack Lemmon's character too. Why did you people make this movie? WHY?!?!?!

This Movie will forever sit on my shelf never to be watched again!


I strongly disagree that people say this film is rubbish because it is my favourite film. Dan Aykroyd plays a great role in Getting Away With Murder. All through the film we are unsure what is coming next. If you like serious films this is a film for you. In my views it gets 10 out of 10.


Quite simply put, one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune to see. The "comedy" centers around the wacky misadventures of insane vigilante Dan Aykroyd and his next-door neighbor/World War II Nazi monster Jack Lemmon. Ha. Ha. Avoid at all costs, especially to escape the horror of the most uncomfortable simulated sex scene ever captured on film (a truly horrific extended sequence between Lily Tomlin (!) and Aykroyd). The only humor provided in the entire movie is by Bonnie Hunt, via one funny line which I believe she improvised (see IMDb quotes). Trust me: you absolutely want to get as far away from "Getting Away with Murder" as possible.


This is one of the worst movies I´ve ever seen. Avoid it if you can.


A SINGLE GIRL (Benoît Jacquot - France 1995).

A little known gem with the beautiful Virginie Ledoyen in the lead. I have a special relation with some films and this is certainly one of them. I first saw it - not long after it came out - on Dutch public television in my final year in high school. I thought the girl in the main role (Virginie Ledoyen) was the coolest girl I ever saw and the film always stuck with me. Later on, largely due to her performance in this film, she would become a big star and continued to be in the limelight and even played alongside Leonardo DiCaprio in THE BEACH (2000), so that's probably why I kept remembering her role in LA SEULE FILLE.

For a large part, the film plays in real time as the camera follows Valérie on the day she finds out she's pregnant. She starts a new job in a hotel as a maid. Her day-to-day routines are followed, her various encounters with the hotel guests and her intermittent meetings with her boyfriend at a nearby café. He doesn't know how to handle the situation, he doesn't have a job and cannot seem to make up his mind about anything, let alone this situation. He is a bit of a loser. Off course Valérie is in the toughest spot but somehow she never ceases to lose control or overview of the situation. She is on screen all the time as the camera follows her constantly while she walks down the corridors of the hotel, in the elevator, walking down the streets. Even though she has an attitude, is arrogant and acts a bit too wise for a girl her age, she remains absolutely fascinating throughout the film.

The lack of plot hardly mattered to me, because it's compensated by Virginie Ledoyen's radiant presence. This is the perfect example of a film where one actor or actress completely makes it work.

Camera Obscura --- 9/10


As John Lennon once wrote, "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."

This is a very simple film, and that simplicity gives it an extraordinary beauty. And speaking of "extraordinary beauty," Virginie Ledoyen is a revelation, a young Isabelle Adjani in the making.

Ledoyen plays Valerie, a young French girl who one morning meets her boyfriend in cafe, argues with him, then runs off to a hotel a couple blocks away to begin a new job. Her new co-workers greet her in the manner co-workers always greet a newcomer: some with welcome arms and others with contempt. When Valerie gets a break and runs back to the cafe to finish the argument with her boyfriend, we feel every tick of the clock. We know she is taking too long on the break and has got to get back!

But everything that happens to Valerie is so very real and so very urgent because the film is shot in real time. This was a daring attempt by the director, Benoit Jacquot, but his gamble hits the bullseye. Of course, with Virginie Ledoyen to follow around with his camera, Jacquot could hardly go wrong.


"La Fille seule" is an absolute gem of a film that is particularly fascinating because its structural simplicity belies a complex, multi-layered character study. And the subject of writer/director Jacquot's scrutiny is a headstrong, independent young woman who, while acknowledging her vulnerability in the face of several personal crises, refuses to sit idly by and play the victim. The camera utterly adores actress Virginie Ledoyen (who portrays Valerie with raw vibrance), which is perhaps why there is never a dull moment in a film that was shot in real time so that viewers could get a glimpse of even the most trivial of daily tasks that Valerie undertakes. What is also interesting is Jacquot's low-keyed exploration of sexual harassment in the workplace and of how brief, chance encounters with strangers can have long-term effects on our personal attitudes and perceptions.


A Single Girl (La Fille Seule) is one of those rare, pleasant films. Beautiful, young, Virginie Ledoyen is followed with a video cam as she argues with her boyfriend then takes a job as a chambermaid dealing with various personalities and rebuffing passes from her boss. Virginie was made for the close-ups; one never gets bored watching her walk down the corridors of a large hotel. And this beauty seems unaffected by it all; she is another pea in the Parisian pod. Director Benoit Jacquot has an eye for beauty and for film; this is a must see.


I loved this movie... its a powerful tale shot in realtime, that shows two pivitol hours in the life of a single girl... As someone who has worked in the hotel industry the thing that struck me was the fact that if you changed the langague to English it could be sit in an American city. It a warm truthful picture of life.


I cought this movie on late nigth television, and it really grabbed me. I never knew the name untill I found it here. I was impressed by the simplicity and the fact that I never actually got bored of seeing the lead actress walking through corridors. It's a realistic movie, low budget and i really liked it.


the french make everything chic! even work! the movie is about a day in the life of a young girl, who gets pregnant, dumps her boyfriend and is starting her first day as a maid in a big hotel. so cool! the boyfriend is dumped i can't remember for unknown reasons, but hell the baby will grow up by itself. ah now i remember, speed is the main motto of this movie. the girl runs around everywhere, she does everything at top speed, make beds, deal with problems, watch the baby grow, unfortunately those of us who live life, know that a year doesn't just fly away, it has to be lived, that we have to wake up, brush our teeth, go to work, scratch our ass, come back from work, drink ourselves silly, get made fun of by vain blonde girls and then do it all over again. and definitely kids don't grow up by themselves. so yeah, some of the other reviews will have you believing that she's totally in charge and ah so in control, which is true, but in a fake sort of way. in a way, like someone who's got a sheet load of cash and is only play acting with life. unfortunately, we don't have that luxury, but hey it's good to see on the screen. i particularly like the the whole maid scenario, those are some of the best scenes of the movie, like when she is making the bed and this old geezer grabs her. i wish that was me, like a little cameo part. go see this movie!


Don't get sucked in by the higher rating. I don't want to call it the WORST movie I have ever seen because I fear you will want to see it just to see how really bad it was (you know, driving by an accident, but slowing to take a look). Don't let the pretentious fans of Jacquot sway you. There is no question that Ledoyen is beautiful to look at, but the dialogue was both silly and annoying. They'll tell you to view it on several levels....don't bother, on any level, this movie was a total waste of celluloid.


"Matador" (which means Monopoly, i.E, or Monopol as we say in Sweden) is what "Dallas" or "Falcon Crest" are to the US viewers and what "Varuhuset" or "Rederiet" are to the Swedes. This being said, "Matador" is better than all of them!! "Matador" belongs up there among the best TV-series EVER produced in the world, in my opinion. Starting in the 1920s (I believe) we get to follow the people in the small Danish town of Korsbaek, particularly the families Varnaes and Andersen-Skjern (who are constantly at odds with each other) up to the 1950s. This is an important period in the Danish - and Scandinavian - history (with the 2nd Worl War; the occupation of Denmark) and even though I'm not Danish I really enjoy learning more about Denmarks national and local history in this way as well. The gallery of all colorful characters (played by the greatest Danish actors of the time) really is what makes this story and TV-series work. They all have their individual story and a dept; no one is one-dimensional. You really care about these people and want to see what happens with them.

I grew up with this series through my teenage years as it was shown at Swedish TV4 daily during the afternoons when I got home from school, and I became totally addicted to it. =) My favorite character in the whole series - and the heroine I root for - is Elisabeth (played by Helle Virkner), although her neurotic/hysteric/weepy sister Maud (Malene Schwarz) is kind of priceless too! ;) (and that's why Elisabeth is my heroine; for putting up with her!! and *spoiler- spoiler - spoiler* why, oh why, didn't she marry Dr. Hansen - he is just so cute! - and SO in love with her.. ;) Ah, well... Kristen is cute too, I suppose... =P)

Except for being a great historical mirror of these decades, this series more so shows what gossip, narrow-mindedness, intrigues, too much money, family pride and man-egos =) do to people and what effect it has on friends and family in a brilliant way... especially between the banker Varnaes and the store manager Andersen-Skjern. Because underneath it all you really feel and sense that these two families, especially the central male characters of Mads Skjern and Hans Christian Varnaes, really could be best friends and really would have like each other if things had been a bit different... it's really both ridiculous and sad. But that is whys this is one of the greatest TV-series of times!!

I hope it's available on DVDs for people worldwide with English subtitles, cause it definitely deserves it.


I have seen a lot of TV, some bad, some good, but nothing compares to this TV series from DR (Danmarks Radio = danish state television).

When Matador was shown the first time on TV, the streets of Denmark lay empty. Approximately 50-60% of the country's population was inside watching the fascinating history of the imaginary town "Korsbaek" and its inhabitants unfold and evolve.

The DVD box set has been purchased by over 1.000.000 people in Denmark (which only has a population of approx. 5.200.000)!!!

Now nearly 30 years later, I have not seen any TV series that can top this one. It has been sold to approx. 20 countries and is currently repeated on DR for the fourth or fifth time.

This is as good as it gets!


