Philip Kaufman is a director whose films are hard to connect. He's made three of my all-time favorite films, Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978), The Right Stuff (1983) and The Unbearable Lightness of Being (1988). His follow-up to The Unbearable Lightness of Being is perhaps too similar in focus and subject. Henry & June, much like TULB, is based on European literature and set in Europe, very artful in its creation, and about sex. Actually, this film is all about sex. A lot of people don't seem to like it because it doesn't seem to have much point other than the sex. But I think there's a place for erotic art, and, damn, this film is one of the most erotic works ever made. I bet you a dollar you can't make it through without touching yourself at least once. I never found it boring; I was utterly absorbed by the beauty of it all. Maria de Madeiros, whom you will remember being pleasured orally by Bruce Willis in Pulp Fiction, is the star (she plays Anaïs Nin). I have to wonder, watching this movie, why she didn't become the biggest star in the world. She certainly is one of the sexiest women ever to appear on screen. Her eyes are maddening. It almost doesn't matter for this film, but she gives quite a good performance, too. Uma Thurman is also quite sexy, and also gives a fine performance. I'm not a big fan, truth be told, but this is one of her best performances. I was less impressed with Fred Ward, who plays Henry Miller, and Richard E. Grant doesn't quite pull off an American accent. I don't know. I don't think I can ever see him as anyone besides Withnail again. Kevin Spacey is also good in a small supporting performance.


The title characters in this film are writer Henry Miller and his wife June. Two friends of Anais Nin. And more. The fact is she is frankly obsessed with both of them. A writer of erotica, she wants to experience sensuality in bold and daring ways. She gets the chance when her husband Hugo brings Henry to stay with them while he works on his novel. After June arrives Anais finds herself secretly thrilled at the hidden lascivious feelings the couple seem to bring out in her. Before long she is acting them out in abandon. This takes place in 1930s Paris and scenes of sex are are everywhere. They are as casually shown as if walking through different rooms. There is a richness and matter-of- fact manner about this film. Even though it is NC-17 I don't see it as "dirty" just boldly erotic. There are terrific performances by all involved. Actress Maria de Medeiros looks like a beautiful wide-eyed waif and is emotionally perfect as Anais. Fred Ward gives an unforgettable portrait of gruff and down to earth Henry Miller. Uma Thurman in an early role as June is beautiful and tragic.


this film is just flat out exotic in every sense. the period details and characterizations are perfect and the controversial erotic material well integrated into plot and pacing of the film.

the basic plot involves Maria DeMedeiros' character's affair with famous author Henry Miller (Fred Ward) and her attraction to his wife June (a smoldering performance by Uma Thurman.)

all of the actors and actresses involved do splendid work but it is the beautiful Uma Thurman who steals this film. she's only in the film about 25 minutes but those scenes radiate an eroticism that has been unmatched by any film since. she is simply gorgeous in this role and any person doubting her acting ability due to her poor script choices recently should check out her performance in this film.

the much talked-about erotic elements and explicit sex scenes that caused the MPAA to create the now useless NC-17 rating, are actually well integrated into the film and actually work to create better understandings of the 3 principle characters through their sexual behaviors and practices. the film isn't all sex like some people think, but when the erotic elements rear their head, the intensity and focus of these scenes throw people off kilter.

overall this is a fantastic film that drags just a little bit near the beginning and end, but is perfectly acted and stunningly filmed.

a great date film or for people who love truly great cinema.

rating:9.5


I saw this in theatrical release when it came out, and just recently on home video. As others have commented here, seeing it now can clarify some of what changed in the assumptions of filmmaking during the 90s. This film isn't apologetic about taking its subjects fairly seriously, even while not getting too solemn or "taking *itself* too seriously" in the bad sense. What I'm trying to say is that it isn't flip, and doesn't feel that it has to elevate cool to the ultimate virtue.

If my code words there haven't made it clear, what I was objecting to was how Tarentino has influenced attitudes. But there's an entirely different kind of crummy moviemaking that actually came to mind as a contrast to Henry and June while I was watching this, and that was Moulin Rouge. Please excuse me for using one movie as a club to bash another, but while watching H & J I really felt this connection and contrast.

Even though the 30s (H&J) was a quite different era from the 1900s (Moulin), they're both distant enough from us to raise similar questions about how to handle that sort of milieu. And they have in common being set among artists and aspirants. "Moulin Rouge" presents Erik Satie and Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec as characters on the fringe of the story, tossed in for spice perhaps, but gives us not a hint about what Satie's music sounds like, nor a glimpse at any Toulouse-Lautrec canvas (though I credit the production design with getting something of his feel into how the film looks.) We are told the hero is an aspiring artist but have no idea what his work is like, what he thinks, what the artistic times were like -- except a vague profession of "all for love".

"Henry & June" makes pretty clear what Miller's and Nin's aims were in their writing, and even some of the flavor. It also fills in the artistic surroundings, with for instance some of Brassai's photographs as well as using him as a minor character, and a clip from Le Chien Andalou. The score (with the filmmakers realizing the not everything is of-the-moment, and the avant garde of the 30s would still be "processing" the avant garde of the 20s, teens, and before) gives us snippets of Le Sacre du Printemps and some of Satie's piano pieces. (It was hearing the Satie that triggered the comparison for me, since -- as above -- I've been using the absence of his music from Moulin Rouge as an indicator of the shallowness of its approach to its setting.)

The makers of Henry & June figured out that the best way to show us exteriors for Paris of the 30s is to selectively show us Paris of today. This would have worked also for Moulin Rouge, better than the gratuitous and grating special effects. True, some landmarks of the (18)90s and 1900s are gone, but that doesn't call for wholesale resort to animation.


I've watched this movie several times over the past 10 years. It is beautifully photographed, top notch acting and the mood of the film is captivating. I especially enjoyed watching the actress Maria de Medeiros play Anais. The erotica is also very beguiling


I suppose that the IDEA of the film Henry & June is alright; you know, find yourself, discover who you are, etc., etc. ... but does it really have to involve so much prolonged sex scenes? And really, what WAS the point?

I kept on waiting for this film to actually, I don't know... begin, I suppose. It just seemed to go in circles. And just when you think that you can't take it anymore, they throw in another half an hour. I kept on thinking to myself, For God's sake, this is almost bordering on porn. All sex, and minimal pointless plot (and what good plot there was, they sure didn't focus on it as much as trying to create arousing scenes) Why don't I just leave? --- I didn't leave, although now I wish I had. I just kept on hoping that it was going to get better. But it didn't. I stayed in the end because I figured that I might as well if I had made it through the rest of it.

I thought that the actors were ok though, considering what they had to work with. But in the end presentation will never add up to substance, and substance there was not. Again, I beg of the director, What the hay was the actual point? I give Henry & June a 3 out of 10. See it if you so desire, but I REALLY don't recommend it.


this is a movie about one of my most perferred writers Henry Miller and my absolute favorite female writer Anais Nin. While I thought the movie was quite good and very well acted it only left me with the taste of wanting to read one of the writer's work. I'm not sure if this a disappointment to the movie as much as it is an attribute to the writers who each had a wonderful way of putting together words in such a manner as to make the experience of human life sound as poetic as the experience itself actually is. One thing about the movie that I noticed was the amount of smoking done in the movie, probably as much as any movie made since the fifites. Is the smoking intregal to the movie? no. but there's is some aspect of character lost in today's movies due to directors timidity with smoking or hat wearing. Anyways, this movie was partially undone I think by it's length but overall serves as a very good if it lacks some of the poetry of the writing. It's direction and all other production aspects seem to be up to standard but given that the movie based on true events lacks alot of the standard movie arch and direction that usually satisfies. What were left with is a retelling of people passionately in love with being alive.


I've seen the William Holden version, and the Robby Benson version, but this OUR TOWN is by far the best. This is the filmed version of the Tony award winning broadway play, filmed simply on a bare stage in New York city, and it really works well. Our school used it as a template for our production! Featuring stellar performances from Spalding Grey, Eric Stoltz and Penelope Miller, this piece will move you and make you laugh- there's a reason this is an American classic. Watch it with your family..


This is just a great great filmed version of a great great play. Watching it was amazing because I've seen this play so many times, and yet for some reason they found a new better way of doing it. Spalding Grey is an inspired choice for the Stage Manager, he's sharp and prickly and much darker than the old friendly guy who usually plays this part. And Penelope Anne Miller and Eric Stoltz as Emily and George are just fantastic, I was very moved by the famous 'soda fountain scene', that if done poorly can ruin the play. The third act with the dead was very moving, I just can't say enough good things about this version of Our Town. Track it down, you won't be sorry.


SPOILERS WITHIN!!!

Working as a second shift engineer at a PBS station has it's compensations... and the WNET production of Thornton Wilder's OUR TOWN is one of them!

The night that we aired it I didn't get a whole lot of other work done; it grabbed me from start to finish, and I stayed married to my console and program monitors all the way through.

This version has more guts than the 1940s movie version in that it's much more true to Wilder's original intent. This version doesn't "chicken out" on the ending and spare Emily's life. I always considered the Hollywood ending to be an unforgivable act of cowardice.

I've seen the play many times before, but this production startled me in it's final act with a single bit of stagecraft.

The sequence featuring Emily's funeral... mourners singing around the grave. Emily's sudden appearance as she leaves the world of the living is unexpected, and ELECTRIFYING! It's the slickest handling of this part that I've ever seen, anywhere!!!

The following sequence with her as the new arrival to the graveyard, and her attempts to relive the best day of her life are BEAUTIFULLY handled. The performances are absolutely riveting.

I'd STRONGLY recommend this performance for introducing teenagers to the dramatic stage... if it's possible to get use rights, it would make an EXCELLENT classroom teaching tool, especially that amazing final act.

