Extremely few comedians are successful, even fewer for more than a year or two and the majority of those few that are still working the large venues, who prove themselves to be other than just some flash-in-the-pan dressed up in an ill-fitting suit of success by an aggressive publicity team and a gullible, entertainment starved audience; usually build their careers on one or two jokes that they've turned into their shtick: they have a quirky personality that is charming or, at least, familiar. Essentially they're one-trick-ponies with long legs. This isn't something I was really thinking about in much detail until I watched the exception to all these rules: George Carlin in Life Is Worth Losing. Here is a man who is nearing seventy years old (as of this writing), his fiftieth year in show business and he presents us with his finest, most polished work of all. He is one of those exceptionally rare breeds, in any given professional field, who not only improves with time, but substantially so to an extent that you clearly see all of his work until now has been the foundation for the masterpiece he offers us now. Not one to be particularly impressed by the vast majority of so-called "great" things, it took me a while after my first viewing of Life Is Worth Losing to absorb what I had seen and several repeated viewings shortly thereafter to understand I was witnessing a truly great comedian, a genius, THE master of his craft. In a world where the vast majority of "great entertainment" is hyped up bullsh*t and mediocrity, a passing fad at best that sours on your second taste if not turning bitterly toxic, George Carlin is a man who shows us what real, adult comedy should be: a mixture of cleverly constructed fun and intelligent material that makes you think about our comically tragic existence. This is George's best performance and material so far, his most thoughtful, thought out, thought provoking and heartfelt.

I really expected to see and hear universal applause and praise for this great work. Instead, I was surprised to hear and read so many negative reviews about this masterpiece. Surely these can't be the same George Carlin fans who loved his work before. Especially those who said this work was "bitter". If anything I found his latest offering to be a lot less angry than most of his previous work and more thoughtful. Then I realized what all the fuss was about: in this performance George is holding up the biggest mirror he's held up so far. He's forcing more Americans to look (and laugh if they have the courage) at themselves than he ever has before. He leaves very few stones unturned in his satirical offering. For a start he talks about a lot of Americans right off the bat when he discusses obesity, as a third of Americans are classified as medically obese and about half of those as morbidly obese, according to the latest American Medical Association studies. He also talks about mindless consumerism. Between these two subjects he's covered the vast majority of Americans. And since Americans are becoming more dimwitted and righteous, the bulk of them will not laugh at themselves, the purpose of intelligent humor but prefer the sadistic, mean spirited "humor" they see on television (which George satirizes in "The All-Suicide TV Channel") or read in those idiotic emails too many people forward to everyone in their address book with titles like "10 jokes about rag-heads" or "Stop complaining you homeless person". (Some of these atrocious emails that preach intolerance are erroneously attributed to George Carlin but in fact are written by other people, none of whom have the courage to take credit for these awful, embarrassingly written pieces. Sources: see www.snopes.com or www.georgecarlin.com)

If you watch "Life is WorthLosing" for just the opening and closing segments, you will see pure brilliance. The opening segment "A Modern Man" is a work of genius and you will be awestruck by George's mastery of the English language as well as his selection of timely material. The closing segment "Coast to Coast Emergency" is actually a very hopeful piece but I think too many people get confused by it because he's discussing the bitterness of the average person and is revealing that the solution to most people's unhappiness is to rid themselves of their own bitterness. Don't listen to the critics of this work, it's a fantastic piece. Typical of the vast majority of naysayers, they are really talking about themselves when they describe George as "bitter". It's why it is always a risk to tell the truth because most people want to kill the messenger that brings them bad news, especially when that "news" (intentional ignorance actually) is about themselves.

This is George Carlin at his polished, intellectual best. It is a masterpiece of comic genius that you will want to add to your library and watch again and again; especially after one of those too frequently increasing moments of realizing the dumbing-down of your fellow countrymen and women is an alarming reality.


Many people on both this site and Amazon have claimed that "Life is Worth Losing" is George Carlin's worst comedy performance. One reviewer claims he has simply turned into a bitter misanthrope - but I don't think that's very fair. I thought "Life is Worth Losing" was indeed one of Carlin's harshest acts, but it was also very funny.

His opening, "Modern Man," is a four-minute mind-bending string of words (similar to the opening of "Complaints and Grievances") which is hilarious and almost unbelievable - whoever hears this and thinks Carlin is "losing it" must be kidding! After this he begins dissecting American life and basically thrashing about the people of our nation with his words - labeling Americans as fat, mall-loving idiots. And some might be offended by this, but that's why he's George Carlin.

Carlin may be getting older but I really fail to see how he's "falling apart" as a comedian here - I thought it was a great show and although it's his most bitter act I've heard, a lot of it is also totally true.


Brilliant. Edgier than ever. I hope someone has taken down his opening monologue and posts it in the Memorable Quotes area. Truly one of the supreme comic geniuses of our time. I particularly enjoyed the hypothesizing about "Suicide TV," and the skewering of America's obsession with all things sensationalized. Nobody is ever safe from Carlin's wit and command of the English language, and he wouldn't have it any other way. Interesting to see how he has elaborated on elements of his live stage act from two years ago. I also appreciated how there was much, much less time devoted to non sequiturs and more ramblings that were all connected, often in a very twisted and disturbing way. Here's hoping for more Carlin specials to come.


George Carlin remains the King of HBO comedy and refuses to relinquish his crown with GEORGE CARLIN: LIFE IS WORTH LOSING. Carlin continues to be the master observer of all that is good and evil and twisted in the world. He opened this set with an extremely long poem about himself, utilizing every pop-cliché that we have become accustomed to hearing these days and has a way of making most of these clichés sound banal and silly. Carlin also does something in this special that I liked that he rarely does: he referenced a joke from an earlier concert because he got mail from people who didn't understand it and chose to explain it here. You don't see that often. This show, like all of Carlin's shows, is scathingly accurate and roll-on-the-floor funny, but this one seems to have a darker theme floating over it than most of his shows. The majority of the material seems to be centered around subjects like death, dying, suicide, murder, and other cheery topics, yet, as always when watching George, I found myself laughing my ass off and agreeing with everything he says because after all these years of pushing the comedic envelope, one constant that has never changed with George is that everything he says is absolutely correct.


I agree with one of the earlier posts that ppl must be getting offended 'cause he's officially made fun of everyone and if he hadn't yet, then this routine touched that last nerve on the so-called "hard-core" supporters that think that his best yrs are behind him.

My favorite is one guy who thought that after he started attacking religion that his routine went down hill and why? Because he's some full-of-himself, "moralistic", religious nut himself and got offended... Obviously he didn't take in the message George has been sending all along... to take a step back, realize what's going on around us, and most importantly, LAUGH!!!! This was a very ingeniously performed routine that took a shot at all the ills of pop-culture, the morbid curiosity of your average person, and ultimately the extreme human behavior(exclusive to us so-called "civilized" beings) that shows how primitive we really are...

And for those of you that don't think there's punchlines how 'bout when he talks 'bout "scarfing" and throws in the pun, "think of how many kids are trying to pull this one off" Also he touches on several current topics like obesity, stupidity, and consumerism that are just becoming too much of an issue to ignore, I mean the whole "pretty soon all you'll need to get into college is a pencil" is so true, I mean I know that i'm not as "enlightened" or "educated" as I should be and I know that if I had the same study habits/dedication towards school just 20yrs ago there's no way I'd be able to get a college degree but now i'm just a couple months away from graduating college, just going to show that they're definitely lowering the standards, I mean I'm no dummy either, but still, getting into and graduating college is becoming less of a big deal 'cause the best way to help "educate" the ppl is to lower the standards....

The obesity part... OMG... Being in Europe now, yes there are obese ppl, but nothing like the "interstate buses" you see in the US, especially in the Southeastern states...

And as for consumerism, while he's touched on the subject several times the "spending money we don't have on things we don't need" is just becoming more and more evident in society! I could go on and on, but the ultimate genius of this bit is how society is "going to the dogs" and he touches on this not only in the Suicide Reality TV bit, but also the Eliminating Electricity to bring us back to primitive times and finally the Nationwide Natural Disaster bit as well as just the whole routine shows us what's wrong with society and that it's only getting worse, so what should we do about it... SIT BACK AND ENJOY THE RIDE!!!!


This was no unlucky 13. It was just as good as the previous 12. Although the comedy wasn't as intense as in previous years, people have been going to not only see George the comedian, but also George the storyteller. Carlin has been around for a long time and has seen a lot of things. He likes to express his feelings and bring up things that most people take for granted. Essentially people listen to Carlin to laugh and also to learn something. So if you feel that this wasn't good because it wasn't as comedic, then i think you completely missed the purpose. George may not have been as quick as he used to be because his age and drug use has taken its toll. Overall I rate this a 7.


We had a gasoline shortage in 2000 and in August of 2006 and now we have yet another gasoline problem. I predict that we will soon be paying $5 per gallon and everything will become prohibitively expensive.

People, if you own a bicycle, take care. Lock it in your garage with the front wheel removed. You may have to use it to go to work. If a couple owns a business, look for a bicycle built for two.

In the meantime, the solution is TRICYCLES, for those of us who never learned to ride a two-wheeler. Tricycles don't use gas. Four of them can fit into a parking space. The effort required to pedal it would cause people to lose weight and build muscle. Think how this would benefit marriages. Couples on the verge of divorce would reunite; they would see less of each other, thereby eliminating some of the reasons for arguments. It's hard to engage in adultery since a tricycle doesn't have a back seat.

The children, taken care of by a stay-at-home mother, would have to learn all the games we played as children to keep ourselves amused. We played Tag, Ring A Leeveeo, Statues, Simon Says, Touch Football, Stick Ball, Jacks, etc., which prevented the childhood obesity which is so prevalent today.

Renee Sinrod, Clearwater, Florida


My husband and I are long time fans of George Carlin. This was a George Carlin that I had never seen in stand-up and I hope I never see again. His non-funny diatribe about human depravity and his crude discussion of human fragility was unsettling and I found it difficult to believe anyone in the audience was laughing. George is certainly one of the brightest comedians around and most of what he discussed resides in truth. But the old George could take that truth and make it funny. We did not find any of this act funny - only dark and depressing. George offered a view of the future without hope and although his view may be correct, I would prefer to hold out for a tab bit of hope. Either George goes back to pot before his next stand-up or I shall have to take it up to tolerate his new very dark attempts at humor. For god sake, lighten up George!