It is great to revisit the town of Korsbæk in 2007, approximately 25 years after it was first aired. The series is not only a truthful rendition of mid-century Denmark from 1929 to 1947, but also a documentation of Danish self-understanding in the 1980'es - at the time of Danmarks Radios broadcasting monopoly  and the series itself was, and still is, an integral part of the ongoing formation of the national self-understanding (of which we seem to have a LOT! ) Among many other things this series had a great impact on the understanding and self-understanding of gay men in Denmark. As it originally aired in the early eighties - the peak of the aids-epidemic - and connected themes such as solidarity in the face of oppression, helping those in need during the war, and the conflict between a relentlessly striving businessman and his gay son, the series undoubtedly raised both general awareness and the wider public support for the same-sex civil unions legislation, passed in 1987.


I have to agree with all the rest of the Reviews. Matador has to be one of the best TV shows ever made. All the actors are the cream of the Danish acting world. The Director was the best in the business for bringing Danish Life to Life, so to speak. I am amazed it has not been shown on British TV as it is very comparable to that other magnificent British TV drama "When The Boat Comes in" I would be hard pushed to say which one was better. But Matador has a longer run and does manage to cover the German occupation of Denmark. Which will be an eye opener to the British public if shown on British TV. So I do hope somebody gets the courage to show this on UK TV. As it is just a great TV Drama about families and the stress of the new on old ideas and values. So it still has something for today's TV audience. I have never got tired of watching it. Its called Matador because that is the Danish name for the board game Monopoly.


I bought this thinking I was gonna see Olivier Gruner kick some butt for 90 minutes but no the reasonably impressive cast including Michael Madson, Michael Ironside and Martin Kove are all wasted in mere cameos as they make way for the introduction of new action star Dan Anderson. The film also known in another name as Last line of defence 2 an apparant sequal to another film Gruner was in as the lead as a different character. What is the point? the first which I have not seen is apparantly about an alien or something, this is completley different featuring a story about a disgraced army guy (can't remeber who he worked for) who needs to rasie 5 million for a special new cancer treatment that will save his son and other children. Michael Ironside plays a wealthy business man who is of course a dirty scoundral who is swimming in dirty ill-gotten money. He laughs at Dan Andersons character and refuses to give it. Dan decides to steal it from him with the help of some ex colleagues from the special forces and his new workmates in his office job. This film looks painfully cheap throughout, no explosions barely any action of which is wafer thin, with little special effects such as squibs and bullet holes neccassary to add depth to any action scene and fight choreography is uninspired as is the fact that there seems to be not one good stunt. All action flicks from the bid busdgets to home movies should have some sort of dangerous stunt in it. Dan Anderson is bad, I doubt he will evr work again, he can't act, I see no sign of any fighting ability, he is nothing more than a beefy bloke who has been scraped from the bottom of the action barrell. So many people could have been cast here, you look at the amount of actionb stars there are out there, even the like of Don the Dragon and Gary Daniels, Billy Blanks can act better than this guy plus they are all martial artists. The best acting in this probably comes from Gruner which is saying something, Madson and Ironside are wasted but are merely coasting through happy to pick up there cheques for minimal effort. The possibilities the plot had are wasted, the script is poor and the direction flat, there is nothing to hold your attention, certainly not the painfully wooden Anderson who is either an Ex-American football player or a stunt man turned actor. He's bid but in no way looks bad, he just doesn't have an action man look of toughness he can give out,Gruner has this and it makes you think he would have been so much better in the lead. Why in all honesty they made this movie is beyond me it is so uninspired. I have been tricked. The cover of the DVD I rented has Gruner, Madsen and Ironside on the front so I naturally thought this was an Olivier flick, by this fact I wasn't expecting too much but I was shocked at the appalling use of mis-advertising. 2/10 (the two is for idea, but there are no marks for the execution)


Yes, this film is quite awful which, I am afraid, is ultimately the director's fault. It does not help that the story is very thin and the action almost awkward.

However, this Dan Andersen intrigues me -- not just the great body but also the vulnerable giant quality. He seems to have a bit of an accent. What is it? Danish, like the name Andersen? His acting makes fellow beefcake Vin Diesel look like Lawrence Olivier? Nonetheless, to a certain point acting is a skill that can be worked on.

Any information on Dan Andersen would be appreciated. Usually thorough IMDb has nothing on him. Even Google can't find him.


Well, I already knew about the shameless advertising this movie is guilty of before going into it. The names of Michael Ironside, Michael Madsen and Oliver Gruner are displayed in big letters on the front-cover of the DVD, yet they only have supporting rolls in this flick. The leading character, John Kennedy Brascoe, a (soon to be former) Navy S.E.A.L. lieutenant, is portrayed by Dan Andersen. Now where the hell did they find this guy and who is he? Apparently he did this one and only movie in 2001 and then completely disappeared from the face of the earth. Because I am so intrigued by this, I guess I'm going to do a little internet research on this man. It's already very obvious that the film-makers were trying to introduce him as the next big action star, but sadly that plan failed miserably. Now I must say that he at least tried to put down a performance of some sort, but as an actor, his skills are extremely limited. And on top of that it seems that he somewhat feels uncomfortable in front of a camera. Other than that, no offense please, the guy's pretty ugly-looking too. But I won't hold that against him, 'cause he can't help that little fact. So, nice try Mr. Andersen and I'm sorry this whole movie-thing didn't seem to have worked out very well for you.

So what about the movie? Well, as an action-flick, this one fails big time. And that's not even because it's poorly executed or something. In the 5-minute-long opening scene, this movie promises to be an action-packed (because of several guns at display) B-movie with an international software-smuggling plot. But after that, to my utmost surprise, this turns into a soap-opera family drama and all this lasts for the next 40(!)minutes or so. Fortunately, during all this, Michael Ironside, Oliver Gruner and Charles Napier have already graced the screen with their limited screen-time. Charles Napier actually only has a little cameo, as he is in only one scene. But it was fun seeing this big-mouthed cult-icon again. Michael Ironside is once again very enjoyable as the filthy rich (and illustriously corrupt) Mr. Baker. And Oliver Gruner? Well, everyone knows the man isn't a great acting talent. But I always have so much fun when I see him delivering his lines with that almost incomprehensible accent of his. He even has trouble saying "I'm taking you out, a$$h@Le!", so you can imaging what fun it is seeing him trying to pronounce "dishonourable discharge". After those 40 minutes, Michael Madsen enters the ring, and well, he's just cool as ice, as always.

Probably the only sequence worth watching is the organized robbery of Mr. Parker's mansion. Another funny line comes from Michael Ironside: "Who in this little soap-opera of yours, would be best served by you dying?". Now, was writer/director Steven Rush trying to be witty here? By applying some self-mockery here and referring to the fact that this whole movie actually is more like a soap-opera than an action-movie anyway. Or maybe Michael Ironside came up with that line himself, after having read the script? I sure would love to give him some credit for that. And even more funny was the fact that Mr. Parker had to give no less than 3 hints to John Brascoe before he could guess who placed the hit-contract on his head. I mean, how dumb is this ex-Navy S.E.A.L character? And there are even some more enjoyable but extremely uninspired and predictable twists in the plot. And of course the obligatory love-interest (including love-scene) for Johnny Brascoe.

Now, I can somehow imagine that on paper this screenplay perhaps didn't even look that bad. It's just sad that this movie neither works as an action movie or a drama (with the latter aspect being portrait in a just too cheap type of fashion). And strangely I didn't even mind wasting 90 minutes of a lazy Sunday afternoon on EXTREME HONOR. Must have been because of Ironside, Madsen and Gruner's funny accent. So there you have the 3 solid points this movie deserves.


Wow, where does one start with a movie like Extreme Honor? I caught it on TV a few days ago and I can tell you that I now have an answer for the next person who asks me what's the worst movie I've ever seen.

Yes it's that bad! Everything in this movie is bad. The acting is comical, the action is awkward, the screenplay is badly written et cetera. The lead man, Dan Andersen, is about as charming as an old toothbrush and he obviously has no experience or talent for acting. While watching this movie I kept asking myself, was there no one in the process of making this that realized how poor this movie is?

I couldn't find a trailer for this movie anywhere but I suggest looking up "Extreme honor Scene 5" on youtube for a preview.

The only reason one should watch this pathetic excuse for a movie is for a good laugh at the awkwardness that this movie is.


In England, Gary Ellis (Christopher Exxleston) is a very insecure and jealous pilot, who owns an airplane. He loves his wife Tess Ellis (Kate Hardie), but maybe because of his physical condition, she cheats him with the writer and her colleague Alex Madden (Rhys Ifans). One day, after his wife has had sex with Alex, Gary has a heart attack. Meanwhile, a seventeen years old man has a fatal accident with his motorcycle, and Gary receives his heart, through a successful operation. Gary decides to look for the donator's mother, Maria Ann McCardle (Saskia Reeves), a very religious woman and she becomes obsessed for Gary. The explosive combination of jealousy, affair and obsession leads the quartet to a tragic end. This movie is a really frightening thriller about obsession. The screenplay is very tight, the direction is very sharp, the atmosphere is scary and the four lead actors and actresses have really a great performance. It works perfectly on DVD. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): Not Available  I Saw It in an Imported DVD


The only way to see this film is on the big screen. It's dark, menacing, disturbing but has some moments of great power punctuated with lighter scenes of typical McGovern dialogue. The acting is first class as is the subtle direction. You may need a cast iron stomach for some of the sequences, especially at the end which is pretty shocking. Not exactly a deep movie, but a good watch none the less.