If you get the chance to see this performance DO SO!!!


Until I saw this version of Our Town I did not really understand the power of Thorton Wilder's play. This version contains real people and not characters lifted from cloying greeting cards. The cast is excellent. When Dr. Gibbs dresses down his son for ignoring the chores, we understand why George cries. We see unstated confusion and conflict between the doctor and his son regarding his mother and then marital tension, loving tension, between the Gibbs when the mother comes home. Penelope Ann Miller elicits the pathos of seeing the ones she loves who do not understand what she now understands about life. Spaulding Gray is quirky and purposefully detached from the characters of the play he is supervising. He is at his best when he lays out the town in the first act description. His use of his hands is excellent.


As a kid, I loved this game. I played it a zillion times during Spring 1993 with my friend Andrew. I used to play Axel or Blaze and he would be Adam and no matter how often we played it we never seemed to get bored. Then Streets of Rage 2 came out. And we quickly forgot that this one even existed.

You play as ex-cops Axel Stone, Adam or Blaze Fielding, who have quit the force in order to take on the bad guys in their own way. There are 8 levels to work thru in a run-down and corrupt city led by the evil Mr X. Beating up all the bad guys and the end-of-level boss is much fun. Level 4 (The Bridge) was my fave because you could chuck baddies down the holes into the river. You even have the chance to become Mr. X's right hand man at the end of the game (at a price). This leads to the 'bad ending' in which you become the the boss of the syndicate. Exactly how this is possible is a mystery since you destroy the syndicate on your way to Mr. X, but never mind.

Streets of Rage also has truly fantastic music. The composer Yuzo Koshiro did absolute miracles with the limited technology of the Sega Genesis. The main theme, Level One, Level 4 and Final Boss are standout tunes.

As a Wii owner I am proud to have this forever on my console. But with Streets of Rage 2 also available, it does kind of render the first one somewhat obsolete.

Pros:

Average graphics but nice backgrounds represented in a comic-book like panel progression that fits the tone of the game.

Great tunes.

Easy to get into and hard to put down.

Cons:

Vastly inferior to the infinitely more complex Streets of Rage 2.

Poor enemy AI. Baddies often walk away from you instead of engaging in combat. This is especially infuriating with the Level 5 boss.

Lack of combo moves.

Lack of decent weapons.

Bad guy models are repeated far too often.

Graphics B- Sound A- Gameplay B- Lasting Appeal B-


I wasn't expecting much, but this movie actually delivered the goods! In this day and age of "torture porn", it was nice to be able to watch a horror movie that actually had suspense, mystery, and and a plot line. Gorehounds, this movie is not for you. But if you enjoy horror mixed with mystery, suspense, and heartbreaking drama, this movie is for you.

Pros: Nora Zehetner, "Eden" from "Heroes" really shines in this movie. The rest of the cast is fine, particularly Jessica Amlee as "Amy" and Gabrielle Rose as the mean "Mrs. Locke". This movie has a mystery - not a body count. The score is haunting. The make-up effects are incredible.

Cons: The movie could have benefited from better cinematography. You rarely see horror movies shot so brightly nowadays. The camera captures everything you need to see, but it is done in an almost matter-of-fact manner with no flair.


I have to say that I didn't expect much from this film when I rented it today, but I was really surprised by it.

Although the film's story is quite a cliché as is suggested by the back of the DVD case, in my opinion it's done surprisingly good. A pretty conclusive story, except perhaps for the start of it all, not too bad acting and a nice music score form into a decent mystery thriller. I liked how the heroine actually investigates quite a bit throughout the movie instead of just getting the conclusions laid out for her in front of her eyes. Additionally the film doesn't use too many flashy, cheap shock moments and successfully tries to depend more on the mystery itself. And, contrary to the cliché, the heroine doesn't behave exceptionally stupid all the time.

On the downside you won't have many surprises coming in the story if you've seen at least a few mystery thrillers. The ending actually managed to satisfy me, a feat rarely achieved by that genre of movies.

If you like mystery thrillers and always thought that those loud, noisy "in your face" shock moments are overused you should try this movie.


Anyone who is nitpicking at this movie over ridiculous things such as "do school websites list past students' phone numbers" and "this character would've/should've/could've not let the younger sister driver" should be ignored.

Films are made for viewers willing to allow the film to take them where it will. If the film be imperfect, the real film lover will still attempt to see it for what it wanted to be; for what it's actual *point* was. That is, of course, assuming there is one.

On the other hand, there will always be the wannabe Sherlock Holmes of film fandom, who will pick at the silliest details as if a movie somehow needs to be a fully provable mathematical truth.

Silly.

On to the film.

I must say, it is a typical thriller with horror elements taking place in a typical old house with typically hidden "creatures" and such, where the main character attempts to uncover a mystery until in the end -- surprise. If you want to understand what this film's atmosphere is like, think of "A Tale of Two Sisters" and "The Others" (with Kidman).

Is the movie super-successful at what it does? I wouldn't say so. I will say, though, that it was certainly not a failure either. In fact, "willing viewers," as described above -- in other words, those viewers who have managed to retain their childlike sense of wonder and innocence when they sit down to watch a film -- should be left completely unaware until the final revelation.

And let me tell you, mate, if you have any kind of compassion for the characters you see on screen and think the value of cinema lies partly in you allowing yourself to become emotionally involved with them (as opposed to analyzing their every action like some goofs will inevitably always do), you will be horrified at the ending. Bleedin' horrified. Not that it's particularly "scary" in the typical horror film sense, but because of the human suffering and injustice involved.

Ignore the yapping cynics and enjoy this perfectly acceptable entry into the spooky-family-in-an-old-house-with-a-dark-secret roster. However, allow me to still add that that if you are looking for a movie along this theme and want one that is *really* well done, watch "A Tale of Two Sisters."


i had really low expectation going in.mainly because of the words MTV films appearing on the screen was surprised at how well done this psychological suspense thriller was.i found it very atmospheric,and suspenseful.there weren't a lot of cheap scares.it was intelligent,and well written,in my opinion.the ending was unexpected.i was also very impressed with the acting.Nora Zehetner as Christy was very good,but Matthew Settle as John really impressed.basically,my opinion of MTV films went up several notches after this film was over.i don't get the low rating(5.3/10).but that's just my opinion.for me,Beneath is a well deserved 8/10


In Edgemont, Montana, the teenager Christy Wescot (Nora Zehetner) is very connected to her beloved sister Vanessa Locke (Carly Pope). On her fourteenth birthday, Christy asks Vanessa to drive her convertible car, but she has a car accident, hits a rock and is thrown off the seat; however Vanessa is trapped in the car that explodes and she survives disfigured and totally burnt. Christy is sent to Pine Bluff Psychiatric Care Center for treatment while her sister is treated by her husband Dr. John Locke (Matthew Settle) at home with the assistance of the nurse Claire Wells (Eliza Norbury). When Vanessa has a heart attack and dies, Christy has a breakdown in the funeral service telling that her sister is alive in the coffin. Then she moves to California for the pre-med, but is haunted by nightmares and weird visions. When the caretaker of the family Joseph (Don S. Davis) dies six years later, Christy returns to Edgemont for the funeral and has a cold reception by John and his mother. However, her niece Amy (Jessica Amlee) that is afraid of "dark things" behind the walls of the house asks her to stay in the town for a couple of days and Christy's friend Debbie (Nicole Anderson) welcomes and lodger her in her house. Christy has mysterious blackouts with strange visions and decides to investigate the death of her sister that she believes had been buried alive, disclosing a dark secret, while the locals believe she has borderline personality disorder.

"Beneath" is labeled of horror, but it is actually a thriller with some touches of supernatural mysteries. The intriguing story and the characters are well-developed, the acting is above average and in the end "Beneath" is not a masterpiece but a good movie and worthwhile seeing. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Sombra da Morte" ("Shadow of the Death")


MTV films makes a really moody horror film. To be certain its the sort of thing thats been done before, but even then this has some genuine shivers and some creepy moments.

The basic plot has a young girl returning home when her old caretaker dies. The girl has a tragic past that includes the death of her sister after a fiery car crash. Plagued by visions and a sense that her sister was buried alive she begins to search for clues as to what happened seven years before.

This one came out of left field for me. I have vague notions about hearing about the film, but I never really remember seeing or hearing anything about it. I'm pretty sure that helped my enjoyment of the film since I had no preconceived notions for it.

Looking like TV movie with interiors that remind one more of a set than of a real place this film over comes its limitations (and occasional WTF moment) to play out almost as if its an extended Tales from the Darkside or other similar horror anthology show. Odd shifts in perspective, some genuine creepy, but not too in your face imagery and willingness to go sans blood and guts except as required make this pretty much a throw back to the old days of horror when less is more. Its not perfect but even with its flaws and the following of a well worn path at times this still manages to be a solid little thriller of the B variety.

Worth a rental with a bag of popcorn and a soda.(Though don't buy this just yet -its a bare bones release that they want almost 30 dollars list for- too much for too little)


***WARNING: THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS ***

"An honest life ends in a peaceful death" Proverb.

"Beneath" is a horror flick released straight to video and marks the directorial debut of Dagen Merrill, co-written with Kevin Burke (who also wrote 2003's "Tahiti", an indie drama that earned some critical praise).Christy Wescot (Nora Zehetner, "Brick") is a 20-year-old pre-med student who cannot fully live her own life since her older sister Vanessa (Carly Pope, "Sandra Goes to Whistler") was killed in a car accident six years earlier, in which Christy was driving. "Give me the wheel! Christy!" could have been the last words she remembers from her sister, who was also a young mother and the wife of John Locke (Matthew Settle), a local doctor in the town of Edgemont.

