There aren't too many words to describe this film other than "amazing." I am embarrassed to admit that I am 23 and this is the first time I've seen this film, however now that I have I will be certain to go out and purchase any Buster Keaton film I can get my hands on. I was lucky enough to find this film packaged along with Steamboat Bill Jr. and two Charlie Chaplin films (The Kid and Tillie's Punctured Romance) at my local Wal-Mart for a measly $5.50 and decided to give it a try. Heck, a dollar can't even buy a popsicle now-a-days, but can purchase one of the greatest comedies I've ever seen. Go figure.

I won't bother you with a detailed plot, all you really need to know is what is expressed in the opening scenes, that this man loves only two things in life, his General (the train) and his woman (who is not very likeable but still drives Buster throughout the film.) When both are taken away from him he has nothing to do but to retrieve them at any cost which begins his amazing journey.

The plot alone is entertaining, however the obvious draw of the film is Buster Keaton's amazing stunts, including the famous (and dangerous) scenes of him riding in front of a moving train while attempting to dislodge large wooden planks that are blocking the tracks in front of him. However, the entire film is one large stunt, as he jumps back and forth from carts on the moving train as if it is no big deal (today a stunt double would certainly be used, and likely a blue screen as well). The best joke, which I don't want to give away, is another great stunt as he attempts to catch up with the runaway train as he is being chased by soldiers.

My only negative comment towards the film is the soundtrack. My copy was not digitally remastered (that's what you get for $1 a movie) and released by a company called "Quality" Special Products, so I cannot speak for any newer copies, but the soundtrack for this film was the worst I had ever heard in my life. Having seen a few dozen silent films in my life (with the best being The Passion of Joan of Arc) I learned quickly that I could better enjoy the film by hitting the "mute" button and I would recommend that to you as well. I wouldn't be surprised at all if many younger people are immediately turned off by the annoyingly repetitive soundtrack.

Well, when the only thing you can say negatively about a film is the soundtrack, you can trust that the film itself is great if not the greatest silent comedy of all time. Another commenter said that this comedy is much better than those which came in the talking pictures period, and while I don't agree with that (The Thin Man series are some of the greatest "dialogue comedies") I would certainly not call the man a liar.

Buster Keaton is a genius. I hope every parent forces their child to watch at least one of his amazing films before his legacy slips away and kids begin to think that Jackie Chan is the greatest "stunt actor" in the history of film. Films like Rush Hour have nothing on "The General".

10/10


Buster Keaton's "The General," about a man and his engine, puts you in a world where the most comically inventive situation that could happen will happen. From major comic situations to throwaway gags, "The General" always knows what to do.

The story begins in leisurely fashion. A title card tells us that Johnnie Gray (Keaton) has two loves in his life: his engine and his girlrespectively, The General and Annabelle Lee (Marion Mack). Johnnie goes to visit Annabelle, followed by two engineer-worshipping boys and, unknown to him, Annabelle Lee herself. He and his entourage arrive at the door; Johnnie polishes his shoes on the back of his pants legs, slicks back his hair, and gently taps the door with the door knocker. Then he turns to notice Annabelle. Keaton's understated reaction is a testament to his uniqueness. Any other comedian would have done an explosive double-take.

Now Johnnie and Annabelle are together in her parlor, but the boys are there, too. Johnnie stands up, puts on his hat and opens the door as if to leave. The hero-worshippers are ready to follow, but Johnnie lets them out first, then closes the door on them. This is a gentle ruse in the world of silent comedy. At Keystone both boys would have gotten kicked in the pants.

Now the two are alone. Annabelle's father sees them from another room and is about to break things up when her brother enters and announces that Fort Sumter has been fired upon: the War Between the States has begun. Annabelle kisses her father and brother as they go to enlist, then turns expectantly to Johnnie, who cocks his head like a confused puppy. She asks, "Aren't you going to enlist?" Realization hits him, and he leaps off the seat. Before he can run out the door, Annabelle kisses him. This so overwhelms Johnnie that he flings out his arm in a farewell gesture and falls off the porch.

Johnnie races to the general store, which is now a makeshift recruitment office. Taking a shortcut he manages to be the first in line. The door to the office is opened and Johnnie comes marching inonly he and the rest of the line go in two different directions, and he has to jump over several tables to get in front again. He gives the enlistment officer his name and occupation, but the man rejects him. Johnnie is more valuable to the South as an engineer. Later, Annabelle believes that Johnnie didn't even try to enlist. She refuses to speak to him again until he's in uniform. What follows is a classic moment: Johnnie sits on the connecting rod of his engine. He's so miserable that he doesn't notice when he starts moving up and down, until just before the train enters a tunnel.

Time passes and we learn that a group of Unionists are secretly passengers on The General. When (nearly) everyone is off the train having dinner, the Unionists climb back aboard and take the engine. Annabelle, a passenger herself, was still on board. She is now their prisoner.

But Johnnie only knows his beloved General has been stolen, possibly by deserters. He pursues the engine by taking another, The Texas. Through a mishap he becomes the sole person aboard The Texas, but the Unionists think they're outnumbered and continue to run. What follows is the true joy of the movie: two long chases (separated by an important plot twist). Now the movie changes its quiet pace for almost nonstop action.

I love it when the Unionists break off the rail car to hinder The Texas. At one point, the car, which Johnnie thought he had switched to another track, reappears in front of the baffled engineer, only to disappear later just as mysteriously. We see the logical circumstances that lead to the car's seeming magic act, and the equally logical situations that keep Keaton occupied, preventing him from seeing what we see.

Comic logic is important to "The General." In no other movie do hyperbolic slapstick gags seem so plausible and inevitable. In a throwaway gag, Johnnie empties a burlap sack full of shoes because he urgently needs the sack. Of courseof course!he loses his own shoe in the pile and must stop to hunt for it.

We move to the second chase, where Johnnie has The General and the Unionists are the ones pursuing him. Now Johnnie must contend with Annabelle Lee.

Marion Mack leaves no mark of her personality on the screen. She deserves credit mainly for being willing and able to take it. Bette Davis and Katharine Hepburn were never thrown around, trod upon or knocked about the way Marion Mack was. She has hilarious moments. The excitement of the chase does not prevent her from taking out a broom to sweep the dusty floor of the engine. An exasperated Johnnie tells her to keep throwing wood into the fire. She takes a small stick and daintily puts it in. Johnnie sarcastically hands her a sliver, and she puts that in, too. Then, in a moment that has an audience roaring and clapping, Johnnie grabs her and half-throttles her before kissing her instead.

The final section, most of it a battle scene, includes the shot where The Texas begins to cross a burning bridge, only to crash into the river. Owing to Keaton's disdain of fakery (one of several reasons his works seem modern) he did not use a model but a real train on a real burning bridge. The crash cost $42,000reportedly making it the single most expensive shot ever in a silent film.

A worthy closing gag was too taxing even for Keaton's ingenuity. Johnnie's dilemma is to kiss his girl while saluting the passing soldiers. His remedy is only mildly funny. Is anyone complaining? "The General" is a work of art and a work of genius.


Buster Keaton once said that if he hadn't been a comedian, he might have been a civil engineer. He was not only a mechanical whiz but a spatial genius who devised stunts and gags with the grace of pure physics. It's no wonder he adored trains, the most elegant of machines, and brought them into his movies whenever he could. When one of Keaton's former gag-writers loaned him a book recounting the theft of a locomotive from Georgia by Union raiders during the Civil War, he was immediately fired with enthusiasm to bring this "page of history" to life. His first certainty was that the production had to be "so authentic it hurts." He even insisted on using historically accurate narrow-gauge railroad tracks, which he found, along with appropriate landscapes, near the sleepy town of Cottage Grove, Oregon.

Most importantly, the area had stretches of parallel tracks, which allowed scenes of Buster on his trainagilely scrambling over the cars, balancing on the roof to scan the horizon, chopping wood for the engine while armies pass unnoticed behind himto be filmed from another train running alongside. Buster, his train, and the camera are all in motion; the wind whips through Buster's hair while smoky pine-covered hills rise and fall around him. These scenes are not only the highlight of the movie but a peak in the history of *moving* pictures, and they put to shame all later back-projection and process shots, models and computer-generated effects. The quality of Keaton's film-making is simplypun intendedunparalleled. Every shot in The General is clean, fresh and efficiently composed; the action is captured honestly and legibly at all times. The film never tries to be beautiful; its beauty is functional, just like the grave, masculine beauty of the locomotives and railroad bridges and Civil War uniforms.

The General's narrative structure is as strong and uncluttered as its look. Like a train, it stays on track, never meandering for the sake of a laugh or a stunt. All of the gags rise organically from the coherent and straightforward storyline. Adapting the historical incident, Keaton made himself the engineer of the stolen train (Johnnie Gray), rather than one of the raiders. As he saw immediately, The General is one long chase, or rather two chases, structured like the flight of a boomerang. First Johnnie on a borrowed train, the Texas, chases his own stolen train, the General. He manages to steal it back and races it towards his own lines, pursued by the raiders in the Texas, who try to prevent him from carrying their battle plans to his own high command.

The General is not Keaton's funniest film, but here he was going for quality over quantity in laughs. A number of the gags, like the box-car that keeps appearing and disappearing as it switches tracks, have a long build-up for a relatively modest payoff. But the laughter is mingled with a gasp of awe, and the best moments never get stale on repeated viewings. The cannon attached to the back of Buster's train goes off just as the train starts around a curve, so the ball flies straight and hits the raiders' train coming out of the curve. Riding on the cowcatcher, Buster hurls one railroad tie at another lying across the tracks, striking it precisely so that it flips out of the way. A forlorn Buster sits on the crossbar of his train's wheels, so lost in thought he doesn't notice when the train starts to move, carrying him up and down in gentle arcs: stillness in motion.