What a witty and brilliant British thriller. A mother is losing her son who died in a motorcycle accident. His heart is tranplanted into the body of a young man who has suffered from a heart attack. His wife is seeking love and satisfaction with another guy. And the mother is falling in love with the husband who owns the only remaining sign of life of her beloved son, his heart... this all leads to a fatal menage-a-quatre with a deadly end for nearly everybody.

This film is really heart-grabbing and a perfect mixture of some hopeless love affairs, a psycho thriller, lots of good acting (especially by Sakia Reeves who plays the despaired mother and Rhys Ifans as arrogant TV manager) and some really witty metaphors about the often used topic "heart". Love songs, quotes, heart beats, heart attacks, etc. - you've never seen so many references to the love symbol "heart" in a movie.

At the end of the film, you see a shocking scene of the bloodstained mother walking around with a human heart in a bag... the (often heart-related) sound track songs are also very suitable, and after watching this movie you will never see all those "heartache love story" cliches the same way!


Almost didn't see this, based on reviews here. Glad I did, it was a very entertaining film, with many genuine laughs. The only way I can explain the ton of bad reviews here is that I think the movie industry tries to hype every movie as if it was the absolute best ever made. It raises our expectations too high.

This isn't a "great" movie, or a "blockbuster," but is was solidly entertaining throughout.


This movie was great. I don't know why all of these people thought it wasn't good. If you haven't seen this movie, I advise that you should watch it. You will certainly laugh and you'll certainly have a lot of fun. Steve Martin is great, and so are Goldie Hawn and John Cleese.

I rated it a perfect 10!


Someone should tell Goldie Hawn that her career as a teen-age gamin ended thirty years ago.

This is one of the worst films released in years, an unequivocal disaster in which the two leads give themselves over to a frenetic exposition of their trademark tics in an effort to make up for a bad script and bad directing. This thing should have been smothered at birth.

I hope John Cleese got paid a lot for having his name attached to this disaster. He is the only performer who came through this stinking mess more or less unscathed, his only fault being a failure to realize that the rest of the cast would sink the picture.


This remake of a movie is funny! Steve and Goldie are a great on screen couple! They bounce off each other with their comedic timings. The antics that come about are hysterical! I love the car scene with the map - that could happen to anyone and I fear that it would happen to me one day if I rent a car like that! Let's not forget John Cleese! LOVE him! He is quite the "gay" man in this film - what an uproar he makes!!! His scene in the guest room with the fur coat and the high heals - makes you wonder how long it took him to learn how to walk let alone dance. This movie is a GREAT remake. I thought the first one was a little strained but this version is RIGHT ON THE MONEY!


One comedy that is so American that you may have problems sleeping afterwards because of the jaw pain you will get due to too much laughing. I would advise you to take some kind of Prozac before not to be too much overwhelmed by the silly situations this film develops with gusto and vicious pleasure. The poor people from Ohio do not have one gram or one 176th part of an ounce of luck when they come to New York for a job interview. The plane is out-routed, nearly out-sourced, their deluxe rental car has no air conditioning. They get lost because they don't know how to read a map, and then their rental GPS gets stuck in some kind of French sounding neighborhood and they end up in a fish-market or something like that with crates and fresh squishy things. 2,200 dollars for a 200 mile, at the most, ride. At the hotel they are kicked out because their credit card has been overdrawn by their own daughter. And that's only part of the beginning. Get to that film to discover the hundreds of details and risks out-of-towners run in New York City, an apple in which any smiling friendly face may be the worm that is eating the core of it. Very well done and so dynamic that you may fall for the good old days of Hair in Central Park.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines


This movie is truly funny, why does everybody compare the original to the remake? If you want a true comparison the the original was bland, this piece is something else I watched it when it first came out on video and I was with my family and friends , we all laughed and enjoyed it. If you can't see humor in this then you my friend need to lighten up, sure this won't appeal everyone comedy has changed the past decade if a comedy doesn't have any controversial meaning or non stop sex, fart jokes then its not funny but to everyone who can take a joke its a must buy or at least a rental.

I recommended this movie to my friends and family and they all enjoyed it, maybe we're from another planet?


We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this Neil Simon comedy looks at what it's like when you have the worst of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth going, know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing something when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis... and much better also.

It's not that Steve Martin is a lousy comedian or wrong for the role as the harried and stressed advertising exec; quite to the contrary, on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is equally inept either; her work has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first saw her in TV's Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The problem with this movie is that it's not about the hapless couple at all: it's really about New York and why everybody should come to New York to live and love their lives away in married bliss  sort of  in the greatest city in the world. That's if you're a New Yorker...

Look, the 1970 movie is still an excellent comedy that realistically explored all the things that can go wrong when you take a trip somewhere, and included most of the situations and sight gags that you can imagine about what can happen to you in a strange environment. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into gratuitous tangents specifically for an audience these days that expects or wants to see excess. For example, not content with the star appeal of the main players, there is a cameo (relatively long also) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of New York, as we all know. What  Giuliani bucking for President even then? Worse  a walking talking advertisement for the kinder face of New York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as Basil Fawlty  but this time, as a prancing cross-dresser also  once again browbeating hotel staff, sycophantically sucking up to rich customers and generally making himself look like the idiot he is, in this role. And, in the process, doing great damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the harassed couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, New York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one.


Average road comedy that has average production quality and nothing original or new to offer as all presented here have been done better in other films of the same genre.Although still funny at times and big fans of the lead actors here will be entertained because they will see that they still have their talents in 1999.Goldie and Steve are certainly the main attractios here and they did a great performance.Very funny scenes at the last 20 minutes involving a drugged out Steve.Not a big fan of road comedies and the lead actors?Stay away then.....


I picked up cable -- it's as lousy as I remember with the same B-movies you would expect, but with 355 channels now instead of 99. Out-of-Towers is one of the B-movies. Playing 459 times this month on all the Bad B-movie channels, Steve Martin plays a watered down Neal Page from "Planes, Trains and Automobiles," a much superior movie. Goldie Hawn plays a bimbo with smarts again, but one thing that was neat about her role is that they acknowledge her age and "over-the-hill" sex appeal that someone like Richard Gere still hasn't figured out. John Cleese reprises p****d-off hotel manager Basil Fawlty from the very funny BBC show "Falwty Towers" and gets a good amount of laughs, even if one is a cheap cross-dressing joke. Plus its great to see the Kids in Hall star Mark McKinny get slapped by one of his his mentors, Python's Cleese. Do some laundry, dishes, sort through your video collection like I did; it has some good moments. Not a great movie, but ok to watch maybe once. Average C-. 6.8 of of 10.


It's terrific when a funny movie doesn't make smile you. What a pity!! This film is very boring and so long. It's simply painfull. The story is staggering without goal and no fun.

You feel better when it's finished.


When I saw previews of this movie I thought that it may be dumb, but it will at least be funny. Well I was wrong. Even though somewhere deep down the producers had an interesting message to convey about parents being left alone and re-evaluating their life, the way they tried to deliver that message was horrible. The first fifty times something silly happened to the couple was relatively funny. But by the end, I could almost predict what stupid mishap is going to happen next.

Throughout the movie I like a total of maybe five lines of dialogue and everything else was at best mediocre, which is still more than I can say for the movie itself.


Largely dense road movie with some comic relief provided by the excellent John Cleese (although he is really sending up his performance in Fawlty Towers). Seems to flip from over the top slapstick to slushy sentimentality at the drop of a hat, and the worst part of the film is that Martin and Hawn have to "find themselves", who they are, etc. See it at your peril.


I remember seeing Goodbye My Lady back when I was a lad as the second part of a double feature. I was pretty amazed at this most unusual canine.

Young Skeeter, who lives with his Uncle Jesse in the swamp area near Pascagoula, Mississippi comes upon a most unusual dog in the swamp. It grooms itself like a cat, has a hyena like laugh instead of a bark, and has the speed of Secretariat. Any kid like the one I was when I saw this would want to possess an animal like this. When Skeeter finally does capture him he finds he's got the most natural hunting dog ever seen those parts.

Brandon DeWilde was a pretty popular child actor in the Fifties, Shane and The Member of the Wedding cemented his career. He and Walter Brennan playing Uncle Jesse are a winning combination. They get good support from Phil Harris as the local grocer, Sidney Poitier has a small role as a young black neighbor and William Hopper, the Yankee visitor from Connecticut.

Would you believe this film was produced by John Wayne? His Batjac Production company occasionally did films that did not star the Duke. Duke got a top director in William Wellman with whom he had just finished The High and the Mighty to direct Goodbye My Lady and Phil Harris and William Hopper who was in the cast of same. Wellman mixes all the elements just right for a winning film.

This unusual dog turns out to be a basenji from Africa and of course the dog is lost from it's real owner. The ending isn't what you would expect from a boy/dog picture, it's more real and that's as far as I go at this point.

Living in Buffalo as I do now, there's a bit of humor here that non- Buffalonians can't appreciate. Phil Harris has a hunting dog named Millard Fillmore, named after our 13th American President. Fillmore is somewhere in the middle rank of Presidents generally, but as a native of Buffalo, you'll find a few people in this part of the world who will accord him as great.