I saw Ralphie May at a show in Houston and he said the same thing. I didn't believe him and forked out the $120 bux for 2 tix and went to see him. I took my wife. I have always lived and breathed Carlin and have been known to spit out a Carlin line or 2 from years past, often...I was soooo incredibly disappointed. Last night I watched this HBO special since his road material is usually different when he does the big show. It was a carbon copy of the horrible act I saw here. I hope he can make a turnaround, but sadly, I do not think its going to happen. I guess he's going to just talk about the all suicide channel for another 5 years. What ever happened to the first stage (hippy) and second (sports and disasters) phases of his career? We'll miss ya George...


All I have to say is that "Life Is Worth Losing", if you had to sit through George Carlin's new stand up. I am a huge fan of his past HBO stand up's but this one made me go to sleep. He has just lost his touch, it's a shame what rehab will do to you. The comedy was really just not there, the delivery was not sharp, stuttering over lines, reading of cues, just not Carlin humor. Yes the show had it's up's, but very few, and none of them where worth repeating the next day. I hope this new clean cut Carlin takes a drink and a couple pills, because this is not the guy that gave us such great stand up's as, "You are all Diseased", "Complaints and Grievances", "Jammin' In New York", "Doing It Again". George, please give us the old pi**ed off, grumpy Carlin that everybody loves.


As someone who's seen a couple of George Carlin shows and thought them hilarious, this stand-up special was utterly dismal. I admire George Carlin's attempts at misanthropic social commentary and humor, but this show was way too heavy on misanthropy and almost empty on humor. Carlin does not make any jokes or punchlines at all, nor does he attempt to make any humorous statement in what can only be called an ugly and hateful rant. His waxes rhapsodic about suicide rates and sexual perversions, but only describes them, with no attempt to make jokes about them or connect these morbid topics with the audience, much less himself. In order to be funny, he would have to connect his topics with a joke, or at least make some flippant remark that the audience could find ironic or cheeky. Good satire looks for irony in their topics, and Carlin just describes his topics without connecting them to the greater sphere of the human experience, with the irony serving to make the comment humorous. Carlin doesn't try at all to be funny; he just harangues and blathers on. Carlin's laziness is apparent and frankly insulting; misanthropy is a wonderful topic for a humorist to focus on, but in order to be entertaining, it must be FUNNY! That is why misanthropes like Jonathan Swift and Mark Twain are still read and beloved today. Carlin's rants have no point other than to vent his frustrations and shock his audience. It is pathetic and saddening, as Carlin now appears to be in the twilight of his career. This is an inauspicious end for one of the best humorists of the twentieth century. I hope Carlin will work harder to be funny the next time around.


Robert Newton returns once again to his famous role from TREASURE ISLAND, that of Long John Silver. Once more he chews the scenery with gusto and is just grand fun to watch in this particular role any time you can catch him.

This time Long John sets out to save young Jim Hawkins (played by Kit Taylor who sadly doesn't possess the memorable screen presence that his predecessor Bobby Driscoll put into the role) from a cutthroat pirate named "El Toro" Mendoza (Lloyd Berrell) but also added into the mix are a slightly more memorable crew of pirates following after Long John's lead and Long John's frequently comedic interactions with his main squeeze Purity Pinker (Connie Gilchrist), who has her eyes firmly set on marriage and settling down the old sea Captain. Things become truly adventurous when the band of pirates set out for a return to Treasure Island and meet up with some most unexpected surprises and obstacles along the way.

In many ways, this unofficial sequel to the classic Walt Disney film, has a more gritty, real down to Earth feel about it although it really adds little new to the mix. Still any boy who ever dreamed of pirates and searching for lost treasure should find much to enjoy here. Great fun overall, Newton is just a pure delight to watch in this entertaining, surprisingly well-written and executed boys fantasy brought to life.


Very cheesy, direct to video B-movie. Although the acting was pretty good. There were a lot of first rate actors in the movie Ernie Hudson, Nia Long, Donnie Wahlberg, etc. The story was cheesy and simplistic. It was not very interesting and although I actually watched the whole thing I was rather bored with it. I can see why this was not distributed in movie theaters. I don't think it would have done very well. My advice is don't spend your hard earned money to rent this. Wait for it to come on cable or borrow it from somebody who has already wasted their money on it like I did.


I happened to catch this movie last night on tv. Nevertheless, it was sunday and I live in a town where tumbleweeds are more lively than the actual citizens. Anyway, this movie was pure unadultered crap. The direction was crap, some decent acting, and the sets looked like those of a shitty american soap opera. This movie was a joke, if I kept on watching it was because my only other option was some Martha Stewart show, and i Can't put up with that since my liver is about to give up on me. Well, skip this at all costs, it is not worth a penny.


It's the wee hours on Sunday night / Monday morning, and channel-surfing brought up this movie. It didn't seem too bad, and in fact, I was really enjoying it. I was curious about who played Rick, and naturally went to IMDb, and I found out that I should hate this movie, if I can trust most of the other reviewers. Phooey on them --- I LIKED IT!! It kept my attention, stuff was always happening, heck, I had fun! That's what I watch movies for -- fun. I don't know about direction, plot holes and all that other jive -- save that for English class and Miss Pruneface. I mean, what more do you want from a movie: vertigo, Tim Lister AND Tony Todd, a drum magazine in a 9mm pistol, jeez, this movie had it ALL!


This movie was so awful that it inspired me to sign into IMDb after not doing so for a couple of years.

For the life of me, I can't understand why HBO would buy the rights to show this "film". ... (think Walker Texas Ranger type storyline, script, and dialog)

The director assembled an encore cast headlined by Terrance Howard, Donnie Wahlberg, and beautiful Nia Long. However, as another poster mentioned, even the all star cast of actors couldn't save the lame script and the predictable "plot twists".

This was an awful movie. I'm glad that I watched it on HBO so I only wasted my time and not my money.


This is definitely one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Bad dialogue, overacting by the leads and a ridiculous story make for a cable TV movie. It wouldn't have made any money theatrically. The ending seemed forced and contrite. The movie doesn't explain why Freddy is afraid of heights or why he lied to Carmen when they first met. This movie has many negative stereotypes, not only of African-Americans but of music industry people, especially the Hip-Hop music world. Greed isn't foremost in every music mogul's mind. I don't understand the title change. The original title of "Never 2 Big" made more sense. Freddy's little catchphrase was only used a couple of times in the movie.


As hard as Ernie Hudson, Nia Long, and Terrance Howard tried they couldn't do enough to save this Luke-warm movie. As a matter of fact, if it were not for the afore-mentioned actors I would have given this movie a 2 or 3. The acting in this movie was borderline terrible, the directing was even worse, and whoever wrote the script completely failed. This was the most unintriguing who-dun-it film I've watched in some time. The climactic scenes were anti-climactic, the "twist" was ho-hum if not predictable, and the ending was just criminal. This movie seemed to be something more for start up actors as opposed to the seasoned actors in the movie. It was a nice try, but it just didn't meet the mark.


I have to say that butter was the greatest movies ever made. I am not joking when I say this. Using the talents of Zeus, Ernie Hudson, and Tony Todd was pure gold. Now, maybe I am biased when I rate this movie a 10, but I was on the edge of my seat in this non-stop thriller. I happen to love these three actors and having them work together was icing on the cake. Ernie Hudson put in an Oscar winning performance and Tony Todd and Zeus were great as Ernie's right hand men. The ending was a classic similar to the ending of Reservoir Dogs. All I can say is "It's butter baby!"


84 minutes b/w movie by Fred the Hammer Williamson. It won't win any screen guild awards but no one expects it to. You see it to watch Jim Kelly, Richard Roundtree, Jim Brown, and Fred Williamson kick a$$. That's what they do. The 2 minute car ride on the BQE with no words could have been done away with and the funky dog is used too much. I liked the movie. Bad guys pi** them off, bad guys get killed. That simple.


One Down, Two to Go may rank a few notches beneath other celluloid team-ups with these stars, but it definitlely has it's share of fun moments. Jim Kelly's character is wounded for most of the movie, but it's always a pleasure to watch big bad Jim "SLAUGHTER" Brown team-up with Fred "The HAMMER" Williamson! Especially when Richard "SHAFT" Roundtree is in the mix! One Down is no Three the Hard Way, but there's just nothing like the spectacle of the Hammer uttering the immortal line "Back off Mojo! You may know Kung Fu but I know Gun Fu!"! LOL! One Down, Two to Go is a cheesy blast of fun that goes best with favorite beverages, good popcorn, and a room full of rowdy B-movie lovers.


With this once-in-a-lifetime cast (reuniting the four greatest blaxploitation stars of the early seventies), this picture should be more fun than it is. Someone seems to have drained the life out of these performers; Jim Brown, in particular, comes off very badly (judging only from this movie, you'd come to the conclusion that he can't act). The film is also poorly structured, keeping the stars away from each other (and from any enjoyable interaction) for laaaaarge periods of time. And Williamson must have really had it in for Jim Kelly; he barely gives him 1/5 of the screen time devoted to the other leads, and he features him in only two brief fight scenes (he even loses in one of them!). Cool score, though. (*1/2)


You would expect a little more effort from Fred Williamson, but this one just ain't happening. The fact that it looks like it was shot on someone's home video recorder doesn't bother me. That fact that Jim Brown, Jim Kelly, Richard Roundtree and Joe Spinell show up while the movie still sucks does. What went wrong? It starts off very good, with a real life karate match that was probably shot in Madison Square Garden. After that, it's all down the drain. As for the most absurd scene? A wounded Jim Kelly being taken to a hideout while a love song plays in the background. That song by R&B singer and keyboardist Rodney Franklin is the only highlight of the movie.

