Peter Pan grows up, gets married and forgets his past, turning into a fat boring corporate lawyer. He has two children but isn't a very good father, spending all his time on his work. During a visit to his Granny Wendy in London however, his past returns to haunt him when the villainous Captain Hook kidnaps the kids and holds them to ransom. Peter must return to Neverland, remember who he really is, and save his family.

Hook is a terrific riff on J.M. Barrie's classic fantasy Peter Pan. Suppose Peter grew up ? And suppose Hook came after him for revenge ? Then suppose Hook decided not to kill Peter but to steal his son's affections instead ? Thanks to a great script by James V. Hart, Nick Castle and Malia Scotch Marmo, this movie combines all the high-spirited fun and adventure of the original stageplay with a wonderfully bittersweet nostalgia on childhood lost and the joys of parenthood. This isn't really a film for kids; like Drop Dead Fred it's really a film for adults with lots of goofy childish moments. Williams is excellent as Peter Pan, transforming from blinkered, out-of-shape, scaredy-cat into fighting, flying, crowing boy-hero, the kids are all great, and Hoskins has a scene-stealing role as the gleefully light-fingered, self-preserving Smee. An unlikely best of all however is Hoffman - whose method overacting I can normally just about manage to stomach - who is dazzling as the swashbuckling, iniquitous Captain James Hook, complete with batty wig, wall-to-wall histrionics ("Don't try to stop me Smee !!", he bellows repeatedly, whilst faking a suicide attempt), a pathological fear of clocks and an accent you could curdle milk with. Hoffman extracts all the villainous comic potential possible from his performance, especially in a wonderfully wicked scene where he lectures the children on how much happier their parents were before they came along. Although not as acclaimed or as successful as many of his other movies, have no doubt - this is one of the extraordinarily gifted Spielberg's best films, and his talent shines through in every scene. Featuring fabulous sets for the Neverland locations, great flying effects and beautiful photography by Dean Cundey. My one gripe - the unnecessary romantic subplot with Tinkerbell, which adds nothing to the story and showcases far too much of the consistently awful Roberts. However, that cannot spoil what is a lovingly-made and ingenious fantasy, which gently reminds all adults what they once used to be. Good form !!


There are some films, like Santa Claus the movie or indeed Hook that are continually panned by critics and cynics alike. Hook is a blissfully wonderful and funny story with a superb cast. Robin Williams never fails to impress and adapts excellently to this role and the changes the character goes through. It is a film that makes you want to be young again, to be carefree and full of "happy thoughts" and perhaps there is a message in this movie about not forgetting what it is that makes you happy.

Brilliantly scripted and with great timing; especially between Dustin Hoffman's Hook and Bob Hoskins' Smee, this film never fails to brighten up my day.

"Bring me the heads" of those who disagree I say!


A comment was posted suggesting that fans of the book stay away from this movie. I couldn't disagree more!! I absolutely love the book, and I adore this movie. It is not meant to be a recreation of Barrie's brilliant and timeless story... it is, well, sort of a sequel in a way. It's a "what if" scenario, just one option of many. It's very cleverly tied closely to the original story, with many references woven throughout the entire storyline, if not as much in the plot itself. The creativity in every aspect of the film is very impressive, and a better cast could not have been chosen. Any fan of NeverNeverland and the story of Peter Pan is sure to immensely enjoy this movie. It even enforces family values and has a great moral to the story (especially for those who have suddenly surprisingly found themselves grown up!)


This movie didn't rate well with critics (sometimes a really good thing). It's too bad, though, because this is a terrific flick. Our entire family (ages 6 to 46) enjoys this movie year after year. It's just a lot of fun.

Dustin Hoffman is very funny, even a tad twisted, as Cap't. Hook (and I'm no Hoffman fan as a rule). Robin Williams is in better control of himself than he often can be, and makes you really believe that Peter Pan is and does as Mr. Barrie's original character did. And Bob Hoskins (Smee) is a gem of an understated comic here.

Don't be fooled by the detractors or critics -- see this and believe in some make-believe for yourself.


To describe my relation to Hook in just a few words: A fantastic movie, even though I've never been fascinated by the Peter Pan stories. I'm 19 years old and I saw this movie eleven years ago (1992) and I still love it after over a dozen viewings. The story, the way it looks, the characters (especially how they've developed since the "main" Pan story), the feeling. In my opinion, "Hook" is a competent fairytale, not to mention VERY well done! In my top ten.


Robin Williams is probably the best Peter Pan I've seen. Well, at least, a grownup Peter Pan. It's not a usual role for Robin compared to Mrs. Doubtfire or Good Morning Vietnam. He's a workaholic to get away from his family, along with his drinking. Then, his kids are gone and look who tells him that Captain Hook kidnapped his kids. In comes Maggie Smith. She is a wonderful Wendy!! This movie has it's ups and downs, of course. But, Robin's humor along with Dustin Hoffman's performance as Hook and Julia Roberts as Tinkerbell makes this movie a perfect childhood movie that can be watched with the whole family!


There is no good reason for this film to get anything below a 7.5. I have loved this film since my childhood, and recently was on the verge of tears during one particular scene.

Perhaps people just don't know what to make of this movie... and they critize it as being kiddie and trite and whatnot... its a KID's MOVIE, for God's sake! Dustin Hoffman and Robin Williams are great in their characterization of Hook and Pan. The beginning of the movie builds great tension with the "After-the-fact" kidnapping - the hook slashes down the hallway build up great suspense. Just...MAN THIS MOVIE IS GREAT!

Like I said before, just pretend this movie is rated "7.5" and go RENT IT! You will love it! Just don't except an all out Spielberg masterpiece, you might be just a little (yes, maybe just a little) disappointed. Otherwise, SIT BACK, ENJOY, and say FU to all the idiots who gave this movie a low rating.


Honestly, despite the crap people here throw on Hook, I've always enjoyed watching this movie when it comes on TV. I still cry during the scene where Pan goes back to the tree where the lost boys hid out in the original cartoon. He starts to remember this past of how he was orphaned, taken to neverland, and watched his best friend Wendy grow old as he forever stayed a young boy. Reaching deep into his past of sadness and happiness, Pan (Robin Williams) evokes real emotion from the audience. Perhaps this is not one of Spielberg's better films, but to me, this is saying alot about the man. The fact that love one of his lesser effort as a childhood favorite, makes me want to watch all the rest of his films, such as Encounters and the Color Purple. Spielberg is truly a great director, and this movie, while not showing every facet of the man's ability, is truly an enjoyable and memorable ride. Please watch this movie (with an open mind) and judge it for what it is, not as a flawless work of a master director. As for me, this movie has a true treat, an fantastic heart-warming family movie like we all need every now and then. (8/10)


Sheesh! It is amazing how much control the Hollywood establishment has over the entire spectrum of news media. In the morning paper, I read about some new movie for the first time ever. At noon, there it is again in a news magazine I get in the mail. Then I see some "news" story about it at six o'clock, and later on in the evening there's some story about one of the stars, and later again, an interview with the director and so on. The next day, the movie opens in a theater near you... and it turns out to be one mediocre dog doo of a flick that's begging seats in the "dollar theatre" a month later, only to be forgotten by year's end.

Then, there are movies like this one.

I'd never heard of it when I happened by chance to see it at a friend's house.

And I'll never forget it. What a masterpiece!

If you're a musician, and especially if your first instrument was a hand-me-down, you might appreciate the peculiar tendency of a musical instrument to absorb and even accumulate the human soul, and find its way into the most appropriate hands. That's what this movie is about. Although if you're like me, you might think it's about that one hand-me-down that nobody else wanted, that got you started, the one that years later, when you saw some kid admiring it, you just *knew* it no longer belonged to you...


This is a good film from a number of viewpoints, including intellectual, visual and emotional, and it even has an intriguing plot line. Effective and smooth use of flashback allows the movie great latitude. I enjoyed it and recommend it.


I was intruigued by the title of the movie and I am glad that they waited til near the end to reveal why it was red. I liked how the movie wove together the tarot readings and the different owners of the red violin and I also liked how it was all again brought together at the auction. I don't mind reading subtitles- that made the parts of the movie that were in Germany and China and Italy more authentic. The music was very good and the story that most touched me was that of Kaspar Weiss the little boy with so much talent and such a weak body. A very good film- I also enjoyed the directors other work abou Gould- he has a knack for typing music and stories together.


Its no wonder that ITV has dropped both David and Frank, I for one am glad about this. This show, when first seen was bright, fresh and most importantly funny. One thing that I notice to make me go off the two is how much they relish their title as celebrity and will bully anyone in the audience if the say something to know them. When some does knock them they really take it to heart that 'A mere mortal has stood up to them' and will quickly ask about their fashion or take a dig at their looks (If they are not very attractive).

Take in to fact the both Frank and David look like tramps and are the ugliest people in to studio I find this ironic. The bulling become more harsh as the gags got weak, which was about half was thought the second series. David I found was the worst for pointing out peoples problems and I found it funny when someone asked him if he thought that he was nothing with Frank. To see this guy who thought that he was a God brought down to his knees by a *Nobody* was kind of nice.

The show is over now and so is David and Franks bulling, The BBC don't want them back, ITV told them to go and now frank is trying to start his stand-up career again where he left off.


The Mike Hammer adventure My Gun Is Quick survives against some pretty steep odds. First, it comes from the paw of Mickey Spillane, with the problems that implies; its cast and crew are (and were) unknowns; it's all but forgotten; and what little word of mouth circulates around it tends to be dismissive. But, like the curate's egg, it's not too bad, and parts of it are pretty good.

Hammer (Robert Bray), on stakeout for the last 52 hours, staggers into a diner for another cup of joe. He flirts with a young hooker, giving her bus fare back to Nebraska. When she's found dead the next morning, he takes it personally. A baroque ring she wore turns out to have come from an Italian treasure stolen during the war. Seeking to avenge her killing, Hammer, in the inflexible tradition of Los Angeles private eyes, works his way along the underbelly of the City of Angels to the missing loot and the murderers.