Harris makes a joke about nothing ever being named for Fillmore. Where I live there's a page or two in the phone book for things named Fillmore. That must have sent up a few howls back when I was a kid in theaters here.


I just caught this film recently on American Movie Classics. It was better than I ever would have expected. The summary for the film reads like a Disney story "An old man and a young boy who live in the Georgia swamps are brought together by the love of a dog.", but the film actually mixes in a lot of humor with a sad story.

The stars in the film include Sidney Poitier, who doesn't play a real major role in the film, and Walter Brennan. If you know who Walter Brennan is, then you've proved that you watched those Sunday afternoon Westerns as a kid, like "How the West Was Won" or "Support Your Local Sheriff". Brennan's unique voice has been mimicked over the years by many, and is one that almost everyone would recognize. It's the unmistakable "country hill-billy" voice that we all can help but smile when hearing.

The film isn't a comedy, but give the viewer plenty to smile about. Uncle Jessie's as the stereotypical hillbilly is the source of many of those grins. He is supposed to be cutting firewood to make money, but he can't seem to cut more than 1 or 2 pieces daily before succumbing to an all-afternoon nap. He also has some fun dialog like "when I gets me enough money I'm gonna git me a set a dem Roebucker-teeth [false teeth from Sears & Roebuck], and if-en I save enough maybe I'll git me a couple-a gold ones" or some banter with his nephew Skeeter that includes words like "mighten" and advice to "don't crowd God".

Skeeter, the nephew (played by Brandon De Wilde), has some great facial expressions throughout the film and also has some funny scenes with Lady (the dog).

The dog that they boy finds and subsequently catches and names "Lady" is said by the boy and Jessie to "laugh, sure as day" - and by God, they weren't lying. The dog in the film actually laughs! I mean it's a dog-laugh, but it's unmistakable.

Anyway, while not a film that I would rate as a "can't miss", "Good-bye, My Lady" was a fun film that had it's touching moments, but mixed in a lot of fun. A really good Sunday afternoon flick and a must for Walter Brennan fans.


I was introduced to this movie by my niece, who had seen it at her vocational school. She and her friends (about a dozen girls) sat and watched it over and over, and cried their eyes out at the end every time! For a 50 year old movie to have that much impact on a group of modern 15 and 16 year old kids really says something about the quality of its content. It is certainly out-dated in many ways, and shows training techniques that would, no doubt make the ASPCA cringe today. For those of us that grew up in a little less gentile world it brings back memories of how life used to be. The acting in the film is good throughout, the characters are generally believable. If you have ever had the pleasure of interacting with a Basenji, than you will realize that most of what is depicted in the movie concerning the dog is quite plausible. It is one of the best dog movies I have ever seen, and really worth a look (if you can find it).


I too caught this one on American Movie Classics and I have to say it's a modest little movie that does a lot of things right. The moment we hear of a movie about a boy and a dog, we expect a surfeit of sentimentality, a la "Old Yeller". This movie is rather understated, right down to being in black & white and having a single acoustic guitar do the background music. The movie does not opt for the cheap happy ending it might have, but gives us something sadder and more real. By doing so it makes for a much richer movie. This fine little film isn't going to be on anyone's "ten greatest movies" list, but it's worth a see.


Phil Harris's contribution to this low-key gem should be acknowledged. Harris does not strike a single false note in his role as the local merchant and bird hunter. Sydney Poitier is a little less believable. By the way, the characters are properly described as swamp folk, or swamp rats, not hill billies.


Having just recently returned back from South Korea, teaching grade school English for 2.5 years, I can relate to the predicaments the characters have in this film for their reasons in wanting to learn the English language.

I especially loved the performance of actress Lee Na-Young in the role of Candy, and found it to be absolutely hilarious. As an attractive actress and a popular commercial model, it's so far-out seeing her dressed-down and wearing plain makeup to portray this hopelessly out-of-luck, clumsy girl, who has to learn English so that she could communicate with western customers who arrive at her office with their problems when it comes to their monthly bills.

There's also a romantic subplot -- more of a romantic triangle -- with Candy pining after a guy named Elvis in her English class, who Elvis in turn is trying to go after his Australian English instructor Cathy. Elvis also has problems of his own, because his interest in learning English is to better communicate with his long-lost sister, who was given up for adoption in America due to his poor family finances many years before...

You can totally tell that this film is the first, and probably the only one of its kind in South Korea, highlighting the recent English craze, where adults want to learn English to better improve their business English when it comes to international business, and students learning English through expensive English academies so that they could either study abroad/or live domestically and enter top-notch universities.

Even in the DVD supplements, you get a whole variety of fun-filled quizzes about the film, cast/crew/director interviews, and even reactions from Korean fans and Korean celebrities who attended the premiere of this film.

As I make my plans to return to South Korea for another tour of duty of "English Curriculum," I can refer to this film for its hilarity and hijinks in the everyday world of the difficulties of mastering another language.

This is a very funny film that I highly recommend, and for originality it gets a grade of 9/10 from me. :)


I had no idea what this movie was, or what it was about when I first picked it up, but I found myself sucked into it quite quickly.

This review may contain slight spoilers, but if you've seen a romantic comedy before, you'll know the outset.

At first glance, it's a fairly stock-standard romantic comedy about an adult class in Korea being taught english by Cathy (Australian Angela Kelly) for various reasons (business, family, overseas trips), but as you see more there are a few things that set this film apart from its competition.

My main gripe with this movie would be that the characters seem to change their attitudes and feelings on a dime. The obvious love between the two main characters 'Candy' Yeong-ju (Na-yeong Lee) and 'Elvis' Moon-su (Hyuk Jang, playing a very different role than from his efforts in Volcano High) seems to start too slow and then bullet ahead just in time for the end credits.

Despite the comedy, this film does have some extremely touching moments, and I did feel for most of the characters with the possible exception of Cathy. Most noticably with Moon-su's side-story of a sister that was adopted and moved to America at a very young age.

All in all, it's a nice and pleasant film. I found myself laughing out loud in more than one scene which is rare for me. Also look out for cameos from some better known Korean actors, such as the man on the train with the newspaper.

6.5/10


i completely disagree with the posted review i usually give people the benefit of the doubt but this movie is quite funny and i think the usage of different movie mediums (ie animation, documentary)added a very cute yet thoughtful comedic value. It is a romantic comedy and not much should be weighed upon the realism but there are some pleasant real life twists and communicational misunderstandings and misinterpretations that give the movie a nice personal relevance. Also the underlying theme of the importance of people worldwide learning English as a necessity is mind opening.Especially how it is presented. The movie Isn't very serious or artsy which makes the point of people having trouble worldwide with being forced to learn English that much easier to witness for those of us who grew up in a place where English is the native language. I definitely recommend this film for fun and definitely for anyone who has the experience of being forced to learn English.


Even though the character development are not as established as hoped, this movie comes off as a pleasant surprise. The scene transitions are not always smooth, and there are a few odd tacks in the script course, but it does come off altogether as a cute date movie. The production techniques are very good, with some interesting animation along the way that enhance the whole scene. Especially the fighting game sequence.

The acting was good; Hyuk Jang was good here, better than Windstruck I think. But the top acting goes to Mun-hee Na as Moon-Su's mother. There is a fairly dramatic section about a reunion of separated family that she really carries home. The dramatic portion cut into a lot of the comedy and seemed out place, but it did add some additional depth to the otherwise thin story line.

Some of the character interaction were not clear but as a whole it was well done and comes off as time well spent.


This story is about relations between Mun-su (starring Jang Hyuk) and Na Young-ju (starring Lee Na-young), both of whom are classmates in a private English class. Mun-su, having a taste of girls, would frequently look out for girls working in his shoe retail shop. However, Young-ju, who had an interest in Mun-su, frequently looked for him. Mun-su said she was normal. They eventually became friends, and would frequently sit together in English classes.

One day, Young-ju boasted about a pig in her grandparents' farm who had the ability to recognize the English alphabet. The curious class decided to take a trip to the countryside and look for the pig, only to discover that the pig had been eaten up earlier on the same day (it was just a convenient excuse for Young-ju, as there was in reality no such intelligent pig). Young-ju used a little piglet and trained it to recognize the English alphabets, of which her efforts was discovered by Mun-su, who stepped in to help. However, the pig ran off after they successfully managed to achieve their goal, and had to run into the farms to recapture the pig. The entire expedition, along with Young-ju's family had a party that night before returning.

During the return journey on the bus, Young-ju overheard Mun-su sharing a photograph of a woman with his partner, which she mistook as Mun-su's girlfriend. As she listened, Mun-su boasted that the woman in the photograph was more beautiful than the person herself in real life.

A depressed Young-ju skipped classes, and her English teacher had to look for her before the second last day of class, prompting her to return to class. When Young-ju refused, the teacher knocked on her head, and both parties had to turn up in class the following day with a plaster on their heads. The day after, Young-ju, following a farewell lunch party in a Korean restaurant with the class, (of which Mun-su did not turn up, claiming that he had some personal matters to attend to), happened to meet Mun-su's mom as she entered a hotel, looking for Mun-su. Her mum took Young-ju to be a public relations officer, and Young-ju discovered that Mun-su's mum was meeting the girl she had seen in the photograph.