Score, 2 out of 10 Stars


Four top actors from the 70s blaxploitation era starred in what should be considered as a reunion. It looked like this film was made and released way too late long after the genre's heydays. Obviously, it doesn't feel like a classic 70s show at all. Don't expect much from Jim Kelly, who gets shot twice in the shoulder and remains helpless throughout the rest of the film. That leaves Williamson and Brown to do the bidding. They seemed to be veterans together in doing this. Unfortunately, the awful slow pace of the action bogs this one down along with a serious lack of originality and too many jazzy soul tunes interferes the whole thing. Richard Roundtree (SHAFT) only appears during the final minutes. The ending was absolutely catchy, and should've proven something about the actors' future following the making of this picture. It's interesting to note that the two Jims and Fred Williamson (who directed this) were cast together in THREE THE HARD WAY, which wasn't the greatest 70s blaxploitation movie around. ONE DOWN, TWO TO GO was a nice try at reviving the soul-crazed genre out of the grave, but it fails miserably at the end.


In this hoped for "revival" of the Blaxploitation genre, you have the superstars of Black '70s cinema: Jim Brown (always with the biggest gun with the longest barrel), Jim Kelly (who I always thought was a posturing joke), Richard Roundtree (still looking good post-Shaft), and Fred "Da Hammer" Williamson (so cool, he has ice dripping down his back!).

Only Roundtree has kept his actor's dignity of the four. Fred still cranks out his Po Boy Productions straight to video flicks, but I will say he still does well in Europe. These low budget films actually are profitable there. I'll give him that. Brown has had his own share of woes in the press in recent years and just walks through this one. Jim Kelly has to be thee WORST actor of the group. GI Joe (with the Kung-Fu grip) could whoop him easily. (In one scene, his woman is getting gang-banged, and he's getting his KF stance on against one bad guy). And Roundtree didn't embarass himself, and has at least has maintained a long list of character roles, most notably the "Shaft" update with Samual L. Jackson in 2000.

This is one turd of a movie, lovingly directed by Williamson. Bland direction, hokey lines, low budget hoettas, you name it. Yet it's considered a cult favorite, by whom I don't know. I'll skip the plot. It's so banal it doesn't bear repeating. On the level of a Cynthia Rothrock film. But the best scene is at the end when Fred "Hammer" sticks one of his trademark cigars into a pooch's mouth.

So there you have it. Gets a 2 out of 5 from me.

And most of the soundtrack was "moonlighted" by Jazz Fusion keyboardist Rodney Franklin, but credited to others.


There are not enough superlatives to describe this entertainment event. Antonio Banderas shines on EVITA and PHANTOM OF THE OPERA(with Sarah Brightman no less!). Glenn Glose radiates on SUNSET BOULEVARD songs. Elaine Paige astounds musically. A new group called Boyzone, young men all dressed in white - makes one wonder aloud, when will they take America by storm? Donny Osmond repeats his JOSEPH AND THE AMAZING TECHNICOLOR DREAMCOAT spectaculars! Kiri Te Kanawa is also a marvel as is Michael Ball (who uplifts the most with his "Love Changes Everything" - which literally had me dancing on my living room floor because of the gospel choir backup). Bonnie Tyler will amaze with her motorcycle rock rouser and Sarah Brightman - as always - is beyond description. Rent buy or borrow (as I did from the Library) this visually and auditory treat...I loved every second. Webber's birthday present is a gift from heaven!


If you are a die-hard Andrew Lloyd Webber fan like myself, this is an absolute must-have for the permanent collection. I loved every minute of it. Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber's 50th Birthday Celebration was the night to remember.

Sarah Brightman sang beautifully, as she soared into the stratosphere in the "Phantom of the Opera" duet with Antonio Banderas. Donny Osmond offered clean phrasing and vocalism in his selection from "Joseph and the Technicolored Amazing Dreamcoat." Glenn Close brought Hollywood style and charisma to her selections from "Sunset Boulevard." Julian Lloyd Webber brought technical mastery and pitch-perfect intonation to the "Varations for Cello and Orchestra" piece.

And then, almost towards the very end, Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber himself came out and personally introduced Dame Kiri Te Kanawa to the audience. Dame Kiri, a few moments later, sang the world premiere of his new song, "The Heart is Slow to Learn," intended for the sequel to his magnum opus, "The Phantom of the Opera." Well, it was in a word, stunning. Te Kanawa sang passionately, and with the sincerity a famous classical performer would bring to Wagner or Puccini. Absolutely breathtaking.

And then, the entire cast came out to sing "Happy Birthday" to Sir Andrew, with Kiri Te Kanawa and Sarah Brightman soaring above the entire orchestra and chorus. There was no dry eye in the audience.

An absolutely wonderful performance!


The best ALW music performed by the greatest musicians and singers on the magnificent stage of Albert Hall - it is enough to make a delightful concert. Add impressive decorations, spirited acting of the performers and excellent choirs and dancers - and you will get a superb show. During two hours you can enjoy lovely Joseph (with Donny Osmond, of course), clever Variations (very artistically played by Julian Lloyd Webber), dramatic Evita (only Paige's unique voice can reveal full splendor of Don't cry for me Argentina, and Antonio Banderas is the best Che ever), dynamic Starlight Express, solemn Requiem, passionate Jesus Christ Superstar (even though this musical is not among my favourite Webber's works I couldn't but admire Michael Ball singing Gethsemane), beautiful and mysterious The Phantom of the Opera with exquisite Sarah Brightman as Christine and Banderas proving that he can act Eric (AND HE CAN!), impressive Sunset Boulevard with remarkable Glenn Close, interesting Whistle Down the Wind (Tina Arena, Bonnie Tyler, Boyzone, Michael Ball sang differently styled fragments), wonderful Love Changes Everything (Michael Ball once again at his best), and of course famous Memory (another unforgettable performance from Elaine Paige). And the concert had to be so grand for the sake of Sir Andrew. I adore the moment when the entire cast sings `Happy birthday' to him. A charming scene! Furthermore, ALW presented his new masterpiece The Heart Is Slow to Learn sang beautifully by Dame Kiri Te Kanawa, and then a young star Lottie Mayor performed Whistle Down the Wind in the most engaging manner with Sir Andrew himself at the piano. My favourite Jellicle Ball (Cats) was used as the brilliant conclusion of the concert. It's a show to enjoy again and again and again!


The only reason I bought this film was to see Mr. Banderas in the singing role he was meant to play. I'm sick of hearing that he overly sang or his costume was not good enough. The only reason no one liked him is because he's a Latino, fair and square. He has the voice, looks and talent yet was denied the starring role in the film to an actor with no vocal talent whats so ever. Luckily anyone who can appreciate the great talent of this man can see how great of a singer he is. And another note it was great to see Glenn Close as Norma Desmond, The original Sunset Blvd is my favorite film and she comes off very well as the deranged character.


When I watch a DVD I really like to watch it from start to end without skipping anything.

With this presentation I felt like 1 hour was great, a half hour was ok, and another half hour was poor. I'm sure if I owned this DVD I'd always wish to skip by the poorer stuff.

I really liked Donny Osmond, Elaine Page, Michael Ball and the various "Cats" songs and the song by Boy Zone.

I was greatly irritated that they let Antonio Banderas sing the Phantom. He just does not have the voice for Phantom of the Opera. His Evita song was OK though.

There were also a couple of songs by people that I did not recognize that had very bad unmusical voices.

Sarah Brightman's voice is good but her facial expressions looked a bit odd.

DVD lovers will find the Dolby 5.1 track on the DVD sounds very flat. It feels more like Dolby 2.0 or even Dolby mono at times.

So overall I'd give it 7/10. Since the best parts can be found on Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat and on Cats (both of which I own already) I don't feel compelled to buy this DVD. It is worth watching. However, I'd only recommend buying it if you don't have any of the other Andrew Lloyd Weber DVDs.


...and so is "Luv". What might've been a mod, madcap romantic comedy is just an exercise in shouting (you'll never forget that Jack Lemmon plays "Harry"--it's all you hear from the other performers). A suicidal man is brought down from a bridge-railing by an old school friend who has other plans for the guy: fix him up with his unhappy wife so he can marry a fitness enthusiast. Had possibilities, few of which are realized. One is tempted to put some of the blame for this mess on Lemmon (who does some uncharacteristically sloppy slapstick here), but Clive Donner's direction should bear the brunt of it--he has no clue how to present this story. Based on the play, "Luv" has bright opening moments but soon sinks into theatrical clichés, the kind that creak and wheeze with age. Worse, it's a visual insult, with tatty color photography that only serves to expose the cheap production. What a shame! Lemmon and Peter Falk (so good together in the earlier "Great Race") make no music together, and Elaine May struggles for dignity. I struggled through "Luv" and laughed maybe three times. *1/2 from ****


(Contains spoilers)

This satire on new-fangled but repressed citizens was a big hit on Broadway in front of the right audience (future Woody Allen fans). Perhaps it was not a good idea to put it on the big screen with a star cast, a scenery worthy of a Spielberg film and in cinemascope, no less. Absurd theater and pantomime never work on screen. Add a car-chase and an incomprehensible amount of slapstick and you understand why this film flopped. The plot in itself is good: Winner-type Milt Manville (Peter Falk) wants to get rid of his wife Ellen (Elaine May) and marry his sweetheart Linda. So he hires loser-type Harry Berlin (Jack Lemmon) to become Ellen's second husband. Before long Milt and Ellen realize their new spouses are losers and reunite. Since Harry won't leave they decide to kill him.

Peter Falk's performance is adroit and smooth. His Milt is a true braggart: he shows off with his golden watch, his silk underwear and his terrace-house. He styles himself as "broker" although the source of his income is a flourishing second-hand trade ("A fortune is waiting for us in garbage-cans!"). Harry, on the other hand, is the classic loser. Top boy in school, high-flying plans. Drinks & drugs & girls & gurus. Now it's "why me?" and he contemplates suicide.

Milt tries to make Ellen palatable to Harry. He smartens her up and lauds her talents: She represents her married life diagrammatically. Milt sells Harry as intellectual: "He nearly wrote a book!" and cajoles Ellen into falling in love with him despite his tics and unsavory table-manners. But it's not before Ellen and Harry discover they have common interests (flamenco) that two hearts beat like one. There are some inspired moments when the lovebirds place confidence in each other. Ellen recklessly declares things like: " I wish I were a lesbian" and "I'm too intelligent. Men feel threatened". They go to an amusement-park and lead a "profound" conversation about their miserable childhood. During the divorce-suit Milt tries to beat them at their own game "I have been flogged!" - in vain: the judge allows him to keep nothing but his underwear...