I agree with author Jim Kline who describes The General as Keaton's most personal film, the one that best captures his unique vision, spirit and personality. In many of his films, Buster starts off as an inept or effete character and develops into a hero. But his competent, ingenious and athletic character in The General, who is also modest, tireless, and underestimated, comes much closer to his real nature. There is a shot in The General of Buster's eye isolated on screen, framed by a hole in a white table-cloth, that has always reminded me of Dziga Vertov's kinoglaz, the "camera-eye." Keaton melds with his camera; there's no distinction between his qualities as a performer and the qualities of his movies. They have the same silence, the same strictness, the same strange blend of gravity and humor.

The General might be the most serious comedy every made, but it's not a tragicomedy. That, as in Chaplin's blending of pathos and low humor, was something people took to immediately. But no one knew what to make of The General. Original reviews accused the film of being dull, pretentious, unoriginal, and unfunny. Even today, people who have heard it acclaimed as one of the greatest movies of all time are sometimes puzzled or disappointed by it on first viewing. The General is challenging because it doesn't flaunt its virtues; like Keaton's concise and economical performance, it holds a great deal in reserve. Take the movie's most famous shot, of a train crashing through a burning bridge, for which Keaton built a real bridge and destroyed a real train. The shot lasts a few seconds in the finished film: he doesn't dwell on it or hype it. Who else in Hollywood would sink money in a spectacular effect and then downplay it? Keaton never forces a response from the audience, never manipulates, never overplays. He doesn't show off his acrobatic skills or his enormous repertoire of comic talents, nor does he play for sympathy. Anything so subtle will always leave some people cold. But for those who can see the expressiveness of Buster's so-called "stone face," who get his peculiar dry humor, who appreciate the rigorous purity and taste he displayed, these virtues are all the more stunning because they are understated. Buster Keaton always has more than he's showing; you can see it in his eyes.


It is "generally" (or should I pun and say "General Lee"?) said that the best comedy of the silent film career of Buster Keaton's career was his Civil War epic THE GENERAL. Apparently planned with more care than any of his other film projects, it involved not only researching a period of history some sixty years in the past, but getting the correct rolling stock, costumes, weapons, and props to make it look correct. And it worked so well that Keaton never really could (despite some great moments in STEAMBOAT BILL JR.) out-do it. In fact, the closest thing to his best sound film (or film that he influenced that was a sound film) was his work with Red Skelton in the comedy A SOUTHERN YANKEE, where he returned to a Civil War theme.

THE GENERAL (as I mentioned in discussing the Disney film THE GREAT LOCOMOTIVE CHASE) is based on the "Andrews Raiders" stealing of the Confederate locomotive "The General", and an attached train, which was used to damage tracks and bridges. The raid (in February 1862) was from northern Georgia into Tennesee. It only lasted 20 miles, as the coal for the train was used up and not replaced. Andrews and several raiders were hanged after a trial. Others went to southern prisoner of war camps. The effect of the incident far outstripped it's military success. The damage (after all) could be repaired. But like Jimmy Doolittle's Raid over Tokyo in April 1942, it had a tremendous effect hurting Confederate morale. The area attacked was hundreds of miles from the battlefronts of Virginia or Kentucky/Northern Tennessee that were in the current events of the War at the time, and so was considered safe by the Confederate government and public. Instead it had been shown quite easy for Northern raiders to hit and run for awhile.

Despite it being a brief incident of the war, the locomotive chase would remain famous after more important events were forgotten. The actual locomotive is still in existence in a museum in the south. When Lesney did it famous series of "Models of Yesteryear" the first locomotive that was included in that series of collectible toys was "The General".

The story, however, was ultimately a downer. But Keaton took the basic tale and made it a comedy of the period. First he changes the viewer's perspective - it is not concentrating on Andrews and his men, but on the Confederates. Secondly, he builds up the story of Johnny Gray, a railroad engineer who tries to enlist but is rejected (the twist of logic failure in the script is that the Confederate draft board head does not bother to explain to Johnny that he is more useful as an engineer to the cause than as a soldier). Because Keaton's family and girl friend (Marion Mack) see he is not enlisted, they believe he turned coward.

Johnny eventually is the only person who tries to retake "the General" from the raiders, and the film has actually two chases in it - first Andrews and his men stealing the train, and then Keaton sneaking into Northern lines with Mack and retaking it.

Along the way are many comic classic moments, such as Keaton carefully standing on the cowcatcher and carefully using physics to knock off broken wooden ties that might derail the train, or when (at a moment of dejection) Keaton sits on the connecting rod that links the trains wheels and finds himself pulled into the locomotive barn while in a sitting positions. The situation of fighting the Yankees during the second chase, and finding Marion Mack there "helping" him, are wonderful - especially when she judges which lumps of coal are pretty enough to be used to keep the engine fired (she throws away the ugly little ones). Keaton's reaction to her stupidity is a wonderful moment.

The classic conclusion of the comedy is the battle of the two sides at the river, and the burning of the railroad bridge (with it's destruction of a second locomotive). It has been called the most expensive sight gag in history. By the way, the Northern General who ordered the locomotive across the bridge is of some special interest. He was Mike "Turkey Strut" Donlin, a frequent member (and starring player) of the old New York Giants under John McGraw and Christy Matthewson in the first two decades of the 20th Century. Donlin (who got his funny nickname from the way he ran the bases) left baseball to become a film actor (he had worked a bit in vaudeville). Keaton was a sports fan (and showed this in his film COLLEGE, where he shows his abilities in several sports) and hired Donlin. This was the latter's most famous performance - look at his reaction to the collapse.

It must be regarded as Keaton's finest film, and certainly the best war comedy to come out in the silent period. It may also be the best war comedy to come out of any period of motion pictures.


The General has all the sweet earnestness in the world. It is about trains, frontier America, flower-faced girls. The story is about a Confederate train driver (Buster Keaton) who gets his train and his girl back when they are stolen by Union soldiers.

The film is slow-starting, then hilarious action comedy, often voted one of the best films ever made. Its sequences of sight gags, each topping the one before, is an incredible joy to behold. The film, however, was a box-office disaster on its original release. The story is based on an actual incident of the Civil War, treated more seriously in The Great Locomotive Chase.


I haven't had so much fun watching a movie for a long time. The General is a silent comedy (mostly slapstick) about Johnny Gray, a train engineer with two loves: his engine and Annabelle Lee. Annabelle soon dumps him because of his failure to enlist into the Civil War (they would not take him because he was too valuable as an engineer). Things are then sped up a year, where we see some Union commanders planning to hijack a train to unleash a highly sophisticated master plan. As it so happens, they steal Johnny's engine, a big mistake.

Buster Keaton does a phenomenal performance as Johnny. His face and character is ideal for this type of comedy. He reminds me a lot of Leslie Nielsen from the Naked Gun movies (but, of course, less old). He is often ignorant of what is going on around him, leading to plenty of laughs. This also makes him a very charismatic character.

There are countless train related jokes. The first one comes right at the beginning, when we see Johnny being followed by two kids and a woman, in a line much like a train. The bulk of the movie is made up of Johnny running a train, either chasing or fleeing from the Union soldiers. The movement and maneuvering of the trains is beautiful. The stunt work is an incredible accomplishment. The finale is explosive.

The General was a lot of fun to watch. It gave me more laughs than most modern comedies, and had plenty of substance on top of that. This is enough for me to label it as one of the greatest comedies ever. After my first viewing, it instantly became one of my favorites. It is timeless gem that should be watched at least once by anyone interested in movies.


Buster Keaton always amazes me. He was truly one of the most hilarious deadpan screen clowns of early cinema. And The General, even clocking in at around three hours, is surprisingly watchable based on his physical performance alone.

Granted, I still admit that I prefer the silent clowns in shorts, because it can be a bit exhausting to watch them in an entire feature, especially since they are often strings of vignettes thrown together and my modern brain prefers to edit out everything that's unnecessary, but some of the joy in these films is found in those very moments. There are multiple points in the General, a story about a Southern engineer that has to rescue his beloved from the clutches of the North in the Civil War, where Keaton's character, Johnnie Gray, has to stop his train, jump out, and remove something from the tracks, which in itself can be quite boring, but the way that Keaton injects physical comedy into those moments keeps me entertained.

And it's a marvel how so many realistic, yet comedic stunts that Keaton could come up with. It's nothing fantastic like some of his other films, but it's still funny. And I think the strongest point of his comedy is his completely stonefaced response to all adversity--but he lets you see just a little his plight in his eyes and it's just enough to know that he is frightened, but that the rest of him doesn't react similarly creates such an amusing dissociation that it goes from bizarre to funny. Whether he's pratfalling due to surprise or erroneously succeeding at something he's unskilled in and being shocked by it, that response of his is winning.

But the General does show its age a little. It exists in a time when people were still getting quite used to movies and so there is a lot of space that doesn't get edited out to help people get a better sense of the context. I wouldn't dare cut those moments out of this film, even if I could re-edit it, because the space always had something going on, but at the same time, this film, if made today, would be cut to one-and-a-half, or two hours and pack in the comedy more tightly. The plot and story are simple, but exist more than to just help the comedy move along--except at the end when the first story was accomplished. Then we move into a second extraneous, but still amusing, story regarding a battle between the North and the South that could've been excised and still having a decent, though simple, story.

I didn't really love the score that the DVD company attached to it, which is a number of classical pieces end on end. I think a new commissioned soundtrack would've better matched the piece, but I guess we get what we get. And on the plus side, you can always mute the movie and play whatever on top of it.

Is it perfect? No. But despite the age it shows, it still holds up as an enjoyable work from one of cinema's greatest physical comedians. If you want to spend three hours with a silent clown, this is not a bad way to go. 8/10.


