I discovered this show years ago and wow is this funny! Unlike the American version, this show had no restrictions and anything goes with the improvisers. Also unlike the lame version of todays "Whose Line", the games at times where played by other improvisers that made things fresh. Song styles before becoming about the same thing every time by Wayne Brady, were actually funny and were about different things. I remember when Mike McShane and Josie Lawrence did a song styles and the song was about kitty litter. Greg Proops did news flash once in a while instead of Colin all the time, and I loved the game Helping Hands. My personal favorite improvisers are: Paul Mertin, Tony Slattery, and Greg Proops. The ongoing war between Greg Proops and Clive Anderson was always funny, how the improvisers will say that Clive has no neck, and Clive Anderson is a MUCH better host than O SO BORING Drew Carey.

The Last Word: The British Version Ruled. Want decent improv without the restrictions and with humor? Tune in, It rules.


4 comedians play various improv games for the amusement of the audience and are supposedly given points over the course of the game. The winner gets to read the credits in an unusual way.

It's only by virtue of UKTV G2 (or Dave, as it now prefers) that I'm able to watch re-runs of this. And I think it's a gem of a programme which has never failed to raise a laugh yet.

Clive Anderson, as host, remained dignified even when he was the butt of the jokes, and the improvisers themselves have unbelievably quick wits. Stiles and Mochrie were obviously the stars of the show, but others such as Greg Proops, Josie Lawrence and my personal favourite Tony Slattery all managed to put on strong performances time after time. It would be great to see this return to British shores sometime, even if only for a one-off special.


Well what can i say it's the best comedy show i have ever seen in my life. I was too young to remember the original series some of the early ones i was not even born to see but thanks to one UK TV channel bring it back i am now hooked. I never miss an ep (thank you digibox that records). I have never seen anything so funny. The guests they have are simple amazing. Ryan Stiles and Colin Mochrie are the best comic's i've seen in years and i think they make the show.

I have started watching the US version but it's not as good because somethings i don't understand what they are talking about because some words are different in the US.

I think this show should be brougth back and make new eps here in the UK as it will bring a new audience of people who missed it the first time.

If you have not seen it you should go and watch!!!!!!!


SPOILERS

I have managed to catch a couple episodes of the British Whose Line Is It Anyway, and I must say, it was incredibly funny. As I mentioned before, I enjoy the American version a little more, but if you watch them side-by-side, you will realize that they are both two great shows that should still be on. You will also see that a lot of the people in the American version are in the British version, and I enjoy that a lot, but I also get to see a lot of the talented and funny British comedians, too, so that is also great.

Here is the basis. It is practically the same. A group of comedians to improvisation games together. After all of the games, the host decides who the winner is. However, whoever wins still plays the last game with the other contestants.

Overall, this is a terrific and very funny show that, from the episodes I have seen, was a wonderful show right until the very end. Anyway, this, like the American version, is hilarious and you would not want to miss it.

9/10

Recommended Shows: Whose Line Is It Anyway, Thank God You're Here.


Tokyo Eleven is an extremely tacky but very amusing send-up of Battle Royale, full of bad jokes and abysmal acting, both of which are quite obviously intentional. I gather it's one of those b-movies made by a bunch of people who were simply out for a laugh and didn't take themselves too seriously, so I can't really fault them for having made it. Besides, a lot of 10+01's humour is very tongue-in-cheek, which ultimately means it's very entertaining.

One of the film's main selling points (if you can call it that) is the fact that Masanobu Ando aka Battle Royale's Kiriyama stars in it, which should attract fans of the actor and/or BR. Ando himself is obviously in on the joke, which makes Tokyo Eleven (and Ando) all the more endearing in my eyes.

No, this isn't exactly Tarkovsky, but then it isn't meant to be. It's simply a fun movie to watch, preferably in the company of friends and ailed by plenty of booze.