The funniest scene in the film shows Ellen and Harry during their honeymoon in Niagara Falls: She asks him intimate questions - and he answers them down to the last detail. They test their love: He steps on her feet, she cuts his suspenders, he throws her mink-coat in the flood...But soon Milt and Ellen are disillusioned. Linda spends her days in bed, curlers in her hair, and refuses to pay maintenance for her husband's ex-wife. Harry too has an aversion to work and plans to study medicine instead...

There is much witty dialogue in this film. My favorite moment comes when Ellen examines her diagrams and jumps to the conclusion: " You love exclusively Milt - you are gay!". Lemmon's facial expression when he considers this alternative for a very long second is priceless, but sadly those moments are rare. An overdose of slapstick quells any delicacy of feeling. Lemmon looks half-starved, he went down to 136 pounds - of the films he made between 1962 and 68 this is the only one I hesitate to recommend. I doubt that you will love this film in its entirety, better concentrate on its details. It parodies the love-life in a hedonistic but insecure society ten years before ANNIE HALL.


I have to say the same thing about this film that I said about "The Happening" (from the same year, coincidentally), and that's that you almost have to hate it BITTERLY not to like it A LITTLE. I agree about a lot of the slapstick being out of place (though not even all of THAT). I think there's at least one good thing about Harry's "fits" (his hysterical blindness and deafness and so on) and that's seeing Peter Falk react to them in his usual low-key way. Maybe "Harry" WASN'T the best part for Jack Lemmon, I don't know, but Falk and Elaine May really made the most of their roles. And even Nina Wayne (the sister of Carol Wayne, I imagine), who had a much smaller part, makes the most of her comical "dumb blonde" role, without genuinely copying her sister. And of course, it has several great character actors - Eddie Mayehoff, Severn Darden (in a nearly silent role) and Paul Hartman (in a completely silent one). One of the best scenes has Harry reciting "Star Light, Star Bright" in an aggravated Jack Lemmon voice (which clashes with the poem completely, of course), and it's also the scene where Ellen wishes on the star by saying, "I wish I were a lesbian, that's what I wish. Then I wouldn't have these demeaning problems." Harry : You'd have other problems. Like picking up girls. Ellen : That's easy. You just have to be a liar and a hypocrite. Harry : It's not as easy as that. Do you know what a haircut costs these days? Again, on the one hand, I find the complaints about LUV hard to disagree with, and on the other hand, I find the movie impossible not to like a whole lot.


I recently saw Lemmon in 'Tuesdays w/ Morrie' and found that film very rewarding. It really displays how talented Lemmon was as an actor, so I set myself a goal to view as many of his films as readily available thru my local libraries. Last night, I saw LUV and it won me over! Lemmon does border his performance on a Jerry Lewis-like character, but it does NOT detract from the story or the supporting performances. Ms. May is suitable in her role and cracked me up with her business-like charts reflecting the sexual intercourse frequencies of her two marriages (Falk and Lemmon). If you really want to fall-out laughing wait until the Niagara Falls scene in which Lemmon and May compete to test each other's LUV. HILARIOUS! Also, if you pay close attention you'll see a young Harrison Ford as a hippie-type who sucker punches Lemmon over a fender-bender. This film is watchable and makes observant commentary on suicide, marriage, extra-marital lust, and the nature of LUV ... just keep in mind the decade in which it filmed ... the '60s. It's a companion piece of sorts to Peter Sellars' 'I Love You Alice, B. Toklas.' Don't miss it!


Way before Woody Allen laid claim to the same people and the same territory, this 1967 film based on a 1964 play by Murray Schisgal, directed on Broadway by the young Mike Nichols (who had been Elaine May's partner in Chicago) may be the first Hollywood film ever to feature a group of highly neurotic, overly articulate, and -although never named as such apparently middle-class Jewish urban characters. Unfortunately, as funny and satirical as the film is at times, opening it up to the real world with naturalistic settings did not help support its weak story structure. When push comes to shove, the movie is no more than a series of sketches, the sort that Nichols & May did so brilliantly on records and stage. Irishman Jack Lemmon seems miscast; he does his best, however, to sustain the frenetic shtick, mugging outrageously at times. On the plus side, the brilliant and then beautiful Elaine May (future director and writer of many a film flop) may be the greatest crazy Jewish American Princess ever portrayed on film. Try as she might, Woody Allen's second wife, Louise Lasser, understudy in the original Broadway production, could never quite match Elaine May when it came to sheer J. A. P. nuttiness.


Luv (1967) Dir: Clive Donner

Production: Jalem Productions/Columbia Pictures

Woeful 'humorous' look at love, marriage, divorce. Harry Berlin (Jack Lemmon) is about to commit suicide by jumping off the Manhattan Bridge when old acquaintance Milt Manville (Peter Falk) serendipitously scoots by, oblivious to Harry's intentions, and blithely asks him to come to dinner. Harry's problem is he doesn't believe in anything. But Milt believes in love, in fact he says he's more in love today than he was on the day he got married. The joke is that Milt loves a woman that isn't his wife (ba-dum-bum!), but she won't even look at Milt until he gets a divorce. Milt knows his wife Ellen (Elaine May, whose real life maiden name is Berlin) won't divorce him, so he conspires to introduce Harry and Ellen and get them married, leaving him to his dreamgirl.

Lemmon, Falk and May all play your stereotypical neurotic New York Jews (Lemmon is affecting a particularly embarrassing accent), which is supposed to be inherently funny but isn't. For all I know, it might have been in 1967 to an audience that hadn't heard of Woody Allen. The humor is mostly bizarre non sequiturs (two junk dealers who do business with Milt) and patience-testing absurdities. There is some satire of bourgeois values; Milt, after telling Harry how happy he is and how he has it all, takes Harry to his home for dinner--the home is in some hellish suburban subdivision and upon seeing what 'having it all' means, Harry promptly tries to kill himself again. But otherwise the film is virtually destroyed by Harry, played annoyingly by Lemmon as a borderline special needs person, shamelessly mugging his way throughout. And the obvious comedic pieces, I defy anybody to watch them and not sit there stone-faced. If you do, you are a far generous person than I am.

* out of 4


In this film, there is a lot of action. But, that's almost all. Poor acting, Hogan can only play with his eyes, even when he close them, and Shannon Tweed is never naked... Sigh... (For the aficionados, a little catfight between Tweed and an european nurse could be the best moment of this movie.) By the way, Shadow Warriors I is very much better, same team, same director, same action, but much more entertainment.


This is the first movie I saw starring Hulk Hogan. This guy really can't act at all. Add up the utterly stupid plot, conversations and action scenes and you get a helluva movie.

This piece of crap starts with a kidnapping of a girl. Hulk Hogan, here his name is Mike McBride (haha), and his moron friends are assigned to save the day. And in what manner: they go to the house of the kidnapper, who is the father of the girl, and shoot everyone and everything. Once they accomplished this mission something completely different happens. Hulk Hogan is captured by some villain who injects him with a poison that will slowly kill him within 24hours. Look at Hogan's face as he tries to act like he's really going to die. It's painfully funny. After he gets injected with the poison his friends pop up completely out of nowhere shooting all the bad guys, which of course are not American. Shannon Tweed, the "femme fatale" jumps over a sand dune on a motorcycle while killing the baddies. And so it goes on and on. Amazingly brainless and cliché action scenes followed by amazingly brainless and cliché conversations. At one point Hulk is even trying to be emotional, thinking of his "pals" who died in earlier operations. You get to see some idiotic flashbacks of dying soldiers. Then Shannon Tweed comes in to comfort him...hahahaha...this is some really bad acting.

The bad guy is so tremendously evil it becomes a joke. Everything he says, does and thinks is pure evil. And of course he's Russian, what else... His sidekick is even worse. Some kinda gorilla-a-like monster who does everything 'the boss' says. Of course, further on in the movie Hulkie and this mean machine get in a nasty fight with each other.

In the end, after a lot of dim-witted, extremely unbelievable action scenes and other crap, you see Hulk Hogan and his moron crew (one character is called Andy Powers btw, djeezes), walking side by side, way too cool, with in the background a big explosion. Hellooo....... Oh, I almost forgot the hilarious scene with the brainsick madman in the helicopter going completely nuts throwing grenates at the 'bad people'like he's Santa handing out candy to children. Luckely, every grenate takes out a couple of baddies, thrown away in a real old-school McGyverisch style.

Everything about this movie is so crappy and pointless...You can't do otherwise than laugh about it. I hope to see other rubbish starring Hulkie, coz he's so incredibly funny. They should make a movie just with Hogan's face and a spin-off starring his mustache.


Hulk saves the world, yet again. Like all of Hulk Hogans movies this is in the so bad it's good category. Naturally I wouldn't say that to his face. The one thing that stops this movie from excelling in that category though is that it has quite a few really revolting bits in it. For example, the fact that every single baddie of the two unconnected plots is a foreigner and every one of the morally good people is American.

There's little point in pointing out odd behaviour by the characters or plot inconsistencies in a movie like this, but I will anyway. In the first plot, which really is just a filler because they didn't manage to pad out the 2nd plot to last for more than an hour, the good guys need to rescue a little girl who's been kidnapped by her Austrian dad from his American wife. The Austrian turns out to be majorly wealthy, but a foreigner so he deserves all that he gets, like having about 15 of his life guards shot while Hulk and the team rescue the little girl. A bit over the top or what? This plot also serves the film makers with an excellent opportunity to show as much cleavage as possible. This is achieved by having Shannon Tweed, disguised as a guest, sneak into the exclusive party the little girl's dad is holding at his estate. She gets to wear a necklace with a camera hidden inside so her necklace and of course her cleavage are shown in close up's a number of times. Pure genius.