I just wrote a review for STEAMBOAT BILL, JR. and that makes this review VERY difficult, because I really can't decide which of these two films is better. To me, they are both nearly perfect and represent the best full-length material Keaton performed--at least when it comes to stunts and laughs. It's sad really, as just after these two triumphs came the sound era--and a seriously negative down-turn in Keaton's career, as MGM repeatedly gave him terrible material--pairing him with the brash and inappropriate humor of Jimmy Durante.

This film is probably the best of his films when it comes to concept and consistency of the humor and plot. It really never lags and is both exciting and funny throughout. And, for once, I have nothing critical to say about the film. No matter how many times I see it, it just seems perfect. This might just be my favorite silent comedy--period. It's that good.

By the way, while all is practically perfect in every way about this film, this is NOT my favorite Keaton full-length film. While not as funny or filled with amazing stunts, OUR HOSPITALITY is an amazing film for its artistry. In addition to being the prettiest of his films, it also features among the best characterization for Keaton--with a full and rich plot. My advice is to see THE GENERAL and OUR HOSPITALITY and see two very different and probably equally great films from a master.


I remember when I first saw this movie. I was laughing so hard, I nearly cried!

I really love the scene where the Union spies drop the wood down at him and when he looked up. One of the spies pointed out that: "There's only one man in that engine!" HOW STUPID THEY WERE!

I thought it was amazing how he did all of those stunts! Because they did not have the technology back then to edit it like it was something else.

The scene were the train fell into the river after the bridge collapsed, was perhaps the most expensive and difficult part of the movie to film. And if you noticed the looks on the faces of the Union officers when the camera cut to them, those were for real, because they were not told what was going to happen to that train!

So Bravo Buster Keaton!

10/10


Having never seen a silent film before, I wasn't sure what to expect going into it. Buster Keaton's "The General" is set in 1861, the year the American civil war broke out. Like all young men at the time, the film's main protagonist John Gray (Keaton), a railroad engineer tries to enlist in the army but is denied entry as he is deemed more valuable to the southern cause as an engineer. Subsequently, he is dismissed as a coward by his girlfriend, Annabelle. It so happens that one day soon after, the northern union spies steal his train.....with Annabele on board and it's up to Johnnie to go deep into the enemy territory to recapture the engine and the girl.

Buster Keaton who also co-wrote and co-directed the film is utter perfection as the title character. Not only are his facial expressions when he realises that something has gone wrong on the train hilarious but one must also give him credit for doing most of his own stunt work! Also deserving of praise are the film's three composers whose score is memorable and never feels repetitive.

Overall: 8/10 and a great first film for anyone who wants to broaden their horizons by watching films made in the "pre-talkies" era.


Buster Keaton is generally known for his comedy forays in the silent era, but this movie is a hybrid romance, comedy, and action movie. The plot is merely a vessel for the action and stunts, and for a movie that came out in 1926, I was impressed.

In what was apparently real stunts, I watched Keaton jump from trains and inflict pain on the North. It's an interesting commentary too, on films from the South. With the film being in black and white, Union soldiers symbolically come out looking as the villains with their navy blue uniforms appearing black. The opposite is true as well, as the South's gray uniforms look white on the film stock, giving them an aura of righteousness.

It was also an interesting theme that Keaton got all of his motivation from the girl that wanted him to enlist, and all his inspiration from his other love, The General. Both helped him mold himself into a soldier, and by the end it was all tied up with a nice bow. An enjoyable hour-and-a-half


Johnny (Buster Keaton) won't be marching home, as he is not allowed to enlist. His girl Annabelle (Marion Mack) won't speak to him because of it. They don't realize he is needed an an engineer.

The Yankees steal his train and Johnny jumps into action, not knowing that Annabelle is captured and on the train.

The chase is both funny and exciting as a chase should be. The Yankees try all manner of tricks to get away, and Keaton stays after them bumbling along.

Soon, he is behind enemy lines still chasing. Soon, he is on foot and finds out the enemy plans and has to rescue Annabelle. The scene with the bear trap is pure magic.

The chase is now reversed as he tries to get back to Confederate lines before the Yankees catch him. Annabelle wasn't much help and provided some great comedic moments.

As expected, Johnny does, in fact, come marching home finally and is made a Lieutenant.


I read this as metaphor for the changing state of cinema.

It came out the same year as the first major talkie, which certainly scared the bejesus out of Keaton.

The railroad to the Civil War era is as the cinema to the early 20th century -- a frighteningly ubiquitous, revolutionary technology whose power was not fully grasped (think atomic technology to the mid-20th century). The real war here is between the silent stars and the synchronized sound revolution. The track is the linear stream of history and Keaton's train is pursued by its more youthful, vigorous counterpart. How does he fight its advance? sight gags, the way he's made his living. He chose to represent the south because even then he knew his was a dying art form, one that was eclipsed almost instantaneously. This film obviously had a huge budget, so studios still invested heavily in silent film, but Keaton knew what was coming.

The score here is of interest too. It's not the kind of music you associate with comedy, certainly not what Chaplin used. Then I realized: Keaton is absolute deadpan, so in that light the music makes perfect sense -- it's deadpan too, just a dramatic observer of comic events, like Keaton himself, an observer of his own gags.

Visually, it's remarkable, the motion of the camera, the balanced framing, the wonderful examination of nature fighting technology.

There's something about Keaton too. He has that kinetic tension that allows a still face and form to enthrall, like Clint, Benicio, Brando. Really incredible to watch.


It's difficult enough to write comments for films around fifty years old but when were talking 'silent' there's another dimension of difficulty inasmuch as one is moving into a world of title cards and 26 frames per second. On the other hand a truly great film will suffer comparison with the best of later eras and so it is here. If one is new to Keaton, knowing only that he was a deadpan comedian who performed hilarious yet often dangerous stunts then this will be something of (in the words Oscar Hammerstein put into the mouth of the King Of Siam) a puzzlement; it boasts a more or less straightforward narrative in which engineer Keaton's train is stolen by Union troops during The War Between The States and he sets off in pursuit. Any gags occur naturally within this context rather than being contrived and the film is better for this. I doubt if I can add anything pertinent to previous comments so I'll content myself with reporting that I'm glad to have seen it at last.


Some people may roll their eyes at the thought of another mafia spoof, but Steve Martin does a good job with it. He plays hit man Vinnie Antonelli, who is having to hide out in the suburbs. Vinnie is a cool dude, and decides that FBI agent Barney Coopersmith (Rick Moranis), who is protecting him, needs some fun in his life. So, he shows Barney the time of his life...at any cost.

In some ways, the movie is another excuse for the generation of comedians who grew out of the "Saturday Night Live" and "SCTV" routines to do their stuff. And you'd better believe that they do just that. Joan Cusack and Carol Kane play supporting roles, but I wonder whether or not their characters could have been developed further. Overall, it's a really good movie.


A very pleasant, watchable movie that doesn't have much meat on it. Martin is good but not great - he's kind of recycling his Czech wild and crazy guy routine with a slightly different accent. He tries to unstuff Rick Moranis' stuffy FBI agent - Moranis is not believable in the role, but this movie doesn't ask you to believe him. Joan Cusack is wonderful as Moranis' love interest. I wish she could choose higher profile roles that are worthy of her talent.

I like the theme of old gangsters going to "Heaven" - in this case, that's San Diego - away from the dark, dreary world of the East Coast via the witness protection program. It's a good idea, and there are a few good laughs. I just wish it had challenged me more as a viewer. There's some really deep material here that could have been explored, even in a comedy.


This has to be the worst film Steve Martin has ever made. He is utterly unbelievable as both an Italian-American and a wiseguy that all other elements in the film which are not bad, just average, gets totally washed out to sea.

It's amazing that Martin's character is based on the same man as Ray Liotta would later immortalize in Martin Scorsese's most brilliant film. His co-star, Rick Moranis, plays just about the same character as in "Honey, I shrunk the kids" and its sequels, so that is not really interesting to watch either but I would rather see a whole movie with that character again and the rather lame love story between him and Joan Cusack than spend it watching Martin squint and squirm his way through every stereotypical mannerism we associate with Wise's.

To be fair, I have never really seen a non-Italian-American give a good performance playing an Italian-American, except Marlon Brando and maybe I am being a little cruel to Martin but he is no Brando. Parodies of Wise's got tired after Brando which essentially was some kind of parody on it's own.


How disappointing. "My Blue Heaven" is incredibly slow-paced and involves very little actual humor. I'm afraid much of the blame must go to Rick Moranis and Joan Cusack, who instead of playing "the straight man" sort of plays goofy unbelievable characters in the straight man role. That's a conflict. The romance I didn't buy at all, the humor comes straight out of kid flicks.

I'm not an arty guy. I don't need a whole lotta humor or drama to keep me happy. I mean, I could bear "Sgt. Bilko" and actually enjoyed "All of Me", other Steve Martin flicks on the bad side. But this is not a low-budget film with some pizazz and cult appeal. Skip it.

Who should see this film:

-- nobody, even if you might think you want to, even on a rainy day

-- mobsters in the witness protection program who can't repent

I'm forced to give "My Blue Heaven" a 4 out of 10.


My Blue Heaven is a wonderful example of Steve Martin's diversity as a comedic actor. I love his devil-may-care attitude in this one and his relationship with Rick Moranis's character's is absolutely hilarious.

Martin plays Vincent 'Vinnie' Antonelli, a low-level mob figure who is turning state's evidence against a bigger gangland figure. He is in the witness protection program, and assigned to Barney Coopersmith (Rick Moranis), an FBI agent who is chomping at the bit to do some "real detective work."

I won't go into the plot, but it is quite enjoyable to watch.

One of my favorite Steve Martin movies.

It rates a 7.2/10 from...

the Fiend :.