The sudden death of family caretaker Joseph (Don S. Davis) prompts a phone call from John to Christy informing her that the funeral services will be held next Saturday. This phone call releases the latent anxiety Christy has been suppressing for the past six years. So when Christy jumps aboard a bus, she's already been fired from her job and is in need of antidepressants for a diagnosed borderline personality disorder spurred by her guilt over her sister's injuries. "Why did you go away?" her niece Amy (Jessica Amlee) asks her. Christy sardonically replies, "I went to prep school" (University of South California). Now Christy's niece lives in the Locke family home with dad and her grandma, the ominous Mrs. Locke (Gabrielle Rose), whom her cute red-haired granddaughter calls a "weirdo", and she is indeed, since she disappears from the dinner table and prefers to eat alone in her place. Amy is convinced a dark, mysterious thing killed good ol' Joseph and that Grandma is mean and secretive. Nora Zehetner maintains a mesmerizing tension from the very beginning. When she contemplates her arrival home to the small town from which she's been disconnected for a long time but has never severed her ties to, she does an awe-inspiring job of conveying Christy's conflicting emotions. And this is one of the main reasons the film succeeds, because its plot devices rely basically on our empathy for the lead character. There are moments that as a viewer we can notice the story would dry up if Christy couldn't find a new clue, a new clear thought, an accusatory gaze from some of the townspeople who have become strangers to her. She finds it difficult to reconnect with a junior high school friend, Debbie Houston (Nicola Anderson) and the townsfolk try to make her move on. Christy must not only hide the pain of her lonely existence and the hallucinations that plague her, she also has to face the humiliation of condescending treatment from the neighbours, nurses, and cops around her; though one of them, Jeff Burdan (Warren Christie), is pretty kind to her, his cop pal Randy (Patrick Gilmore) makes a cruel remark before being introduced to Christy.

Christy investigates some circumstances that occurred during the six months of rehabilitation that Vanessa received in Locke's home immediately after the accident, a losing battle against a certain death. Christy finds out this rehabilitation took place in a room beneath Locke's house where Vanessa was attended by a nurse named Claire Wells (Eliza Norbury) whom supposedly left town and moved to Portland, Maine. Christy also investigates the details about Vanessa's burial, as well as her medical files (which are now in private access for John Locke), all the while succumbing to near psychotic states when she suffers random seizures that lead her to draw darkly artistic portraits of people and threatening symbols. The laid-back manner of the townspeople grate on Christy's nerves as they stubbornly deny her suspicions regarding her sister's death. Christy is constantly perceived as an unstable, meddling girl, which fits these simple-minded locals struggling in a post-mining economy ruled by Locke's dynasty.

But as another character says to Christy at the beginning of the story, "Death is always hardest on the living." And this obsession with her sister's death makes the heroine's lunatic mind spin frantically like a profaned coffin. "It lives in my walls. I hear it crying". "I take pictures 'cause I can't draw", Amy says.

Passageways designed for escaping the mines, locked entrances, insects-plagued basements will confuse us as much as they confuse Christy in her confused mental state; the film is soaked with the romantic, timeless beauty of Nora Zehetner, whose performance as an isolated young woman with a precipitous imagination elicits our innate sympathy and conquers our hearts in the end. Zehetner's Poe-like heroine maybe is a paraphrenic without love life but she's the last voice standing against the apathy and lack of conscience that the town represents. Christy awakens our sedated morals, defending her right to unmask her tortured soul, a beautiful, vulnerable but never weak, Miss Lonely in the land of guilt". http://jake-weird.blogspot.com/2007/08/beneath.html


Saw this short on Cinemax. I absolutely adored it! I've read a lot of the other comments about this film and they talk about how insulting it is to veterans and blah-blah. Well that's just crap. The intention of the film is to deliver a much deserved slam to Michael Bay and Jerry Bruckheimer (two of the worst filmmakers in all of film history) and their all style/no substance $100 million action flicks. And to this point the short succeeds impressively. With scenes of quick back-and-forth, genre-distilling moments ("I'm the smartest man on your panel who never speaks up unless the world is in terrible danger..."), Ben Affleck is blown up by a piece of asteroid. Funny, funny stuff. But more then funny, it's down-right clever. Congratulations Mr. Moniot, you just got yourself a fan! 10 out of 10


Appears to be an attempt to satirize all past movies about Pearl Harbor. And maybe all other movies about war. The credits are more interesting than the movie - maybe longer, too. But the production quality is surprisingly good. I do hope there's not a sequel :)


Who spent the time to watch this move which is done in poor taste and insults one of the greatest American leaders. Don't waste your time. I would rather get injection into the base of my finger nails then watch one second of this "film" which is in true poor taste and form.


Despite what you may think, this movie is not a Michael Bay parody. It makes fun of three of his movies, but they do not make fun of his style or his personality. Camera work makes no attempt to emulate Bay's DPs and most of the jokes are from the scripts of his movies.

Get one thing straight people: Michael Bay does NOT write his movies. If you are cheesed off why don't you blame J.J. "I made Alias and Lost" Abrams? He is as much responsible as Michael Bay.

Sadly, the screenwriters of Bay's films are often overlooked. One day Akiva Goldsman will be killed once someone realizes he wrote Batman and Robin AND won an Academy Award.

There is one great joke in the movie which parodies one of the best lines in The Rock. If only the rest of them chose to go that route instead of making Ben Affleck and Matt Damon jokes.

Lastly, the short film is about 5 minutes long. The first 30 seconds is the worst logo for a movie I have ever seen and the remaining time is spend on credits. The film truly shows off better than anything the talent of some people's home special effects. They look down right horrible, but still better than flash animation. I don't know whose idea it was to use shoddy special effects, when Bay actually uses some great ones. At least, the sets are amazing.

Does this film make fun of Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer? Sadly, no. The film uses corny jokes and a poke at America every now and then. It's no better than if the director looked at the camera for 5 minutes and said: "Hey, isn't this funny because I'm making fun of stuff you hate?" Lame jokes get you nowhere, Mr. Moniot.

Bomb.


Seagal has of late been doing material so utterly poor, to suggest that it may be time for him to call it a day, and concentrate on a promising music career. Seagal looks old, overweight and lethargic in his recent films and aside from the slightly more professional twosome of Into The Sun and Belly Of The Beast, looks utterly bored. Add to this fact he is not doing his own stunts, fighting or even dialogue, then clearly many fans are getting annoyed. However Seagal has one of the most forgiving and undemandingly loyal fan bases out there, so he's getting away with it.

Mercenary For Justice is on one hand the usually bog standard he's been doing lately, but on a slightly more positive not he does most of his ADR looping and also all his own fights. Now that might seem like something that should be a given for an action man but these days Seagal films are rated on the following: Participation in fights, stunts, in the shooting itself (not using stand ins!) and participation in performing his own dialogue. As such this film is a step up from Black Dawn and Today You Die, his previous two, poor, poor movies.

The trouble is that the film has an awful script, poor direction and of course an incredibly wooden performance by its lead. The action is all filmed rather than using stock footage, as in the other Seagal and Don E Fauntleroy team up, Today You Die, which borrowed from several films. This it least has Fauntleroy showing slightly more control behind the camera, but unfortunately the film is one of a line of contractually obligated films Seagal had to do. Sure he got well paid to do them, but the fact is there have been rumours of on set troubles with Seagal, turning up late, changing the script. How true this is I don't know but certainly in this film and TYD, Seagal is probably only present for 2/3 of the movie. Thankfully MFJ marks the last time Seagal will work with these producers and this director, following a much publicised legal battle of suing and counter suing.

MFJ makes no sense whatsoever, perhaps largely due to the slipshod and difficult production thanks to the problems between the producers and the star. This is so poorly constructed and shabbily put together that it makes one wonder just how Seagal fans (myself included can keep coming back in the vein hope he'll do a good movie again. Similarly the film is not helped by a poor cast around Seagal, who lest we not forget is not in the movie that much. However Luke Goss isn't bad, but he is sorely underused. In perhaps the most awful performance ever committed to a B action film, Roger Guenveur Smith, grates, and annoys in the most clichéd British bad guy role, in which every word is ludicrously overly enunciated. As such the poor cast fails to engage in the dull and dragging scenes without the main man Seagal. The action itself ranges form mediocre to bad. There's plenty of explosions but the film is badly edited and the fights sequences are particularly dull, despite Seagal's participation in them. They unfortunately lack imagination and aside from some bone breaking and flushing peoples heads down toilets, it's all pretty brief and uninspired.

The sad thing is that many Seagal fans will "settle" for this junk. It shouldn't be that way. I only hope that the far more promising sounding projects, Shadows Of The Sun and Prince Of Pistols will have a more interested Seagal. I don't blame the big man for not raising his game in a film this poor, he was allowed to give minimal effort to collect a big fat paycheque, so fair play to the man. However he will have to deliver better films otherwise the paycheques could well dry up. DTV films don't have to be awful and Lundgren and Van Damme are proving that. I hope Seagal takes note in his next few films, but thankfully I see there will be little chance they are as bad as this. *1/2


"Mercenary for Justice" has one heck of an opening. It starts on a war-torn battlefield with Seagal and a group of mercenaries fighting a legion of French soldiers after having kidnapped and killed the French ambassador. Director Don E. FauntLeRoy, who did the so-so "Today You Die" with Seagal, proves his worth with this sequence as the action is fluid and crisp and looks like it cost way more than the reported $15 million it actually did. It's clear with this film's opening: Seagal is hearing the fan's pleas for better films, and he's going to start trying better. Another thankful gesture to his loyal fans in this film is Seagal actually does his own fighting, and while the fight scenes are less impressive, at least it's him doing it. The plot is ridiculous and silly and most of it doesn't make a lick of sense, but since when did it have to in a Seagal movie? What matters is that the film looks good and makes Seagal look good. Having been a Seagal fan for a while, I must say I was pleased by this film.