It's not quite the same town where earlier gumshoes Dick Powell and Humphrey Bogart and Robert Montgomery plied their trade. As in the memorable Mike Hammer movie Kiss Me Deadly of two years earlier, it's the late-Eisenhower L.A. of freeways and oil derricks and strip clubs, a changing landscape where the Mexican presence can no longer be ignored. Even the wealthy live in cold, '50s-moderne showplaces of spindly blonde furniture and plate glass walls draped with sheers. But Hammer's quest is the old and familiar one of multiple murders, duplicity and femmes fatales of increasing lethality.

Wisely, the movie takes Hammer 'as is.' It doesn't pull back from his easy violence, his racism ('greaseball' is a favorite epithet), and his misogyny ('Off my back, chick  I'm tired!' he bellows at his secretary Velda). But it keeps its distance and doesn't glamorize him, either (though it does grant him his primitive 'code').

The movie (shot in black and white by Harry Neumann, with over 350 titles to his credit) has an almost retro look to it, and there's a jazzy, percussive score by Marlin Skiles, another unsung veteran of countless genre programmers. The acting stays serviceable and occasionally better, but the script keeps careless track of some of the plot strands (the man from Amsterdam gets misplaced entirely). My Gun Is Quick boasts one distinctive passage: Hammer looks in from an upstairs window down at a chaotic scene crowded with police, ambulance drivers and several of the characters, as a body is wheeled away. It's filmed entirely without dialogue, the only sounds being the wind, the surf and the muted music of bongo drums.


This film has been on my 'must see' list for years and I finally got to see it recently. It is probably one of the better low budget detective yarns of the late 50s and is improved by having a producer (Victor Saville) very familiar with his material having produced two earlier Spillane/Hammer films. Robert Bray is excellent as an unshaven worn out Mike Hammer and is well supported by the rest of the cast. The script and location photography are good and the music suitably sleazy and atmospheric. What lets it down is the predictable ending, often a problem with Spillane stories - it's nearly always 'the dame that dunnit'. My favourite Hammer film is the first version of 'I, The Jury' which benefits from some superb noir imagery. This film isn't quite that good but is a serviceable and very entertaining movie.


The quintessential Mike Hammer (Robert Bray), haggard, menacing, but essentially a decent guy in a dirty world inhabited by ruthless killers, gets involved in the murder of a young aspiring actress, who only the night before he had met at a lonely downtown diner, and had helped out with bus fare back to her native Nebraska. Her death was related to a piece of jewelry she was carrying, part of a cache of stolen war time jewels. Forced to get to the bottom of the murder, not for money but because of his connection to the girl, he unravels the mystery in the typical Hammer fashion of payoffs and beatings. Released two years after Aldrich's Kiss Me Deadly, MGiQ is the poorer man's version, though it has its own charms, mostly in the way of the LA settings and Bray's portrayal, tired and unshaven, but with the determination of a pit bull.


(Some Spoilers) Somewhat better then you would have expected Mike Hammer flick with Robert Bray in the leading role as the tough as nails private eye who gets involved in a slew of murders as well as a hunt for the missing one million dollars Venacci Jewel collection. All this because he took the time and effort to help a young girl named Red, Jan Chaney, from Nebraska get herself straightened out and go, with Mike handing her a twenty, back home to mama and the boy she left behind.

It's when Red is found dead, in a suspicious hit and run accident, with his name and address on her that Hammer goes into action in finding who's responsible for Red's untimely death; that he rightfully feels was a murder not an accident. It's when Hammer finds that this usual ring, with a V craved on it, that Red had on her was missing that he had his girl Friday, or secretary, Velda, Pamela Duncan, check it out for him.

Finding out, from an 10 year old Time Magazine cover, the ring belonged to the long lost Venacci jewelry collection it became obvious that was the reason for Red's murder. Hammer traces down two persons who can help him break the case of the murdered redhead who happened to work with her at the nightclub the "Blue Bell". As expected the two persons whom Hammer got in contact with dancer Maria Garcia, Genie Coree, and the deft mute janitor Jane, Terrance De Morney, ended up being murdered before they can help Hammer in finding Red's killer or killers.

The one clue that Hammer, with the help of his secretary Velda, came up with was what would lead him to find why and who was behind not only Red's but Jane and Marie's murders as well. It had to do with a rented apartment that was occupied by Col. Holloway, Donald Randolph, just after he was discharged from the military after the end of WWII. It was Col.Holloway, a US intelligence officer, who in fact stole the valuable Venacci Jewelry collection while he was serving with the US Army in Germany back in 1945! Having spent ten years behind bars Holloway was soon to be released from jail and it was certain to Hammer, with the jewels never being found, that the Venacci Jewels were somewhere hidden in that apartment that Holloway rented. What Hammer didn't know at the time is that not only Holloway was interested in finding the long lost, or hidden, Venacci Jewels but a gang of murderous jewels thieves lead by Frenchman LaRoche, Peter Mamakos, were also looking for them!

A bit below average, compared to the previous Mike Hammer movie "Kiss Me Deadly", "My Gun is Quick" is rescued by actor Robert Bray's interpretation of the ruthless and unprincipled Mike Hammer portrayed by Ralph Meeker in the aforementioned film. In that Bray's Hammer, in the film "My Gun is Quick", has a heart of gold and played strictly by the rules. That besides him being as convincing, if not more so, as Meeker was in showing how brutal and ruthless Mike Hammer can be when he wanted to get information as well as slug it out with the bad guys.

This in fact took away Hammer's both bad guy and anything to get results image and made you for once like him. Instead of making him, like Ralph Meeker, the best of a bad lot compared to those he fought which Mike Hammer comes across as in almost all of the films he's portrayed in.


I love this version of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. Jeff Goldblum is the best Ichabod Crane I have ever seen. Unfortunately, I have only seen it maybe every other Halloween, shown on various local stations that don't advertise their lineups in the TV guide. Also unfortunately, the film is aging poorly so every year it gets a little fuzzier. But it doesn't feel like Halloween until you see Goldblum's stammering and Adam's apple bobbing and the lovely romance emphasized in this version. I'm crossing my fingers that it will be remastered and put on DVD. Am I crazy? Yes, but I can hope.


Jeff Goldblum is simply a supreme actor. He has the talent of drawing the audience into the role he is playing at the time and that is a rare thing indeed! This move is a wonderful example of the Headless Horseman story. I wasn't even aware there were VCR copies of the movie. Hopefully the studio/production company will become aware of the need for a DVD of this movie. Considering all the DVDs out there at this time, this DVD would be a step in the right direction of quality home entertainment. Plus, it is not just a seasonal type of movie. The story was very interesting and creative. Definitely worthy of year-round appraisal. See it, it's great!


This version with Jeff Goldblum is pretty good.It is one of them films where nothing spectacular happens until the end but the end is worth waiting for!Some of the scenes are very similar like the cartoon.Goldblum was the perfect choice to play Ichabod Crane as he is tall and thin!That's all I'll say but if you like The Legend of Sleepy Hollow story and the new film and are able to check this out do so because it is a very rare film and it is a good watch for the mystery and horror fan!


This version of Legend of Sleepy Hollow has all the ingredients of a classic. The mood is set in the beginning through music and a great opening scene...I make it a point to watch in the autumn between Halloween and Thanksgiving...I guess you need to have grown up in the 80's to really appreciate the feel of this particular version...Great Family Film and stands on the ability and confidence of fine acting...even in the quirky monologue...This film is getting rave reviews from at least 20 or 30 of my family and friends. I suggest anyone reading this review to go and get yourself a copy on the VHS format with the original cover...I don't know why they didn't print any DVD version yet...it is worth a view either way.


The TV movie version of Washington Irving's classic American story diverges from the book in many ways, however this is a great movie. Jeff Goldblum is great as Ichabod Crane, with his tall, skinny frame storking throughout the movie (although for some reason he's constantly licking his lips). Fritz VanderHoff, his patron and introduction to Sleepy Hollow's supernatural side, is amazing comic relief and really gets into the historic side of his handyman character. Paul Sand is also quite good as Fred Dutcher, Dick Butkus' sidekick. I grew up with this movie and still love it, from the period clothing and locations to the close ups of Palmer in the barn. Every time that I watch it I come away with something new. The picture quality is lacking, as it is a reproduction of a 1980 TV movie, so its just itching for a DVD release. This is truly an American classic and Jeff Goldblum; et.al. should be petitioning for it's re-release on television, if not a theatrical release.


Ever since I saw this on tv many years ago, it has been my favorite Sleepy Hollow. I've seen 3 other Sleepy Hollows, including the most recent one with Johnny Depp, and I still prefer this one. One of the elements I love most is its authenticity. I think it is very true to the original story that everyone knows, and so many of the actors and actresses are perfectly suited for their characters. Jeff Goldblum is excellent as Ichabod Crane; besides his tall and gangly appearance, he has an amazing ability for playing quirky characters. I have yet to see someone do a better performance. Dick Butkus gives a great supporting performance as the coarse, insensitive Brom Bones as well. This is a movie that I wish would be shown every year at Halloween; I think it could become a tradition just like The Grinch at Christmas. If you come across it in a video store, it's definitely worth seeing.


I've been a Sleepy Hollow affectionado ever since i saw the animated Disney classic as a kid, and I suppose I've seen pretty much every version from TV, movies, and cartoons since the 1950's. In many ways, the Disney one is still my favorite. I loved the Tim Burton film with Johnny Depp, but something about it wasn't right. In a world where Biblical names were commonplace, "Ichabod" is a most unflattering name, meaning "the glory has departed" - but Ichabod Crane, originally NOT the nicest of men, has become a hero over the years. Depp's Ichabod was too handsome and brave, and there were no NYC police in 1799, let alone forensics specialists. And so Jeff Goldblum remains probably the best-cast Ichabod Crane of all time. He has a look similar to the Disney one, but he has a much more pleasant manner, Burton's film, is ghostly and mysterious and well done. The subplot with a brutish Brom Bones (wasn't Bram the hunky one?) and a girl friend (NOT Katrina)ain't that great - but the overall film is very enjoyable, and seems to have quite a fan following. A good Halloween tale for all ages.