Setting aside the fact that Joan Cusack is a fantastically beautiful woman and always worth the price of admission, I am continually amazed that Steve Martin can ham it up and make it work. Rick Moranis is always the worried little guy and that's OK but Martin is at his best, clowning it up as a Mafia good guy, wearing some of the most outlandish outfits since Jack Nicholson in Prizzi's Honor. Don't get me wrong. There's nothing funny about the mafia or the mob. But, Martin creates his own persona with some great lines as funny as Marissa Tomei and Joe Pesci in My Cousin Vinnie. As a loveable sleazebag, Martin is great...and, of course, Joan Cusack is also great. Check this one out. It's fun.


People forget about the amazing comedy that comedians Steve Martin and Rick Moranis have. From Little Shops of Horror, to LA Stories and Parenthood, Martin and Moranis are equally as funny and talented as Wilder and Pryor or even Martin and Lewis. They are not only funny but have a chemistry that allow the two actors to be different characters. In My Blue Heaven, Steve Martin proves he can play Italian. Not since Al Jolsen does an actor make fun at a nationality so well by doing it so fake. This is one of very few perfect comedies that tells a comedy without jokes. The characters alone make the movie funny, even though they are not aiming to make you laugh. Well, some are, but the overall drama of the movie makes you laugh. In a story like this, the characters can do no wrong.


If you havent seen this movie...... do it !! It is absolutely fantastic. Steve Martin in is best role ever. If you dont like it, god forbit, I dont wanna know


I would have believed this to have been the worst movie of all time until I read that this was supposed to be the life story of mobster-rat Henry Hill whose mob career was featured in Goodfellas.

The opening premise is that gangster Vincent 'Vinnie' Antonelli (Steve Martin)'s garishly dressed wife joined Vinnie in Witness Protection so that Vinnie could get a house. Poor Vinnie doesn't even know how to use a lawn mower. While Vinnie struggles with the concept of mowing the lawn, Steve Martin flubs Brooklynese, massacring the entire dialect so incomprehensibly that the average affectionado of the tongue of Kings (Kings County that is) couldn't fathom a word Martin was trying to say. Someone might have told poor Steve that Italians lead all others in home ownership and tenderly care for the humblest plot.

Yet Vinnie finds a suburban Eden a little too disquietly quiet. He teams up with a few other exiled mobsters in reversion to their sordid games, only to be rescued from local law enforcement by the FBI. To that extent the movie gives an accurate picture if not often with comical overtones, of Witness Protection. Hill in various TV interviews acknowledges having lapsed despite attempts of the FBI to bail him out of new trouble by relocating him.

Vinnie faces a formidable adversary in local prosecutor Hannah Stubbs (Joan Cusack) who is constantly frustrated in ridding the town of Vinnie.

Poor Execution by Martin of the Brooklyn accent, the uncharitable view of Italians, and giddy silliness about a serious problem: Federally Supported and Funded Crime Waves through Witness Protection won a *** 1 *** rating from me.

Vinnie in this movie


I have watched this movie more than a hundred times. Not to sound too neurotic, I even have a spare (second) tape of it. Unlike many comedies, wherein knowing in advance distills the comedic moment, in this movie I can't wait to see those moments again and again. Steve Martin's excellent, over-the-top version of a low-level mafioso stuck out west at "123 Happy Street" waiting to be a witness for the prosecution in a big mobster's trial' is a treasure. And all the supporting actors and actresses are extremely well cast, a factor that - to me - is paramount in building the afterglow of a really good flick. Joan Cusack is perfect; Rick Moranis is perfect; Bill Irwin is perfect; and so are virtually all the others, too many to list. And the highlight moments flow into each-other like fluid gold. The "stolen car" portion; the "merengue dance"; the "undercover uncover"; the "return at the airport", and on and on. And behind all of this is a terrific, light score that magnifies the airy movement of the script. There are scores of comedies I like and watch numerous times. Many have bits that are extremely funny, often incredible. Who could forget some of the stuff in "Tommy Boy?" But if I could keep only one that I knew would never get old, this is it!


I admit it -- I am a sucker for a certain type of Steve Martin movie ("The Jerk," "L.A. Story," and of course "My Blue Heaven") -- the days when he was choosing to make stuff that was wonderful mix of funny and sweet. In this movie, Martin and Rick Moranis have a nice chemistry as a semi-reformed mob guy and the FBI agent assigned to protect him. There are some incredible one-liners, sight gags, and a great cast of character actors showing up as various old-time wise guys. As usual, Joan Cusack is terrific as the love interest who manages to make Moranis softer and more tough at the same time. It's also a movie that makes you sad that you don't see Melanie Mayron more. And the dancing scene on the beach -- completely charming.


It was a good movie, with a great comedic story, and I can't see any flaws in it whatsoever. I've watched it a couple times through. There's no bad acting in it and it includes two of the best actors of that era--Rick Moranis and Joan Cusack. While I like Steve Martin and have seen many of his films, I can't say he's all that great of an actor, just kind of funny. In this one, however, he had a hard role to play, and he played it well, doing great voice-acting too. I can recommend this film to anyone who hasn't seen it. It's very enjoyable and funny. I like it.


I hadn't even heard of this movie until I stumbled across it on late night TV and found it more than adequately funny. As a Sicilian, I got over any real sensitivity on the mobster subject long ago. The beautiful thing about Martin is that he can be absurd in almost any role he plays and still be likable and funny because of that very absurdity. This allows him to doing characterized spoofs of even evangelists with relative impunity. The magic formula is that just about everything he does in a role would supposedly make one dislike him, but one doesn't.

I am not exactly sure what failed to make this movie more of a box-office success, or why it got so little attention. I would think that there would have been enough Martin fans to give it a good flying send-off and kept it there. Possibly it was due in part to the fact that by the time the movie was made, the movie-going audience demographics had started to change considerably. Adults were becoming more likely to rely on TV and video-tapes for their viewing fare, unless they thought a movie had the scope and grandiosity to benefit from the very large screen. The movie houses depended more and more on the teeny-boppers who relied on them as social outlets or at least just another place away from home(ugh!). And most teeny-boppers lacked many of the points of reference that would make the whole New York/wise guy/FBI/not really bad guy shtick really funny. Then of course it was also the beginning of end-less violence and computer generated special effects which youth saw and popularized as an extension of their video games.

Considering the more recent offerings such as Bewitched, this movie is on a different plateau altogether. If you are in your forties now and have been exposed to the Sopranos, by all means see this movie if you missed it originally. Chances are it will make you laugh, hard. And is that not what a good comedy is supposed to do?


***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This Court TV original movie does a commendable job of pointing out the injustices often caused by mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Mercedes Ruehl is excellent as Susan Walker, a single mother who is sentenced to 20 years in federal prison simply because her live-in boyfriend and his cronies were peddling marijuana on a large scale.

Walker refused to plea bargain since she considered herself to be innocent and devoid of inside information. Unfortunately, all of the other defendants in the case (they KNEW they were guilty) accepted a plea bargain, pointing their fingers at Walker as a co-conspirator to shorten their own sentences. As a result Walker, who was guilty of nothing but trusting the wrong guy, received the longest sentence of all.

Overall, the film is quite compelling for a made-for-cable flick. Ruehl rules her character throughout.


Court cases are always interesting when human stories are involved and this is a human story-not something to do with organised crime or fraud. It highlights an injustice for a start and its a reminder that the worse the crime is the less time you serve if the continuing release of rapists who go on to reoffend is anything to go by.

Though this is not 100% about a real person its many who found themselves serving a sentence for what is actually NOTHING. At the beginning you see the woman Susan trying to find a solicitor who was supposed to be better than the ones the courts appoint but her fees were too high so she declined because she can't find the money without remortgaging her house she learns she can't as its been seized-supposedly paid for by her partner's drug business which she had nothing to do with. You see her pleading with him and finally ordering him out because of the drugs business.After which she is suddenly arrested and learns the partner has been as well but as he plea bargains for a lesser sentence she can't do that -she knows nothing. These mandatory sentences are unsafe convictions. The main of the film is to show how she coped inside-which is admirably. This conspiratory law is likely to be repealed but at the moment its as crazy as the Human Rights Act


OK, so you watch this movie which was made in 2002 and think the comments by some here are correct. Specifically I mean that this injustice is Bush's fault.

Well sorry it shouldn't be a political issue, but in fact it is. These Drug War laws were initiated by a Democratic Congress, not actually Republican.

Yes I'm a Democrat by need to set the record straight.

OK so Susan Walker, who basically was tried, convicted and sentenced to 20 years just because her boyfriend was dealing drugs. This type of sentencing was very regular during the 1990s. Both Bush Sr. and Clinton didn't do to much about. Under Bush some 23 wives received the same sentence and under Clinton the # is over 120. Mr. Clinton also did nothing.

In 2000, George W. Bush actually had all these cases reviewed and 95 of these cases were over turned.

This story takes you through one of the cases, but is actually true events from 3 different women. Susan obviously is the focus of this film but the personality is from a GA women (Daniel in the film) who also was released. Her character is played by Rachel McAdams. The 3rd women, whose name was never released is still in jail.

Its a wonderfully intense film to watch. For a TV production they did a great job with the time-line. Again understand the events are not all that of Susan Walker.

For more information you can find the full Susan Walker story on-line.

Enjoy this film.


This was a good movie, I agree with the last poster. However, that last poster was making a lot of sense until their last sentence where they criticized the star of the movie in not being very pretty and being pushy. Huh? What has that to do with anything? It totally turned that intelligent review of the movie into a base adolescent review. In real life, we are not all pretty, handsome or meek and mild. Movies don't always feature beautiful people. I find it shallow of one to remark on the looks of the star in this movie. She gave a great performance. To top it off, do you know what the "real" person in this story looks like? She could be even uglier than your perception of the lead character in this movie. I fail to see the relevance in the actress's looks. Besides, she is not ugly. Ugly is more related to character than physical appearance. I believe "ugly" people are people who are evil. This actress is not ugly.