This had to have been one of the most awful movie I have seen in my life. I have seen quite a few stinkers, believe me, but this movie takes the cake. It seems Steven Seagal's moves are becoming slower and slower after each film he makes. He really should start to lay off the Burger King meals if he wants to move two seconds quicker. You will quickly notice his huge gut within 10 minutes into the movie (God forbid should you watch this crap longer than 10 minutes).

The movie starts off with scenes of men gunning each other like they're auditioning for Saving Seagal's Private. The camera shots were terrible. It was like watching a toddler trying to control the camera steady while learning to walk. I didn't quite understand why they were fighting; actually, I didn't understand what the movie is supposed to be about other than John Seeger, Seagal's character, wanting to get revenge after someone used him for whatever purpose the writers threw into the script. Seeger's agenda also includes rescuing a little boy and his mother after being kidnapped by the same villain that used Seeger. At least the kidnapping gave the lead character a purpose to go on his 'mercenary mission'.

There were also moments where you think to yourself "Are you freaking kidding me?" There is a scene where Dresham gets into his car and never realized that Seeger was in the backseat (honestly, how could you miss seeing an ape in the backseat of your car). Seeger holds a gun to Drasham's head from the backseat while having difficulty spitting out his witless dialogue. Dresham signals for a policeman's attention, policeman walks over, Seeger somehow manages to master the art of teleportation, and mysteriously ends up in a van that happens to drive by when Dresham jumps out of the vehicle the split second Seeger disappears.

The acting is just pure trash. I honestly do not know how some of these actors can bare the embarrassment of being cast in such garbage. Seagal's dialogue are even worse in this film. It seems that he's trying maybe a little too hard to be witty by mumbling humorless one-liners. Should anyone find them remotely funny deserves a slap to the face.

I just really can't go on about this poor mess. Steven Seagal should retire from film now and rest in peace. God forbid him to continue torturing those that he call his loyal fans.

P.S. - Seagal, please take notes from Wesley Snipes movie, "The Detonator" At least his movie had somewhat a story to it. And please, please, man hit the gym.


"Mercenary for Justice" is garbage. Sure, it looks slick, with above-average (by DTV standards) production values, international locations, and some great stunts. But don't let the looks fool you. The story makes no sense whatsoever from beginning to end, and Seagal's ego-feeding is in full-force here (he is introduced as "the most decorated soldier in Gulf War I" - apparently he wouldn't even settle for "second most decorated" - and, of course, nobody can land a single tiny hit on him in a fight, despite the fact that these days he has to send his stunt double to climb over a 10-foot wall). The viewer has no idea what is going on or why, and in a turn of events that shows just how utterly moronic this script is, Seagal and his female partner Jacqueline Lord kill several perfectly innocent Cape Town cops and security people who were just trying to protect the bank that these two were (inexplicably) robbing, yet the film apparently expects us to continue regarding them as the good guys (!!!), because they are trying to save a black kid and his mother. What the hell? Oh, and why does that kick-ass muscular and deadly female mercenary we see in the opening sequence get killed off so quickly? At least SHE could climb over a wall. (*1/2)


This movie isn't bad if your comparing it to Wesley Snipes' DTV movie The Detonator. They both score about a 1 out of 10. This movie is absolutely awful!! The plot...there isn't one, not that I could find anyway. If you watch this, DON'T RENT, and find a plot please let me know what it is because while watching the 84 minutes of this trash, in between the horrible acting and watching Seagal being out of breath, I couldn't find one.

Now lets talk about the scenes a little. Seagal (John Seeger, who's the genius who came up with that one) in one scene goes to "punch" someone in the bathroom and you can see obviously that he doesn't, I mean the guy he's trying to hit isn't even in the picture, and there's a punching sound. Where's the editing director?!?! Must have been cut to pay for Seagal's drinking/smoking habit. Anyway, another one is the same scene Seagal is throws this guy into a stall in the men's bathroom and knocks the stall off the wall and no water comes splashing out. There's not even a hole in the wall where the pipe goes. I guess Seagal didn't want to get wet or the floor because his fat a$$ may have fallen down and not gotten back up. There are many others but I just keep getting more and more mad the more I think about how awful this crap was. Seagal is supposed to be some bad-a$$ mercenary but he can't even talk without being out of breath. I just couldn't accept the fact that he's supposed to be some mercenary. And speaking of mercenaries, who has ever heard of a "Good" mercenary. That's like saying a good murderer. They just don't go together. Terrible, simply terrible.

Don't rent don't even give it the benefit of the doubt and certainly don't contribute to Seagal's drinking/smoking habit.


Steven Seagal might be getting old and he also might not have the same shape he had 20 years ago but he certainly still can make a movie great just by being in it.

Actually, this movie itself is pretty good. A lot of money has been spent on making it realistic and entertaining. Reminds you of the good old days when Van Damme and Seagal were backed by big budgets.

Mercenary for Justice is a colorful film filled with explosive action scenes, great dialogues and one-liners, fight scenes in which Seagal actually takes part. It had been a while since I really saw him perform anything close to his Aikido moves. The balance between realism and utter irrealism is just perfect.

You got to remind yourself that action movies are a genre in themselves. Lots of folks try to bring them down for various reasons...they just don't get the point. Just like romantic comedies and politic thrillers all follow some basic rules, action movies are also lead by a set of pre-requisites that you just expect to be there. Villains you can hate, a hero you can love, a beautiful girl, guns roaring...

The production is good. Direction sometimes reminded me of "24 esquire" hand held camera. Little part of scenes are sometime fast-forwarded to get a feeling of speed. Well... this still is a direct to video release, I guess they have to include some cheesy stuff.

The only downside to this picture is the story. It's pretty hard to follow but it does keep the characters on the move.


What in God's name has happened to Steven Seagal? Sure, his movies were never... the intellectual type but this film is so bad he should be ashamed to have done it. The action is boring, the story/script is a joke (where did the blonde from the beginning go? Where did Bulldog come from?), the characters are flawed (ie. John and Maxine kill everybody in the bank but when some guy asks not to shoot him John just punches him in the balls?!?) and the acting from the supporting cast is on porn-level. And that so called high security prison with it's 20 guards? It looked like it would cave in after the next storm. After this Steve should really consider to either stop acting or wait for a decent script to come along...


i have just seen this movie and i and have to talk to Steven about this , Steven this is the worst action movie i have ever seen. What happen to you ? you look like Marlon Brando and the plot what happen to the plot i just saw a lot of people shooting and cars driving fast though the city. Come one man you can do better than this ,i used to like your movies until now that is . And was the point of kidnapping the fr ens ambassador and his family whit servants be cores they wasn't mention until late in the movie did they survived or what ? and the bad guys whats the deal about them did they work together or against each other,and the Greek minister ??? the bankdirektor arrested the F.B.I man can he do that ? i could go on forever whit this see it for a god laugh


I'm a Seagal fan and the rave reviews from other Seagal fans for MFJ brought me back to his films. After I was bored to death with OUT OF REACH and INTO THE SUN I gave up and said I would return till Seagal did a decent film again. I missed Submerged, Today you die and black Dawn, but then good reviews started to flood in for this movie. Supposedly he does all his own fights and the action is well done. So I went rented this movie along with Black Dawn because the thought of a good Seagal film got me overly excited. All I ask from a Seagal films is entertainment, but I was bored my MFJ. Did Seagal do his own "fight" scene?...yes. Was it a good fight scene?..No. The key word there is "Fight" and not "Fights". He has only one real fight scene in the movie. The plot was impossible to follow and the movie was just bad. I actually watched Black Dawn the next day and while Seagal was doubled for all his fight scenes the movie was much funner to watch than MFJ.


I was confused when I ran across this on the hotel TV (with no guide screen on the cable). Steven was looking a little older, so it had to be recent, but the cars belonging to these allegedly super-rich villains were all 10-20 years old, so what the heck was it? This came out in 2006? No way. Big budget there -- just scan the local classifieds for $2500 cars. Even TV shows don't stoop that low.

I guess that doesn't have much to do with the movie, except this level of quality and attention to detail carries over to the script, acting, everything. You notice things like this when there are no interesting characters to follow, no coherent plot, and the dialog hurts your ears.

There is nothing of merit in this movie. Seagal should cut his losses and go do commercials -- they would offer him more dignity. I hope they let him keep one of those 1988 Benzes.


Mercenary for Justice starts as corrupt CIA agent John Dresham (Luke Goss) & all round bad guy Anthony Chapel (Roger Guenveur Smith) arrange the kidnapping of the French Ambassador in a remote African island using hard as nails Gulf war veteran John Seeger (co-executive producer & uncredited co-writer Steven Seagal) & some of his mates as cover, plausible deniability & all that apparently. John isn't happy when he learns the truth & is even less happy when his best mate Radio Jones (Zaa Nkweta) is killed during the fighting. Back in the US & John promises to look after Radio's widow Shondra (Faye Peters) & young son Eddie (Tumi Mogoje) but Chapel is hired by billionaire Greek Arab arms dealer Ahmet Dasan (Peter Butler) to break is son out of prison & kidnaps both Shondra & Eddie in order to force Seeger to carry out the break. Seeger isn't happy & his mood doesn't improve & sets out to gain revenge on those who double crossed him & are threatening the lives of his friends family...