I've loved this movie since its first airing back in 1980. Actually I only caught the ending that night because of being out late trick or treating..lol. Great cast, especially Jeff Goldblum and Dick Butkus. For a lot of the movie you get so wrapped up in the characters that you almost forget about the real headless horseman. There's just something very nostalgic about this film. The clothing, the log cabins, the small community, the nice manners, the ghost tales, the hospitality, the music, the location..so much to enjoy! The story is a little modified from the original but that's okay, it still works very well. I don't think much of it was filmed in a studio which gave it that more realistic feel. Just a wonderful film from beginning to exciting end.

Yes a DVD release would be very nice.


I loved this one! Icabob Crane is here and Brom Bones (Dick Butkus) is angered that Katrina Van Tassel, his "girl" is taking a fond interest in Crane. When poltergeists appear, Crane still doesn't believe until one fateful night... My only problem with this is that it does not remain trueful to the book by Irving.


Okay, I am so fascinated with the "Sleepy Hollow" movies, but this one is the most inadequate one. The acting is horrible, the camera shots are worse, but this movie does hold a place in my heart, so I gave it a 7. It was an okay movie, Jeff Goldblum was not a good Ichabod though, but Butkus rocked. It always comes on here in Chicago the Wednesday before Halloween from 4 in the morning to 6. I have it now, it was released on video for some time.

All in all, this is an average TV movie, and WOULD BE BETTER AS A "LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRARIE" HALLOWEEN SPECIAL. If you get a chance, check this out.


To the Producers of "Boudica"

All my life I have had a special interest in ancient Celtic culture and lifestyle and a particular fascination for 1st century Britain. Therefore i have done a great lot of research over the years and read and watch anything I can find on the subject.

"Boudica" was probably the worst historical film ever made and could easily enter the Guinness Book of Records for the most historical inaccuracies, both in number and variety, ever seen on a screen. Apart from the swords (where were the shields?), chariots and some of the women's hairstyles there was absolutely nothing right. i know it wasn't meant to be a comedy, but there are some utterly hilarious lines in this film.

Female leaders were very common in ancient Celtic society. Boudica was probably the ruling queen of her tribe anyway, but the Romans only accepted a man in that position and made Boudica's husband (who was much older than her and died of old age, not headaches!) the client king. There were a number of warrior women in 1st century Britain, though Boudica was the only one mentioned in history. Tacitus writes that to the Romans "the worst humiliation of losing the battle with Boudica, was being defeated by a woman!"

Tacitus, although on the other side, describes the British tribes and some of their customs and clothes in some detail. The producers of the film obviously haven't read any of that, or the actors and actresses would at least have worn costumes and hairstyles more appropriate for the period. Women always wore dresses, even in battle! The minor warriors wore very little, while the aristocracy dressed up to impress for the occasion with lots of (mainly gold) jewellery and colourful clothes. The women wore two piece dresses - a wide shirt of linen or wool held together in the middle by an elborate belt, and a full skirt. When horse riding, the skirt was pulled through between the legs, still covering the knees. Cloaks made of wool or fur were worn in the winter, and woollen leggings resembling leg warmers. The men wore similar shirts and cloaks, and breeches which were wide at the top. In the film they wore 20th century jogging bottoms and some sort of cavemen's furs reminding of the "Flintstones".

The men's 20th century hairstyles, I would think, would have looked out of place, even to anyone who never read anything about the 1st century. Almost all of them had their hair too short and where were their moustaches? Here, instead, some of the Romans have (very modern) beards, they would not have had in that period. Most Celtic men, especially those of any standing in society, had moustaches and a long mane of hair. Similar to some Native American tribes, 1st century Britons took pride in their long thick hair. Baldness was seen as a curse by the gods, so never in a million years would there have been a bald priest, and never would a druid or a priest of any sort have worn such rags! The Roman women are dressed up to the nines, although tacky and pantomine like. The Celtic women, and men, would have been dressed up elaborately.

Alright, we don't know the names of Boudica's daughters, though they wouldn't have come out of Arthurian legends or even Wagner. They could have read some ancient Welsh legends and picked some simple names from those.

A Celtic king who didn't want to go into battle would have been deposed, possibly murdered by his people for cowardice. There were no retired warriors anymore than bald priests in rags.

Claudius is hilarious. These scenes reminded me of a cross between "I Claudius" and the "Carry-on" films.

"Acts of Terrorism"? "Peace Process"? President Bush was here - did anyone recognise him?

Celtic funeral rites varied depending on the tribe. However, they never burned their dead. In fact, they went through a lot of trouble to rescue both the dead and the living from the flames, when any of their dwelling places was set on fire by an enemy. Any warrior of rank, especially a king, would have been buried with his sword, jewellery, food, sometimes other weapons or even a chariot. Their graves were usually in a wood and not marked on the outside. I won't go into too much detail here, not even sure you're still reading this. Death by fire was the ultimate punishment (only given to worst criminals), as there was a general belief that it would destroy the soul as well as the body and prevent the person from being reborn. I think there may have been a mix up with a Viking burial here, looking at the flames and water.

"Empire under new management!" another 20th/21st century phrase. "Read my lips!"

The Celtic aristocracy did not live in villages, but in hillside towns. They kept their homes and themselves clean, their hair, bodies and clothes washed regularly. There would not have been an army of the great unwashed, at least not before the battle. In fact, the Celts invented soap.

The Greeks visited Britain before the Romans, not to invade but just to trade, and there are some descriptions of their customs, looks and music. Music was distinctive and melodeous. Singing and playing instruments and dancing was a way of expressing high emotions. They had harps, though not those we know today, a variety of pipes, flutes and drums. We don't know their tunes, though some might have been similar to early medieval or middle eastern type music rather than new age pseudo Native American dirges used in the film.

The "Excalibur" type magic doesn't work here, only making the whole thing more ridiculous.

We are not sure what sort of music they had in the 1st century, but we know that music, poetry and storytelling was an important part of Celtic culture. Singing, dancing and playing instruments expressed their high emotions. They had harps, though not those we know today, a variety of pipes and flutes and drums. Middle Eastern or early medieval type tunes may have been similar, or at least would have fitted into a proper historical film, instead of some weird new age pseudo Native American wailings. I think I heard a didgeridoo once as well, but by then nothing could shock or surprise me anymore.

"What the hell is going on?" Nero said. What is a Classic battle? Then someone mentioned Anglesey! The island was called Ynis Mon, still known by that name in Wales today. The Romans always took a local name and latinised it, therefore called it Mona. The Angles occupied the island five centuries later and called it Anglesey! The producers wouldn't even need to read about this, but could have asked any Welsh person the right name.

The Romans drank from metal tankards and pottery cups, not glasses, as far as I know. Well, certainly not Art Deco glasses.

i don't think the Britons grew cabbages either, maybe mushrooms though I don't know. Their diet consisted mainly of meat, cheese, bread, cakes and apples and berries, maybe some leaves were used as vegetable garnish. Herbs were used in medicine rather than cooking.

Well, I just had to get this off my chest, even if no-one reads it.

Sincerely,

Kersty Evans


If this is going to have a theatrical release in the US this is going to bomb big time. A very dissapointing film, with the occasional good momment, but the worst thing is the typical trates of ITV dramas that have crept in. The tendancy for everyone behind the scenes to try and stand out from the crowd by throwing in their own little bits. As a result what could have been a good film was pretty much destroyed.

The beginning and ending was just downright patronising and the scenes in Rome (which seemed there entirely to emphasise that Nero was as nutty as a fruit cake) were pretty redundant. There were however a few good battle scenes and some good acting. On the whole though it was just bad camera work, bad directing, poor script, feeble attempts to shock the audience and very little genuine authenticity.

I rated this at a 4/10 but had it not been for the unprofessional start and end it could have scrapped a 6/10 because there was enough reasonable content here to make this film enjoyable at least for a one off viewing.

If you see this film on TV and like ancient history and legends it's worth a watch, but whatever you do don't pay to see this in a movie theatre because this is a long way off being anything other then a TV movie.


I didn't hate this movie but there were a lot of times where I grimaced at the usual things that annoy me about historical films. I would love it if for once someone decided to explore the possibility of making a historical movie that actually tries to recreate a picture of what really might have happened! Is this so difficult? Will it screw up the story so badly to just make it feel real? I want the Romans to talk Latin and the Celts (if possible) to talk in their language. (subtitled with English) That's how real it should be. Virtually no one should have white teeth either. And they should spend a bit more time researching the tactics! Romans didn't just stand there waiting to be attacked (the final battle) they would have thrown their pila (javelins) and then drawn swords and hacked into the enemy. Standing defensively works for spear armed infantry not for assault infantry like the soldiers pictured in the film. No one has to know all these details but it's not like one is asking the director to move a mountain just to show the (cooler) actual tactics that we would have seen had we been watching the battle... Sure not many people will care about the added accuracy but...what have they got to lose by it? A few extra nights on google searching for ancient accounts of roman warfare??? As for Nero I thought the film showed him to be too concerned about the incident, like it was consuming his life. I don't think it occupied his thoughts as much as they make out - he is even totally preoccupied with the Celts before the rebellion! (which actually occurred years after Claudius's death).


Well, it was made for cable, so I will not bash the TV-series-like visuals. Neither will I criticize that everyone in the movie speaks English, although some sort of lingual contrast between Romans and Boudica's tribe would have been desirable. But to begin with this is technically very bad: the props - especially those of the Roman city that is destroyed - are obviously fake, and so is this way that the raped and tortured Boudica and her daughters drag themselves home (it looks like something from a zombie movie). The acting is generally unconvincing or perhaps just not very well directed. When Boudica confronts the enemy in a battle she resembles an enthusiastic housewife at a Rod Stewart concert more than a bloodthirsty avenger. The plot lends so many elements from "Braveheart", "Gladiator" and the like that it almost looks like a parody on historic epics (the main character whose family is assaulted, the cry-baby incestuous villain, the triumphant sacrifice for freedom and so on, and so on). And on top of it the opening sequence with its direct address of the audience and the anachronistic final is ripped off from Potter's "Orlando", only without embedding this theme in the entire script. Two stars because this is actually (unintentionally) quite funny at points.