Personally, I found Tokyo 10+01 to be a funny, cartoony, lightweight, cute and trashy bit of fluffy nonsense. As cheaply made as it undoubtedly is (and looks it, much like most of his other movies such as Nagai Yume (Long Dream) which was still very much a triumph despite its costing limitations), Higuchinsky is fast proving himself to be the master of how to take a 100-yen budget and stretch it to its absolute limit whilst still maintaining a stylish aesthetic, in keeping with the character of the stories he is handling.

The acting quality is utterly over-the-top, mischievous and silly - Masanobu Ando in particular appears to be having great fun messing with the role of Fake, a master fine-art forger whose portraits unfortunately look like they were painted by a monkey with two left hands. This is *clearly* not a movie made to be taken in the slightest bit seriously, referencing with a knowing wink many contemporary classics, including Ando's most Western-mainstream movie Battle Royale, and taking the mickey out of them quite mercilessly.

I enjoyed this movie greatly, but don't watch it thinking you're going to be getting anything as unique or profound as Uzumaki or Long Dream, otherwise you *will* be disappointed. Just enjoy it for what it is: a silly, lightweight spoof with no money behind it, but a great sense of humour.


Having no previous knowledge of the directory Higuchinsky or his history, I didn't expect much from this movie judging by Netflix's rating. What I found however was a pretty hip piece of independent youthful film-making that kind of blends the 80's, 90's and the future.

It reminded me of a hard core version of Takeshi's Castle (AKA Most Extreme Elimination Challenge).

Eleven unwitting participants are thrown together into a city wide game in which they must split up into teams and make it across the finish line before their time expires. Each is fitted with a wrist band that reveals their location and time remaining. Removal of the wristband results in a lethal injection. Groups are intercepted along their route by henchmen. Proximity of henchmen is detected and signaled by the wristbands.

A kind of real life D&D, treasure hunt, survivor, laser tag, reality TV spoof.

This movie has the appearance of a student film or home made movie. It looks like it was shot on video tape and transferred to film, however the acting, special effects and gags are just as good as any American teenage slasher comedy, except is has the coolness of a video game, urban anime and Japanese game show all rolled into one.

I really liked it.

=Game Over=


"Tokyo 10+01" comes from director Higuchinsky who brought us the imaginative and entertaining "Uzumaki". That makes it all the more surprising and disappointing that the action flick is such a mess. It starts out with 11 people in an unknown room (shades of "Cube") and quickly turns into a parody/hommage of Kinji Fukasakus "Battle Royale" with a couple of ideas from the German TV movie "Das Millionenspiel" thrown in for good measure. The result is an embarrassing piece of film: The story has no power, no sense, no timing, no anything. It just moves along for only 70 minutes and still manages to bore. And the twists at the end are so bad, the film even manages to have an anti-climactic ending.

It's neither funny nor gory, neither suspenseful nor witty. So at least you could expect it to be stylish coming from the guy who did "Uzumaki", right? No. Its look is utterly cheap. The digital technology makes the sets look like remains from "Battlefield Earth" and the camera tricks (zooms, blood on the lens etc.) are both childish and annoying. I don't get how Higuchinsky could have done this. What did he try to do? Low-Budget-Trash? Some sort of guerilla film making? Whatever he tried, the result is a disaster. If you loved "Uzumaki" like I did, avoid this film at all cost or the name Higuchinsky will fall a lot in your esteem. It's a bore-fest that looks like it's shot by an amateur. Or in short: Crap!

Rating: 1/10


i bought this expecting a modestly done BR clone. what i received was a parody that basically ignored its source material about 15 minutes into the film. the points i alloted it go toward a kind of amusing introduction (the entire forrest gump analogy and whatnot) and a few scenes with interesting CGI backgrounds. here is what kills the film: the characters becoming annoying very quickly, a character is killed off almost immediately (without the viewer even getting to see!), and unlike BR - the bad guys have a legion of soldiers that attack the contestants. so basically, aside from maybe two or so instances, there is no contestant versus contestant bloodshed. if i rented this from a store, i wouldn't have been as disappointed with the results. unfortunately, i paid $13 for the DVD off ebay and was only able to recoup about $4 selling it to a video store. unless you have a pocket full of money that has no other potential purpose, and you're absolutely obsessed with anything REMOTELY related to Battle Royale...i recommend you avoid.