A common trait for really bad movies like this is the way Mister Evil's henchmen are disposed off. Naturally they're positioned all over the building but one single punch ALWAYS knocks them out cold, never to return to action for the rest of the movie. Unless of course there's a fight scene needed, then the baddies get hit over and over again before they finally get knocked out. Similarly, the baddies can fire machine gun rounds after rounds at the good guys without a single hit while the good guys need one single shot to dispose of entire armies. Unless the baddie has had a bit of screen time, then he'll be much harder to kill. Also, like in all bad action movies, either the number one or number two baddie will be totally cruel and evil when he's got the good guy tied up but will become a shivering coward once the roles are reversed.

I don't know, I'm probably not who this movie is marketed at (I shudder to think of the target audience) but I'd find it much more interesting if the baddies actually had a reason to be evil. They're always evil for no reason which makes them cartoon characters. But then, every single character in this movie is a cartoon character.

So, in conclusion. Good for a chuckle but not really a truly good, bad film.


This movie is the worst thing ever filmed. I wouldn't really call it a movie. Yet it had me laughing for hours, so I must give it some credit. The beginning is classic. SPOILER ALERT!! It depicts a few members of the team doing there thing. We have Shannon Tweed punching and kicking a punching bag with absolutely no skill at all. We have Appolo sculpting something out of what appears to be a big block of sheet-rock with awful drawings hanging in the back ground. And of course Hogan having some kind of fit due to shell shock from the gulf war. So lets recap. Shannon is a kick boxing chick and Appolo is an artist, kind of. With Hogan being crazy. Suddenly a woman appears and says "I saw your add, it said you help people." Can you picture the add people? Mike Mcbride with a huge gun in the back of Guns and Ammo magazine with the add saying something like "Guns for hire"

So basically the lady wants them to rescue her daughter who has been taken from her by her evil ex-husband. The fact is that, this lady might be crazy, and could have lost the child in court. The Shadow Warriors don't ask any questions, they take the case, probonoe no less. So in short they go to this house where a party of some sort is taking place. The team runs in shooting up the place, and rescuing the damn kid.

Should I continue, well OK. I can tell you this about shadow warriors. You should watch it, go to you nearest departmental store and look in the 5.88 rack. Both 1 and 2 are there One isn't that funny. But 2, Oh my god. Its the funniest thing of a movie ever.


To sum everything up: the inexplicably popular Hulk Hogan, washed-up can't-believe-it's-not-porno star Shannon Tweed, Apollo Creed, the cop from "Last House" (who was cool before I saw this) and some other guy who is cleaning up vomit at Wal-Mart while you read this shoot for hours and hours and hours from open spaces without getting a scratch. Usually writers try to make it remotely believable by having one guy shot in the arm or something like that but no, none of that for the indestructible Hulk Hogan. There's just something bothering me about Hulk Hogan being surrounded by twenty guys and just shooting them one by one with his painfully slow moves. It's a way-too-common trend in action flicks that villains with machine guns who are off-screen immediately stop existing. At least Seagal hides behind a crate or something. It's also pretty hilarious how none of the people who get shot appear to bleed, they just fall down. It looks like a bunch of kids playing cowboy and Indian. For people who think wrestling(which in Hogan's case, is not a lot more than soft punching) is real.


If you found GRAVE OF THE FIREFLIES depressing, just wait till you see NOW AND THEN, HERE AND THERE. A shocking entry for Akitarou Daichi, the man responsible for the delightfully funny ANIMATION RUNNER KUROMI, this thirteen-episode mini-series is often disturbing with nary a lighthearted moment; at the same time, though, it is very intriguing and interesting to watch.

The series begins on a deceptively cheerful note when young Shuzo Matsutani--who refers to himself as Shu, so that's what I'll call him from now on--is making his way home from a kendo practice match when he sees -- wouldn't you know -- a mysterious, quiet girl sitting alone on a water tower. The girl, who goes by the name of Lala-Ru, catches Shu's eye and he somehow manages to strike up a conversation with her. Suddenly, out of nowhere these giant snake-like machines appear and kidnap the girl. In trying to rescue her, Shu finds himself transported away from his cheery hometown of Japan into a dreary, desolate futuristic world adorned with the very fitting name of Hellywood. And this new place is sheer hell indeed; Shu finds himself prisoner on a dominating fortress where children from other parts of the world are being whipped into war soldiers. It turns out that Lala-Ru has a pendant that can bring water and life back to this desolate world, and the insane, maniacal despot who commands the fortress, Hamdo, wants it at any cost. Of course, Lala Ru does not have it; Shu took it from her in a vain rescue attempt only to lose it again when he is taken prisoner himself. Subjected to physical torture and abuse, Shu is forced to become a soldier and observe one horrifying atrocity of war after another.

As with GRAVE OF THE FIREFLIES, NOW AND THEN HERE AND THERE deals with the consequences of war as well as the plights of lonely individuals struggling to survive. Here, however, the trauma is turned up by a huge notch. The children forced into war are a rather surly, sometimes confrontational bunch forced to commit terrible crimes against their will, making this a potentially sadder and bleaker story. There are even plenty of scenes which involve backlashing, murder, genocide, and others that leave little to the imagination. But all these seem like nothing compared to one particularly mean-spirited subplot, in which a young American girl, Sara, is raped by one of Hamdo's soldiers. (We later discover that she is pregnant from this encounter.) There are also several moments where Hamdo makes somewhat sexual advances toward Lala-Ru, much to the chagrin of his lady lieutenant Abelia. Such sequences make NOW AND THEN, HERE AND THERE a very difficult and sometimes painful series to sit through, although the show does end on a positive note (albeit somewhat awkwardly). Needless to say, this is not a series for either children or the faint at heart.

It also deals with some very compelling character studies, particularly in the cases of the children held prisoner at Hellywood. One of them, Tabool, is nasty and cruel, secretly scheming to overthrow the dictator Hamdo and conquer the fortress. His childhood friend, the emotionally wartorn and borderline dangerous Nabuca, hides a noble heart but often gives in to his darker side. (Of the characters, he is the most interesting.) Technically, NOW AND THEN, HERE AND THERE is not the most impressive show; the color palette is appropriately dark and imaginative, but the animation itself is more like traditional television quality, not up to the polish of shows like, say, FULLMETAL ALCHEMIST. Simultaneously, however, this style gives the series even more of an edge. The melancholy musical score is very fitting, although not necessarily one that will be remembered long after the show's over.

The vocal performances are what will really stick with you, depending on whether you see the series in Japanese or in English, as produced by New York-based Central Park Media. The company's track record of dubbing has been shaky, although their dubs for LODOSS OVA, SLAYERS, KUROMI, and WORLD OF NARUE are among some of their better ones. So, too, is this one. Although the ADR script stays a little TOO slavishly close to the subtitles, the dialogue flows well. The vocal cast includes veteran dub performers such as Dan Green, Crispin Freeman, Rachael Lillis, Scottie Ray, and Lisa Ortiz. All do excellent jobs, but it's really Jack Taylor that steals the show as the psychotically evil Hamdo. His bravura role makes up for the some of the other weaknesses of the dub--one of which is that the children sound too mature. Ed Paul's Shu, although emotionally sound, takes some getting used to as well. All in all, though, it works pretty well for this kind of show.

With its dark, dreary nature and often painful sequences, NOW AND THEN, HERE AND THERE is not an easy series to recommend; however if it's emotionally powerful Anime you're looking for, then this series may be worth a look.


I had the honor of watching this series about 2 years ago. I rented all 3 yes 3 DVDs from blockbuster and was not disappointed. The visuals are amazing, the characters well drawn and designed, the technology is well thought out as well. Its a simple story about human nature and how far someone will go to return home and to stand up for what they believe in.

This series is why I love anime, Of all the anime series out there this and berserk are my favorite. initially I was struck by just how beautiful the whole thing looked and I like the idea that a kid can be a main character and not make the show seem fruity or childish like so many "made for America anime" some of that is o.k. but I really like more serious stuff:)


All in all the best animated series I've seen. It was hardcore. I watched the series in Japanese with English subtitles. The series gives you a feel of the horror and suffering people can endure under the will of a tyrant. Most people will give in to the tyrant and become like the tyrant in their compromise to survive. A few will express good and hope despite the great evil being inflicted upon them and those around them. I'm sure this story derived it's material from the ongoing horror stories throughout the world: child soldiers kidnapped in Africa, young recruits to the Taliban and radical Islamic terrorists, rebels who join the FARC in Colombia, gang recruits in major inner cities throughout the world, etc.


This movie is the adaptation of Stefan Zweig's story "Letter from an unknown woman" to China settling in a time period before the cultural revolution (1930-1948).

The director (Xu Jinglei) who is also the main actress of the movie has created a very nice visual atmosphere to reflect a heartbreaking one-sided love story. The performances of the players and the music of the movie are successful. Although the tempo of the movie becomes unnecessarily slow at certain parts, the overall result is quite satisfactory.

If you are interested in Asian culture and the living style, you will find an additional taste in this movie.


Long, languid shots of an immense beauty define this beautiful story. Warm, gentle colors fill the screen with stunning images and sounds, both music and painful silence awaken all our senses. This is a movie of a different kind than the average Western viewer sees in the theaters.It doesn't bombard you with explosions and cheap thrills. It doesn't cherish the obvious and trite. It dares to force the viewer to introspect and face the disquiet. This is a different world, where the real action and thrill is in the eye of the beholder, where director is not expected or required to chew everything for us, so that, God forbid, the viewer doesn't choke on the plethora of meaning. And guess what? We survived and we are better for it.Thank you.


Overall, it's a nice movie for Xu as her second movie as both the director and the leading actress. The adaptation is so natural that nobody would regard the story as a "non-Chinese" one. The music is great with Lin Hai, the outstanding composer. The sound of Pipa goes smoothly with the movie, typical Chinese which fits the time background. As for the actors...Well, here is by what I mean "it could be better". Jiang Wen isn't that suitable for this part as "the man", Xu Jinglei(the director herself) isn't mother-like enough for the part as "the woman". Some supporting roles are quite good, eg. the old servant... Voila.