This Arubian, American & South African co-production was directed by Don E. FauntLeRoy who is also credited as cinematographer Mercenary for Justice was the second of three awful straight-to-video/DVD action flicks he made with Seagal (the other's being Today You Die (2005) & Urban Justice (2007) which are just as bad) & at this stage I seriously doubt whether Seagal will ever make a decent action film again, entertaining action fare such as Hard to Kill (1990), Marked for Death (1990), Out for Justice (1991) & the two Under Siege (1992, 1995) films seem a distant memory from a very long time ago. One of the main problems with Mercenary for Justice in my opinion is that it's insanely complicated & tries to be too clever, there are all sorts of vague double crosses & ulterior motives & supposed twists & turns that are just so contrived & convoluted that they make little sense & are so badly written & presented end up making the whole film feel like a complete unfocused mess. No-ones motives are ever fully revealed, I still don't really know what that CIA guy played by Luke Goss is all about, why were Seagal & his men fighting at the start, who was Chapel & why did he hire people he couldn't control & the whole thing is just a mess that jumps around from scene to scene trying to be clever but it's so poorly put together it's annoyingly confusing. Even though it only lasts for about an hour & a half it feels much, much longer which is never a good sign, the dialogue is terrible, the character's are not fleshed out & their motives are never made clear & there isn't even much action in it which is the final nail in it's coffin really as far as I am concerned.

These days Seagal is fat, you can see it & he's out of shape & not that menacing & he looks sluggish, slow & unconvincing in the action scenes. There are one or two fights which are quite violent but for the most part he leaves the action to other people & is it any coincidence that one of the other main character's is fatter than he is? I am sure that guy Bulldog is there to make sure Seagal isn't the fattest person on screen during the action! During the old days Seagal's action scenes were based around brutal martial arts violence & amusing one-liners, these days he can barely walk yet alone pull those moves off. There are a few explosions, a few shoot-outs & some fights but nothing special or that memorable.

According to the IMDb this had a budget of about $15,000,000 which I don't believe for a second, there is no way this cheap looking film cost that much. Apparently shot in Bulgaria & South Africa. The acting sucks, Seagal minus pony tail mumbles his way through the film as usual while Luke Goss has managed to put this turkey behind him having appeared in the recent Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008).

Mercenary for Justice is another terrible low budget shot in Eastern Europe action flick with Seagal who really should either lose some weight or call it a day & realise that he can't make these action films anymore. Not good.


I am not sure what fans of Seagal are complaining about given his recent disasters over the years from 2002's The Foreigner through "Out of Reach" in my opinion would be #98, 99, and 100 on IMDb's bottom 100 list. However, after slight improvements in the films "Into the Sun" and "Black Dawn" I have to say "Mercenary for Justice" is his best film since "Half Past Dead". I say this because the film had me interested from start to finish. The fight scenes are credible, the action staged well, and Seagal's old persona comes out in this film. It reminded me of "Marked for Death" in its style. Some faults are evident, such as the bad dialogue and acting from the supporting cast. That is Seagal's stunt double again jumping fences to get behind the truck after the initial war sequence. The bathroom fight sequence as well as the last 20 minutes of the film make it all worth it. Truly, *** out of **** in its class.


Another ninety days, another Seagal release. This one seems like a sequel to Submerged, in that Seagal is working as part of a team again (thus meaning that other actors get the bulk of the meaty action sequences) and this movie (sadly) is all over the place (plot-wise) as Submerged. Seagal plays John Seager, freedom fighter and freelance mercenary, who after getting shafted by his current employer, goes to work for an enemy of the said employer, and proceeds to shaft him. Any further explanation would be either: a major spoiler.....or news to me, as i couldn't keep up with the movies many plots and twists. What is of major importance to all Seagal fans however, is the action. And this movie (the second by Faunteroy, director of the equally fragmented Today You Die) has plenty of action (to make up for the lack of logic, perhaps?) and (what seems like) no fight-doubling for the stout sensei. Upon further inspection, the fight scenes (as usual) are shot extremely fragmented (why use one edit, when forty will do) so it's hard to tell. Seagal certainly performs a few of his (feared lost) classic Aikido moves (the fight in the bathroom, being a brutal notable) but the surrounding stuff (i.e, plot) is up there with the manic confusion of The Foreigner, Out for a kill, Out of reach and Submerged.

A fair portion of this, could be down to the fact, that Seagal crammed filming this one with (roughly) about three other direct-to-video classics......so i guess you've got to credit quantity over quality, nowadays? As a lifelong Seagal fan, i enjoyed it, but i fear it'll lose him more fans, than create new ones. Technically, it's sound, the performances are OK, the action scenes are fine....i just wish these Direct-to-video releases would tone down the 'filler' plot, thus making the movie easier to understand? As for Seagal, one can only hope that the forthcoming Prince Of Pistols puts him back on the big screen (where he belongs) as i feel these 'small' studios (and their directors) are doing this once great action icon, no favours.

Bottom line, If you're a Seagal fan, you have to buy it. If you're a casual viewer, rent it, but i'd be surprised if you rented another, given the somewhat superior quality of other equally budgeted releases on the shelves at the moment. One for the fans. 7 out of 10 (only for the presence of Seagal)


Steven Seagal has come out with an array of DTV titles since 2003's The Foreigner and none since then have been very successful in winning over many action fans. As a hardcore fan, I personally have been mildly disappointed in Steve's stuff of late (mainly Out Of Reach, Submerged and Black Dawn) due to uses of voice dubbing, fight doubles and very flat plots, which is why Mercenary For Justice is an exception.

The plot is very simple: group of mercenaries are betrayed on a mission by their boss, mercenaries are then blackmailed into taking another mission, mercenaries get mad, mercenaries get even.

What separates MFJ from Seagal's last couple is the obviously improved production values, the opening battle sequence looks almost as good as your average war film (not forgetting the uncanny over the top ability of all protagonists to hit their targets with extreme precision). Seagal doesn't appear to be dubbed and performs 95% of his own stunts and fights, which is a breath of fresh air for this fan (and for most I would imagine). He looks like he's having fun with this movie and works well with his supporting actors. A very big mention must go to Roger Guenveur Smith who plays Chapel, his character is so ridiculously over the top that its almost impossible not to like him.

All in all, MFJ is an great, fun action movie and Steven Seagal's best since Into The Sun.


What a horrible piece of dreck. The plot is non-existing, the actors are stupid lame and incoherent (as was the non-existing plot), the camera-work something my little sister could pull off, the dude who seeger recruiters has got to be the MOST annoying person _EVER_. I couldn't stop thinking about smacking him in the face every time he opened his mouth. Apart from that he overacts when the dude can't even act, he pronounces every sentence with incredible agony, thinking it probably raises his 'acting' skills to a higher plane and makes him look even a more bad guy. IT IS HORRIBLE.

The main actor has gotten even fatter then previously, and now takes about 2/3 of my widescreen TV. What a waste of perfectly good film and time of my life.

Seriously though, i you know what the film is about please tell me. I would like to know. Because the movie sure didn't!


...he wouldn't have to keep grinding out quota dross like this.

Look, we all know the plot by now. Bad People with Foreign Accents plan to do Bad Things to Good People with Domestic Accents. Seagal is the only man standing between blah and blah and blah de blah blah. OK, we know. We know. Let's just enjoy the ride.

The problem is that the "plot" of this movie jumps around so much that it's impossible to keep track of who is doing what to who and why. Really, I couldn't keep track of Good People and the Bad People, or when they switches sides or why, or which side Black Tech Guy is on from minute to minute.

On the plus sides, Seagal does his own "fight" scenes, but they're just sad now. His leathery skin clearly makes him invulnerable to conventional weapons, and while he does his usual twist/lock work, he's also forced to do some strikes that are simply pathetic. The guy can barely punch past his own belly these days.

The highlights are the supporting cast. Jacqueline Lord is surprisingly competent, and looks like she should have been in a lot more productions than her resume suggests. She clearly missed out on her big break a decade or so ago, but does well as mature totty.

Matt... uh, sorry, Luke Goss owns the few scenes that he's in, but there's just not enough of them to save this movie, and they're irrelevant anyway since Seagal is playing his usual immortal Myrmidon Let's give Goss the last word though: "This is unbelievable," he opines, and there's not much to disabuse that notion here.


Wow.. what a great movie,, the best Seagal DVD in years,, even better than the new Pistol Whipped, this one has everything,, an opening Army battle scene,, everything blowing up,, good fight scenes for Seagal that we haven't really seen in years, a decent plot line,, also lacking for many of those DVD's of his in recent years, and this one even has a sexy as heck girl for Seagal to be with,, i liked the many different characters in this one,, Chappel for one was pretty good,, i don't touch guns... that's you're job,,, moron.. what a line. all in all this was a very good movie, it had all the action that you could possibly want from a Seagal movie, so therefore i give it a perfect 10.