'Tokyo 10+01' has a promising start, introducing colorful characters who will be involved in a game of death. The soundtrack was decent too. However, the film goes downhill due to poor special effects and poor spoof jokes. The title of the film is a spoof of Ocean's Eleven (2001) and there were some references to Brad Pitt in the beginning of the film. Overall, it was unbearable to watch even though the runtime is only 70 minutes.

If you are looking for good spoof films, I recommend Spaceballs (1987) and Kung Pow (2002). Please stay away from 'Tokyo 10+01'.

Mao points: 2/10


You know you are in trouble when Laurel and Hardy don't make their appearance in this film until the six minute mark!! Despite their being the funniest comedy team in the world, the studio insisted on sticking too many diversions into the film--including lots of Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson Eddy-style songs and portions where the dialog is done in rhyme! With any comedy team, usually the more songs the more bland the film and this film is certainly no exception. Only a maniac would have thought of doing this or adding rhymes in a film like this!

And, speaking of maniacs, whose idea was it to include a guy in a gorilla suit?! The idea of a "wild gorilla" running about the Swiss mountains just doesn't make any sense--even in a comedy.

Most of the movies in the latter portion of Laurel and Hardy's careers were rather poor and stale. Of the movies made from the late 1930s on, perhaps the best are Blockheads and A Chump at Oxford. While not as bad as the 20th Century Fox Laurel and Hardy pictures or Atoll K, this movie just isn't up the quality of their earlier pictures. Simply put, the duo are looking rather old and ragged and the jokes that worked well the first few times look a bit stale here.

My advice, see something else or else you might not appreciate this comedy team. This is far from their "A game".


Working as an Alpine hotel maid, a SWISS MISS prima donna tries to capture her composer husband's attention - with a little help from Stan Laurel & Oliver Hardy.

Although given good production values by the Hal Roach Studios, Stan & Ollie are the only real reason to watch this minor comedy. While on screen, they never fail to amuse and entertain. (Watch Laurel try to steal brandy from a sturdy St. Bernard - and Hardy sing `Let Me Call You Sweetheart,' accompanied by Stan on a tuba.) The trouble arises from the long stretches when they are missing, while the romantic subplot threatens to swamp the boat. Why couldn't Mr. Roach understand that the Boys' fans wanted to see the Boys, not a pair of vacuous lovers work out their marital difficulties?

 Walter Woolf King & Della Lind are in good voice as the composer & his wife, and their songs are pleasant, if unremarkable. But we care not a whit for them, and regret every moment they filch from L & H. Even the usually humorous Eric Blore, as the composer's manager, has to deliver lines that are rather forced & flat.

But the Boys come through hilariously with what time they are allotted. Whether trying to sell mousetraps to suspicious Swiss, or attempting to move a heavy piano across a most vertiginous swinging bridge (while being hampered by a gorilla), they are never anything less than magnificent - the sweetly innocent visitors from a zany parallel universe all their own.


This marvellous film neatly sets up a position - that the Swiss Tyrol is the traditional pleasant place of thigh slapping, jolly peasants and picturesque vies. From these images, composer will create his masterpiece. But to get the right mood, the staff at the swank hotel he is staying at must get themselves up in traditional costume - the image is artifice. Into this artificial, romantic world comes the dialectical opposition: Laurel & Hardy, with their arguments and bad luck. Immediately they arrive, the locals are shown to be devious cheats. They are then forced to work as slaves in the hotel to pay off an enormous food bill. All the while the composer is writing his ridiculous score, full of innocent mountain maids and singing crickets. The composer's prima-donna wife arrives and his false vision of innocence is shattered. She wants to play the innocent Swiss miss in his new work but he, rightly, rejects her as too worldly. To get the role, she connives, flirts and manipulates the hotel staff, including L & H. The greatest sequence involves our heroes attempting to get a piano across an Alpine valley rope bridge - the precarious position of artificial human culture within a dangerous natural world is exposed. To add icing to this cake, they are finally attacked on the rope bridge by a gorilla! This gorilla in the Swiss Alps might be something which Luis Bunuel would have enjoyed. In the end, the composer welcomes his wife back and accepts the artificial, anything-but-innocent nature of his art. L & H, the latter of whom has been in love with the wife, are chased away from the village by, of course, the gorilla.