Alex Kingston stars in the gritty dram about the formidable Iceni queen Boudica.

No longer being able to bear the pain of seeing the woman he loves with another man Dervalloc sets off across the waters away from his passionate Queen, convinced she is content with her King and two children But Boudica has a lot to be unhappy about. As wife to King Prasutagus of the Iceni tribe, she sees her fierce husband shamed before Rome's greedy onslaught. Prasutagus accepts a treaty that preserves his tribe's independence but at the cost of high taxes. When he dies mysteriously, Boudica becomes the Iceni leader but allegiance to her is not all one sided. Depraved Roman captain Catus shows the spirited queen a copy of her husbands will which leave half of his kingdom to the roman empire.

Convinced the will is a forgery Boudica battles to bring her people away from the slavery that is Rome and attempts to conquer the very powerful roman empire with tragic consequences.


I hate fact twisted into some overdone fantasy/historical fiction called epics. This is one of the worst. I am obsessed with Celtic culture and I look it up endlessly. I have no problem in creating epics with a touch of unrealism. It's fiction. I like adding spin to it. But I absolutely hate it when people take history and completely ignore facts to add their own "idea" of realism.

Boudicca is one of my heroes. But she was usual for her time. The actress played her well, but the whole idea of Boudicca should have been left to true, hard-core lovers of Celtic culture.

One day,maybe, someone will get it right. The actors were fine: the writing was WAY overdone. Stilted and unimaginative.


This movie was inspiring to me, as it was about a woman who would not give up. She is one of my favorite actresses, appearing on ER in the U.S. It was also about an empire which ran over indigenous people, a practice which continues into the present time. There are many lines in the movie which might just remind you of current day statements. And listen closely to Nero, does he remind you of anyone? The actors are all great in my opinion, they do not falter or miss a beat. Yes, it is a bit violent, and if that is a concern, you should not allow small children (under 8 or 10) to view this. Since we rarely see things about the Celts, I was happy to have an idea of how they dressed and some of their customs. Women definitely had equality, and that is rare to see even in these modern times.


I've been looking at the comments on this site, and it looks like almost everyone who posted is very familiar with Boudica and very upset by what are apparently myriad inaccuracies. It makes me wonder if anyone saw this show who wasn't a history freak. So let me begin by saying I know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the real story. But from the vantage point of someone who isn't horrified by incorrect costumes and hairstyles, I thought this was an excellent movie with many striking scenes. Also, as someone who doesn't watch ER I have not pigeonholed the excellent actress Alex Kingston into whatever character she plays in the show. I am only familiar with her from her first rate performance in Moll Flanders. It's very silly to object to a performance not based on the quality of the performance but on what you're used to seeing the actress in.

I liked this about as well as I liked Braveheart (which I thought was good but overrated).


Nothing wrong with the choice of actors, but the history itself was underutilized. The rape of Boudica's daughters were overemphasized to the point of trauma to even the moderately sensitive viewer. Just knowing that the girls were raped was enough. The producers didn't have to actually show quasigraphic on public television. Basically it would be called disgusting.

Anyway, the fighting was well done, but teh ending was too abrupt and left the viewer wanting to know what happened after the battle. All in all, the show was about 90 minutes.

I was at best disappointed.


I investigated this a possible movie to show to my Latin students about a strong female hero. Unfortunately, it proved completely unsuitable.

Disturbing battle violence, a scene of full frontal male nudity, a very graphic and prolonged gang rape scene with thrusting and screaming, and an unnecessary sex scene between Boudica and her lover after battle.

I didn't even get to the part where Nero has graphic sexual activity with his mother.

No educational value, no entertainment value.

Avoid for students at all costs!

Even lovers of Alex Kingston will be disappointed.


The acting was good, the picturing of that time was OK.

But! Sick movie producers alert!

After 30 minutes there is this horrible scene where young Nero has a sexual relation with his mother, and they show everything. I don't care if they want to show Neros sick mind, I don't need pedophile flirting in movies. You can tell such things in a movie without tongue kissing and breast sucking thrown into the face of the watcher.

I turned the movie off and I suspect I'm not the first doing so.

Don't see this movie.

Watch something else.


This game is excellent, especially when dealing with two dimensional Super Nintendo gaming.

You control Samus Aran, who has been on two previous missions. She encountered Metroids in both, and now the last Metroid has been captured by Ridley. You must fight your way through incredible caverns.

The graphics are stunning for Super Nintendo, possibly some of the best. The music is also excellent (who can forget the chilling voices in the second, final section of Norfair?). The battles are intense. The gameplay is extremely easy to control. The storyline and plot are both deep and interesting. Not only does this game mix great gaming with great music, it also adds in puzzles, freaky enemies, and unique sound effects that all add to the gameplay, allowing you to immerse yourself in the world of planet Zebes.

Also, for a Super Nintendo game, this one is huge. There's Brinstar, Norfair, Maridia, the Wrecked Ship, even Tourian. You even see the previous location of the Mother Brain in Brinstar as you make your way through the caverns, which helps the consistency of the games alive. Nothing is altered to make the storyline contradict itself.

The previous games were pretty good, but this one is obviously the best. It is an excellent thriller, action/adventure, puzzle game that will interest anyone.


Being the third in the Metroid series, "Super Metroid" takes everything that was ever great from the first two "Metroid" and "Metroid II: The Return of Samus" and makes everything better. The game plays the same as the previous two (side scroller) with Samus Aran returning the Metroid Home World to eliminate her past enemies. Again Samus has to locate various weapons such as the ice beam, missiles, bombs, high jump boots, energy tanks along with new weapons; super missiles and bombs, grappling beam and x-ray scanner. Super Metroid uses some of the same maps from the original Metroid which are now deserted and has an overwhelming feeling of nostalgia. Accompanying the beautiful graphics is a great soundtrack reminiscent of the music from the series. I'd like to add more to this attempt at a review, but I fear that I might give too much away for those who have yet to play this game.


One of the greatest games of all time, especially of the sci-fi genre. Absolutely everything about this game was well done from the amazing graphics, to the tight controls, to the even more haunting music in the background. From the start to the finish, the game never lets up as far as atmosphere and action. Creature sounds are top-notch and will actually make you jump in some places. Metroid has always been fun because at the start you are real weak and then by the end of the game, you feel like you could take on any kind of bounty hunter prey in the universe. This game is still in my library and i still play from time to time. Absolutely recommended.


Aside from the perfect graphics, music (despite low-quality samples), gameplay, controls and the terrific, gigantic and ingenious level layouts, Super Metroid was also a thrilling video game experience like very few others. I can count in my fingers the number of games in all these years that were truly capable of putting me in the shoes of the protagonist: Super Metroid, Metal Gear Solid, Zelda:OoT, Shadow of Colossus, Metroid Prime 3.

Super Metroid did just that: put me in the shoes of a space bounty hunter battling bazillions of aliens while exploring the deepest recesses of creepy alien environments in search of the last Metroid. The real world simply vanishes and you are just there. It didn't even need first-person view to do just that, like in the Metroid Prime series. It is that mindblowing, specially in its heyday: it was like witnessing Star Wars back in the 1970's.


This is without a doubt, the Best game in the Metroid series. The graphics are awesome and the game play is very satisfying. But in the end how could you not love a game were you play as a hot female going around and blasting aliens. Sure it has some cryptic elements, but in the end is it really possible to make a good game without those? This is not only my favorite game for the SNES, but is also my favorite video game of all time. There is one thing about this game though that I find kinda odd though. Like the fact that 80% of the monsters in this game sound like monsters that appeared in Godzilla movies. This is one f**k of a great game 10 stars out of 10!


Anytime someone asks me what I'd consider the scariest movie ever, I say "Silkwood," and they say "But that's not a horror movie."

No?

There is so much to fear here, and scariest of all, probably, is the fact that the title character lived just a few decades ago, in modern-day America.

There is the fear that comes from living in poverty, or right on the edge of it. Silkwood, her cohorts, and most of her coworkers have little education; they live humble lives of church revivals, rebuilt cars, and "mystery meat" sandwiches brought for lunch in brown paper bags. The nuclear plant where they work is the only game in town (or the entire state), in terms of wages and benefits. And so, every day, they live in fear of losing their jobs. They have spent their lives being instructed to trust authority and submit to it. They are intimidated by the managers and supervisors who frown on camaraderie, and positively scowl on their labor union.

There is the fear of the unknown at the plant -- trucks being dismantled and buried behind barbed wire, under guard and under cover of darkness. Management gives the workers the minimum amount of information they need to perform their jobs, and often withhold or disguise facts that are essential to their very survival.

Karen, a somewhat rebellious, less-than-conscientious worker, is shocked into activism when her co-worker Thelma, becomes exposed to radioactive contamination, or "cooked." For me, this sequence is one of the most disturbing. Thelma is probably only in her 40s, but she looks like she's ready for retirement, due to the hard life she has lived. Her daughter is dying of cancer, and she herself wears wigs most days, because her hair is falling out. It's hard to watch the weeping, pleading Thelma being forcibly scrubbed head to toe with a stiff brush, water being shot into her eyes and nose, in a dubious attempt to "decontaminate" her. She is then patronized by a doctor who straight-facedly assures her that she has only superficial exposure and will be just fine.

There is fear when Karen sticks her neck out -- talking to union reps, traveling to Washington, and being sent back to work with a dangerous assignment: to gather evidence. At one point in the film, absolutely no one is supporting her. Her roommate feels resentful and rejected; her boyfriend has moved out, jealous of her involvement with the sophisticated people from Washington, and her co-workers treat her like a pariah, afraid that being seen talking to her will brand them as troublemakers, endangering their jobs, or even their lives.