This is an issue that still gets little attention from the media. Kudos to the writer and director for addressing one of the several crises (including health care and prison reform) that are still in shambles today.

Mercedes Ruehl is excellent as a woman who merely dated someone (who happened to be a drug dealer.) She was a nurse and had young children in the house, and once she realized what was going on she kicked the boyfriend (Russell) out.

At any rate she was arrested for associating with a drug ring. She had answered the phone a few times and merely taken a message, like anyone would in a busy house with children, friends, etc. Apparently the burden of proof for the prosecution in this criminal case was accepted as hearsay. People are guilty until proved innocent once they are "in the system". And if you cannot afford an excellent criminal attorney to defend you, the system is unjust.

We see many of the women in similar situations who were imprisoned with ridiculous sentences, some for 100 years. This is a disgrace that this can occur here in the U.S. If you like this film you may also enjoy "Against Their Will: Women in Prison", starring Judith Light as a woman who was unjustly imprisoned. 10/10 Very highly recommended.


This movie was excellent. It's about a middle-aged, middle class single mother with two kids who unknowingly breaks the law. She is then arrested, convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

She finds out about these stupid laws that can send you to prison even for just answering a phone call or driving someone somewhere. She appeals her case to courts for seven long years. She never gives up. She released from prison and has her sentence commuted.

This law The War on Drugs, was made in the '80s. Although, it makes no sense it was passed. Currently they are trying to get these laws abolished.


In 1989 the gals in this picture looked fantastic, and their outfits were out of this world. Dona Speir,(Donna),"Fit to Kill",'93, played a very hot looking gal who showed plenty of her flesh and especially her cleavage. Hope Marie,(Taryn),"Nactropolis",94, worked together with Donna and also showed a great deal of her body parts. These two gals wind up in forgotten Hawaiian isles where WW II was fought with the Japs and there still remained a single person who was still fighting the world and had regrets over having killed American's during the war. Donna and Hope are faced with all kinds of men in the jungle, and fighting hand to hand combat with big and small men who are drawn to these women like a magnet. The acting was horrible, and if it was not for the two women in this picture, my vote would have been ZERO !


A typical entry in the Sidaris filmography, Savage Beach features the usual assortment of well-endowed women, goofy villains, and exotic locations, and is simple minded if occasionally violent fun. The highlight of this one is Michael Mikasa's appearance as a World War II Japanese soldier stranded on a remote island--in order to age him, the makeup department seems to have submerged his head in a bowl of collodion. It's not a pretty sight.


I saw this film on the closing night of Sundance, mostly because all the other films I wanted to see were sold out. I'm glad I went. Nick Stahl and Vera Farmiga dance adeptly around and through the film's premise, which is coaxed pleasantly out of a screenplay that writer-director Carlos Brooks has polished over seven years.

Stahl plays a public radio reporter confined to a wheelchair since a childhood accident. While following a lead in a bizarre story, he meets Fiona (Farmiga), a mysterious woman who leads him into a reclusive subculture. At first, microphone in hand, he wants the story. But then a trip to a second-hand store for some shoes convinces him the story isn't what he thought it was.

The Sundance catalogue billed it as a "psychological thriller," but in my opinion that misses the mark. Yes, we're introduced to some oddly quirky characters along the way. But Brooks bills is as a detective story, and that's how I think it's best approached. It's an exercise in restrained exposition that keeps the viewer guessing right up until the film's final scenes.

As with most independent films, this one makes good use of small-scale locations and intimate moments. Even the Manhattan exteriors favor enclosed sidewalks and narrow passages. The cinematography, done on high-definition video, is crisply executed and richly textured with subtle but effective details. (The lustrous wallpaper in Fiona's apartment actually has its own screen credit.) The camera spends a great deal of time at the eye level of a wheelchair occupant, emphasizing the point of view and expanding the small spaces in which many of the film's scenes take place.

Stahl and Farmiga drive a substantial portion of the film by themselves. Brooks admits that the their story took over the film as he shot and edited it. As a result the supporting ensemble retreats to the distance, a position from which performances from James Frain (as Stahl's mentor) and Michal Leamer (Fiona's mother) can give brief but memorable performances.

Vera Farmiga creates a complex character whom you can't help loving, hating, and fearing all at the same time. Nick Stahl's performance stays even and understated until his veneer breaks apart and the detective story comes full circle.

The only negative aspect to the film is the frank treatment of the subculture that frames the principal characters, not because the treatment is unfair or poorly executed, but because it's likely to take the average viewer by surprise. Look for wide release in May 2008.


I liked "Quid Pro Quo," a LOT. Do NOT be put off by the subject matter; that's just "local color" for a good, old-fashioned mystery, one that opens up" into not only revelation, but self-revelation. For those who like mystical mysteries, it's even got a pair of magical shoes that perform miracles.

The film is what it is not only because of a masterful script, but because of two actors who basically eat the screen with fine performances -- Nick Stahl and Vera Farmiga. Stahl plays a public radio reporter who is semi-paralyzed; the accident in his youth that killed his parents left him in a wheelchair. He gets a tip from an anonymous woman that at a local hospital, a man recently walked in and tried to bribe one of the residents to amputate his leg. Following up on it, he finds that not only is it true, but that there is a subculture out there that *envies* those in wheelchairs, and wants to become like them. They call themselves "wannabees," and have been known to cripple themselves or have others do it for them so that they can live their "inner dream" of being confined to a wheelchair themselves.

His investigation leads him to a mysterious and beautiful young woman, played by Vera Farmiga in a performance that is going to get her a LOT of work in the film biz. She's tremendous -- innocent, sexy, conflicted, and at every turn of the plot the person who leads Stahl's character deeper and deeper into his investigation of why on earth someone would *want* to be confined to a wheelchair.

It's a great flick, by a first-time writer/director, someone who IMO is To Be Watched. Highly recommended.


Helpful Note: Wikipedia definition: Quid pro quo (Latin for "something for something") indicates a more-or-less equal exchange or substitution of goods or services.

Carlos Brooks makes an impressive debut as both writer and director of this little independent film QUID PRO QUO, a story that may make some viewers uncomfortable because of the subject matter, but an intelligent investigation of a subculture unknown to most and a script that leads to a surprising ending - if the viewer keeps thinking after the rolling credits are over!

Isaac (Nick Stahl) is a reporter for a small radio station, a role that gives him the opportunity to uncover novel human interest stories for his audience. Interestingly, Isaac is a paraplegic, confined to a wheelchair since age 8 when he was the survivor of a car crash that killed both his parents. He has full function of most of his body, but cannot walk. Isaac receives an email from one 'Ancient Chinese Girl' that contains a message about a person who convinced a doctor to amputate a normal leg. Isaac is fascinated and sets out to investigate the story and eventually discovers the source of the email - one young and very beautiful Fiona (Vera Farmiga) - who introduces him to a subculture of people who want to be wheelchair bound: in a group meeting Isaac hears strange stories from a disparate group of people who meet to discuss their obsession with being paralyzed, their chance to be noticed and cared about as quasi-invalids who would go so far as having an amputation of a normal limb to enable their wheelchair dreams.

Isaac soon discovers that Fiona shares this obsession, demonstrates her secrets to Isaac, and the two begin to bond physically and emotionally. Isaac is the first person to see Fiona make her 'debut' in public in a wheelchair. They share lunch in a café and share their life experiences: Isaac confesses that he harbors foreshortened memory of his accident - his last memory is lying in the road seeing a young girl with red and white pompoms trying to save him. Isaac surprises himself (and shares his surprise with Fiona) when he buys a pair of 'Fred Astaire shoes', and upon trying them on, he is able to walk! Fiona's response is mixed - she is happy that Isaac is ambulatory but at the same time she is led to believe that Isaac's paralysis may be of an hysterical nature, that he really has never been paralyzed except as a reaction to the guilt he harbors about his parent's death and his sole survivorship of the accident. How these two people deal with the information as it develops provides a startling ending to this story, a detective mystery that in retrospect proves to have given us, the audience, countless clues throughout the film - clues only discovered in retrospect!

Both Nick Stahl and Vera Farmiga give vital performances, able to draw us in to their odd characters and make us care. There are many fine cameo roles - Kate Burton as Fiona's mother, James Frain as Isaac's priest friend, and all the members of the wannabe wheelchair bound group - and the cinematography by Michael McDonough is both appropriately claustrophobic indoors and transcendently beautiful in the tulip fields of Skagit Valley, WA used as the setting for the upstate New York accident location. Mark Mothersbaugh ties the moods of the film together with his expert musical score. This is a tough little film to watch, but a film that supplies much gratification and challenge. It is a fine debut for Carlos Brooks. Recommended. Grady Harp


Vera Farmiga (playing 'Fiona') and Nick Stahl (bringing 'Isaac' to life) get two endlessly interesting characters thrown their way by first timer Carlos Brooks, and they know what to do with the material. Fiona's part's the most fleshed out and she hands in the greatest performance I've seen in quite some time; I have to scrape some long term memories together to conclude I can't remember seeing an equally great performance in at least half a year, that one being Jason Patric's in 'Your Friends & Neighbors'.

'Quid Pro Quo' deals with a difficult subject, namely paralysis: Stahl's semi-paralyzed and confined to a wheelchair since involved in a brutal car-accident at age 8, during which he lost both his parents. He's a radio-journalist whose work one day brings him in contact with Fiona, she's charming, endearing and very sexy but she makes some unexpected revelations about herself: she feels she's a paralyzed person confined to an able body. We follow Nick as he further descends into the subculture and Brooks passes us some insights about paralysis along the way.

I couldn't help reminiscing about 'Spider ' and other Cronenbergs when viewing, QPQ's style's not totally unlike the fore-mentioned but if some reading at the moment fear 'boredom' (I would never dare to call Cronenberg 'boring' but I can understand why some might would be inclined to), I can assure you QPQ makes for a very accessible film.