This is one of my favorite Laurel & Hardy films, so I don't get what's not to like about it. Sure the music may be a little outdated, but the talent is definitely there. Everything about this movie screams class--from the sight gags to the outrageous costumes (which if you really look at the costumes and sets they probably cost a fortune in Depression money) Laurel and Hardy are great for the whole movie with some of the goofiest antics I've seen in any of their films (selling mouse traps: they drill holes in the floor so the mice can get in and then cap them with golf balls so they can't get back out) The gorilla in Switzerland is hilarious (and really random) but makes me laugh every time. The organ filled with soap is fun as well as the great fight scene with the chef, and their antics in the kitchen. For me the best part of the movie is when the boys go to serenade the chambermaid (complete with Stan playing the tuba). Give this movie a chance, it is artistic comedy at its finest!


Stan and Ollie turn up in Switzerland, of all places. Stan thinks that they will be able to sell mouse traps to the Swiss because there are more mice there than anywhere else in the world. The owner of a cheese factory offers to buy their stock, but pays with counterfeit money. Thinking they are rich, Stan and Ollie celebrate with a slap-up meal at a local hotel. Then comes the crunch - they are unable to pay the bill.

The hotel owner sets them to work as dishwashers. In no time at all, most of the crockery is broken.

Also at the hotel is an American composer, trying to write a new musical. His wife shows up and, in an effort to make her husband notice her, pretends to flirt with Ollie...

One of the weaker Laurel and Hardy features, this still manages to be a lot of fun. Stan and Ollie have some great scenes together, such as their drilling holes in the cheese factory's wooden floor, playing a tune by popping soap bubbles coming out of an organ, and Ollie serenading the Della Lind character.

Switzerland as depicted here is peopled by blonde girls in pigtails, and yodelling men in leather shorts with feathers stuck in their hats, but who cares? 'Bonnie Scotland' was hardly an accurate depiction of that country either.

Funniest moment - a close run between Stan's attempts to get a barrel of brandy from a St.Bernard's neck, or his and Ollie moving a piano across a rope bridge, where they encounter a gorilla ( don't ask ).

Did I hear someone say dated? Well, Stan and Ollie never needed to swear or fart to get laughs, did they, unlike today's 'comics'.

Altogether, a pleasant viewing experience.


being a fan of Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy for as long as i can remember. i have seen all of their films from Lucky Dog up to the dire Atoll K and this is in my top five favourite Laurel and Hardy films of all time.

Stan and Ollie play mouse trap salesman who get riped off by a cheese salesman and must pay off their debt by working at a local hotel. there are many funny moments in this film including the fire scene (once you see this film you will know what i mean) but there are a lot of boring songs that spoil the comedy of Stan and Ollie but apart from that a classic piece of vintage comedy.

watch this and enjoy!


Inane "plot" involving the inept duo as mousetrap salesmen in Switzerland; the studio apparently decided the film needed some romantic interest, but if you ignore that (as you should) there is some classic gags. The one with the gorilla and the piano, and Stan and the St Bernard are personal favourites!


This is by no means the best full length Laurel & Hardy picture but there is still plenty to enjoy here. Many people have issues with this movie but there basically is very little wrong with the movie itself. Therefor this movie is perhaps a bit too under-appreciated by most.

It's not the funniest Laurel & Hardy movie but at least its story is enjoyable enough and has plenty of entertainment value in it. Of course Laurel & Hardy were already over their top in 1938 but there were some moments in this movie which reminded me of their glory days, from back in the late '20's till the mid-'30's. I'm talking about the moments when the boys are drilling holes in the floor, when they have to do the dishes and when they have to push a piano across a canyon. The movie is filled with moments which reminded me of their best years, that were unfortunately already behind them when they made this movie. The movie has some memorable moments in it and the movie is consistent enough to consider this movie a watchable as well as a very enjoyable one, that unfortunately can not conceal that the two boys already had their best years behind them though.