The girl, known as Victoria or Moon-young, spoke no Korean and needed Young-ju to translate. As Mun-su's mum, wearing a hanbok, expressed her grief, regret and joys to Victoria, Young-ju, who had only just learned simple English, was at a loss and uttered out that "she looked more beautiful in the photo than she was in real life". Victoria looked astonished, hardly believing her ears. As her mother walked away, weeping, telling Young-ju that she will be going to the restroom for a while, Young-ju told Victoria that everybody hated her because she is not Korean. Victoria responded to Young-ju and told her to tell them that she came with good intentions and left.

Mun-su's mum was astonished when she returned to the empty table. Mun-su arrived at this point of time, seeing his mother weeping. A guilty Young-ju went into hiding, seeing everything. They checked the counter, and found out that Victoria had just checked out of the hotel. Victoria gave one last glance at her family, before leaving for the car. Young-ju stopped her car, and told Victoria that everybody was waiting for her, and that she was actually lying.

Victoria went back in, and hugged Mun-su and his mother. Young-ju slipped away and boarded a train, with Mun-su leaving his newfound family and trailing behind Young-ju. He boarded the same train, and confessed that Victoria is not his girlfriend, but his long-lost sister from New York. Mun-su found Young-ju and helped her to put on her shoes. Following which, they kissed each other, and the entire expedition on the train cheered for them. The couple married later and had a baby.

Please, everyone know name of song, when Yeong-ju is crying in metro and Moon-su hind her....I like this song..If you know...very please send me email: 46tom46@gmail.com


I almost passed on this movie since it appeared too quirky for my tastes, a romantic comedy about a class of South Korean students and its Australian English teacher. Well, I was right about the quirky part, but I was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. This is a fairly straightforward romantic comedy made exceptional by the performances of the two leads, Na-yeong Lee and Hyuk Jang. Lee plays Yeong-ju, a relatively shy, awkward woman, who immediately falls in love with the young "player", Jang's Moon-su. Yeong-ju tries to win his love through every means possible, from asking outright to teaching a pig English. She is borderline psychotic and she would be considered a stalker in the US, but she's so funny and adorable you want her to win anyway. I must admit, it was also fun watching Lee, a very beautiful actress, turn herself into a clumsy mouse-of-a-girl.

The subplot is touching: Moon-su is trying to learn English so he can translate conversations between his mother and his sister, Victoria, who has lived in the United States since she was given up for adoption. Mun-he Na plays Moon-su's mother and also gives an endearing, heartfelt performance. The only discordant note in the entire movie is the young actress playing Victoria, who clearly cannot act, but her poor performance only made me realize how good the other's were.

There is also some witty use of animation in some scenes that cleverly supports the story without threatening to overshadow it. A possible exception is the Mortal Kombat parody that does goes on for a bit but it is pretty funny nevertheless, and it occurs early enough in the film so that it fades to the background by the two-thirds mark.

As an aside, I have no idea what the picture on the cover of the DVD is portraying as it bears no relationship to the movie itself. Don't attempt to judge the movie by that picture.


When I saw this in the theater as a 7 or 8 year old kid, I cried when it finished. It was by far the most captivating movie I had ever seen. I liked it better than Star Wars. The unbelievable stop-motion effects of Harryhausen still look great, even when compared to CGI. Things have not improved much. And Jane Seymore in the belly-dancer outfit! Good Lord! You must see this movie to believe it! The gold minotaur rowing the boat and the fight between the troglodyte and the saber-toothed tiger at the end stand out in my mind so strongly when I think of this movie.Get a copy of this movie, Jason and the Argonauts, and then Clash of the Titans and you have a fantastic Saturday afternoon of movie watching.


(Minor Spoilers)

Let's be honest and a tad realistic about this film, shall we?

By TODAY'S standards, this is a "cheesy" kinda film compared to what technology we've got. And I think at the time of this release we had gotten "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" and "Star Wars" so our expectation levels were running higher for "special effects" and "whimsy" than this.

But I still can get entertainment out of this film.

How?

By remembering how old I was when I saw it and WHOM I was with when I saw it. My family.

I was a child. This film wasn't in my all time top ten, but it was...fun. It was one of those movies local channels threw on Sunday afternoon before or after a televised ball game..or when a ball game was rained out. Come on, admit it..you remember!

And that's the point. This film's special effects were nice..not spectacular..not even up to Ray Harryhausen's standards, but the Harryhausen mark was there which made it entertaining (Admit it, you LOVED the walrus scene!! How 'bout that Cyclops?!?! As a child this was all good! You remember!!).

For very young girls, this Sinbad was REALLY nice to look at back then. For the very young guys, so was Miss Jane Seymour and Miss Taryn Power. Then there was the story which was kinda fun, the adventure which was kinda whimsical and the happy ending where the bad guys got theirs'.

This was done at a time of assuming children would love this kinda stuff. Back then, more would have. Now, most children don't even think "Spy Kids" can give them a buzz.

This movie is about childhood and remembering what it was like to have an imagination and watch a story unfold for nothing but the sheer enjoyment of it...the fun of eating "Good 'n' Plenty", "Snowcaps", "Malted Milk Balls" and Popcorn without thinking about calorie content to make this even more fun to watch...and the "eye candy" of Wayne, Seymour and Power help a so-so story that's really better than a lot of stuff I've seen today that they charge ya $10 a ticket for! Parents may not have liked it as much as the children but that too is part of the fun!

Have a heart when watching this. Watch this as a "fun" romp....as remembering when families watched shows together (..or in my case my dad mumbling under his breath about how the game was due on and he had to sit through this 'crap' first!), the pre-teen tingles of watching a handsome Wayne, young Seymour and/or Power (...ya know...before having breast implants and weighing 95 pounds was mandatory in Hollywood for women to do this kind of film work?!?) and telling your parents you were REALLY interested in the story...really.

Maybe I've got a more "nostalgic" view about this film..its because I'm not looking for academy award winning material with this kind of film, but it does its job of...entertaining...and if you have children and want them to be children for a tad longer, this may be the film fare for them. Or just for you, if you want to curl up with some popcorn and remember "the good old movie fluff days" where special effects were done by hand and stop motion photography by the "grand-daddy" of the genre and a Sinbad movie where Sinbad actually looked like you might imagined him to look like back then and evil characters who were evil and got theirs....pretty much simplified.

Open your mind and when you have a moment...enjoy. Don't take it seriously just sit back... watch...and HAVE FUN..with your children, as a family.


Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger was the third and final Sinbad movie with Ray Harryhausen creatures.

In this one, a prince is turned into a stop-motion baboon and Sinbad and crew go on an expedition to Ademaspai to restore him back to human form. They face plenty of dangers on the way including several giant creatures, some of them prehistoric (more on those later). He is being followed by an evil witch with magic powers, Zenobia, along with her son and a stop-motion metal creature, Minoton. On one occasion, she turns herself into a seagull to spy on Sinbad and on return to her ship as she transforms back, she is left with a webbed foot as she has ran out of potion. She is defeated at the end in the form of a Sabre-toothed Tiger and the prince is restored back to human form.

Now to those creatures: we start with a trio of ghouls and other creatures include a giant wasp, a giant walrus, a Troglodite and the above mentioned Sabre-toothed tiger. The other two stop-motion creatures, Minoton and the baboon appear throughout the movie. All of them look impressive, thanks to Ray Harryhausen.

Sinbad is played well by the Duke's son Patrick Wayne (The People That Time Forgot) and the rest of the cast includes Dr Who actor Patrick Troughton, Bond girl Jane Seymour (Live and Let Die), Taryn Power, Margaret Whiting as Zenobi and Nadim Sawalha.

Though not as good as the first Sinbad movie, The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad, I still enjoyed watching this one. Excellent.

Rating: 4 stars out of 5.


Sinbad the Sailor voyages to the mythic northern realm of Hyperborea to restore a caliph from an evil witch's transformation.

Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger, the follow-up to the classics The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad and The Golden Voyage of Sinbad, is an uneven conclusion to Ray Harryhausen's celebrated "Sinbad Trilogy". The troubled production began with a draggy script, budgetary restrictions and an inexperienced director; the film as released suffers from choppy editing, over-length and routine music scoring. One animation highlight (the giant walrus) is obscured by an optical snowstorm. The attractive cast performs listlessly and the villain is campy rather than truly menacing, although former "Doctor Who" Patrick Troughton is delightful as a befuddled wizard.

Yet, for all its flaws, Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger remains an entertaining escapade in the old-fashioned Saturday-Matinée tradition. Costuming and settings are colorful and the film looks handsome in widescreen. The quest for the mystical Shrine of the Four Elements has a particularly epic quality with the usual eclectic blend of mythical elements set against the backdrop of the Arabian Nights.

Most importantly, Harryhausen's realistic stop-motion animation is as extraordinary as ever, with two of the animated-puppet creatures -- Kassim the Baboon and Trog the Troglodyte -- successfully functioning as actual communicative characters within the body of the story. Other wonders include insectoid demons, an over-sized mosquito, Minaton the Brass Minotaur and the saber-tooth tiger of the title.

Genuine movie fantasy is a rare commodity, and Ray Harryhausen's vision and conviction shine through the circumstances of production to make this a satisfying final visit to the land beyond Beyond.