I am a huge fan of the American film Letter from an Unknown Woman (Ophuls/Koch, 1948), so I was ready to be sort of defensive about this one. But I must admit it is really very very good. One reason I don't mind having another version is that this one is so different. While the 1948 version is squarely in the romantic tradition, this film is very realistic. It is also much closer to the Stefan Zweig short story that both films are based on. The best thing about it I think is the amazingly convincing portrayal of a character who ages from her early teens to her early thirties. I have never seen that sort of thing done so well. The one flaw, I think, is the casting of Wen Jiang as the man who is the object of the woman's erotic obsession. He just doesn't have the magnetism to get us to sympathize with her fixation on him. But then, maybe we aren't supposed to.


Stefan Zweig's novella "Letter from an Unknown Woman" has survived many screen adaptations, the most famous being that made in 1948 by French director Max Ophüls, starring Joan Fontaine. Here, from Mainland China, comes one of the latest, adapted by actress and director Xu Jinglei. Transposing the milieu effortlessly from 1920s Vienna to 1930s and 1940s Beijing, it is a fairly short feature (which befits the length of the original) telling the love of one woman (played by Xu Jinglei herself and the young Li Yuan) who falls for a writer (Jiang Wen) - someone who conveniently forgets her once their liaison is over. Hauntingly scored, and beautifully shot by cinematographer Li Ping Bin - full of dark, brooding chiaroscuros - it is most sensitively directed by Xu Jinglei. Seen almost entirely from the female perspective, Xu's second directed feature is a finely chiselled piece of work. Jiang Wen, as usual, gives the most ample support. If you come across the DVD, you must watch this.


The other user comment misses the point of this film entirely; Passport to Suez is not supposed to be a serious historical examination of what might have happened had the Nazis gained control of the Suez Canal, but a spy/mystery/adventure with some comedy laced in.

Warren William's final turn as Michael Lanyard is a real winner, thanks to a complex and witty script and the direction of the great Andre De Toth. The Lone Wolf films are always entertaining (with the exception of The Lone Wolf Spy Hunt, which was nearly ruined by Ida Lupino) but Passport to Suez has a classier feel than any of its predecessors. The camera-work in the film is moody and atmospheric, William's first meeting with Mr. X is very memorable, and one murder scene that takes place on an Alexandrian street is positively stunning, something Hitchcock needn't have been ashamed of. The mystery is intricate and well-meshed, and the script features a memorable array of colorful characters--Gavin Muir's friendly and urbane Nazi operative, Sheldon Leonard's slick nightclub owner, Anne Savage's femme fatale, Sig Arno's eccentric stool pigeon, Frederic Worlock's uptight British intelligence officer, Jay Novello's sleazy spy, and especially Lou Merrill's phlegmatic but deadly double-agent.

William himself handles the atypical seriousness of the plot perfectly and reins in his usual enjoyable hamminess, while Eric Blore provides impeccable comedy relief(his reaction to the mysterious phone caller at the beginning of the picture is hilarious--I feel that way with certain telemarketers).

The propaganda in the film is mercifully minuscule; it has none of the protracted speeches that popped up in the earlier Lone Wolf film Counter-Espionage. Aside from Warren's remark to Muir about the "New European Order having no room for sentiment," propaganda is bypassed for sheer entertainment.

A worthy finale to William's illustrious stint as the Lone Wolf.


A very good film for Warren William to end his Lone Wolf career on; after a break Eric Blore soldiered on as valet for a few more films. This outing has an interesting plot, fascinating characters and relationships, inventive photography and Fritz and Karl had to suffice as the only links to the unmentioned Nazis.

The Baddies are out to get the plans of the Allied fortifications for the Suez Canal to eventually control the region and then the world ... How they go about it, get it and lose it is as ingenious as it is ridiculous but as it's the McGuffin it's not that important anyway. The similarities to Casablanca are striking but this is a good film in its own right - the inter-relationships of everyone (all slow, sly or slinky) and especially everyone to Rembrandt, Whistler and Cezanne and vice versa are engrossing to behold and is perhaps the film's strongest point. The badinage between Blore and William was perfect, hardly any serious exchange between them throughout, except when Blore was either tied up or being untied. Lloyd Bridges was wasted in this one.

All in all well worth watching as a non-serious potboiler, heavy political commentary will not be found here! William only made a few more films after this before he died of cancer in 1948, which makes Blore's hopeless look at the camera at the end with "Here we go again!" all the more poignant.


The importance of the Suez Canal in World War II cannot be overstated, except in this movie where it seems grossly understated. Correspondent/spy Valerie Blore (as played by Ann Savage) correctly appraised the situation when she says: "Whoever wins Africa wins the war." The Suez Canal was pivotal to the shipping of petroleum from the oil rich nations to Germany, which required fuel both for production and for keeping its armor moving and its airplanes flying. Control of North Africa meant control of the Suez. Even more so, it would solidify the grandiose plan of physically linking Japan with Germany, a plan not likely to be effectuated. Still, this movie loosely addresses the problem of Axis control if certain secret information is leaked to the enemy.

As a film, if never quite stresses danger, with most of the action related to incidental elements: the engagement of Donald Jameson (Robert Stanford) to Valerie King, the bar owned by Johnny Booth (Sheldon Leonard), and the silly activities of the three counted-spies, whose movie names just happen to be Whistler, Rembrandt, and Cezanne. Most of the time the acting seems preoccupied with something other than what is happening. All in all, it seems a typical Lone Wolf movie where the danger of a nazi submarine lurking to get secret information is only slightly more important than the flowers in the hotel room. A major saving grace for this film is the acting of Eric Blore (as Jameson) who putters around as a sort of mini Winston Churchill.


I saw Demonoid very late one night, intrigued by the weird sounding plot. The plot is indeed very strange and a touch nonsensical, but the movie has such a fast pace that I never questioned any of the happenings too much. Some of the dialogue is hilarious, as are the occasional action sequences. The acting is as low rent as you might expect, except Samantha Eggar, who is as pretty and talented as ever. The effects are cheap looking, but effectively gruesome for the most part and funny when they aren't. The film begins very well, with a potent surreal feel to some of the early sequences, especially down the mine. The endings classy too. This is one of the best killer hand movies I've seen, certainly the oddest (and I really dig the oddness). Well recommended to connoisseurs of the obscure and bizarre, anyone looking for conventional film making qualities or coherence will be less well served. Best to watch at 3AM with a lot of beer/cheap cider.


Demonoid, Messenger of Death starts some 300 years ago in a Mexican mine where some ancient demon or other possesses the left hand of a woman, she is chained to a wall by robed religious fanatics & her left hand is cut off with an axe the disembodied hand then tries to scuttle away but a guy stabs it & places it into a silver hand shaped casket. Cut to the present in a town called Guanajato in Mexico where Jennifer Baines (Samantha Eggar) has just arrived to join her husband Mark (Roy Jenson) who has recently brought the mine & intends to reopen it, once at the mine Jennifer causes a wall to collapse & reveal a mummified body, women eh? The local workers start bricking themselves & refuse to enter the mine due to ancient legends about the 'Devil's Hand', soon after while in the mine together on they're own Mark & Jennifer stumble across a room with the glove shaped casket in it & Mark decides to take it. Later that night Mark opens the casket & finds nothing but dust, however a hand reforms itself from the dust & possesses Mark. The ancient left hand possessing demon is free & goes about doing what it does best, possessing people's hands with the ultimate aim of possessing Jennifer's for some reason I'm not sure of...

This Mexican American co-production was co-written, produced & directed by Alfredo Zacarias & is one zany, crazy & at times gob-smacking exploitation film that provides terrific entertainment for it's slight running time of 78 minutes. I feel Demonoid, Messenger of Death is an ambassador for the much neglected, maligned & under-appreciated sub-genre of possessed killer hand films, I mean there are literally 100's of films featuring evil aliens, indestructible homicidal maniacs, giant bugs, ghosts, Dinosaurs, genetic mutated monsters, zombies & scientific experiments gone bad but how many possessed killer hand films can you name? Not many & that my friends must be addressed... Sorry, I got carried away there. Anyway, the script by Zacarias, David Lee Fein & F. Amos Powell really is as crazy & bizarre as it sounds, at least it shows a lot of imagination & it clearly has the intention of trying to fill every last second of screen time with some bizarre situation. Overall Demonoid, Messenger of Death doesn't make that much sense & you can't take it seriously but that's all part of the fun. I absolutely love the scene in which a policeman walks into a Doctor's surgery & demands at gunpoint that the Doctor cut his hand off or he'll kill him, this part is played 100% straight & the ridiculousness doesn't end there. There are numerous flying severed hands, satanic rituals, dodgy gamblers, disbelieving priest's, mummy's, re-animated corpses, ancient demons, gore, nudity, bad Mexican actor's, a car chase, a woman who thinks walking into a pitch black cavernous mine 100's of years old wearing high heels is a good idea & a pace which never lets up. I have to admit I really liked this goofy film, it was just so entertaining for all the wrong reasons.

Director Zacarias creates some pretty decent moments, the sequence where the hand reforms & is inter-cut with footage of real mummified bodies is particularly effective. There are plenty of dumb & downright silly moments in it but god damn I had fun with it. It has that cheap & sleazy early 80's horror film vibe to it & there's some decent gore as well. There are, of course, lots of severed hands but also some decent severing methods like one guy who puts his hand under the wheels of a moving train, ouch! There are surgical removals & one is severed by repeatedly shutting it in a car door & the hands preferred method of murder is to attach itself to someone's face & then squeeze it until the person dies!

Technically the film is OK, it's a little rough around the edges but I doubt the filmmakers had much money to work with. The special effects vary from really bad to just bad. I thought the music sounded very familiar & I was right because most of it is stolen from The Incredible Melting Man (1977). The acting was OK & you have to consider the fact that it's very hard to convincingly fight your own hand while it's still attached to your arm, isn't it?

Demonoid, Messenger of Death is a pretty unique film, it's certainly something a bit different & overall I was throughly entertained by it. I can't really recommend it as most sane people would probably hate it but if your a fan of obscure exploitation then this is an absolute must. Mr Zacarias, the film-making world needs more people like you, I mean they just don't, won't or simply can't make 'em like this anymore which is not a good thing in my book.