Their worries seem more and more valid as the movie progresses. She walks into a roomful of supervisors, and they all fall silent. Suddenly, every time she walks past a radiation monitor, the alarms sound and she, like Thelma, is dragged to the dreaded decon room, where her skin is scrubbed raw -- torture chillingly disguised as medical necessity. Even her home is no longer safe. Plutonium is found in a urine sample that she brings from home, and every item in her house--right down to the wallpaper--is emptied and taken away from her. Her stone-faced, smooth-talking boss is right there, encouraging her to sign a statement that will undoubtedly absolve the company of any responsibility.

The headlights Karen sees in her rear-view mirror are not the last thing we see that frightens us. It's her wrecked car being slowly towed past the restaurant where a union meeting is still in progress.

The movie hits so many of our fear buttons: Helplessness, loneliness, rejection, vulnerability, and finally, the bottom-line thing we all fear the most. The most encouraging note is the awareness that anyone who sees this movie will come away with. It's a blueprint for empowerment.

e.w.


The lives of working class Americans are shamefully under-represented by Hollywood, and when a poor person is depicted (as something other than a criminal), it's almost always with the subtext of hope and the American dream. But hope isn't what drives someone, like the real-life Karen Silkwood, to risk her life working with plutonium for the only employer in a company town. Silkwood didn't find hope, but she did get scared, and angry, and put her job (and those of her colleagues) at stake to uncover dangerous practices before dying a mysterious death. 'Silkwood' the movie doesn't give us the glib conclusions of a conspiracy thriller (it refrains from giving an opinion on her cause of death), but it does give an excellent portrait of life at the bottom, and the mounting sense of claustrophobia and paranoia that accompanied Karen's perilous voyage of discovery. Meryl Streep does an excellent job in the title role, portraying a woman gradually losing her sanity, and the whole cast is good, even Cher in an unglamorous role. In conclusion, this is a serious and important film; and a reminder for the fortunate how hard, and ugly, life can be, even in the "land of the free".


After watching Silkwood, I became fascinated and mesmerized by the true story behind it. I read the book, bought A&E biography video, and the History Channel's video: Contaminated, the Karen Silkwood Story. Despite reading other comments, I totally disagree about Karen Silkwood who probably saved more lives and lost her own to protect her colleagues and neighbors in Crescent, Oklahoma. If she had not spoke up in the seventies, Kerr-McGhee would still have a nuclear reactor plant in Crescent, Oklahoma. What most people do not know is that Karen's mysterious death haunted a huge ENronlike company. The plant closed in the following year. The shocking discoveries such as missing plutonium and horrible working conditions for its employees.

Two showers for the entire company! Karen Silkwood's life was tragically cut short but she did more in 28 years than most people can do in their entire lifetime. Meryl Streep played her wonderfully. Kurt Russell and Cher played their roles quite admirably. This film was showed to high school students who became equally fascinated by the story after viewing the history channel's video. After the film, they even wanted to watch the biography video. Now anything that can keep teenagers interested in plutonium and nuclear energy is worth all the trouble. THis film's only criticism from the students was that there was too much smoking in this film. Granted, all the main characters smoked in the seventies. After all, I think lung cancer from smoking was far less riskier than working in a nuclear plant.


One of the things that many movies are missing these days are the small details and things that happen in everyday life - and how we are able to learn about characters through small visual clues rather than the large hammer of exposition-driven dialogue.

For instance, in the scene where the characters are looking at the slides of the trip to Washington: towards the end are two photos with Streep and Ron Silver's character. In the second photo, she leans into him a little bit. That tiny bit of body language makes us wonder - and Kurt Russell's character too. He suddenly moves his arm from around Streep's and suddenly she's aware that something's wrong. It's all in the unspoken. There isn't a preceding scene where she picks up the other guy, or goes to bed with him or even lies to Kurt Russell. It just cuts to this scene, and we the viewer learn along with Kurt that she's been unfaithful - which also reveals a little more about this person Karen Silkwood.

She's not a perfect hero - she's flighty, irresponsible, impulsive and non-committal - so the question becomes, why did she change? Why did she risk her life when she finally truly understood the risks? And how does Kurt Russell come to terms with this changed person he is in love with, given that he is just a guy who knows how to fix a car not save the world?

Watch Mike Nichols' inspired direction; he rarely cuts away in the middle of a scene. A lot of Kurt, Cher and Meryl's acting happens all in one take. *That's* truly good acting and directing.

Good dialogue in a film is in knowing what's happening without it being said. Don't fast forward the first hour - really pay attention and see how much you learn from the small details that will enrich your viewing of this film.


I took the time to register with IMDB just to present a more accurate review of this movie than the person that wrote that the movie was a joke. While not one of the best movies of its type, it's still pretty well done. The story moves along well....clues are dropped throughout the movie to show the possible conspiracy at work. I would consider "The Insider" as one of the better movies of this type that was made in recent years, and even that movie shows traces of having evolved from movies like Silkwood.

I find most movies of this type that were done in the 80s as generally pretty cheesy. Silkwood does a pretty good job of "not being too cheesy". And if there is any trace of "cheesiness" (if you will), it's represented in the way that the townspeople react to Karen Silkwood. And the reactions worked for me, because when I think of how seriously people reacted to issues like nuclear or toxic contamination back in the late 70s/early 80s, there was a lot less info available. Nowadays in the "Oprah" and "11 o'clock news warnings" generation, where there's something new that we should be cautious of everyday, these types of stories are much more believable.

Meryl Streep (as expected) far outshines the rest of the cast. Kurt Russell turns out a pretty nice performance. Cher's performance was ok. I think at the time she probably received a lot more recognition for this role because it began to show her range. But she's been better in subsequent roles.

All in all, Silkwood is a movie that doesn't suprise or open the eyes of all the conspiracy- conscious people that are alive in 2003, but it does provide a touching story about a town that was dealing with the prospect of having to choose between the risk of toxic infection and their livelihood. But the real story here is about the one woman that cared enough to dig a little and ask a few questions and the danger that developed from taking a stand. 8 out of 10.


Contains spoilers

Karen Silkwood works at a nuclear processing plant in Oklahoma; the company's business involves manufacturing plutonium fuel-rods for the nuclear power industry. At the beginning of the film Karen seems to be an ordinary worker with no tendencies towards activism or political radicalism. (The fact that she and her boyfriend display a prominent Confederate battle flag in their bedroom would suggest that politically she is on the right). She changes, however, when she realises that the management of the plant have a cavalier attitude towards the health and safety of their employees, particularly the risks of radioactive contamination, and that, worse still, they are doctoring x-ray photographs of the fuel rods in order to cover up potential defects that could prove disastrous. Karen becomes a campaigner for improved safety standards, but is killed in a car crash while driving to meet a journalist to inform him of her suspicions.

I would agree with the author of the earlier comment who stated that Hollywood films rarely focus on the lives of modern working-class people, and that 'Silkwood' is one of the rare exceptions. (Films with a labour relations theme, such as 'Matewan' or 'The Molly Maguires', often have a historical setting, as though clashes between workers and employers were something from the Bad Old Days which have largely been overcome in modern society). Nevertheless, 'Silkwood' is not simply a tale of 'workers versus capitalists'. Although Karen's safety campaign has the support of her trade union's national leadership, she antagonises not only the management of the plant but also many of her fellow-workers, who value job security more than personal safety. There are few other employment opportunities in their small town, and they fear that, if forced to implement stricter safety rules, the company will simply close the plant, thus putting them out of work. There is a strong implication that the 'accident' in which Karen dies may have been arranged deliberately, but there is no hint as to who might have been responsible.

The more recent Julia Roberts film 'Erin Brockovich' owes a clear debt to 'Silkwood'. Both films are based on true stories, and in both a young single mother takes on a powerful corporation playing fast and loose with public safety. 'Erin Brockovich', with its upbeat ending, is more optimistic; it is also, in my view, the better film as its director Steven Soderbergh is able to hold our interest throughout, whereas 'Silkwood' can drag at times. The first half of the film, which concentrates as much on Karen's tangled personal life as on the main theme of nuclear safety, can seem particularly slow. Nevertheless, the film becomes more gripping in the second half, aided by a superb performance from Meryl Streep in the leading role, one of a series of great parts that made her probably the best film actress of the eighties. I am always surprised that she lost the 'Best Actress' Oscar to Shirley MacLaine's caricature of a performance in 'Terms of Endearment'. There are also excellent contributions from Kurt Russell as Karen's boyfriend Drew and from Cher, cast against type as Dolly, the dowdy lesbian who befriends Karen.

'Silkwood' is not a great film, but it is a brave one, treating a controversial social and political issue with greater freedom than we normally see in Hollywood movies. 7/10


When I first saw this film a year ago, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I couldn't believe how brave one woman could be, with disastrous consequences. Someone who fought not for herself, but for other people as much as herself. To protect others from terminal illness and maybe death.

Karen Silkwood is a normal woman, dating a normal man, living with her boyfriend and friend in a normal house in a normal town. She works in the power plant, which seems to be pretty normal, but when the truth is unfolded, it puts everyone who works there lives in danger.

Meryl Streep --- Karen Silkwood

Cher --- Dolly

Kurt Russell --- Drew

Written by --- Nora Ephon

Directed by --- Mike Nichols

Running Time --- 126 mins

Certificate --- 15

**THE PLOT**

Most of the people in Karen's town work in the local power plant down the road from where they live. It's an easy life. They go in and work, even though they have to wear special masks, they're pretty safe. But, all goes downhill when Karen realises that the plant are cheating all the employees and putting people's lives in risk and in danger.

Karen was stuck in a marriage she was unhappy in, and moved from Texas to a little town miles away. Although she was happy she'd got out of an awful marriage, she had to leave her kids behind with their father and move alone to a new town.