Evil witch Zenobia (a wonderfully robust and wicked portrayal by Margaret Whiting) casts a spell on Prince Kassim (handsome Damien Thomas) which transforms him into a baboon. Courageous legendary sailor Sinbad (a solid and likable performance by Patrick Wayne) embarks on a dangerous journey to the chilly Artic in order to reverse the spell before it's too late. Assisting Sinbad on his perilous pilgrimage are fiery Princess Farah (radiantly played by the beautiful Jane Seymour), flaky wise old wizard Melanthius (a delightfully dotty Patrick Troughton) and Melanthius' feisty daughter Dione (a winning turn by luscious blonde looker Taryn Power). Standing in Sinbad's way are Zenobia and her no-count son Rafi (a nicely venomous Kurt Christian). Director Sam Wanamaker ably maintains a brisk pace throughout, stages the frequent thrilling action scenes with considerable brio, and effectively creates a charming magical atmosphere. Ray Harryhausen's extraordinary stop-motion animation creatures include a chess-playing baboon (the sequence where the baboon reacts to its reflection in a mirror with startled grief is truly remarkable), a trio of skeletal sword-wielding humanoid insect demons, a powerful bronze colossus called the Minoton, a savage gigantic walrus, a helpful horned club-brandishing troglodyte, and a ferocious saber-toothed tiger. The scene where Power and Seymour go skinny-dipping is pretty bold for a G-rated film. Roy Budd's splendidly stirring'n'sweeping majestic orchestral score and Ted Moore's exquisitely rich, vivid and vibrant saturated color cinematography further add to the overall enjoyment of this engaging and satisfying fantasy adventure treat.


Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger starts with Captain Sinbad (Patrick Wayne) arriving ashore after a long voyage to see his friend Prince Kassim (Damien Thomas) & his sister Princess Farah (Jane Seymour), however he discovers that Kassim has been transformed into a Baboon by his evil step mother Zenobia (Margaret Whiting) using black magic so her son Rafi (Kurt Christian) can become king. In order to prevent this Sinbad agrees to do all in his power to turn Kassim back into a human being & see him take his rightful place as king of his land. First he must find a wise man named Melanthius (Patrick Troughton), but that is just the beginning of the journey that spans continents & is full of danger & evil...

This English production was directed by Sam Wanamaker & I personally liked it a lot, I like all the Sinbad fantasy films & this is no exception. The script by Beverly Cross & producer/special effects man Ray Harryhausen has a simple yet functional story, it has a villain, plenty of monsters & mythical creatures, exotic locations, action scenes, sword fights, black magic & a chess playing Baboon, what more do you want? The film moves along at a nice pace, is never boring or dull & provides terrific entertainment of the kind that will never be seen again. The character's are a bit on the thin side with only Zenobia the villianess standing out as being memorable & the dialogue isn't great either but that's not the reason you would want to see Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger is it? Persoanlly I think it's a magical, hugely entertaining fantasy adventure with plenty of monsters thrown in there for good measure. I really, really liked it, it's as simple & straight forward as that.

Director the late Wanamaker seemed an odd choice, he's much more widely known as an actor & Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger was the only theatrically released film he ever directed, everything else he directed was made-for-TV. Anyway, he does an OK job & he integrates Harryhausen's effects & monsters into the action quite well although no one set piece really stands out as being brilliant, they're all very good but not as memorable as some of the other monsters & fights Harryhausen created for some of his earlier films. I loved the bronze Minatour & he was easily my favourite creature from the film. The special effects don't hold up that well in the light of today's multi million CGI effects but I'd rather watch the magical work of Harryhausen rather than a soulless computer graphic. Interestingly Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger came out the same year as Star Wars (1977) which probably put Harryhausen out of business & just about ended his career.

Technically the film is good, with nice locations, decent effects, costumes, sets & production design. There seems to lots of varying locations as well including the open sea, rocky mountains & a snow covered pole. The acting isn't anything special apart from Whiting who seems to be enjoying herself as she plays it up as the villain.

Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger is a terrific film, it has all the elements one wants in a fantasy film such as this. My only question is why is it called Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger? Sure there's a cool sabre-toothed tiger in it but it doesn't have much significance & it's eye is never even mentioned or has any relevance at all. This was the third & final Sinbad film following The 7th Voyage of Sinbad (1958) & The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973).


After having re-visited Harryhausen's Sinbad trilogy recently, I have decided that this one, overall, compares very favourably with the other two. It is the most epic of the trilogy and has the most ambitious storyline (POSSIBLE SPOILER) involving a voyage into a lost world hidden behind the ice sheets at the North Pole (no doubt an idea partly influenced by Disney's 1974 'The Island at the Top of the World').

The creatures in this one are the least spectacular of the trilogy (THE SEVENTH VOYAGE & THE GOLDEN VOYAGE have better and more spectacular ones) but Harryhausen's artistry is as great as ever and he really should have been given a special accolade for imbuing Kassim the Baboon and the Troglodyte with so much character. It really is remarkable watching them 'act'. Demanding kids may find the creatures disappointing but now that I am older I can appreciate the fine work that went into realising them. Harryhausen's puppet work possesses a tangibility that CGI is only just now coming close to emulating.

I also find that I care about the characters in this film and what happens to them. The woodenness of the acting and the dialogue of the previous 2 films in some way stopped me from caring very much. This picture does not suffer in the same way, as both acting and dialogue, while nothing special, are better here. Jane Seymour is also very easy on the eye and is the best looking Sinbad girl of them all.

Overall, highly recommended for young (but not very young) children and for adults who were kids when it first came out and want to recapture some nostalgic vibes. I feel that this one is best for a sense of epic adventure and empathetic characters, THE SEVENTH VOYAGE OF SINBAD is best for the monsters and THE GOLDEN VOYAGE OF SINBAD is quite possibly the best of the trilogy overall.


If you ever wondered what movies you should be watching in high resolution technology this one should be on top pf the list. You want to see the details on the bronze minotaur (called Minaton here) the intricate patterns on the thousands of fabrics, and precious jewels, the different eye lash-layers on "evil" queen Zenobia and the expanse of ultra blue seas.

The third of Ray Harryhausen's Sinbad films has apparently gotten a bad rap over the years, which I can not understand. It may be for Beverly Cross' script and some of the performances, notably Patrick Wayne as Sinbad, which I happen to think is totally fine and entertaining, but may not be perceived as such for those searching for dramatic acting. This rap should be disregarded as it is not only largely unfair, but inadequate in noting the entertaining values of this movie. No doubt it could have been better, but as an exciting adventure it is more than good, thanks to a strong cast and Ray Harryhausen's excellent animation.

The story is about Kassim, the caliph of Baghdad, who mysteriously disappears at the very moment of his coronation. Sinbad, arriving in Baghdad both to sell his merchandise cargo, and also to see again his love interest, the caliph's sister played by a luscious, very young Jane Seymour. He is drawn into a trap, by Rafi, a dark handsome prince played by Kurt Christian set in a magnificent tent, which includes belly-dancing entertainment. His mother, the evil dowager queen Zenobia, played Margaret Whiting, who is more than familiar with the black arts is behind this plan and all others, as we know just by looking at him, that Rafi has no brains or sense of direction. Barely escaping an attack by three sword-wielding fire skeletal creatures, Sinbad finds Kassim's sister and a baboon, which is actually prince Kassim, as transformed by the magic of queen Zenobia so her own son could be caliph. At this very point we should wonder if this 'evil' woman is not actually just career oriented. In New York she would have been directing a real estate emporium or huge corporate conglomerate, maybe both, where Rafi could have just looked good in the publicity ads as she ruled ruthlessly; yet in time she would have done the charity balls, she would have even sponsored some cultural causes, eventually she would have been perceived as a pillar of society. It's all a matter of perception and historical placement, above all Location, location, location!

In order to break Zenobia's spell on Kassim, Sinbad enlists an adequately wise and aged wizard, Master Malanthius and his sexy daughter, the hyper blond, hypnotized-looking Dione (Taryn Power), who also has some of the most vapid dialog in the movie. They meet in the ancient city of Petra, where the wizard lives, and the scene of arrival, and seeing the city through a rock is totally rewarding as a reason to see the whole film, it is so well done and awesome. All have to set sail for Hyperborea, a land at the North Pole magically immune to the polar region's snows. However, Zenobia and Rafi are following. Zenobia had actually had a confrontation scene by Sinbad's ship when she arrived in a feathered and veiled litter and argued with the silly vizier who was trying to look his best in a day-wear saffron and gold ensemble that was striking for the pheasant feathered adornment of his turban that looked like the whole bird was alive, and in heat. Zenobia has decided to enlist help too. She will be aided by a mechanical beast, a bull-headed robot created by Zenobia, and animated with a golden heart, baptized with the name Minaton, close enough to the ancient Minotaur of the labyrinth story. Although great looking as an accessory he is just an elaborate rowing machine in their metalized ship that looks more like an early submarine. The first thing they do is crush the spies that the vizier had set to watching their moves, against a rock as they start on the pursuit, an appropriately delightful moment of evil indulgence.

The best part of the movie is Zenobia's transformation into a seagull so she can leave her ship and spy on Sinbad in his. She takes a potion and has a series of very erotic spasms in her elaborate bedchamber, and suddenly she is the bird. Her flight is not as lucky, once arrived, she transforms into a miniature version of herself and is unfortunately discovered by the baboon, who wrecks her plan, only after much difficulty she manages to change back to the seagull and escape, but there is not enough potion left when she turns into herself: She is left with a huge foot of a seagull attached to her leg instead of her human foot, and will stomp her way through the rest of the film.