"Demonoid:The Messenger of Death" is an entertaining and bizarre Mexican horror flick about a mine proprietor(Roy C. Jensen),his gorgeous wife (Samantha Eggar) and the hand case found by them in an underground mine chamber.During the night the dust turns back into a flying hand,which promptly starts possessing people.Admittedly this crazy horror flick is really bad,but I had lots of fun watching it.Its premise is similar to Oliver Stone's "The Hand":a possessed severed hand is stalking people.The possession of the left hand creates the opportunities for many bizarre scenes:a hand literally catching the train,fortune hunter dynamites his own mine- with his entire crew still inside it and a policeman pulls his pistol on a surgeon and insists the MD amputate the cop's arm sans anesthesia to name only a few.Watch "Demonoid" as soon as possible.7 out of 10.


By the early 60s, the Mexican film industry was beginning its slow but constant decline after the Golden Age ended. Facing economic problems and a stronger competition from foreign filmmakers, the Mexican industry found itself at its darkest hours through the decades of the 70s and the 80s. Sadly, this is the period where director Alfredo Zacarías begins his work, starting as a writer under the guidance of his father, director Miguel Zacarías, and the legendary Golden Age director Gilberto Martínez Solares. Soon Alfredo Zacarías started making films on his own and found success directing the comedies of GAspar Henaine "Capulina", however, Zacarías had big plans in mind and by the end of the 70s, he directed two ambitious horror films co-produced with the U.S.A. and starring somewhat famous American actors: 1978's "The Bees" and this film, "Demonoid, Messenger of Death".

Also known as "Macabra, la Mano del Diablo", the film stars Samantha Eggar as Jennifer Baines, who is visiting the mining city of Guanajuato in Mexico as his husband, Mark (Roy Jenson) owns an important mine there that seems to be very rich. At the time when Jennifer arrives, Mark is facing the refusal of his workers to go deeper as they believe the mine is haunted. Thinking it's all mere superstition, Mark and Jennifer enter the mine and discover an ancient altar to the Devil, which holds the Devil's hand as a relic. Mark takes the Hand as a trophy of man conquering superstition, but soon he'll discover that the Devil's hand is not made for fooling around. The Hand begins to possess people transforming them in psycho killers, and only Jennifer knows the truth.

While the movie is written by Amos Powell (of Croman's "Tower of London" fame) and David Lee Fein (who later would write "Cheerleader Camp"), the film is obviously the brainchild of Zacarías himself, as he wrote the source story the script was based on. Unlike in "The Bees", Zacarías really attempts this time to create an interesting horror piece, and while he unashamedly lifts some ideas from Oliver Stone's "The Hand" (released previously that same year), it could be said that he succeeds in making a somewhat original tale of horror. Sadly, the plot lacks the coherency and the sense to put all the elements together and the bizarre story never really takes off.

Zacarías' direction is technically effective, but his style is outdated and unoriginal, and in the end this makes the film look 10 years older than its true age. To Zacarías' credit, he makes really original set-pieces aided by some good special effects and a somewhat effective musical score; however, the bad cinematography, together with the low-budget and the contrived plot, would diminish the power of those scenes. While he has proved to be good with comedy, he seems to struggle with the drama and the suspense of his film, as if he had troubles directing his cast. The various action sequences of the film are really good for the budget, although again, with a notoriously anachronistic look in the execution.

Samantha Eggar does her best with what she has to work and manages to carry the film despite the movie's obvious problems. Her character is really simple, almost typical, but she makes it likable and less two dimensional. The experienced Stuart Whitman is less successful, although overall he pulls off an acceptable performance as the Priest that helps Jennifer against the Hand. The rest of the cast ranges from mediocre to downright awful, although one can't tell if it's completely the actors' fault due to the bad way the script is written. However, to tell the truth, Roy Jenson did give an effective performance in his short screen time.

It's true that at first sight, one could blame the movie's flaws to it's low budget, it's bad special effects or to its director, however, I think that the real problem lays on the poor way the script was built. Contrived and fast packed, the story never really fulfills its main purposes (to scar and entertain), and never really goes somewhere. While the intentions of the writers were good, the plot was probably not meant to work in the first place. Zacarías has done better films when he has a good script to work with, but in "Demonoid", the lack of coherency of the plot simply make the film boring and tedious.

It's kind of sad that Zacarías had the chance to make this film when the Mexican film industry was at its lowest point, as the very ambitious idea (that without a doubt looked good on paper) simply couldn't work well on film. Fortunately, he finally would make a movie the way he wanted in 1989, with "Crime of Crimes", in the meantime, "Demonoid, Messenger of Death", ends up as another good idea that was just badly executed. 4/10


I wonder if this movie somehow inspired "Evil Dead II"!! A demoniac and perverted hand with a bad attitude spreads terror. That's all you need to know.

Damn it, the effect of the moving hand is the best feature about this cheapie mess. The hand's performance was truly menacing and comic at the same time! It starts a killing spree while possessing, then, it hides under Samantha Eggar's sheets (dirty hand!), and if it wasn't enough, it jumps over a moving car without a stunt double. That's my kind of entertainment.

Now seriously, this movie is as cheap as you can imagine. There are some unintentionally funny situations, CHEAP false scares, horrible f/x, and putrid score. Not even the groovy music is likable.

The premise is good but you can't do anything good with such an extremely low budget and cheap production values. But in defense of this movie, it's meant to be pure B-entertainment. Although the movie is boring, it has it's moments of cheesiness and Mystery Science Theatre material.

At some points I thought I was watching a bad episode of "Miami Vice"! The car chasing, and shootings just demonstrate how poor this Horror oriented movie is.

"The Hand will kill again!". Oh , I forgot to praise the horrible one-liners.


All the signs pointed to this being a bad film...but I went ahead and watched it anyway. To its credit; Demonoid is very fast paced, but the credit ends there as despite the plot playing out quickly, the film is still very boring and the swiftness in the story's movement seems to be a lame attempt to mask this. The plot has something to do with a Mexican mine and a possessed demonic hand. Mark and Jenifer Baines are attempting to reopen the mine, but find themselves in trouble when the workers won't go down for fear of an ancient curse. This leads the couple to go down the mine...and guess what? They release an ancient curse. I actually wish they'd listened to the locals and left the mine closed, as then there would have been no reason for this film to be made. The idea of someone's hand becoming possessed and developing a life of it's own was very well used in classic horror Evil Dead II, but here the idea is sadly squandered and unfortunately the best way to describe Demonoid is simply 'damp squib'. As you might expect, I can't recommend this terrible film as there is nothing going for it.


Let's see, there are four close female friends who struggle at their private lives, while they're highly successful in their jobs:

Mia(Lucy Liu) who loses her fiancé who couldn't deal with not being able to keep up with her. Zoe (Frances O'Connor)who tries not to neglect her children, while balancing her career. Juliet (Miranda Otto) who has to deal with a rebellious teenage daughter, while her husband has an affair. Caitlin (Bonnie Sommerville) who discovers that the person with whom she might spend her life with, might be a woman.

Poor "Cashmere Mafia" just premiered on ABC and has already to prove itself. With four women as leading ladies and stories which focus on sex, friendship and love, the show draws comparisons to successful cult favorites like "Sex and the City" and "Desperate Housewives", not to mention the upcoming similar themed "Lipstick Jungle".

While "Cashmere Mafia" might look like a cheap knock-off of "Sex and the City" , the show actually tries to achieve something else and differentiate itself from its successful ancestors by addressing real life issues like gender rivalry or successful family/business management. Unfortunately the show suffers from stereotypes and a pretty clumsy execution of a concept that might look promising on paper.

Especially the plot which revolves around Caitlin realizing that she might be gay is executed in the most unbelievable way you could imagine. While it's not a bad idea to include a Lesbian/Bisexual in a show which focuses on four women, the execution of the whole storyline lacks of realism. In the beginning of the episode Caitlin breaks up with her boyfriend just to fall in love with a woman the next morning, who magically appears to be a Lesbian as well. The moment in which Caitlin realizes that she might have an interest in this woman is executed very ridiculously with silly music in the background, a long focus on Caitlin's face with a dorky smile.

The dialogue of the show feels forced at times, especially when the male writers want to underline how close and "female" these four women are. The actresses do their best, but lack of chemistry. So far they don't really feel like close friends, but if you look back at the premieres of shows like "Desperate Housewives", you see that it wasn't there from the beginning either. There is still the possibility that they develop more chemistry over the course of the series.

The show is not really male-friendly. The male characters are pretty much undeveloped in opposite to the women and fall into clichés. There has to be a cheater, a man who can't deal with his girlfriend being more successful than he is and the loyal puppy-husband. It's understandable that they focus more on the ladies, but it wouldn't have harmed the show if they treated the male characters equally well and had made them a little bit more complex.

After watching the pilot, the show feels like an underwhelming mix of "Desperate Housewives" and "Sex and the City". Two characters of the show even strongly reminded me at characters of "Desperate Housewives". Juliet is very similar to Bree since she is the readhead who tried to keep up appearances all the way through the pilot, while Zoe feels like a younger Lynette since she has to struggle with the same issues.

The show definitely has some potential to get better, but so far, the show hasn't really been very impressive nor realistic. It definitely needs a chance to grow and I am not sure whether audiences give the show enough time to get better.


So, of course, it got canceled already. I'm not surprised. Good shows get canceled all the time. On the networks. Not so much the cable channels. The cable channels can handle smaller audiences much better. Smart, witty, and fast paced is going to net a smaller audience.

A slower, less witty version of CASHMERE MAFIA is LIPSTICK JUNGLE. Equally as good. Just slower and less witty. It survived to see another season. CASHMERE MAFIA is history. Fortunately, I've got a DVR and I don't mind watching shows over again.

Being a guy who appreciates strong, assertive women, the main characters of CASHMERE MAFIA were exactly my cup of tea, and the metronome scoring for the first episode was a dead give away the pacing of the show was going to be somewhat rapid. It was. Shades of GILMORE GIRLS. I like lots of movement, lots of dialog.

As for the show's realism, I have no idea. The upper East Side is not my stomping ground. However, realism is not why I'm sitting in the balcony. I came to be entertained, and I was. CASHMERE MAFIA is a very, very good show, and a short lived one, too. I will, however, enjoy my own reruns.