Luckily she did find work in the local power plant, but she only managed to go and see her children every couple of months.

One night whilst Karen is going home, she sees her boss burying a massive lorry full of radioactive plutonium into the ground outside the plant. Karen thinks nothing of it, until more and more unfortunate things begin to happen.

In the plant there's a scanner. Every person who walks into the room must pass his or her hands through the scanner, to make sure no radioactive plutonium has affected them. But, when one of Karen's friends gets `cooked' and has to be cleaned with a brush she becomes suspicious.

Soon, Karen fights against her plant to safe herself and her friends around her, whilst trying to cope with a loving boyfriend, and a lesbian best friend, who's fallen in love with her.

Karen fights and fights for others thorough the film, and her strength really makes you sad but overjoyed that there were some people like this in the world at one time, fighting for others.

**PERFORMANCES**

I don't remember seeing Meryl Streep in anything before this. She plays Karen Silkwood excellently, and although she doesn't resemble any likeness to the real Karen Silkwood, she still manages to fool us that she is actually the strong woman herself.

All three main actors have won Oscars, and I think all deserved one for this. Streep managed to show us the witty side of Karen, but also managed to show us her strong and kind side as well.

Karen finds it heart-breaking having to live away from her kids, and Streep really shows us not just how difficult that part of her life was, but how difficult her entire life was.

I was shocked to find out Cher played Dolly the anything but lesbian who cares more about the kitchen table than her appearance! Cher steps down from her glamorous roles, and plays the loyal best friend.

Cher's acting skills really come out in the film, because Dolly seems to be the complete opposite to Cher's character. Dolly doesn't wear make-up, doesn't care about hat people think about her, and basically is very laid-back. Nothing like the real star!

It's nice to see Cher play this sort of role, and prove to us that she can really act. She gave Streep a run for her money, and I'm sure she shocked a lot of people at the time of the release, showing that she really can act.

The third main-character is Kurt Russell, who plays Karen's badly done to boyfriend. Karen deeply loves him, but Drew cant seem to understand why she's fighting against the plant, and is more worried what will happen to her than anything else.

I don't think they cast the best person for Drew, I feel someone shyer would have been a bit more believable. But, nonetheless, he played his part wonderfully as Drew.

All three characters were very strong in one-way or another, and we really needed a strong actor/actress to play them. Someone like Susan Sarandon would have been too stereotypical, for Karen we needed someone who didn't always play the same part.

Obviously, all three actors did a lot of research, because all three main characters were alive at one time, as the film is based on true events. The research pulled off, and they managed to make us believe Kurt, Meryl and Cher are also Drew, Karen and Dolly.

**MY OPINION**

This is my favourite film of all time. Not just because I'm blown away but the story, and the fact it is true, but the characters blow me away. All are so odd, but you can see and understand why they do something.

When I first saw the film, I was very upset but also intrigued. I have learnt a lot about Karen Silkwood and her life since the film, and along with Princess Diana, she is one of my heroines.

Every little thing in the film makes it a must-see for everyone. Everyone will enjoy this film, but maybe enjoy isn't the right word. It's a strong story that you don't enjoy it, but you won't believe what you see.

The film was screen played excellently and thoroughly by Nora Ephron (You've Got Mail and Sleepless in Seattle) and you can tell she looked at every detail.

**ALL IN ALL**

A brilliant film with fantastic performances, a fantastic story that will blow you away. A really touching film. A MUST see!

Written By: Matt Roberts.


Apparently, when "Silkwood" came out, Mike Nichols hadn't released a notable movie since "The Fortune" nearly killed his career eight years earlier. If we call this his comeback, then it was sure a good comeback. Donning one of her many accents from over the years - in this case Oklahoman - Meryl Streep plays Karen Silkwood, a plutonium processing plant employee who sought to expose the dangerous conditions in her workplace...and mysteriously died in a car wreck.

This is the sort of opportunity to be idiotically preachy, but the movie never degenerates into that. It shows how the plant's owners poisoned her and psychologically berated her. This brings to mind the overall issue of how the nuclear age affected the whole planet. Nuclear tests by both the US and USSR left the whole world irradiated. Nuclear power may be discredited, but apparently NO PERSON ON EARTH has escaped nuclear fallout. So much for progress.

All in all, "Silkwood" is a really good movie. It's surprising to see Kurt Russell and Cher (as Karen's roommates Drew Stephens and Dolly Pelliker) in this sort of movie; we associate him with kick-ass roles and her with treacly roles. But they do a very good job. Also starring Craig T. Nelson, Diana Scarwid, Fred Ward, Ron Silver, and Bruce McGill.


A common question to this movie is: If Karen Silkwood and her colleagues are so worried about being contaminated by plutonium at a processing plant then why do they smoke so many cigarettes if they're worried about their health ?

Duh

Because they volunteered to smoke ! They're adults and as adults they should be able to choose their own paths to hell . Even in 1973 the setting of this bio-pic everyone knew the risks of smoking related diseases and it's their health so if they want to ruin their health why should they be stopped from doing so ?

!!!! MILD SPOILERS !!!!

I don't know if it's irony on the point of director Mike Nichols but there does seem to be an awful lot of cigarette consumption in this movie . Certainly if there's any one wanting to give up the weed they should give this movie a miss . But the point remains that in 1973 ciggie packets carried government health warnings and everyone knew of the dangers even though they didn't want to admit it . Was the plutonium industry quite so honest ?

What I liked about this collaboration between director Nichols and screenwriters Alice Arlen and Nora Ephron is that the audience is allowed to think for themselves on the issue of conspiracies and possible state sanctioned murders . Was Karen Silkwood bumped off for knowing too much and for being a trouble maker ? Possibly states the film but much of this is left somewhat ambiguous unlike say JFK by Oliver Stone . Likewise Karen's urine sample . Was it tampered with or was the radiation levels high because Karen was contaminated by a plutonium leak ? Once again the audience is left to make up there own minds

Some people have criticized SILKWOOD because it feels very much like one of those cheap TVMs that even having a well known cast can't disguise . I won't disagree too much but this is because films of the period lacked much gloss and you can probably use the opposite argument in that nowadays Hollywood movies feature too much gloss and visual superficiality . Compare SILKWOOD with THE INSIDER or ERIN BROCKOVICH and make up your own mind if one's not glossy enough or the other two are too glossy to be effective . Certainly Nichols directs a scene where Karen walks through detectors and a jump cut occurs where she is undergoing decontamination procedure . I have no idea why but this scene shocked me to the core and this scene alone makes SILKWOOD a very memorable movie


If "Silkwood" is such a great movie, then a large part of its greatness is definitely owed to Meryl Streep: She plays Karen Silkwood, a single mother who is working in a nuclear plant based somewhere in Oklahoma. In the beginning, Karen seems to be an average working-class girl living a rather simple life, without any ambitions or hidden potential. She stays with her boyfriend Drew (Russel) and their room-mate Dolly (Cher), and the three of them are living an uneventful life. However, Karen changes dramatically, when she starts to realize that the management of the plant they work in, is quite lax on security and health issues. As she starts to get more involved, she gradually finds people around her being distanced from her and even outright hostile and potentially dangerous. And yet, she becomes more and more determined to her goal, defying the risks that are continuously piling up...

The performance that Streep gives as Karen Silkwood is really touching. She gives an excellent portrayal of a girl, who could be naive and even self-destructing on the one hand (just count the cigarettes she is smoking throughout the film to get an idea!), while on the other hand she proves to be a very altruistic and responsible person who does her utmost to protect her unappreciative fellow workers. Streep is amazing in her role, and she definitely deserved the Oscar for that one.

Of course, "Silkwood" is not only Meryl Streep. Cher is very good as the lesbian room-mate, while Kurt Russel is surprisingly good as the confused boyfriend. Mike Nichols signs an excellent direction, so it all adds up very well. 9/10.


Silkwood represents a midpoint in Mike Nichols's strength as a director. It's not badly paced, yet the end comes abruptly. It's not that the ending itself is not strong, because it is. However, as is the case with a good handful of Nichols's films after Silkwood, the ending comes before once is ready for it. As a whole though, the film is not badly made. It has a realistic emotional impact.

Beautiful Meryl Streep's riveting performance, full of character, is the upholstery for the rest of the cast and the rest of the production. Cher comes in as a close second. Where Streep is a wild Southern girl, Cher is lifelike as the sensitive, easily judged character around whom Streep's Karen Silkwood is tame.

The story of Karen Silkwood, who found herself investigating alleged wrongdoing at the plutonium plant where she worked, is dramatized very sensitively, and also very objectively. Though Karen and her husband, played by Kurt Russell, have a large Confederate flag over their bedpost and she doesn't seem to feel any guilt or remorse when she hits a deer with her car, we don't find it difficult investing in her very human story.

Silkwood was not as memorable to me as other Streep films or others by Nichols, but looking back on it, I see that it has a tight atmosphere within it, once again in an objective sense because it does not depict a desirable setting but it is nonetheless a real and absorbing one.


It just comes off as Oscar bait, particularly for star Meryl Streep. She plays a worker at a facility that makes plutonium rods for nuclear plants. She is unhappy with the way she is treated there, and is concerned for her own safety and that of her co-workers. She becomes deeply involved in the union, which irks her superiors. The film has a fantastic cast, including Kurt Russell, Fred Ward, Craig T. Nelson and Cher. Along with the obligatory Streep nomination (she lost to Shirley MacLaine in Terms of Endearment), Cher also received her first nomination. I'd chock that up more to a classic case of dressing down, and one knock-out scene where she admits her true feelings for Karen Silkwood. I hate to say this about the man who gave us Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but Mike Nichols tends to be one of the dullest directors in Hollywood. Woolf is pretty much the only film of his that holds up today, and he's made a ton of stinkers in his career (first and foremost being What Planet Are You From?  blech!). While it's not great either, I'd much rather watch Norma Rae again than this.