"Mercenary for justice"- surely a candidate for oxymoron of the year -is the first Stephen Seagal movie I have seen since the excellent "The Foreigner" and I am disappointed to report that the dear boy has let his love for the folding green overcome his artistic sensibilities once more.What are you like,Steve? That is not actually a rhetorical question because what he is like is clearly Stephen Fry on steroids - physically rather than intellectually you understand.Now I am old and flabby,but my excuse is that I'm also poor and anonymous,I don't go to the gym(I wouldn't know what to do if I ever got there)and I don't have a personal trainer,a life coach or any other of those completely essential adjuncts to showbiz fame.Mr Seagal has no such cop outs.He is an "Action Movie" star,not a bleeding couch potato yet his spare tyre is bigger than the one on David Beckham's Hummer. But I still kind of like him,strange isn't it?An affection forged in the white heat of his masterpiece "Under Siege" still holds sway. Love is certainly strange,but "Mercenary for Justice is a step too far,even for so staunch an admirer. The first ten minutes made me laugh more than the whole of "The Bucket List".A blonde - haired lady with muscular thighs and some sort of circus costume jumps on and off lorries killing highly - armed soldiers before disappearing from our ken rather mysteriously.That bloke from Bros should have stuck to causing pre - pubescent girls to lose bladder control because there's more future in that for him than in acting. The movie is cut(I hesitate to use the word "edited") like the kind of video game you might find on a malfunctioning machine in the Amusement Arcade on Brighton Pier. And our hero?Needs to hang up his black combat pants at least until he can find a proper movie to work in.Perhaps "Under SIege 3",set in a Franciscan Monastery where the chief monk geezer is holed up in the bell tower with an Ingram and Britney Spears.No?Well stranger things have happened,and if it ever comes to pass remember you read it here first.


Seagal is back and bigger than ever. The larger than life actor is back to his best with Mercenary of Justice. The heart felt story begins with Seagal being described the as a wild card and the best at his job i.e blowing stuff up in slow-mo.

A mercenary gets involved in a mission that threatens the lives of his kin. In order to succeed, he must break into one of the most wellguarded prisons in Eastern Europe and free the son of the most notorious drug lord in the world today

In conclusion this is a great and refreshing change from the average action film with real heart felt drama its only rival release may be firewall, however Harrison Ford struggles to compete with Seagal in every aspect.

"It's time to fight again".... Damn right


In Mercenary For Justice Steven Seagal is turning away from his recent Direct-To-DVD releases and opening with a great 'war' scene one that comes close to "Saving Private Ryan". Steven also his hearing his fan base and decided to do his own fights scenes, also at the end he gets back to his 'movie' roots when he goes after the man who set him up in the beginning. The way does it reminds me of his movies "Hard to Kill" and "Out For Justice". Steven is making an honest effort to improve and the way he acts in his movies. If he continues he will reach the stardom he had in the early 1990's and maybe in the future he will go beyond in his stardom we just have to keep him informed so that he may continue to improve.


For a film about how to improve your speaking ability, this one really doesn't take much of its advice. Bad acting, bad animation and a bad narrator are among the things that shoot this turkey down. Rightfully hacked to pieces by Mystery Science Theater 3000 in one of the better jobs Mike and the bots do on a short.


Don't bother comparing this version of an old play with others. This one has Jeanette MacDonald and Brian Aherne and is splendid all on its own. A Word War II era look at the past it resonates with a thousand charming moments. She is lovely and even Gene Raymond charms. I think the special mood of this film may be that all of these faces are gone now and yet with us, part of those of us who watch and feel that vibration of the past lovers, the war in background and the sadness of our loss of that time and those faces, voices, memories. For me a pleasure enhanced with every viewing. A special thank your to Mr. Aherne who will always be a favorite of mine and hopefully others who have watches that expressive and quite beautiful but very masculine face. Definitely recommended.


Smilin Through before Sleeping Through, i was really disappointed in this film it lacked character and interest. Jeanette's singing is the only thing that saved me from complete boredom. Gene Raymond didn't fit the character or the movie, Jeanette didn't have any chemistry with her husband on screen might as well have put Nelson Eddy in the film it wouldn't have been so bad to watch. All in all the songs are nice including "Drink to me only with thine eyes" it looked like she was singing that to herself instead of her loving husband if you ask me. Even Louie B Mayor said it himself " sing to him like you love him"

she was supposed to be singing to her husband with love that shouldn't have been hard, if only she wasn't already inlove with Nelson. Jeanette always looks stunning in color and black and white films if you like Jeanette Macdonald then watch this film other then that nothing special really.


This is not Jeanette Mcdonald's best work even if the film is in color. Even though Mcdonald's husband starred in the movie, I felt that he just didn't fit the character. I like the Norma Shearer 1932 version much better. Norma Shearer and Fredric March make a much better onscreen couple.


What a great way to end the first season of the x-files.An apparent unrelated.minor car chase leads the agents to the discovery of what seems to be concrete evidence of a government conspiracy.The early sequence of the man being chased who then is shot emits green blood which has toxic properties is a classic.Also Deep Throat plays an important part i this episode though can the agents trust him after his lies in E.B.E?A stunning moment happens when Mulder enters the warehouse and before his very eyes is bodies in tanks of water.When he returns with Scully the bodies are gone much to Mulders disgust.He thought he had irrefutable,indisputable proof.This episode must be watched!


The first season of the X-Files went out with a bang. The Erlenmeyer Flask delivers in so many ways. It has the most exciting opening teaser of any episode so far, an intense car chase on the docks of Maryland. This marks the first time that the tag line changes at the end of the opening credits. It reads, 'Trust No One' instead of 'The Truth Is Out There'.

We get our first glimpse of the alien/human hybrid experiments and their toxic green blood. The story is fast-paced with some good dramatic moments between Mulder and Scully and Deep Throat. The episode begs the question, after having been misled by Deep Throat in 'E.B.E.', can he be trusted again by Mulder and Scully? Early on, Deep Throat accosts Mulder as he returns to his apartment, asking why he is giving up so soon. How did Deep Throat know that Mulder was giving up? There is really no way he could have known. The writers just needed to advance the story is how I figure it.

Mulder has plenty of one-liners in this episode as usual, and even Scully gets in a rare joke with her 'monkey pee' line.

With the second appearance in the series of the voice of Danny, Mulder gets an address from him for Zeus Storage. It is located on Pandora Street. I think this episode is kind of like opening a Pandora's box for the rest of the series. The first season was fine and all, but this episode really jump-starts the popularity of The X-Files. I find it to be an interesting parallel. And, that was the actual name of the street in Vancouver where they filmed that scene.

The scene where Mulder enters the warehouse and discovers the bodies suspended in liquid is a breathtaking visual. Another classic visual from this episode is when Scully removes the alien fetus from the canister. Irrefutable proof for Scully? Maybe not.

The end of the episode has a near exact ending to the ending of the Pilot episode with the Cigarette Smoking Man putting a piece of evidence away in the basement of the Pentagon. I like how that shows that the first season has come full circle.

The Erlenmeyer Flask keeps you jumping up until the end when the ultimate sacrifice is made to save Mulder. This episode is a must-see for all.


The Erlenmeyer Flask the Limerick:

A doctor with alien DNA

From the syndicate runs away

A flask labeled "Purity"

Turns out not to be

The monkey pee, Scully will say

Great episode. The mythology officially kicks off into full gear with this wonderful season 1 finale. On rewatching this episode I was surprised to find out how many mythology references originated from this episode. Such as the cloning experiment, Zeus genetics, purity control, the phrase: "trust no one", etc. It is too bad that Deep Throat dies so early in the series but luckily we are given a very worthy successor soon enough. I also thought this was quite early for Scully to get her evidence from the monkey pee about finding alien DNA. It seemed that it took longer for her to find evidence like that in the series. The conspiracy still seemed so new and mysterious with so much to look forward to. I give the episode a perfect 10.


The teaser of this episode was awesome.But what followed was even better. Mulder and Scully get deeper than ever into the conspiracy surrounding them. We get to see some tests involving alien DNA on human subjects and an alien baby frozen on liquid nitrogen. The episode was really good and one of my personal favorites from season one. I love the final scene, its mystical...pure X-Files. We see Deep Throat get killed, shame, he was such a good character. For the first time we hear " Trust no one" which became a catchphrase later on.

Overall a great final, The second season opener "Little Green Men" was just as good


The Season ends with a very excitable bang and leaves us in suspense from the very start. The year has been a very excitable and interesting year and I have loved every minute of it, good and bad. I shall now do my last Good and Bad for Season 1, The Erlenmeyer Flask. Enjoy.

The Good: That alien baby was adorable. x]

The final scene. Beautifully done.

Those bodies in the glass. Wow.

Deep Throat. Trust him or not?

The Bad: The whole shooting thing. :'(

Conclusion: Brilliant end of a brilliant First Season. I want to believe. 10/10


I like films about killers, especially those with an interesting little story or something that makes them a bit different. The Alphabet Killer doesn't disappoint in this respect.

I'll admit, the start was pretty poor, I felt it was quite disjointed and it seemed as though a lot of scenes that should have been there to develop the plot were on the cutting-room floor. However, once we get into the middle and latter stages of the film, we definitely see a marked improvement.

I think Eliza Dushku played her role well in this, and I felt the slant of Megan's mental illness playing such a large part in the story made her character more believable, and added interest to the film.

Overall, this was a nicely put together film. It had little gore or anything really adult-themed, so if that's what you're after this isn't for you. If you want a killer movie portrayed more through the eyes of the main detective than is usual, you might like this. Yeah, you'll probably suss it out, but that's half the fun.


Saw the rating of 6/10 on here and decided to give this a try. Bad mistake!

I thought this was the worst serial killer movie I have ever seen. You know it's a bad sign when the serial killer seems more sane than the lead character.

The lead character was not very bright nor likable, and I spent most of the movie hoping for her demise.

Just because it's loosely based off a real life event does not mean it should become a movie.

I would NOT recommend this movie at all.


I watched THE ALPHABET KILLER on Showtime last night. It is based on a true-life serial killer case in Rochester, New York. However, I'm not sure if the true events that inspired this thriller included a dogged homicide investigator who pursues a child murderer, despite suffering from schizophrenia. It's an interesting take, though.

Eliza Dushku, does an incredible job playing Megan Paige, the detective, whose condition makes her believe she can see the spirits of the victims. I found her character very sympathetic; and, quite believable.