This film features quite a bit of character animation by Harryhausen. The baboon Kassim looks totally real playing chess and most of all in his dramatic scene when he sees himself in a mirror, and despairs over his change. Trog, a prehistoric giant who "is as frightened of us as we of him," as Malanthius sweetly remarks, is a direct ancestor of Shrek, and looks frightening yet endearing. Kassim and Dione manage to befriend Trog, and when Kassim is finally liberated of Zenobia's spell, we feel genuine regret as Trog is killed by Zenobia, again transformed, this time as Smilodon the tiger of the snows. This battle is unusually gruesome, and absurd, yet an exciting delight to watch as both her and Sinbad are endangered by falling ice spears.

The happy ending in the coronation of Kassim as caliph allows us to admire in detail the Jewelled splendor of his court, the plasticized Formica of the rings, the unique, early zircons and other stones are all mystifying, specially when thrown together with pearls and feathers.


This is a good, mild, entertaining family-oriented fantasy movie. SFX by Harryhausen are good era & genre-wise. However this movie is not quite a pure SFX extravaganza, but belongs better to a fairy tale, say Krull or else. You get many conventional subplots: * good prince is turned into a baboon while his evil stepmother wants to see her own son becoming Calif. * belle princess in love with the brave sailor Sinbad. * a secret hermit from a mysterious island. * mummies out of hell, giant tigers, a robot minotaur. * only six moons to counter the spell. * a trip through the north pole. etc etc. A nice movie, very easily watchable.


'Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger' is an old-fashioned action film about the sailor hero. This time, he tries to defeat a witch who has transformed the rightful king into a monkey so her son can be king. Throughout the journey to defeat her and restore the throne to its rightful owner, Sinbad and the others fight mythological creatures and provide several entertaining action sequences throughout the film. Although it is packed with action, the acting seems a little fake, and the direction seems somewhat lost throughout the film without a strong, defining characters and conflicts as one action sequence blends into another. Overall, it is not too bad for an older action film, but do not expect much in the way of a plot. It could have probably been a better story as the ideas were interesting.


I haven't many Sinbad movies, but this one I liked very much. I remember seeing the preview when I was younger. And I said to myself, "This movie looks like fun!" The animation in the movie gave it plenty of character. And Sinbad(Patrick Wayne) was a fine man as well. The witch(Margaret Whiting) was a very fiendish woman. She makes all other witches look like amateurs, especially when she used her sorcery. Her only flaw is when her re-transformation from a bird didn't complete itself. It's when her right foot is still a bird's. The growth formula was something when one of the bees drank it. and was later killed by Sinbad. Jane Seymour does a great job playing Princess Farah. She really knows how to control, and tame things that Sinbad couldn't do. The giant walrus, the golden minotaur, and a the vicious saber-tooth tiger gives the movie something to see. I think this movie is very watchable, and very entertaining. I wished it had gotten better reviews than it did. 3 out of 5 stars!


My Take: Good special effects make up for a somewhat lackluster storyline.

I love watching Ray Harryhausen monster movies, they are really fun to watch. I consider it a gem whenever I find one in a video outlet, an addition to my collection. Harryhausen's effects may be dated to other viewers, but never for me. I mean, for I can see, he started it all. Currently, I have 4 Harryhausen monster flicks. "The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms", "Clash of the Titans", and two Sinbad films, "The 7th Voyage of Sinbad" and "Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger".

"Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger" is a weaker entry in the many movies having Harryhausen's stop-motion monsters, but it contains one of the most elaborate collection of fantasy monsters. Well, we get to see a group of bug-eyed ghouls, a near-human baboon (which is actually a cursed prince), a bronze Minaton (also known as Minatour in mythology), a large bee, a gigantic Walrus (one of my favorite of the batch), a club-wielding Troglodyte and a saber-toothed tiger. All pretty well done.

But lets go to the bad things about this movie. Well, the story's fine, but the script is lacking and the acting is fair. Patrick Wayne lacks the makings of a great Sinbad. I think that the only good performer is Patrick Troughton as the wise Melanthius.

The film is weaker, compared to the fantasy films of this kind, but it is still a wondrous Arabian Nights adventure. Oh yeah, for those who wonder what the Eye of the Tiger is, your guess is as good as mine.

Rating: ***1/2 out of 5.


This has the typical good and bad of those 1950s mythical stories with Jason & The Argonauts and Sinbad and The Golden Fleece, etc. The good being Ray Harryhuasen's special effects and the bad being the stupid dialog and sub-par acting. Boy, this one really has both in spades.

Since this film was done 20 years after those other films, I expected Harryhausen's special effects to be far better, to be honest. For a 1977 film, it didn't look far removed from the cheesy efforts of the 1950s. Maybe part of that was the horrible dialog. The latter was so bad this film was embarrassing to watch at times.

I'd like to see some of these re-made today. I am sure they would be far superior to this Class B junk.


Ray Harryhausen fans beware. If you love the man who gave such great creatures for movies like JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS and THE GOLDEN VOYAGE OF SINBAD and THE 7TH VOYAGE OF SINBAD, don't buy this movie. It's horrible. Instead of having cool skeletons, or six armed god statues, we get to see a giant Walrus and a killer bumble bee. Oh boy! (There is NOTHING better than once inanimate things coming to life... I prefer that to giant Cyclops' or otherwise already living creatures, as far as Ray's work goes.) Patrick Wayne's acting is possibly worse than the storyline, and there is no storyline. This movie is Harryhausen the special effects genius in SLEEP MODE. Avoid it like the Black Plague.


Sinbad sets out to save a buddy of his, a prince, from a spell that has transformed him into a baboon. Meanwhile he woos Jane Seymour who plays the prince's sister. This Sinbad film suffers from a really dumb story and one of the campiest villains to appear on film. This is not the strongest example of Ray Harryhausen's stop motion effects. However, the duel with demons at the film's opening and the battle between the Trog and a sabertooth tiger make this worth a look. Don't be fooled by the film's G rating. With it's violence, scary monsters, and a scene featuring quite a bit of skin from Jane Seymour and Taryn Power, let's just say the MPAA was generous.


And in fact we don't get to see it, we just get it said to Salami Coker (in typical subservient boson role) after he's faced a risible "giant walrus". The whole cast looks uncomfortable with the line, which requires a response of head-held-back "hearty laughter". This single moment is the most notable in the film; an instance of offensive racism being the only second that promotes something other than abject boredom.

For a full-blown Technicolor rendition of fantasy and Arabic stereotypes may be many things, but dull is unlikely to be one of them. Yet Patrick Wayne leads the cast in a Sinbad tale that is curiously unengaging. Wayne's casting as the title role is a strange choice. Not because he's a Caucasian portraying an Eastern man, which was par for the course in the seventies, but because he has all the charisma and latent acting ability of a turd.

His requisite love interest, Jane Seymour, is equally as wooden, and has quite a nasty character. Odd that the heroine should wish to draw blood from the villainess, with a "Let me have the spoils of her face!" So she can scar another woman because that woman is bad? Rather a mixed message to be sending out to the audience.

Things only begin to pick up with the arrival of Patrick Troughton, an actor who has more screen presence in a single frame than Wayne does in the entire film. However, direction is too flat and the narrative too obscure for even the mighty Trout to rescue it. Despite the title, the film's plot doesn't involve Sinbad in a boxing match with Mr.T., but rather a quest to turn a baboon back into a Prince. On very slow boats.

The special effects, good for the time, are undeniably ropy now  has anything aged quite as badly as stop motion? The effects also dictate the laborious pace of the piece. In order for the excessive animation to sit right, the actors give delicate, careful gestures when the creatures will be unconvincingly superimposed around them. So that these moments of contrivedly slow acting don't seem out of place, the rest of the film is downplayed to make one uniformly tedious whole. To this end, the special effects ARE the film, the actors taking a back seat to ever sillier plasticine monsters.

Too old fashioned for today's youth, and lacking any sort of appeal for adults, this dated fantasy really is best consigned to the archives... and forgotten.


I love this movie very much i watched it over and over. I don't see why anyone would think this movie wasn't good. Maybe you have seen better or whatever it is i personally love it. It is one of my favorite movies and I am not Hindi at all but i do love it. It might be a little like "angle face" but i haven't seen that and I don't think it's any better than this. I don't know why you are all trashing about it but maybe you have a good reason but I think i have said it enough but i absolutely love this movie, and to those who say it's not good at all well then I wonder why you watched it and what movies you consider good. As for everyone else that i watched it with they enjoyed it too so it surprises me that this many people don't like it.


Ram Jaane is a Bollywood attemp in the gangster genre. Does it succeed in entertainment and is it worth the watch. The answer is YES, and this is only because of Shah Rukh Khans performance. Ram Jaane (Shah rukh khan) is about a orphan who is dumped in the bin and grows up to be a street wise smart gangster. Once Ram Jaane becomes a gangster, there is no proper plot. Its Ram Jaane and his way of life. Shah rukh Khan delivers a Great Performance. Why doesn't he make more of this kind of role. The movie also stars the very sexy Juhi Chawla in a decent role. The other actor is Vivek Mushram who is long gone and forgotten. Pankaj Kapoor is amusing as the Funny Gangster. This movie is absolutely entertaining. The Ram Jaane character is so amusing, his style and way of speaking is madness. If you like action movies and Shah Rukh Khan. It is worth the watch.