You know how every great song seems to be over far too soon and how every time you eat a great meal the plate seems to be smaller than it used to be, well as interesting and entertaining as 'Quid Pro Quo' is, it could've used a cherry on top of the icing. Carlos's script does bravely take the road less traveled, I must admit to myself maybe a thriller dealing with the subject would've pleased me more. QPQ's a very pleasing (albeit not that deep) character drama, but I saw a brilliant thriller lurking inches underneath the surface. However, for a drama, QPQ 's surprisingly light on it's feet: no vast array of manipulative long shots of Isaac suffering from his condition, no indoctrination to the writer's vision. Instead we get 'Magic shoes', comedic bantering between Isaac and his doorman and a realistic ending. All of these elements, make the film very easy to watch yet it doesn't leave you feeling indifferent.

If you have a brain and a heart you'll enjoy this very fine debut by Carlos Brooks, I'd advise anyone with a passion for cinema to keep an eye on him.


"Quid Pro Quo" is about handicapped reporter Isaac (Nick Stahl) as he's given an odd story - people who wish to be handicapped. His investigation leads him to Fiona (Vera Farmiga), a capable woman who wishes she could be in a wheelchair like himself.

As their relationship blossoms, he discovers some shocking information about Fiona, as well as try to come to terms with his own guilt about why he's handicapped, all of which leads to a shocking climax.

This is a pretty decent movie (Magnolia Pictures always seem to do excellent work), with great acting, a superior story and deep insight into the lives of people most don't understand - those who wish to be handicapped even though they're not.


Movie about an odd, underground segment, the intellectually passive version of Cronenberg's Crash. People who want to be crippled from the waste down and confined to a wheelchair.

It is more than that. It's set within a mystery as to whether a radio reporter is getting lured into a trap or fake story. And unlike Crash, there's no drug connection. It's more psychological, but equally dark, simply without the ambiance and style that Crash had.

The downside is that some of it seems too setup and the story under-developed. The result is that it seems less like a theater film and more like a TV movie, but worth watching.


"Quid pro quo" is a phrase much like the word "requiem" which can be a dangerous thing in a very dumbed-down society. In other words, when intellectual Hollywood lightweights leach onto such phrases or words, without really having the cortical ability to get beyond your average video game, the outcome is never very good. This is certainly the case with this very ignorant movie "Quid Pro Quo". My overall reaction to this lame flick is one of disgust---disgust with the dolts who wrote, produced and directed this waste of cinematographic effort, and also with the fact that this movie is so incredibly insulting to those who are disabled. This movie is supposedly about people who fantasize about being disabled, about a guy who is disabled but really not, and a woman who will never feel complete until she is maimed to the point of being paralyzed and thus disabled. I do not think I could make up anything more retarded or ridiculous without the help of a pan full of psychedelic mushrooms or a partial lobotomy. The really bad aftertaste I was left with after watching this moronic movie was that the people who produced, directed and wrote the script for this movie are probably too vapid and dumb to realize how insulting it is to those who are actually disabled. I was also left thinking that the movie industry must truly be at the bottom of the barrel if a movie based on such an intelligence-insulting script was even produced and expected to be digested as actual cinema. On a final note, this movie was so bad, I am not planning to tell anybody I watched it just to avoid the embarrassment.


This had positive reviews but i've run marathons that passed faster. I watched it with a friend and half way through felt compelled to stop it and apologise, which I've never done before. I eventually finished it but remain baffled by what anyone could think this movie has going for it.

As mentioned elsewhere, the main theme here is able bodied people who want to become paralysed, or paraplegic. So if that's the single most mind blowing and fascinating concept you've ever heard of, then you probably still shouldn't bother watching this because it's not like they explain it. The characters dawdle along through tedious lives and pointless, boring conversations. None of the dialogue or actions are interesting or engaging at all. Occasionally things get a little animated, but it's usually difficult to understand why and always completely impossible to care in the slightest.

Eventually I'm pretty sure nothing happens at the end but even though I just finished a couple of hours ago I can't remember much other than feeling very grateful.


I watch a lot films; in a week it differs from 5 to 10. This screenplay was unique in way that made me think about myself and life and how vulnerable we are.

These two very interesting characters where the moment you met them you want to learn more about them is acted by two very talented actor/actress named Nick Stahl and elegant Vera Farmiga. Before the half of the movie I presumed the big twist about the Nick's character but it was hidden and portrayed in a fine way that when the answer is shown to the audience, you don't feel so much surprise but also you don't feel cheated in any way. Hence, it feels like life itself.

Consequently, the ending which was very beautiful cinematographically with a touch of reality that makes it absolutely delicious that leads to pause when Nick's character ends the film with the line: Isacc Knott, Public Radio, New York.


QUID PRO QUO shows us that no matter how entrenched we are in our world view, there are always people who feel, with equal intensity, the exact opposite. Who would trade mobility for a wheelchair? Meet the characters in this film. QUID PRO QUO examines a psycho-sexual subgroup who feel that they are normal, but "trapped in a walking person's body". We are introduced to a paraplegic radio talk show host who meets a young woman who yearns to be disabled. This part is played by the radiantly crazy Vera Farmiga who rolls over Nick Stahl's staid NPR persona with willful glee. Farmiga injects a recklessly erotic element to this otherwise plodding script. She throws down a little MURDERBALL into this decidedly odd and weird universe, and as to why she is up to all of this? It becomes the strange trick-ending to this odd bit of fantasy. If you liked David Cronenberg's film, CRASH, you might enjoy this movie's nutty vibe.


The film has am extremely simple plot. Very young guy confined to wheelchair by hysterical paralysis mixed with partial traumatic amnesia produced by the parent-killing car wreck occurring years ago when he was a child meets but of course doesn't recognize young chick who drove the car that caused the accident and is now obsessed with the idea of becoming a paraplegic like him aka like the kid in the car she crashed into. This simplistic view of two "mental illnesses" gets dressed up with 1) obsessed chick arranging to meet (and sleep with, equally of course) wheelchair bound guy via the plot device of anonymously informing him of a human interest story (he is an NPR-radio-station-type reporter) 2) utterly stupid 'human interest story' (an urban legend style boffo about a bunch of people who "wannabe" paralyzed for no particular reason whatsoever) 3) "magic fred astaire shoes" (of course, again, the shoes are nothing more than a mental "crutch" the guy is subconsciously using to give himself a reason to walk... that enable wheelchair guy to walk...after falling down a lot, only very slowly, with crutches or a cane...sort of like you'd expect someone who has been working out to retard muscular atrophy but who hasn't stood or walked for years to behave when finally standing and walking... 3) a few couldabeengreat lines that came off as too silly to be taken half-seriously because of the trying-to-be-an-allegory but frankly rather silly plot. (Example: "I'm a paralyzed person trapped in a walking person's body." Sillier example: "wannabe" paralyzed to alleviate her guilt over putting the guy in a wheelchair chick says to him --seriously!!!-- after they discover his paralysis is actually hysterical: "Why would anyone wannabe paralyzed?") The story could have been very good. It was just so obvious about its allegory role and so silly in its urban legend depiction of the way guilt-ridden obsessed chick got into crash victim guy's bed that it kind of gut punched its own good qualities. The next effort probably will be decent.


This was probably the worst movie I have seen since The Arrival. And one of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. Having been suckered into renting this horrific piece of garbage, i left the movie experience feeling ill- literally. Horrible screen writing, atrocious acting, contrived bullshit plots, and unbelievable characters. Magic Shoes? Ginger Jake? Am I expected to believe that somebody who has been in a wheelchair for 20 years could just get up and start walking. Somehow I don't think the human body works that way. If they wanted to make a sci-fi movie maybe they should have contacted Spielberg. How could Vera Farmiga go from being in The Departed to being in this horrendous crap pile of a movie. She should shoot her agent. And anyone who liked this film should shoot themselves.


I just saw this movie through the Los Angeles KCET Movies Series and it was absolutely fantastic! While the movie does contain a subtle political message, it is not meant to sway the audience in the illegal immigration debate. The story carries extraordinarily well with a subject as touchy as illegal immigration and cannot exist without it. Utilizing a theme of abandonment, the movie explores what it means to truly care for and cherish a loved one. With brilliant acting (Adrian Alonso is incredible!), fantastic direction, and a terrific screenplay, the movie is a wonderful, heartfelt journey that brings laughter, sadness, and a sincere sense of happiness into an enjoyable, movie-going experience.


I just saw this film at the Woodstock Film Festival and it was one of the highlights for me. I went in having no idea what to expect and was more than pleasantly surprised. There is not a note of false dialog, it's heartfelt, but not overwrought. It tells a story of a mother trying to support her son and mother in Mexico from LA. When the Grandmother suddenly dies, the 9 year old boy crosses the border to find his mother. From this description it might not sound like much, but seek it out, it's well worth it. All around the acting is wonderful, particularly the young boy Carlitos, played by Adrian Alonso. America Ferrara has a very brief role in this film, don't just see it for her.


A mother gets up before the sun rises on Los Angeles to take the first of many buses to get to the first of her two housecleaning jobs. Elsewhere, in Mexico, her nine-year-old son still sleeps soundly in his bed. Before she left him over four years prior, she told him that should he ever find himself lonely and missing her, that he need only look up to moon in the sky and know that she too would be looking and thinking of him. In that thought, both the title and the dualistic tone are set for a surprisingly poignant piece about the borders that keep both countries and people apart. Director Patricia Riggen's UNDER THE SAME MOON is a brave film that proudly puts a face to an issue that has polarized America. While the main focus surrounds precocious Carlito (Adrian Alonso) as he crosses the US/Mexican border to find his mother after a family death leaves him alone, his journey draws attention to the plight of a people who want only to pursue a better future for their families. It is soft and sweet one moment, difficult and tense the next, but always subtle and sensitive. Its significance is found in its simplicity  while our heart strings are being tugged, our eyes are also being opened.