Unfortunately, the movie was a bit predictable (even the "twist" seemed obvious to me).


i was astounded at the rash of negative comments. in my view this was a great class b movie. while it might not rank with the Cagney genre of gangster movies, for a crime drama, it catches the angst a decent detective trying to find the logic in the irrational might feel.

meet Lt. Megan Paige (Eliza Dushku). she's the detective with the brain. why she asks herself would a deranged killer murder a little girl with the initials cc in Christs Church? The percentage of the population with identical initials is small. What is the perverted logic behind the irrational act? She pours into the case but can find no answers. As she is steadily driving herself crazy with trying to second guess the irrational mind, her finance Capt. Kenneth Shine (Cary Elwes) orders her off the case. Hr attempt at suicide lands her in the funny farm where in group she discusses her overreaching toward a solution.

Zoom ahead to her discharge. A benevolent ex-fiancé restores her to uniform in the records department, but with a recurrence of the alphabet murders she is allowed to tag along with the investigating detective through a series of dead ends until a nearby small town force pins the incident on a hostage taker shot in the act.

Can former LT Megan Paige retain her sanity long enough to find the killer? See the movie.

The cast is not composed of world class actors but the acting is credible.


http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/

If you ever cross paths with Rob Schmidt or Tom Molloy, the director and screenwriter of The Alphabet Killer, then take the opportunity to insult their intelligence, the way they did yours for claiming their movie, The Alphabet Killer, is based on a true story. This movie is so loosely based on the real Alphabet Killings, it needs both a belt AND suspenders to keep it from falling down to its ankles. Artistic license is one thing, but these two go off on such amateurish tangents, you'd swear they were first year film students desperate to impress their teachers and peers with their cleverness. Problem is, there's nothing clever about AK and if these two had any talent, it should have been the ability recognize the source material didn't need embellishment. As it is, Schmidt and Molloy's treatment is so ridiculous, all it needed to complete its film student predictability was a scene with the protagonist lying naked on the floor, in the fetal position, after suffering a mental breakdown. Oh but wait, she slashes her wrists instead! What a novel substitute.

Eliza Dushku acts her little heart out and the harder she tries, the more embarrassed you feel for her and her complete and utter lack of talent. Dusku may be eye candy, but her inability to act natural is such a distraction it even seems the other actors are staring back at her with pity. And there actually are a few talented actors in this film, but they're working with such poorly written material and are horribly misguided by Schmidt's inept, blunt-force direction. Did Timothy Hutton burn every bridge known to actors to be left with no other option but to accept a job on this shameless piece of on-the-nose garbage?

Avoid at all costs. Shutoff time: 32:14.


This crime thriller centers on a detective named Megan (Eliza Dushku) who investigates a series of child murders in upstate New York. But Megan suffers from a mental illness, the symptoms of which get worse as she delves deeper into the killings. She hears strange voices and sees "visions" related to the victims.

With low light levels and muted colors, combined with creepy background music, the film's first half creates an effective thriller atmosphere. We see the outline of the killer, but never the face. Will Megan solve the murders and overcome her illness, or will the inept police supersede, to botch the case? As viewers, we root for Megan to succeed.

Although the script idea originates from a real-life murder case, referred to generally as the "double initial" serial killings, which terrorized upstate New York in the early 1970s, the film's overall plot and main characters are fictional. The story setting is the present, not the 1970s. The scriptwriter created the Megan character out of thin air. And the story's outcome deviates considerably from the outcome of the real-life case. The film's writer wrote a fictional plot, based on a real-life premise. The film's second half fails to convince, largely because of its clichéd plot contrivances.

Visuals consist of an annoying widescreen projection and some hokey CGI effects, in the form of "ghosts". But the low lighting contributes tension, as does some clever low-angle camera shots. And the director relies mostly on a hand-held camera, which enhances realism. Overall casting and acting are fine.

"The Alphabet Killer" gets off to a great start. But it falters in the second half, owing to fictional plot points that dilute the underlying real-life premise. I would have preferred a narrative that followed the true story, though I understand that the reason for not doing so was budget constraints. By lowering one's expectations, the viewer may find the film worthwhile, either as a fictional thriller or as a character study of a woman fighting her own demons.


Interesting concept and an OK storyline that had potential to be so much more interesting than what was created.

The audio creates a very creepy atmosphere at times and the CG is quite effective in adding to this eerie atmosphere. For the first 15 minutes, the film started very well and I was hoping to to be thrilled and suspended for the entire length of the movie... No such luck!

The film was poorly executed and the script was bland and uninteresting.

There was hardly any character development and the Heroine in this movie was annoying and useless. The story was disjointed and the characters were just thrown in the mix without much consideration to the plot. The twist in the movie was like having the straightest chip taken out of a Twisties packet. Not much of a twist at all!

The over exaggerated movements and terrible acting of Eliza Dushku contributed to this film's demise. The script fails drastically to address empathy from viewers and within 15 minutes of watching this, I succumbed myself to 83 minutes of mediocrity.

Bitterly disappointed.

This film confirmed to me that Eliza Dushku cannot act at all.


Sometimes this film plays like a by-the-numbers serial killer movie, and at times the pacing is a little slow. But 'Killer' is buoyed up by several good performances. Hutton is low key but very good, and a number of small, supporting roles are very well cast and acted as well. Elwes is almost unrecognizable due to some weight gain, and he doesn't come off as strongly as some of the others. As for Dushku, well, this is probably the finest performance she's ever attempted. It doesn't always work  she's not especially convincing when she has to descend into madness  but most of the time she's a cut and a half above her usual fare; it's as if she finally decided to take a role where her looks aren't a factor and actually act, and it was nice to see for the most part she could pull it off (hey, they aren't going to see her as an 'adult' actress in Hollywood as long as she plays cheerleaders and works for Joss Whedon). This is the type of role you would have associated with a younger Sandra Bullock or Angelina Jolie (i.e., pre-skeletal), and Dushku compares favorably.

It's not a particularly happy or comforting movie; it's not quite creepy enough to be unsettling, and the director undercuts Megan's madness by showing us what she is hallucinating (showing off, by the way, some really terrific make-up effects); so the viewer is never really sure if, like Haley Joel Osment, she really can see dead people or if she's just going bonkers, or possibly both, the latter caused by the former. But Dushku is interesting to watch here (and not for any of the usual reasons) and shows promise she never has before.


I wish I had something nice to say about this movie. But aside from a few quick shots of Eliza Dushku's boobs, "Alphabet Killer" is a dull, hunt-the-killer movie. There are no special twists, no special effects, nothing exceptional or outstanding about the movie.

The acting is believable enough but it's no testament to the cast's acting abilities; as I said, it's just straight forward, nothing spectacular had to be done by the actors.

The plot was simple. There is a killer that has to be found, so go find him! There are no close encounters with the killer in the movie until the end of the movie. There wasn't a character development of the killer's motif. Heck, there wasn't even development of the heroine's "disease." I didn't get scared, excited, upset, or anything in this movie. All throughout, I was just blah. The movie is based on true events so it was factual, but told in an obviously fictional manner so it felt like taking a course in psychology with Ben Stein as your professor.

Save your money. Get this at a Red Box. You know what? Don't waste your time. Watch it when it comes on TV...and watch it as the background ambiance while playing World of Warcraft or as your bedtime going-to-sleep movie.


Starts out sorta creepy. Kids dying. Don't really want to see that anywhere, even in a movie. Yet as a parent, it really hits home. My wife who normally falls asleep even in the best of action movies stayed awake thru the entire flick. Mostly because we were both hoping for justice. We got WAY less than that. Not only was the ending a "What the hell?", but we COULD NOT understand or comprehend was the last printed lines in the movie:

"A fireman was exhumed in 2006 and cleared of the murders. Nobody has been convicted of the crimes to date."

What? There were no firemen in the movie! What happened to the psychiatrist gone bad? You can't expect people to pay money to rent your videos to give them cr@p like this. Never mind paying box office prices. And you wonder why bitemetorrent is as popular as it is.

You'll wind up getting a rep for pushing the "artistic license" window, and people will stay away. Far away. Especially producers.


If this story is based on a true story, the only thing this story had in common with the truth was the fact that it all happened in a world not unlike the one we live in.

Police planting evidence to incriminate a person they know did not do it and therefore taking a chance to loose face if the murderer strikes again is one of the many, and sadly not the least unlikely, things that makes this movie a bad one.

This movie strings a lot of unrealistic actions together with at the top of this the miraculous recovery of a handicapped man. It was if i was watching Lou and Andy from Little Britain.

I think this movie is an insult of the real victims.


I would rank this movie as one of the top 10 worst movie I have seen this year.

I thought it was a crime type movie according to its name. It turned out to be a horror movie, with ghosts throughout the movie to scare people.

It was not a brilliant crime story as well; the ending was quite silly with no logic. It seemed like the ghosts brought the female police to the solution. And the ending is "The Alphabet Killer" had not been caught, how positive was that? At the end, every one of us looks like idiot, and waste our 1.5 hours.

Did the female police had serious mental illness? She was over-reacting, the character could be more normal than what she did. For the last, half an hour, I really grind my teeth to finish this movie. If I have a brick on my hand, I would throw it to the screen.

Definitely one of the Hollywood junks, don't waste you time and money, and fooled by the beautiful and exciting movie name!!