I never really understood why long Laurel & Hardy movies always also had a serious subplot-line it, which always involved serious characters played by actors why play their roles in a non-comical way. The entire love story of the movie with the more serious characters certainly does no good to the movie its entertainment value or pace. Surely the movie would had been better if more characters and subplots were erased from the script. I mean when you already have 2 characters such as Laurel and Hardy, you just don't need no other characters who play a just as prominent role in the movie as the two boys. It only works distracting, since we never really get to care about any of those characters and are only interested in the faith, antics and silly situations the two boys get themselves into.

A not entirely successful- but still a very enjoyable late Laurel & Hardy picture that deserves some more credit.

7/10


Our story begins in Switzerland at the Alpen Hotel, where the staff was eagerly awaiting the arrival of world renown singer and operetta composer Victor Albert. Edward, adviser to Albert, personally oversaw preparations. Also arriving in town that day were Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, two inept mousetrap salesmen. It was Stan's idea to come to Switzerland to sell mousetraps because it's where cheese comes from. Well, they get into a slap fight with their first customers, then decide to try selling mousetraps to the local cheese factory. They give a demonstration and the proprietor is pleased. He buys their whole business for 5,000 Bovarian Francs. Stan and Ollie decide to live it up at the Alpen Hotel café. They are obnoxiously rude to the chef because he has no apple pie. When Ollie attempted to pay with the 5,000 Bovarian Francs, he learns they are no good. Anywhere. Bovaria doesn't even exist. So now the boys were forced to work for the bitter chef. They were put to work washing dishes and for every dish they broke, they had to work an extra day. From the looks of things, they were going to be here a very, very long time.

Victor Albert arrives at the hotel and composes a lovely new song about crickets. That's when his wife and fellow world renown singer, Anna Albert, arrived. The critics seemed to favor her over Victor, so there was friction between them; Stan and Ollie were put to work plucking chickens, and as soon as Stan noticed a St. Bernard with a barrel of rum around his neck, he became so desperate for a drink that he threw the feathers into the air to improvise snow and pretended to be in pain. He succeeded, and got drunk; After breaking more dishes and adding more days to their already endless sentence, Stan and Ollie are instructed by Victor Albert to move his piano. He was unable to concentrate on his operetta at the hotel and wanted to relocate to a tree house in the Alps. Now we all know what happened the last time Stan and Ollie tried moving a piano, and there is a brief reenactment; After moving the piano into the mountains, they now had to brave a rope bridge over a seemingly bottomless gorge. Stan was still drunk. As they made their way across the rickety bridge, Stan claimed to have seen a gorilla. It wasn't a dizzy spell. It was real! As if that weren't bad enough, the rope bridge gave out. Stan and Ollie managed to jump back onto the ledge and were safe, the gorilla disappeared and the piano fell deep into the Alps, crashed onto the rocky surface and died a swift, tragic death.

Anna seemed to take a shine to Ollie. Stan gave him advice on falling in love and told Ollie to serenade her. So with a tuba outside Anna's window that night, Ollie does just that. The next day, the boys go to see Anna as per her invitation, but first have to elude the angry chef. They succeed and make it to Anna's, only to find she and her husband, Victor, were still very much in love. So, Stan and Ollie prepare to depart, broken hearted. That's when a bandaged gorilla on crutches appears for a showdown...

Swiss Miss, another brilliant musical/comedy with Laurel and Hardy. Right along the lines of Pardon Us (1931), Babes in Toyland (1934), The Bohemian Girl (1936). Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy, the world's funniest comedy duo, outdid themselves again as always. Also in the cast: Walter Woolf King as Victor Albert, Della Lind as Anna Albert, Eric Blore as Edward, Adia Kuznetzoff as the surly chef, and Charles Judels is the Cheese Factory Proprietor. Judels also voiced the horrid Stromboli and that crook Coachman in Disney's Pinocchio. Sadly Laurel, Hardy, King, Lind, Blore and Judels have all passed away. During the scene with the dancers, watch for Stan Laurel's daughter Lois! So anyway, if you are a Laurel and Hardy fan like I am, then I recommend Swiss Miss! It's not a movie about cocoa so don't let the title throw you. See it today, if you can possibly find it. Wonderful music. Wonderful songs. Not a strong plot, but the songs and terrific comedy certainly make up for it.