I have watched this film may be more than 30 times in theater. There was a time when I used to watch this film everyday in the theater and the only reason was Shahrukh Khan. I can talk about story and other stuff but I really don't think thats important. Every single frame of the film is just Shahrukh Khan. 'Ram Jaane' was a very definite flop but for some people like me it was a mania. I remember I was traveling from Lucknow to Hapur and a rickshaw puller did a somersault and landed very badly on the ground. He just got up and started walking singing the title track. I really liked him because I was also in the same frame of mind for may be two months. I used to try somersaults, rectangular black glasses, jacket without shirts and above all drink directly from the bottle. I also used to get these exciting urges to slap a policeman but somehow I controlled. I wonder how I managed to control myself.

There are lots of other interesting things i.e Background music, Shahrukh's dance, action sequences and of course Pankaj Kapoor. I and a friend of started smoking 'More' for good two months. Every time Shahrukh lit a cigarette we did. Every one in this world watch one film with total devotion for example my father who doesn't watch films watched 'Shree 420' fourteen times. For me it is 'Raam Jaane'. 'Khallas'. I really wish Shahrukh hadn't become so big. 10/10.


Oh my god what rubbish some people say about some crap films

The film is a remake of ANGELS WITH A DIRTY FACES and is so bad it makes you cringe

Srk plays a Bachchan type of goon role and tries hard but his weird voice and his utterances at every sentence gets to the nerves

The goons to even the cop are cartoons

The film shows RAM JAANE as a big hero praised by Bhasti Vale Like Bachchan in AGNEEPATH, SARKAR

Rajiv Verma direction is bad Music is okay

SRK as said before tries hard but his weird voice and also expressions at places are a give away Juhi is okay Vivek Mushran is okay the rest ham even the talented Pankuj Kapoor


I remember how excited I was to see Ram Jaane, I was thinking to myself "This movie is definitely going to rock like all of Shahrukh and Juhi's other films; I can't wait to see it!" But I was WRONG... Ram Jaane ended up falling way below my expectations. The story itself isn't really that exciting or on the other hand that boring, you could say it's about average.

Also, Shahrukh and Juhi weren't even together at all in this film! I know that SRK was in love with Juhi in Ram Jaane, but she was interested in some other guy which practically took out all the fun of the film itself! As for the acting, I'd have to say that Shahrukh had done a fabulous job playing his role and Juhi did a fairly good job at playing the role of Bela.

I, myself as a fan of Shahrukh-Juhi was really disappointed after watching Ram Jaane and I know that many of the other SRK-Juhi fans were let down as well.

All in all, Ram Jaane deserved a 4/10!


This short teaches the merits of, what else? Yup Industrial arts. It has a creepy kid who likes those tools a tad more than a normal sane person would and a coach (Chuck Lacey,who did a great many of these 'educational' shorts) who agrees that that stop would never be useful to him, but how he respects that he learned it none the less. MST3K mocked this short unmercifully of course and it was among the funniest ribbing of a short I've seen from the show. Bought a big smile too my face. This short can be found on the Mystery Science Theater 3000 Volume 1 before the film "The Skydivers" (episode 125)

Normal short grade: D

MST grade: A+


Herk Harvey and Centron bring us another little instructional piece of fantasy, this time regarding shop class. A bespectacled young man (who looks likes my dad when he was in high school) discusses with his Mickey Mouse-eared friend on why he loves shop class. He narrates about his fantasy through the short, including his career discussion with his shop teacher, who does not resemble any shop teacher I ever had in high school. Anyway the discussion leads to another discussion about shop with the basketball coach, who states that shop never helped him, yet it did since he now has a ready made hobby of building giant recipe card boxes.

MST has a field day with this short, I would think 95-100% of anything put out by Centron would be great material for the gang from Best Brains.


Wow! Having never taken a shop class, I am happy that I never considered it. Actually, I cannot remember anyone from High School who did take shop -- except for Sheephead in the back of the bus, but he dropped out. You would think that if you were making a filmstrip about why you should take a string of classes that offers ridicule, that you would make your spokesman some what attractive and less dweeby (I used the word spokesman, because everyone knows that girls should not take shop classes, that's why schools offer home economics). The guy with glasses is not only slightly repulsive, but definitely learned the fine art of acting from shop teacher Bow Tie.

Given that the Mystery Science version was funny, this short is so out- moded that it is a hoot nonetheless.


Ah, what is it about Centron productions that make them stink so much? This short basically tells young men that if they don't take industrial arts courses, they'll not have the tools to have a full and rewarding life. It has a LOT of bad acting, stupid plotlines and really doesn't do the job of convincing young men (note I say young men: seems that back when this was made, it wasn't all right for young women to do this.) to take industrial arts courses.


How in the name of anything holy can "Why Study Industrial Arts?" claim to be an educational film?! If this is education, then I'd rather be an idiot! Actually, this movie could have only been created by an idiot. The only reason that it's even worth talking about is because "MST3K" once showed this drudgery. As you might imagine, Mike, Servo and Crow had plenty of funny comments.

If I ever make an educational film, it will be a promotion of vegetarianism. Here's the plot: in 1950s suburban America, mom and dad are trying to feed little Jimmy meat. Jimmy breaks out into a song (to the tune of "U Can't Touch This") about why he chooses to be a vegetarian. Yeah, that's my kind of educational film.


This has to be one of the worst educational films I've ever run across, which of course makes it perfect for Mike and the 'bots.

SPOILER ALERT We open on a depressing scene, young men engaged in the futile attempt to make sturdy and efficient furniture. The focus of our story is seen sanding or polishing his latest creation ("it's for the Grand Wizard"). He then proceeds to daydream (while obviously polishing or sanding the wood down to nothing) about the professions open to him if he pursues industrial arts (all of which are equally depressing). Over the course of the film, he tries to convince his friend, a taxicab with its doors wide open, about the merits of taking IA. He cites his mentor, the stiff shop teacher, and gets backed up by the coach ("boys...hey, boys!"). In the end, Big Ears grabs our hero in an uncomfortable way, and we are left with the knowledge that Industrial Arts is the path to a dull and pointless existence.

In Mike and the 'bots' hands, of course, the film transcends its crappy premise (and thus the ten-star rating). There's at least a half-dozen zingers in their commentary. This is a gem from the shorts legacy.

So why study industrial arts? Because one day you might need to keep your house from sliding downhill, or to construct a desk-set for the local Klan leader. Why else?


I haven't seen this particular short, but I couldn't help but notice how everyone mentions the MST3000 episode this appeared in. Apparently it never occurred to anyone that you guys weren't it's intended audience and that it was taken entirely out of context? I have no doubt it's cheesy as all heck, and probably somewhat offensive, but it's an ultra low budget educational film under absolutely no pretense of being high art. Harvey and Centron made thousands of them, it was a living for them. If you REALLY want to criticize a Herk Harvey film, why not write about his Carnival of Souls, the only movie of his he specifically filmed for wide release, and one of the all time classic atmospheric horror movies? MST3000 was a very very funny show, precisely because it would take a movie out of context, in some cases edit the movie extensively, and then exploit any incongruities and flaws that turned up in the process. That isn't a bad thing since they were witty enough for it to almost always work, but unfortunately a large number of the fans come away from the show NOT remembering the lack of context, NOT noticing the tremendous edits, and worst of all, NOT coming away with the LOVE for these movies that it's pretty obvious most of the people working on the show shared. Which results in a handful of people posting sneering critiques of the one industrial/education film that happened to end up on MST3000, ignoring the THOUSANDS of similar films and their original purpose, not realizing that they're the ones that are out of context here, not this short.

IMDb doesn't allow the posting of URLs in reviews, but if you go to the Internet Archive's Prelinger Archive, they have a whole selection of Harvey's industrial/educational shorts, as well as Carnival of Souls, available for download (since they are all in the public domain).


This is typical Lee Evans, he is definitely one of the funniest comedians around but surprisingly not many people have heard of him. If you want to see what Lee Evans is really like doing stand-up comedy then buy this video, I couldn't stop laughing all the way through, a definite thumbs up and a must see for anyone with a sense of humor!


Lee Evans. The best British comedian of this generation and in my opinion can establish himself as one of the all time greats. His unique brand of physical comedy. His accents on stage makes this guy the funniest comedian on television. All of his live performances has him singing a song on his piano. And this one has been my favorite. Not only can he act, but damn he can sing too. If you have a chance to go and see this guy. It well be the best money you are going to spend if you want to laugh till it hurts. This is probably one of the best shows during his great career and you should really check out the wired and wonderful tour, that was also a great laugh.


I am a very big fan of the physical sweating comedian Lee Evans. Every time I see one of his live shows I know it is going to have new mad, wild and ingeniously written and performed comedy from the excellent stand up. This "Live at Scotland" show is another great example of Lee Evans excellent physical jokes and hilarious bad language genius. He always does good jokes that are not only funny, but also true to life, e.g. restaurants, airports and planes, food, television, etc. The highlights of the show for me were me were the "Lee Evans Trio", and the song at the end called "Suicide", one of my favourite of his songs. Lee Evans was number 23 on 100 Greatest Stand-Ups, and he was number 14 on Britain's Favourite Comedian. Outstanding!