This is a 'Mothman Prophecies'-styled mystery. It lurches along, and doesn't work. What the movie never needs but can't be talked out of, is another scene in which the heroine loses her grip, or her perturbation escalates

But Hollywood sure loves our cultural fictions. In AlphaKiller, a renegade cop does her own thing, barging in on hostage situations, ejecting herself past all restrictions, not because it's plausible for a minute, but because a strong character (trans: loose cannon) can waltz over the problems of a poorly constructed narrative, and overcome the barriers that society places on "getting things done" (This is familiar from hundreds of movies dating all the way back to Charles Bronson's Deathwish in the 70s). In reality, absolutely nothing terrifies Americans more than someone who doesn't behave exactly like the crowd. Perhaps audiences want to see someone go maverick because they deliriously imagine this conforms to their own lives. Or perhaps they know they're powerless and it's comforting to see someone (even a fictional character) acting autonomously. For me, it's extraordinarily tiresome. No one has this much autonomy because society would be in chaos.

Other tiresome tropes borrowed for this movie are: b/w ghosts (from the Devil's Backbone), dramatic scenes in inexplicably dark rooms (X-Files), TV-scaled emoting and the dreaded, pointless ShakyCam.


Over the years, Hammer studios have provided us with some true classics within the horror genre. However, if this is the only Hammer film you've ever seen, then you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise. All the things that make Hammer horror great are absent from this movie; it lacks charm, originality and it isn't intelligent or imaginative. It's a shame too, because the plot isn't a bad one. It involves a satanic cult that is posing as a Christian church and has chosen a child to 'become the devil' upon her eighteenth birthday. However, now that time has come and her father has decided that he wants to back out of the deal, only the cult isn't going to let him. So, as you can see, we have devil worshippers, sacrifice, Christopher Lee as the head of the cult, the devil himself even makes an appearance... this is great horror stuff, and if it had the right handling, it might have been able to capitalise on it's premise; but as it happens, it did not.

The main reason it fails is that it's just so DULL. The film takes ages to get anywhere, and by the time something does happen, you don't care because you're so bored. Speaking of being bored, Christopher Lee doesn't exactly approach his role in this film with gusto and his performance, although still malevolent as Lee always is, pretty much is the epitome of this film; bored. As usual with Hammer, the production values are low; but usually it doesn't matter as you can forgive the film for it, and even like it, depending on the film; but here, since the rest of the film is so bad; it's hard to forgive the bad production values. When the devil does appear, it's so ridiculous that all you will be able to do is laugh. I never thought I'd see the devil as a glove puppet! There are no real standout moments in this film, and even the ending isn't any good. I was expecting it to at least end with a bang after making us sit through nearly ninety minutes of boredom, but no.

I recommend this film to people that want to see every Hammer Horror movie ever made. Everyone else should avoid like the plague.


The last Hammer Horror film features Nastassja Kinski in only her third film, and her first major role. The film was banned in many countries because she was only 15 at the time.

There are several fine actors in this film. There is Oscar-nominee Richard Widmark (Kiss of Death), Christopher Lee (The Wicker Man, LOTR) in what may be his finest performance, Honor Blackman (Goldfinger), and Oscar-nominee Denholm Eliott (A Room with a View, Raiders of the Lost Ark).

While Sister Catherine (Kinski) is being cared for by novelist John Verney (Widmark) on the eve of her 18th birthday at the request of her father (Eliott), we flashback to her bloody birth, bursting from the belly of her mother, presided over by a smiling sinister Father Michael (Lee), as the others present turn away in disgust.

While Father Michael is using his Satanic powers to draw Sister Catherine to her destiny, Verney endeavors to protect her. A battle of will and dark forces ensues. Verney realizes the seriousness of his mission as Sister Catherine escapes after burying a comb in the head of Anna Fountain (Honor Blackman).

That was one slimy demon that was crawling over Sister Catherine prior to her baptism, and that was a very tempting offer made to Verney at the end. Willpower to resist that offer is more than I have.


when a film is copied from a book its got to be at least a little bit like the book itself but this does not and when put beside other horror hammer films like 'the devil rides out' it makes itself look like a waste when there was so much that could have been done to make it a fine film. I give it 4 because i love hammer films, if i didn't i'd be giving it a 2.

If i was any of the actors in the film i'd be rather ashamed but then again it could be just for the money. If your a person who's seen it or is thinking of seeing it first read the book>scare your pants reading it>then watch the film>get board and see that the only thing close from the book is just the bloody title. go on i dare you it'll be a lot better.


Cannibal Apocalypse only half lives up to its title - plenty of cannibals, but no real apocalypse. The premise is fairly original, if terribly stupid - somehow, in the seething cauldron of the Viet Nam war, cannibalism becomes a contagious disease which three vets carry back home with them. I know, I know, cannibalism is a social behavior, not a pathogen, and the movie knows it, too, so some brief lip service is paid to a theory of psychic mutation which is never really explained and immediately forgotten. Unfortunately, since the infected aim to kill and eat their victims, opportunities to spread the disease are rare, and the outbreak burns itself out quicker than you can say "Ebola."

No, what saves this movie from being just an also-ran in the field of Italian zombie flicks is the presence of John Saxon, the face you've grown to love from about a zillion other cheesy 70's action flicks. Here, he's given a real plum of a role, as he gets to slowly change from a man horrified by his post-traumatic stress induced nightmares, to a full-on, unrepentant cannibal seeking to escape pursuit and find a place where he and his kind can live in peace and pursue their alternate lifestyle of wanton killing and consuming human flesh. Is that so wrong?


A cannibal-movie that actually tries and succeeds to be different. This movie transcends the cannibal genre and becomes something else. You'll have to get past the silly & inept Vietnam opening-scene, but then this movie turns into an urban tale of virus-outbreak. A cannibal-virus, that is. There's some violence, there's some drama, there's some nudity, there's some very nice gore and there are four cannibal-fugitives on the run. Awesome mixture that works! Add to that a satisfying ending, and we've got a hit! A hit with John Saxon in it, no less. "Cannibal Apocalypse" indeed feels, at times, a bit like Romero's "Dawn of the Dead" (1978), but the one movie that kept coming to my mind was David Cronenberg's "Rabid" (1977). So if you're tired of all those "half naked cannibals eating human flesh and slaughtering animals in the jungle"-flicks, and if Umberto Lenzi's "Nightmare City" (1980) just made you laugh instead of anything else, then go watch Antonio Margheriti's "Cannibal Apocalypse" (aka "Invasion of the Flesh Hunters"). And make 100% sure you get a hold of the uncut version.


John Saxon seems to be having all sorts of problems. One, he's having flashbacks to Vietnam, where he witnesses two of his men chowing down on somebody before biting him, and two: his teenage neighbour is coming on strong but all John has is an urge to bit her. Nevertheless, he trying to cope, until one of his buddies gets released from the loony bin and starts biting folk in a cinema.

Cannibal Apocalypse, on the surface, appears to be your usual Italian gut muncher, what with all the gore and what not, but what is it I detect underneath? Could that be Social Commentary? The Vietnam vets in this film (well, the two who aren't complete raving lunatics) seem to drift through their world on a wave of indifference and hostility; John Saxon's character is misunderstood - his wife conspires behind his back with a love rival, and Giovanni Radice's Charlie can barely comprehend anything that's going on around him. Wouldn't we all just go a bit insane and go on a murderous rampage? The answer is: I watch too many of these films.

Cannibal Apocalypse moves at a slightly slower pace than it's contemporaries, but Antonio ain't no fool. I've never seen a film by him that even approaches bad. Saxon and Radice both play their parts well, Saxon as an introverted, troubled man and Radice as a guy who is completely out of place in post Nam America. For those who just like to get drunk and watch blood fly, there's plenty of that here too. It's just that this time there's a little genuine drama in the mix too.


I am a great fan of director Antonio Margheriti, whose impressive repertoire includes brilliant Horror as well as great Spaghetti Westerns. His doubtlessly greatest film is the Gothic masterpiece "Danza Macabra" aka. "Castle of Blood" of 1964, starring the great Barbara Steele, followed by the brilliant revenge Western "E Dio disse A Caino" ("And God said to Cain", 1970) with Klaus Kinski, and "La Vergine Di Norimberga" ("Castle of Terror", 1963"). Even though not one of his masterpieces, "Apocalypse Domani" aka. "Cannibal Apocalypse" of 1980 is an original and highly entertaining film. This is quite different to other Italian Cannibal movies that are set in the jungle, as it takes place in the city almost entirely (only the first five minutes take place in the Vietnamese jungle). This film was banned in several countries after its release, but it is not nearly as gruesome as one might expect. It is full of nauseating gore, no doubt, but compared to other contemporary Cannibal-films such as "Cannibal Holocaust" (1980), "Cannibal Ferox (1981) ore "Eaten Alive" (1980), "Cannibal Apocalypse" is actually quite tame.

"Cannibal Apocalypse" is about a mysterious virus that gives people an irresitible hunger for human flesh. American soldiers have been infected with the virus in Vietnam, and have brought it back home with them... The greatest aspect of "Cannibal Apocalypse" is arguably the brilliant casting of John Saxon and Giovanni Lombardo Radice. Saxon is, as always, great in his typical stoic manner. The best performance, however, comes from Radice who is once again excellent in his role here. Giovanni Lombardo Radice enjoys a deserved cult-status among fans of Italian Horror/Gore films and his role here perfectly illustrates why - his character (of the name Charles Bukowski!) is one of the first infected with the cannibal virus, and Radice excellently portrays the Vietnam veteran's blood-lust and insanity. The film often resembles a Zombie-flick more than the Cannibal-flicks of the time. The people infected, however, are not brain-dead flesh-eaters, but intelligent, thinking people - only with the unconquerable hunger for human flesh... One of the greatest elements of Italian Cannibal flicks were their scores, and even not quite typical, Alexander Blonkensteiner's score is great. "Cannibal Apocalypse" may not be one of the greatest Italian Cannibal films, but it is definitely highly original. Lovers of Italian Horror/Gore cinema can not afford to miss this!