Released at the height of America's nuclear disaster paranoia, "Silkwood" is one of those blue-collar one-against-the-many films that revolve around simple folk fighting corporate power and abuse as best they know how. Meryl Streep plays Karen Silkwood, who unlikely and reluctantly becomes a spokeswoman against lax safety restrictions in place at the nuclear plant at which her and just about everybody else in her tiny town works. Since it's based on a true story, the movie ends the way Silkwood's life ended, and it ain't upbeat. But I found the whole movie to be morbidly fascinating, especially the details about how the plant treated those they suspected of radioactive contamination. Meryl Streep and Cher, who plays Silkwood's best friend, are phenomenal, and even Kurt Russell flexes his acting chops admirably. Mike Nichols might not seem like the obvious choice to direct a gritty, ugly movie like this, but he's able to make it feel authentic.

A disturbing but rewarding experience.

Grade: A


At over two hours, Mike Nichols' "Silkwood" is rather long and slowly paced, and not quite what I was expecting. The dramatic, mysterious circumstances surrounding the real Karen Silkwood's life and death led me to think that the movie would be suspenseful and closely plotted, focused mainly on the subject of unsafe working conditions at a plutonium-processing facility. Instead, it's more of a character-based movie, a chance for Meryl Streep to create a detailed portrait of a working-class Oklahoma woman.

Of course it's always a pleasure to watch Streep dig deeply into a character. She subverts our initial impression that Karen is just a rowdy good-time girl, playing her as a woman who throws herself into union and workplace-safety concerns because she is losing everything else in her life. She also has good scenes with Kurt Russell (as her boyfriend) and Cher (as her lesbian housemate).

But ultimately, I think that Nichols loves his leading lady a little too much. He lights and shoots Streep to look almost too movie-star pretty in many scenes (despite her awful shag haircut), and her voice is almost too good when she sings "Amazing Grace." Several scenes could be trimmed or cut entirely, and Karen's character arc would still be in place. For instance, the first 30 minutes of the movie spend way too long dealing with Karen's relationship with her three children, who are now in the custody of her ex-husband, but never appear in the movie after that.

Because Nichols is never sure whether to focus more attention on Karen's relationships or on her job, and is unwilling to even try to explain the confused circumstances behind Karen Silkwood's death, "Silkwood," while a good showcase for Streep, does not fully work as a film.


You know, watch Julia Roberts in 'Erin Brockovich' than watch Meryl Streep here in 'Silkwood' and you'll become a film critic instantly. Meryl Streep is the character, while Julia Roberts is simply playing dress-up. I like Roberts in many movies, but not 'Erin Brockovich' which I found very flimsy and pandering. Kind of TV movie of the week. I'm bringing attention to this film because movies get lost very quickly these days, and this is a great one with first rate performances all around, including Cher and Kurt Russell. It works as a small town drama, a character study, and also has elements of suspense. Everything is pulled together neatly and tightly by Mike Nichols here, and the movie, despite the 80's haircuts and style, still gets you going today.


The only gripe I have with this brilliant film is the Australian-DVD-release cover. Being born in 1979 and not knowing much about Karen Silkwood, it was disappointing to read the ENTIRE plot of the film, including the ending, on the back of the DVD. I had seen this movie years and years earlier, and I didn't remember the ending. It's enough to say it's the Karen Silkwood story, and then let the film speak for itself, because it speaks volumes.

This, I think, is one of those "quiet" films that have sort of disappeared from view nowadays, except for die-hard Meryl Streep fans I suppose. All I remember from seeing Silkwood as a child was being extremely disturbed by the "decontamination shower" scenes in which people are scrubbed down with hard brushes that cause welts on the skin, and they are blasted with either extremely hot or extremely cold water (its not made clear which, but either would be unpleasant i imagine). That this method of decon is not even effective, makes these scenes even more distressing to watch.

The film is quiet, dialogue driven, but that's not to say it's brilliant...in fact, it is very slow, and today's audiences would flick channels in no time. It's uncomfortable (c'mon, it's radiation poisoning we're dealing with here...it's frightening stuff we'd all rather not think about), and in a nutshell, it's depressing. But Meryl Streep is just so likable as Karen Silkwood. You can't help but cheer for her and her courage in the face of an big corporation that practically OWNED the entire county. And Kurt Russell gives an understated and very effective performance as the redneck with a good heart. He's great in one scene (spoiler) after Karen (and an older lady employee named Thelma) have been "contaminated" and Karen asks him if its changed how he feels about her. I was expecting some cheesy romantic line here, but instead he goes, "Well, I still want to f*ck you...I sure as h*ll don't wanna f*ck Thelma anymore though!"

Another standout for me was the very end (another spoiler) the accappella "Amazing Grace" rendition. No sound, no dialogue, just a final shot of Karen Silkwood and a fade out as the song ends. It's a great ending in cinema I think. Understated, quiet and powerful, just like the film itself.


The all star cast delivers all star performances in this first rate drama. I won't alliterate the story line, anymore than I have in the Summary, but this work was very compelling, demonstrating a realism seldom found in these types of works. Do not be surprised to find yourself emotionally invested in these characters and their plight.

While I do not watch it often as the subject matter is quite serious, I do consider it one of my favorites of this genre. The story is great, sadly so, but great. And as I said before, the performances are about the best to be found.

It rates an 8.8/10 from...

the Fiend :.


Karen Silkwood(Meryl Streep), is a nuclear factory worker who discovers the unhealthy factors in that plant. She would never back down on anything, and she appears to be straight-forward with the problem. At least she's got a good sense of humor on her. Especially when she flashed the boss. The true story of the life and death of Karen Silkwood really got me intrigued. Living with two co-workers: Drew Stephens(Kurt Russell) and Dolly Pelliker(Cher). These people are very tight, until Karen was given a raise to work at a higher branch. They jealously of other workers probably made them try to make Karen really sick. Going to the reporter from the New York Times was indeed the boldest thing she has ever done. That night she was going to meet with that reporter immortalized her, forever. I don't think the medication made her run off the road. I say someone from the factory did that. She was murdered! After her death, that plant was history! I would like to know more about Karen Silkwood, other than just the movie, she is definitely a hero! 5 stars!


It seems like most (if not all) the movies I can remember watching with Meryl Streep in the lead are at least solid movies. This one is no exception. Although the pacing trickles at time I always was interested in the characters. Streep, Cher, and Russell are all pretty good. Fred Ward and Craig T Nelson also lend some good support to the leads. There are quite a few supporting actors who have made their niche over the years and are recognizable. Based on a true, Silkwood is deliberate and methodical; at times feeling cozy. The set (house) of the main characters serves as a great backdrop for their bantering dialog. It's set in the south around Oaklahoma and Texas. Only small problem was the ending seemed a little bit hastily put together though, a little bit detracting. Nevertheless worth at least one sit down viewing.


I found it slow in places but this was compensated for by the fact that there were some very honest politics, not something we are used to seeing in American films, at least not here in the UK. On the up side the script was sharp, with some great one liners, and at least the main characters were talking to each other rather than grunting at each other. The script was also very straight forward, carrying the viewer from one situation to the next without having to work out where things were at that point in time. The photography was very good, given that there was not a lot to work on; the factory, the house and some landscapes on the road. It was probably this naturalistic use of settings which gave the whole film much of it's credibility. In fact my only real problem was that, on first watching, I sometimes found it difficult to distinguish between Meryl Streep and Cher.


SIlkwood was a movie that had to deal with the reality of situations that are still considered problems today. Karen Silkwood worked a a plutonium factory, when the Union was almost gotten rid of Karen and some other people got together to fight to keep the union. So someone is starting to expose Karen to the chemicals, and she was internally as well as externally exposed. There was a plot to killer so she didn't tell the union what the real health conditions were like. So she was suppose to go pick up a New York times reporter and she never made it to the airport. Her car was found in a ditch and they claimed it a one person accident. they still have not found who plotted to kill her or who really did kill her. It will be a mystery until some one wants to come forward and tell the truth about what really happened


Silkwood is a movie about a woman named Karen Silkwood who worked at a power plant. After working there for many years she soon discovered that the radiation could kill many people. After discovering there "scam" of filling the defects on the x-rays with a pen, she works with others to try and shut down the plant. Many employees are very upset with her because they do not want to loose their jobs. After being contaminated twice she soon discovered that someone was after her, probably for her part in trying to shut down the plant. She was then killed in a car accident. Police ruled her death a drunk driving accident, but no one knows that for a fact, and nobody knows how much information she really had on the plant. The plant was shut down a year later. This movie was very informative about what radiation can do to a person.


This film was a story of which there apparently wasn't enough of for a movie. I like character development, but come on. I'm surprised Cher got an Oscar nomination for this, since I didn't really think her part was that great. (She has done some excellent work elsewhere) Meryl Streep, as always, just killed in her part. With all the attention she's gotten over the years for her accents, this one should have made the list, too. It ain't easy for a gal from the northeast to sound like a Texan, but she hit it perfectly. (Most who try way, way overdo it.) As for the plot, I have a little trouble with it. It seems to be about the powerless little union rep combating the eeeeeeeevil corporation, including making the (SPOILER AHEAD) circumstances of her death highly suspicious. Maybe I've seen too many Oliver Stone movies, but I just don't buy it. And I think poor Karen Silkwood just shouldn't have eaten those 'ludes before driving. That's known to be hazardous to your health.

On a general note, it's nice to see a film about a bygone, more civilized time, when one could light a cigarette without being treated like Lucifer incarnate.

Overall, an excellent film for Streep fans or conspiracy buffs, and a pretty decent one for anybody else. Grade: C+


Meryl Streep as usual does a good job of characterization. She is a different person in each film she does. She was a Ellen Brokovich type. Too smart for the job she was in. The ending was pretty weak, tho'. Also as a non-smoker, all the constant smoking made me sick. But again, that was pretty realistic.