When Rosario (Kate del Castillo) stares up at the moon, the longing to be with her son is matched only in magnitude by the constant wondering if all of her sacrifice is worth the trouble. The contradictory nature of her existence is a heavy burden to bear. She demeans herself daily cleaning the house of a wealthy woman who treats her like a second class citizen and then has to clean another house and sew dresses nightly in order to put any money aside. As every hour of every day disappears without notice or meaning, years go by without seeing her son. She must work so hard in order to provide him with the possibility of a brighter future and this sacrifice is truly great. For as she slaves away the days, sure to always be on the lookout for the Immigration and Naturalization Service, her son is growing up without her. She has foregone the potential of her own happiness and cut herself off from the one remaining source of joy in her life. The decision she made years ago to cross the border has now drawn another line between mother and son that she knows may one day be too thick to be erased.

When Carlito stares up at the moon, the longing to be with his mother is matched only in magnitude by the bewilderment derived from feeling abandoned. He cannot reconcile his mother's love still felt in his heart and the reality of their situation. Four years after she left, his faith is finally faltering. While Rosario's daily renunciation is a testament to conviction and hope, Carlito's mission to make his way from Mexico to L.A. gives the film a heartbreaking tenderness while still tersely telling the truth of his tale. A boy willing to go to such great lengths just to be with his mother may sound saccharine in nature but there is nothing sweet about a nine-year old hitchhiking in Tucson, working wherever he can to pay for bus fare or nearly being sold into child prostitution. Ligiah Villalobos's lean screenplay never loses sight of the prize long enough to find itself off course but it is also never afraid to talk about the reality illegal immigrants must face on the streets of a supposedly great country. The dichotomy between sappy and serious is what makes UNDER THE SAME MOON so effective. While we want with great desperation to see mother and son reunite, we are also exposed to the reality imposed by our own ignorance upon such innocent hopefuls.

Once upon a time, America used to be the land of the free. People the world over would immigrate in pursuit of the elusive American dream. Things are very different now. Now there is the threat of terrorism, economic unrest and generally widespread panic and fear. To be foreign is to be frightening. All of our misconceptions dehumanize those involved and in a backwards fashion, somehow glamorize the experience. UNDER THE SAME MOON is a fine, refreshing film that gives a voice to those who are so seldom heard in a fashion that will allow it be heard by many. And for all the tears and warmth it brings to the viewer, perhaps its crowning achievement is that all who see it will inevitably find themselves staring up at the night sky shortly afterward, realizing that we all live under that very same moon no matter how many lines are drawn between us.


I love this movie, and I'm sure anyone who is a mother,a father, a son, a daughter, would love this movie. The dialogue just feels so real, sincere because this story is just like the story of many people around the world. Yes, it is about Mexican immigrants, but you don't have to be Mexican nor even an immigrant to feel a connection with the characters. Many people have to move from their origin country to another country for many reasons, work, school, health, and sometimes they leave behind their loved ones. The movie is about love, family and dreams. If you decide to go and see it at the theater be prepared to laugh, and to cry oh yeah you will cry a lot. When I went to see it I cried, many people cried I was surprised to see that even children cried because they got so emotional with this film. I highly recommend this film.


This certainly lived up to expectations of being "a nice movie," an involving story about a young Mexican boy who sneaks into the United States to try to find his mother in Los Angeles. She had been in L.A. for four years and, frankly, I forget why. They don't dwell on that, but there must have been a good reason since she loves the kid and vice-versa. Each Sunday morning at 10, she calls him from the same spot. That's a key to the story.

When the woman's mother dies, "Carlito's" grandmother who had been looking after the young boy, the kid decides his options aren't good at that point and he needs to take a big chance to see if he can find his way to Los Angeles. Yes, you have to suspend your beliefs here a bit, as the odds on a kid actually being able to do that - all with no money! - are astronomical, but it's fun to watch him on his journey and how he makes do with what little he has. Some of the friendships he makes are truly touching and in a way, the best part of the film.

While writing this, it makes me flashback to the film "The Straight Story" when an old man on a tractor drives 300 miles across Iowa to see his long-lost brother. He is befriended by many people along the way, some who go to extraordinary lengths to help a stranger. That's the case here, too.

We also get a good profile of the mother, her best friend and a wonderful man she meets during this story, which takes place in one week. Each "chapter" of the film is broken down into days. Yes, the film is slightly preachy concerning immigration but the story is so good that one forgets about the political aspect, no matter side one is on.

This is a pretty solidly-made film, from directing to acting to the visuals but it's the story that will hook you in early on and you aren't able to let go until the end. The last half hour will keep you on the edge of your seat, wondering exactly things how will turn out. That's good, because it means the movie is entertaining. Definitely recommended.


One can never accuse this film of reaching classic heights, but one can truly say it tries very hard, a little too hard at times. Throughout the film, there are moments that transcend its obvious attempts to manipulate its audience, but it never rises to sublime status, like "Cinema Paradiso" did by tying a personal story to the evolution of a society that lost its innocence and the ability to dream. The parallels in that movie were delicately explored, as Toto's story and that of his beloved city traveled similar path. In "Moon" things could have moved beyond soap opera status. Unfortunately, the tears flow much too easily, even when the situation doesn't quite earn them.

A hard working mother has lost her connection with her 9 year old. Because of her move to the U.S., she lives in constant fear of not doing the best for her child, and to make matters worse, her little boy feels like he is not wanted anymore. Things become worse as events develop in such a way that he is forced to follow the path of many other immigrants and endure a series of ordeals to reunite with his parent.

Along the way, we are witness to many situations undocumented aliens are exposed to, and the film makes an honest attempt to present most people in a fair way, though there are some characterizations that are at best sketchy. The main points are there, but the subtlety is missed.

There are some good performances here, and the male actors do much better, as the young boy easily explores an amazing range of emotions. In addition there are two supporting actors that don't quite succumb to the stereotypes of the uneducated immigrant that most people associate with this type of situation. Eugenio Derbez in particular, does an amazing job as the hardened sidekick who discovers his heart might still be open to caring.

The part of the mother is underwritten and opportunities are not fully explored as we wish we could know more of what propelled her into taking the drastic option of moving to the United States. She is a hard worker, a loving mother, but mostly a shell of character, one who cries on cue, but rarely projects any substance.

In general, the film is a lovely social commentary that might reach a few people and open the way to understanding the plight of some members in society. We only wish we could see a more real portrayal of them.


Do not let the idea of illegal immigration keep you from this film. If you are strongly against illegal immigration, I still recommend watching the film. Overall, it was done extremely well. So even if you are against the characters crossing the border illegally, the movie still won't disappoint. It's extremely touching and the main story is just a son trying to get back to his mother, but faces many obstacles (the border, money issues, untrustworthy people) on the way. It's a lot better than a lot of the American movies that have been coming out weekly. However many people have complained about the reality of such events and the protocol at the Mexico-US border checkpoint, my only advice is to remember that it is a FILM! it never said it was a documentary, so aside from the several "unrealistic" events, the film is lovely and i do recommend it for everyone. if you want to see the more realistic ongoings, please watch Wetback, a documentary on undocumented immigrants from their homeland and crossing to America.


I just saw it. This is one of the best movies that I have ever, ever seen. It goes to my top five list. Regardless of your view on immigration issues, this is a wonderful and so very human story. I am anxious to finish writing this so I can rush back to research the cast, the locations and the even the music.

The casting was perfect, the kid simply amazing. I hadn't seen Kate del Castillo before and will now look for more of her films. Maria Rojo had a minor role, I hadn't seen anything with her since Danzon and I still have a fan-crush. I knew of Derbez only as a comic before and was impressed with his dramatic performance. It pleased me that America Ferrara agreed to an appearance in a small role. I hope to see more of Maya Zapata too, what a doll.

Go see it now so you can recommend it to everyone you know, as I have. It makes me want to study Spanish harder just to get more of this film. And, yeah, I cried too.


Sensitive director Patricia Riggen has, in LA MISMA LUNA (UNDER THE SAME MOON), succeeded in creating a story about the travails of the illegal immigrants from Mexico that serves as a reminder to all of us that one of the reasons for the obsession to take the risks of crossing the border is an attempt to find a better life. While this story concept is by no means a novel one, writer Ligiah Villalobos has provided a script that avoids taking sides, but instead concentrates on creating wholly believable characters caught in the web of immigration - from both sides of the wall. This little film from Mexico is, above all, a film about love, about courage and about resilience and is portrayed by a very fine cast in every role.

Rosario (Kate del Castillo) is a single mother who crossed the border four years earlier in order to support her young son Carlitos (a superb young actor, Adrian Alonso) and her ailing mother by working double jobs as a housekeeper in Los Angeles. She keeps in touch with Carlitos with weekly phone calls and sends him gifts as well as money and love. When Rosario's mother dies, Carlitos takes life into his own hands and plans to cross the border with a little help from his experience with a wise old lady Coyota (Carmen Salinas) who aids immigrants. With his savings in his backpack and his heart aimed toward Los Angeles he sets out on his journey and is thwarted at every turn. He is picked up by two Hispanic students from the US (America Ferrara and Jesse Garcia) whose attempt to transport Carlitos is halted at the border - with the little Carlitos hidden under the seat of the now towed away car. Carlos escapes from the car in El Paso, meets up with some illegal workers who are arrested, leaving the hidden Carlitos with a reluctant companion Enrique (Eugenio Derbez) who is able to aid Carlitos (reluctantly!) to escape to Los Angeles. Through many 'jobs' and untoward situations Carlitos finally finds his way to the spot where he hopes he will meet his mother.