-


It begins with a action-filled sequence that really wakes your interest and curiosity, but the questions that arise in the beginning doesn't get answered, only more and more questions and that is very annoying. The first hour is spent not knowing a lot at a very high speed, and the rest of the film has too many slow spots where the background and the plot is revealed only by dialog, breaking the tempo and flow down to a very low pace.

At several times I wondered whether I really began watching at the beginning, or if this was a sequel to a film where all the characters were introduced... Although, refreshing to see a Korean film, not a complete waste.


I just rented the movie and I hadn't heard about it before. It's nice to see some quite realistic yet action-packed shootout. Notice that you can actually see the bullets making holes in walls (you don't even see that in most Hollywood movies since they seem to think bullets will just bounce off brick-walls...). Some quite good acting and a complex yet sense-making plot (if you can't understand it, watch it again or wait until you've finished high-school..).

You see a quite capable SWAT-team slowly getting decimated all the while hunting a psychotic killer who seems to be constantly hiring new thugs for support too. Most of the background story unfolds only in the end but it makes sense and the tension generated stays fresh throughout. Good work.


Asian cinema has progressed in many ways. Nowadays the production values of for instance South Korean films are almost as high as for standard Hollywood-fare. But still there is some way to go before the quality in all aspects rise up to what we've become accustomed to.

"Yesterday" is basically your standard Asian techno-thriller. Flashy visuals, nice special effects and flawless technical quality throughout. But like many other Asian movies i feel the script would have needed another run-through. The story of missing children being used for experimental research, and the connections to modern-day homicides, is just too messy. I never got a feel for the characters, never got a feel for the story. Also the actors feel a bit low on expressions, which doesn't really contribute when i already had trouble feeling anything at all about the movie. Simply put, this is not engaging enough.

And another problem that is also tied to the script is the fact that the movie is overly long. At just over two hours it stretches the script very thin. Since there are a few really nice action scenes, and a lot of promise in the visuals and general stylish look of the movie, i would like to see a more compressed story. Maybe twenty minutes shorter and some of the slower less meaningful scenes could have been cut out. In general i think both pace and story would have benefited from that.

In the end this movie failed to excite me. While it looked nice (and sounded nice) it didn't have much to offer in the way of plot or character development. And in the end nice visuals and a hefty budget is not enough to keep me entertained for over two hours. With a better script and less drawn-out filling scenes this could have been good. Now it's hardly mediocre. I rate it 4/10.


Recap: 30 years after a top secret research project was shut down, a team of the Special Investigation tries to deal with the aftermath. Someone with intimate knowledge about it kidnaps and murders anyone who was involved (and the lead SI agent's son - well, almost anyway). The SI unit has little leads until the Chief of Police is kidnapped and his daughter, a police and scientist herself, seem to set them in the right direction.

As the investigation continues the team discovers how complicated investigations and life can be were cloning, cryo-treatment and genetic design is possible.

Comments: Does the recap sound confusing? It did to me, but with a lot of potential. But in the end the movie did not help to resolve anything, instead leaving me more confused than ever. Or, quite frankly, I lost interest somewhere along the movie and don't really care that I didn't catch anything.

One problem, the main problem in my opinion is that a lot, seems to be most of it actually, of the dialog is carried out by radio or phone. It is also disconnected from what is shown, so it's very hard to know who says what, and who belongs to which group. To meddle with matters even more the dialog changes between using names and numbers without really saying who is who. And as a last addition there appears to be some cuts in time as the dialog runs along, giving the appearance of some people being able to be everywhere at once.

In effect, I wasn't sure who was firing at who and why, in the movies shoot-outs. There are a few of them, but not sure why really. Quite nicely done though.