I do wonder, though, how a show about four strong, assertive women working at a meat packing plant would do? I mean, I try keeping an open mind about things but I just don't relate all that well to the upper classes. Yachts, corporate jets, and homes in the Hamptons just seem a little irrelevant. Maybe that's just me.


I think too many people are trying to compare this show to Sex and the City, i myself was a HUGE fan of S&TC, but this show is not supposed to be the same and they should not be put up against each other. I think if you watch this show objectively you will really get into it.. i have! I think its very entertaining and have become hooked. Even better, Cashmere has two Ausie actors in the main roles of Zoe and Juliet! Its always great to see Australians doing well over in the U.S. I would definitely recommend watching Cashmere Mafia, i think it is refreshing to have strong women leads in a TV series and we should be supporting it.


I really Loved the show, I hope they re-think it and give it another chance. Who was the Designer for those HOT HOT clothes. WOW!! I think the show was fun, The women are business savvy. It was a bit like Sex and the City, but with a different spin. Lucy Lu wore the clothes that we call bringing Sexy Back. The story lines were sometimes slow, but it could have gotten better with a little time. However; Can we see one person on a show where one of the girls relationship works. Even with some ups and downs some relationships do work. Every now and then viewers would like to see a loving relationship, so we can ohhh and ahhh. The concept of the show was good. Overall we Loved the show.


I've just watched both the pilot and the second episode.

So far, I like the series. The second episode was better than the first, and the show definitely has potential to do better than it's currently doing.

The four main characters are successful women, but they all have their flaws. Sometimes, the show does make me wonder if these women work - the show is also supposed to be focused on their work lives, but we do not get to see them work very much. (Mostly, it's just been Mia working.) The chemistry between the four best friends could be better, but considering it's only the first few episodes... chemistry can be developed over time. (The actresses are great in their own roles - it's only when they're together that you may question if they're really best friends.)

Basically, while I do like this show, it could be a lot better - and hopefully audiences will give it a chance! (There were several other series that didn't get a warm reception initially, but in the end turned out to be hits.)


I believe this show has a lot of potential. I think it had a slow start but it's getting better every episode. I certainly like it better than Lipstick Jungle. It really shows that women can have power too and how sometimes men can be intimidated by that. Yes it is like a Sex in the City except it's does not always have to be about sex. Sex is great but there's more to life than just sex and this show displays that. This show really brings out actresses that have appeared in previous works but this can be their chance to really shine through. I think they should have more shows where women can be powerful. Why does it have to be a man's world? Why can't it be men & women?


Okay, I've just seen the pilot. And in my opinion, I think the show had some potential.

For one, the female leads are all intriguing. Their characters all have interesting, new story lines, and the actresses pull it off rather well (especially Miranda Otto). One thing I might say though, is that while the characters are great in their own respective story lines, they lack chemistry between each other. But considering how the cast of DH and SATC didn't really seem that close to each other in their own pilots, I'm guessing that this might change as time passes by.

Speaking of DH and SATC, viewers might think that this is a bad knockoff of those shows, but it's not. Though the format is a bit clichéd in that it has four strong female leads as in SATC and DH, Cashmere Mafia strives to portray their leads as more ferocious than other shows. To be honest, rather than SATC and DH, I was reminded of a female version of "Big Shots". And while I gave up on BS for lacking sympathetic characters (I only liked Joshua Malina's character), I think Cashmere Mafia somehow finds a way to make their leads sympathetic on top of being strong and vicious.

Though I did like this pilot and the characters, I'm not sure whether viewers will give this show time to grow. Just as people are quick to criticize clichés, they are also quick to criticize the different. And with CM's cast of stronger, more cutthroat, and different women, I'm not sure if viewers will be ready for this. Here's hoping they are.


Four gal pals living in the Big Apple with successful jobs, fabulous lives, and drama to boot. This show sounds utterly similar to that of another show by Darren Starr, Sex and the City. The hit TV show that has won the hearts of many cosmopolitan drinking fashionistas the world over. And who could replace those four girls and their interestingly hilarious escapades and taboo issues? No one could do Sex and the City better than Carrie, Samantha, Charlotte, and Miranda.

Lucky for Mia, Zoe, Juliet, and Caitlin their show is called Cashmere Mafia. While the TV show hasn't covered issues as that of SATC, it does offer a new insight into the world of women. Not only can women just be portrayed as the sensual, sultry, sexual beings, but something more. In Cashmere Mafia, they show that women cannot only be sexy, but also deeply passionate about work, family, and relationships.

In a constantly changing society, where once women were valued for just their pretty face and social lifestyle, women are reaching new heights. I hope that this show does become wildly successful, but even more, I hope this show empowers women everywhere to strive for more and to set their sights higher.

I was and still am a fan of SATC and while I swear allegiance to it, I am open to something different, something new. While Cashmere Mafia covers similar topics that can be covered in most television shows today, they weave the stories to make them delightfully amusing. So for all the Sex and the City fans, the ones who own every season, who order cosmos when they're out with their girlfriends and wear high heels when they're going to a BBQ, it's time to try something new. Maybe it's time to trade in those cosmopolitans for wine and champagne.


I was surprised at first to see this NYC Cashmere Mafia... Great team, interesting story.. But - ain't it too soon to make this kind of film cloning of Sex and the city?

Same plot - 4 successful good looking women, Same age group - 35-45 Same place - Manhattan Same intrigue - sex, men, job struggle, to be single or married Same target audience

But finally - why not? I really miss the Sex and the city and really like this new project, although there certainly miss the secret charm of the original, The Cashmere mafia is well done and interesting. I really like the four actresses, the styling, Manhattan and the special serious spice I feel in this film.


This show reminds me of Sex in the City- without the warmth and genuine friendships. The pilot didn't quite demonstrate natural chemistry between the characters, although that could come in time. And airing the show after Desperate Housewives was smart; while I am sure that some DH fans will not like Cashmere Mafia, I would imagine that fans of Cashmere Mafia will be viewers of DH.

Thus far (i.e. after the airing of only the pilot), I think the show has the potential to capture the chick-flick audience- provided the plots of future episodes are original rather than predictable rewrites of other women-taking-charge shows.


Having seen the first three parts I must say I do like this show and I don't wanna miss the upcoming episodes. Somehow I never had a dull moment watching Lucy Liu, Bonnie Somerville and the other cougars.

I think its a great mixture of glamor, betrayal, intrigues and tough business women. It is fast paced, it has good acting and it does have a plot you wanna follow from one episode to the next and you wanna know where these characters might end up.

Even if it's not that realistic (or do you know a group of successful female executives looking that good?) I like being lifted up a little (reality bites) by a show that has the right heart beat. So I'm looking forward to seeing more of the Cashmere Mafia (must have been the Cartwrights in their former life) an I give them 7 out of 10 stars.


This is one of those movies that I couldn't even sit all the way through, and I have sat through some absolute crap in my days, even many Baldwin movies! I don't mind the blacksploitation genre, but this one was just terrible, acting was terrible, story line was terrible, costumes were cliché and let's not even get into the historical plausibility.

The bottom line is: even if you can get this movie for free or see it with a friend, you'll regret the hour+ of your life that you spent watching it (or less time if you can't sit through it like me).

On the plus side it may be good for a laugh if you're drunk at home with some mates, although it still doesn't have the drunken laughter appeal of something like Python or any of the 70's and 80's cult movies.

If you want a serious movie, don't get this, if you want a drunken laugh then only get this if ALL of the 80's horror films are already hired out.

I gave it a score of one because 'awful' really is fitting.


I am about 70% of the way through this movie and I had to stop. I couldn't go any further after seeing the "wooden" teller counter in the bank bow under the weight of "Linc". I couldn't stop laughing after that. This movie is agonizing. It's painful to watch. I've always told people who criticize some of the "B" level horror films that I'm in a habit of watching that you have to suspend reality for two hours to enjoy most films. It's Hollywood. Enjoy the fantasy trip. But this film won't even let me suspend common sense, let alone reality. I'm guessing that the movie is supposed to be set sometime in late 1800's. I'm guessing because the movie is not even convincing me that it could have been set in any reasonable past time frame. Where to begin...the clothes...the clothes are a joke. It's the wild west meets MTV. Is it a movie or a music video...hmmm???? Check out the woman in the bank robbing gang. Women may have dressed that way in the wild west bordellos, but not for trail riding and bank robbing. The situations are laughable. You can't convince me that there were any women sheriffs and/or deputies or women bank tellers in the wild west days. The acting is deplorable. Where did they get the mayor and his wife...some Disney movie? And who's idea was it to bring Bill (David Carradine's character from Kill Bill) back to life and send him back in time to the wild west? Carradine doesn't have much to lose by starring in this film. He's already at the end of his career. But for the countless young actors and actresses who made the bitter error of choosing this vehicle as a ladder climbing notch in their belts have opted for a bullet hole in their careers. I'm going to try to make it through the balance of this film and return it shamefully to my local Blockbuster store. But I highly recommend this film for file 13. You know, the round file...the trash.....


This film is waste of time, money, oxygen, cigarettes, cokes, electricity, etc. It cannot be worse than this. There is no acting, no directing, no camera moves or tricks or effects... The script is awful. Full of clichés, the worst ones... Music is just stupid. The casting is utterly and totally catastrophe. I like KURUPT though. But he does not talk very much. They tried to mix the white western culture and black R&B-HIPHOP thing!!! I don't even know what to call it. What is David Carradine doing there? Believe me I really want to give away the ending, but I will not, I don't know why. just DON'T !!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please... I am begging you


This is one of the worst films i have ever seen in my life. I have wasted my time with this movie. For this movie a new scale should be invented....from 0 to -10. Gabriel Casseus (Linc) and Antwon Tanner(Zane) must have payed lots of dollars to "act" in this movie. Some people think that anyone can become a movie star.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Now if i wold write more about this movie i would waste more of my time. I hope that not so many people will have to be tricked to watch this movie, a movie made by a bunch of "antiprofesionists". This movie should be in The 50 Worst Movies Ever Made!, top 10 actually. Escuse my English please. I speak Romanian.