Director Mike Nichols ("The Graduate") brings to the screen the tragic story of working class hero Karen Silkwood (Meryl Streep), who died under mysterious circumstances while trying to expose shady practices at the Kerr-McGee plant, the Oaklahoma nuclear power plant where she worked. Nichols' film centers on Karen, her boyfriend Drew (Kurt Russell) and their roommate Dolly (Cher), who may or may not have been a traitor to Karen. It is speculated in the film that Dolly told Kerr-McGee that Karen had gathered some particularly damaging evidence against them, which indeed Karen had done. Whether Dolly had her own reasons for offering the information is still open to debate. But with the help of an impassioned union representative (Ron Silver) Karen eventually decides to meet with a reporter from the New York Times and make the story public. Karen Silkwood died the day of that planned meeting, in what many believe was an act of premeditated murder, disguised by the Kerr-McGee bigwigs as a single-car accident. The plant shut down one year after Silkwood's death, and there is still debate about whether or not plutonium from Kerr-McGee was supplied to Middle Eastern entities. It's a fascinating case about the ethics of corporate power, and also about one person's noble attempt to expose and improve a corrupt system. But "Silkwood" mostly focuses on the human casualties of said corruption, and it does so with a knock-out cast and a terrific script. It is equal parts character study and corporate-political expose, and it is no doubt due to Mr. Nichols' direction that both aspects succeed admirably. While I'm not particularly a Meryl Streep fan, Karen Silkwood is a role she was obviously born to play. She throws herself so fully into the part that the actress disappears completely. Streep brings an accessible, warm funkiness to Karen, and makes her at once sexy, insecure, volcanic, and pitiable. The script does not shy away from Silkwood's own occasionally dubious nature, and the script is smart enough not to canonize her. Russell gives one of his most realistic performances, light years beyond his heavy-handed turns in such films as "Big Trouble in Little China". He has a terrific chemistry with Streep, as well as with Cher, and I think it was with "Silkwood" (as well as "Escape From New York") that he really transcended his early Disney career, and began to be considered for better, more mature roles. Cher, who had recently made her film debut in Robert Altman's "Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean", is excellent as the tender, ambiguous Dolly. Her scenes when Dolly is lying (?) to Karen about the exact information that she supplied to Kerr-McGee are chilling; there is something terrible just beneath the surface of Dolly's reactions, and Cher plays this awkward discussion with a distant, downplayed brilliance. I think the role of Dolly is her best film acting to date. Every performance in the film works, with Diana Scarwid ("Mommie Dearest") standing out in her small role as Dolly's lover Angela. It seems impossible to imagine anyone else in these roles, or anyone but Nichols directing the film. It is claustrophobic and frightening at times, and at other times it is sublimely beautiful and haunting. Not to be missed.


This movie is soooooo underrated. It should have won all it's oscar nominations and should have, at least, been nominated for best picture. I loved(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) this movie. Cher puts on an extraordinary performance, as usual, and proves that she can act, this being her first film. Kurt Russle, i am surprised to say, wasn't nominated for an oscar. This movie was great. If you haven't been able to see it, see it!!!!!!!!


Silkwood (1983) Meryl as martyr! Now firmly entrenched as a leading lady, Meryl costars with Kurt Russell and Cher as a nuclear power plant worker uncovering some nasty bits of information that, of course, cause problems with the powers that be.

As Karen Silkwood, Meryl plays a flaw-ridden person who nevertheless rises above her own private demons and gathers the courage to speak out against an industrial giant. The movie manages to walk the tightrope of personal drama without teetering into melodrama. And unless memory fails me, another Oscar nomination was given to La Streep. Cher too, turns in a winning performance as a lesbian friend of the family.


the story behind silkwood is possibly an interesting one, which i will investigate further after writing the review. for now i would say the script seems even more interesting than the story behind it, but regardless of the star cavalcade they somehow managed to ruin it.

meryl streep does her 'bad girl' thing here, the character you can also spot from 'marvin's daughters' and shows once again that her character definitions are well crafted and practiced but unimaginative. kurt russell has been given a character that's too interesting to be played by kurt russell, and who knows what cher is doing in this movie. the factory doesn't really seem evil, infact the whole setting of the movie appears almost as if you were watching a dramatized documentary about the subject. seems and feels like a tv-movie dispite the stars in the main roles.

i'm not even going start with the overblown ending scenes...give me a break. the ole' bucket became useful again.

in conclusion it all could've been made so much better, an interesting subject with interesting characters but a mediocre movie. but then, it all fits if you watch mike nichols' career going \ from virginia woolf to primary colors you can find silkwood exactly in the middle. still worth a watch if it happens to be on tv.

4/10


This film is awful, the film portrays the women with so many issues, you wonder how balanced she was. Sort of discredits the story, I wish they just went with the part at work, and stayed away from her personal life. My rating on this film is gag me a bag, run from your tv! This film is like videodrome it will give you hallucinations. 3/10


I just hate this movie. Meryl Streep was awful, Kurt Russell did an unusually poor job, and Cher is not really cut out to be an actress. Bad script does not help any. As with most publicized news stories, anybody who read anything about the story knows how it is going to turn out. The three leads were smoking in basically every scene, generally bad quality.

Rating: 1/10


There are many reasons to enjoy "Cinderella 3: A Twist in Time." In many ways it improves upon its predecessors. Unlike the animators from the original film the amazing animators at DisneyToon Australia worked from their own imaginations instead of relying on live-action "reference" film. Furthermore the plot is far superior to the first. Still with me? Great. Here's what makes this plot better than the "classic" fairy tail: 50 years ago Disney's idea was to adapt the fairy tale into a full length film. The story was of a girl who, denied her birthright was forced to work as a maid for her step-family. She dreams of a life of luxury, and because of her kind heart she has friends that do all the work for her, she gets her chance with a prince and after dancing she's in love and gets married. Fairy tales are supposed to teach you something. The original Grimm Tale had a lot more plot to it and actually taught children never to give up. Disney's watered down version still taught that lesson- sort of. But the basic lesson was hold on to your dreams . . . . someone will eventually show up and magically make them come true.

That lesson is turned on its ear in "A Twist In Time." Instead of making everything easy for Cinderella, she is now working against magic and must overcome something a lot more powerful than a mean old lady- a mean old lady with a magic wand. She works hard to achieve her dreams. Oh sure, the mice help, but Cinderella is the clear heroine in this new film- a heroine that little girls can look up to.

Step-mother gets hold of the Fairy Godmother's wand and turns back time to the shoe fitting scene from the first film. One may recall that the step-sisters feet were too big, but also remember that in the Grimm tale the step-sisters cut off their heels and toes to make the slipper fit. Well, this is still a Disney film so magic is used and the slipper now fits Anastasia. Now's when the movie kicks into high. Cinderella is determined to find the prince she met the previous night and she sets off to do just that. Knowing what the girl he danced with looks like, the prince is forced by magic to think that Anastasia is the right girl for him. Although what follows seems a bit hokey when describing it (The magic of the wand is not as powerful as Cinderella and the prince's predestined love) it is handled maturely and time is given for the couple to get to know each other a bit more (in the first film they had said, what, four words) before getting married. Meanwhile Anastasia, who in the beginning wants nothing more than a prince of her own- even if it is Cinderella's prince, must overcome her jealousy of Cinderella lest she take what is not rightfully hers.

This film is not only a worthy sequel to the original film (unlike Part II), it surpasses it. Not just with a much more valuable lesson: Cinderella must not "live in dreams if (her) dreams are to come true" but vocal performances and the animation are consistently better. While the prince's design has been puffed out a little, I always felt the original design was far too stiff. Cinderella also has a pretty stiff design, but under senior animator Ian Harrowell's supervision she is allowed to be expressive and give a performance that can match with Jennifer Hale's vocals.

The songs are a bit more contemporary than the classic film, but that's to be expected. We're not in the 1950's anymore, kids. Personally, I can't get enough of "More Than a Dream," Cinderella's balled that sucked me into the story and told me that we'd be dealing with a much more pro-active Cinderella than ever before (somehow I cant' imagine the Cinderella from the first film singing "There's a better life that's waiting past the mountains I must climb. I will take a chance on love to get my once upon a time" . . . she was much more concerned with what a nightingale sounded like), and frankly that suits me just fine. I feel that this way to go is a lot better character for Cinderella to be. In a time when every other blonde that girls are looking up to are drug-addicts or bulimic it's refreshing to see a twist on a classic character that makes her someone to be admired.

As I've said the animation in this film, which seems to be getting the most flack from critics is astounding. What probably no one short of myself will ever realize is the historic significance to this film. It is the last film to be hand-animated by Disney Animators. Quietly Disney has for years been shutting down the traditional animation studios in Paris, Tokyo, Montreal, Orlando and in the case of the original in Burbank- converting it to a CGI studio. Australia's DisneyToon Studio was the last of it's kind. With this film (and thanks to that overrated story thief John Lassiter) the chapter is closed on Disney's traditional animation Perhaps most fitting this film (unlike the aforementioned studio's final films) bears a dedication to its animators. It reads "Special Thanks to DisneyToon Studios Australia for their many years of producing beautiful hand-drawn animation." I mourn the loss of an art form that Disney worked so hard to gain respect for, the brilliant animators who are now out of a job, and for the fact that their efforts will no doubt be overlooked as "mediocre" by critics and audiences that simply don't understand the effort that went into this film. There are many reasons to enjoy this film, but I fear that prejudice and ignorant people will find their voices of protest and cries of blasphemy for making a sequel to a "classic" the loudest.


I was excited to see this movie when I first heard about it. I love all the Disney fairy tales and while the sequels usually are awful this one was done perfectly! They give personality to each character that was lacking in the first movie. The prince actually wasn't a smiling idiot, the step-sisters were the evil-step sisters but had more spunk, and the evil step-mother was just as wicked and ambitious for her daughters as the first. Even Cinderella herself showed a courageous side that you didn't get to see before.

It seemed to be a darker story compared to most Disney movies and it turned out well. I enjoyed the ending and understood exactly why they kept it that way.

This is definitely an awesome movie to pick up!