The rhythms of the cinematography, the sets, the flavors of both sides of the border, and the music that accompanies the film all contribute to making this story real and believable - and VERY touching. While Kate del Castillo is the major star of the film, it is the performance by Adrian Alonso that remains in the mind long after the credits are shown. Some viewers may find this film a bit too 'novella-like', but the magic that Patricia Riggen pulls from her large cast and verismo directing style will touch the hearts of most everyone. A fine little reminder of the other aspects of the Immigration topic! Grady Harp


I went to a local independent film theater not knowing what to except to see my first independent film. I thought is was worth a try and it was! This movie made me laugh, cry, think, get angry, and remember that love is the strongest force in the world. Yes, there is underlining message here, about our borders, and the hardships illegals face, but the movie is more than that. It is well directed, logical, sensitive, real, very well acted film. There is a small part with "Ugly Betty's" America Ferrara in it, but don't see the movie for just the brief parts with America Ferrara in them. The main characters Rosaro, and her son Carlitos grab your heart and you hang on to every word. There is a character named Enrique that you first think what has he got to do with anything but before long you realize he is so important to the overall feel of the film and reminds us that we are all tied to each other in some way. This is the first movie I saw in a long time that I could not guess what was going to happen next. It was always the unexpected. From the description of the movie it might not sound like something that will give you that much emotion and entertainment,but "Under the Moon" will. This movie is well worth the time to see it and the price of the ticket.


There was only one other person in the theater when I recently saw this movie at a local multiplex late at night: An Hispanic gentleman. He was seated in the uppermost, dark corner of the theater. He had a deeply tanned sun-worn, old-before-his-time look (may have been in his 30's, 40's or 50's; hard to tell), wore somewhat tattered clothes, and kept his old cowboy hat titled low over his eyes. This is a plot-heavy movie whose ending becomes more obvious as the movie progresses. I thought the movie was well done, but as a second generation white American it did not have a particularly deep impact on me. However, as the movie went along, I became aware that this man was quietly weeping through the especially intense parts that dealt with the pain of separated families, and the sacrifices made by immigrants. I suspect this moviegoer was moved less by the movie itself, and more by the reality depicted. The movie thus rang true for me. It was the most powerful personal experience I have ever had at the movies, and I will always cherish it.


A hit at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival, first time director Patricia Riggen's Under The Same Moon or La Misma Luna (in Spanish) is that rare film that's about real people dealing with life's issues that resonate in today's hectic and cruel world. The drama centers on a little Mexican boy, Carlitos (Adrian Alonso), who lives with his ailing guelita (grandmother) in Mexico; when she suddenly dies in her sleep, he sets off to Los Angeles to be reunited with his mother, who's been working as a maid for rich folks. His plan to make the journey across the US/Mexico border doesn't pan out as easily as he had planned, running into stumbling blocks that involve street thugs, migrant workers, a heroin addict, near kidnapping and the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service).

Under The Same moon is a fantastic little Mexican-American film that subtlety transcends the hot topic of illegal immigration. But it's the story of Carlitos and his mother Rosario (Kate del Castillo) that makes this film a definite must see. Child actor Adrian Alonso stands out and basically carries the film, as he gives such a compelling and truthful performance; it's one of those young performances of recent years that will be remembered. Kate del Castillo, as well, exudes that motherly instinct in her tired, stressed-out expressions with such sadness, one can only feel for her. Eugenio Derbez adds some comic flair as the stranger that ends up helping Carlitos to find his mother. At first, he wants nothing to do with him as he, too, is in the states illegally, but then becomes a father figure, realizing the chiquito needs all the help he can get. Ugly Betty's America Ferrera, in a brief role, is good as one who smuggles Mexicans into the U.S. in order to pay for her college tuition. No matter what you think about illegal immigration, Under The Same Moon is a terrific movie about hope, love, survival and the yearning for family, no matter what the consequences. It also pulls at your heartstrings. It's a powerful little film that will move you and perhaps, bring you to tears.

Note: Under The Same Moon will most likely be playing in major Metropolitan cities, so if you can find it, I highly recommend this movie.


Unfortunately, it seems that many people are too blinded by their own political sympathies on either side of the fence to appreciate this movies for what it really was... A terrifically acted and brilliantly written screenplay. It's about familial love that overcomes mankind's boundaries (literally). True, the same story could have been (and has been) told in a more politically correct way, by having the families separated unjustly by Nazi or other intolerance. However, opening the window into this seldom explored and controversial world of illegal immigration gave it a fresh spin that makes it seem more relevant to the world we live in today. The story is told in a fresh and less-than-predictable way. My only wish is that I was fluent in Spanish so that I could have appreciated the film as it was meant to be seen.


Carlitos (very good acting by Adrián Alonso) has lost his mother (Kate del Castillo). She's not dead, no. She left him when he was five to work as an illegal housekeeper in Los Angeles. Though everyday she deals with major problems (two jobs, one of them with a bad employer, running away from the "migra") she has managed to have a decent living in order to send money to his impoverished family back in Mexico. However, when his grandmother dies, Carlitos decides to cross the US/Mexican border with the help of two young Chicanos (America Ferrara and Jesse García), since doña Carmen, la coyote (Carmen Salinas), refuses to help him, due to a promise made to Rosario, Carlito's mother, even though she handles an illegal crossing business. However, things for him will get complicated right from the beginning, starting a dangerous, but beautiful and rich travel from his impoverished Mexico to the modern L.A., meeting a lot of people that, somehow, try to help him on his way to his mother, though things won't be easy at all.

This is not just a simple movie. It tries to tell a simple story, but is in this simple story that lies a major problem: the illegal immigration in the U.S. Beautifully directed by Patricia Riggen and with a great script by Ligiah Villalobos, the film is a touching, completely different road movie, and a totally worth watching cinematographic experience. It's not perfect, being a little "too Mexican" (it's a little kind of a Mexican telenovela), but it is a major, major film.


Little Carlitos has a problem. He has been left home with his grandma because his mother, Rosario, has gone to Los Angeles to work. One thing though, Rosario never lets a Sunday go by without calling her son in Mexico at 10am. She also sends presents that make her son the envy of the town where he lives. Carlitos is much more mature than his nine years. He is savvy of how things work.

Carlitos has made friends with Dona Carmen, a lady that is in charge of the 'coyotes' that bring illegal Mexicans across the border, for a price. She is reluctant to let the little boy try to go North because of the dangers ahead. Carlitos grandma's sudden death gives him the opportunity to try his luck. Help comes in the shape of a Chicano couple that volunteer to take the boy through the border at El Paso. Unfortunately, they are detained because they show as being delinquent in the payment of traffic fines. Carlitos decides he must go on his own.

At this point, the film turns into a 'road picture' because along the way, Carlitos will encounter all kinds of people. In general, the Americans he meets are bad. He clings to another Mexican that started being unfriendly, but in the end he offers a sacrifice to the boy that was completely unexpected because of he sees in the boy the person he would like to be. A happy ending is in store for the boy and his mother.

"La misma luna" is a well intentioned film that proved to be a crowd pleaser at Sundance, the year it was presented there. Directed by Patricia Riggen, and written by Ligiah Villalobos, the film aims to please the audiences which have been targeted to reach. America Ferrera, who appears in a small role, better known for her role in "Ugly Betty", is credited as one of the producers.

The best thing in the film are Adrian Alonso and Eugenio Derbez. As Enrique, talented Mexican actor Mr. Derbez, gives one of his excellent performances. Adrian Alonso, who is older than the boy in the picture wins the audience's heart because of his precociousness and determination to find his mother in a strange land. Wonderful Kate Del Castillo plays Rosario, the Mexican immigrant working as a domestic and being taken advantage by wealthy employers that only want to exploit her and pay nothing in return. Carmen Salinas, a good Mexican character actress is seen as Dona Carmen, the 'coyote' coordinating lady.

The cinematography by Checco Varese takes us from Mexico into the United States along the routes traveled by Carlitos and Enrique before landing in Los Angeles. The musical score is by Carlo Siliotto. The film will please the viewer because in spite of its implausible plot, it has its heart in the right place and sends a positive message about the bond between a boy and his mother.


This is the story about a young child who was separate by his mother. The reason behind this is because the mother was trying to get papers for her son to come to America. So the mother goes to America, while the kid is in Mexico with his grandmother. After having his grandmother die, the child finds out that he is going to be given away to some annoying couple across the street that would care less about the kid. So this kid makes the daring journey across the Mexican border... in a week.

Yeah, if I recall correctly, there have been Mexicans who have taken months, even years to get across the border and you are telling me that this nine-year old kid is able to get across the border, maintaining that adorable look that all young girls will just gaze at? I know that this is based on a work of fiction, but the keyword is "fiction" not "fantasy." The whole purpose for the kid to get across the border in a week was because every Sunday, he would call his mother on a pay phone, tell her how much she loved her, miss her, and cry over her. The kid had to get to where his mother was in a week so that way the mother will not start freaking out.

None the less, this movie is still well-done. I mean, for an indie movie, it is pretty much solid in terms of the acting, direction, and the way things were filmed. There are no big names in this film, (except for a total of three minutes with America Ferrera) so you are more focused on the story line and the motifs/themes of this film. And there are some heart-touching plots in this film that I thought would be overrated, but ended up pretty good and higher than what I expected. And the movie moved not too quickly, but at a good pace to where you did not get bored all the time and you were thrilled to know if the kid will find his mother or not.

Sometimes the movie does go off in that path as if this movie was made by amateurs that written a film for a textbook. Most of the characters speak Spanish, but not all. Do not watch this film if you want to learn about Spanish culture. Because it the background of the film was just, enough, to supply it. They showed a Mexican or two getting treated unfair, and the police attacking some Mexicans. The whole purpose of the film is just to show this boy's adventure.

This is a low seven for me.