Visually, it is very beautiful. Mostly set in very dark and damp places there are some few bright futuristic specks of light and neon, and advanced buildings. Also we have some ghostly images of memories intertwine with the present. Very nicely done, purely visually, too. But it did not help explain or straighten anything. Only confused me more as you had to keep track of what did happen in the present and what did happen in the past.

Not really bad, but can't really recommend it anyway.

4/10


Yesterday is an entertaining sci-fi movie. It's very near to being an excellent film, and in fact is a vast improvement on many recent Hollywood sci-fi flicks. It works really well because the science-fiction takes a back seat to realism and characters.

Yesterday is well acted by the entire cast. It's slow moving, and has a lot more in common with say Heat or Pulp Fiction than your I-Robots or your Serenity's, which may put people off a little. Characters reveal themselves in totality gradually, avoiding you from being able to figure out the entire plot machinations like you could in a more obvious movie.

Action in the movie though sparse is terrific, handled brilliantly from a point of direction and filled with power and excitement. Very few outlandish special effects are used outside of explosions, all of which serves to ground it further in reality.

It's unfortunate then that the film is written in such a way that whenever something big needs to happen, reality gets thrown out of the window. The last twenty minutes turn the film into some over-the-top slasher type premise as serial-killer Goliath systematically demolishes the entire cast other than the two key leads. This is honestly intensely frustrating, as the movie bears the unfortunate hallmark of some Asian cinema that the leads are a little difficult to relate to. It's nowhere near as bad as the earlier Natural City, where I seriously didn't care about anybody in the entire cast, but the main female lead is really bland, and consistently out-shined by the other key female character May, who is preposterously killed off in a frustratingly stupid fashion in the final sequences, almost like Wash in Serenity. You'll watch this and think 'God, you could've sent her off a bit better than that, she would've easily dodged that'. I can't help but feel she got written out so the audience would concentrate on the central lead instead.

This is a good movie, and outside of the way it happens, the end is satisfying. If it wasn't for the slightly desperate final 20 minutes then this could've been a contender for one of the best films I've watched this year. Unfortunately this movie spends 100 minutes as a police thriller then turns into a cheesy slasher movie in the last 20. The ending is great from a story point of view, but the actual events feel more Freddy vs Jason than the Seven meets Heat thriller the rest of the film serves up. It's definitely worth a watch, but be warned it is long, slow and the ending is like suddenly skipping channels mid-film.


I might be exceptionally stupid, but I didn't understand this movie at all! The plot had something to do with serial killers, cloning and genetic engineering, but the main thing might have been something else. I don't know, since I couldn't follow for longer than the first couple of minutes.

The characters weren't properly introduced and there were too many of them (plus their clothes and hairs looked ridiculous). Most of the characters seemed out of place. They were quirky, but no reason was given for their quirkiness. Sooner or later they died, so one didn't have to wonder about them anymore. The main characters were the dullest characters in the movie, which was very annoying. They too were apparently genetically modified, but that seemed to be a completely irrelevant subplot (though I probably missed something important concerning that...)

My advice, don't watch the movie!


it seems south korea has become the major market for good, fun action movies. we've seen a couple of good ones since "shiri" came along. "yesterday" is no exception. tight, powerful action sequences bound together by a futuristic plot, with art direction a la "blade runner" make this movie a contender for one of the best action films of the past years. "yesterday" has the sense to be contemporary, thrilling and without resolving to unnecessary subplots - it is clean, pure fun. lovers of asian action cinema- you will not be disappointed!!!


Yesterday, an thrilling, exiting, sinister science fiction movie fresh out of Korea.

I do agree that i`ts kind of hard to keep track with the plot, but once you do get its a genius idea that confronts the ethics concerning cloning and gene manipulation.

The action scenes are a mere feast with fast moving handheld camera. It has its slow moments at the end of the movie, but cleverly used to reveal the "truth".

Well Recommended!


I rented this in hopes of seeing, at the least, a film with some memorable lines or fun moments, and hoped that possibly I was stumbling across an underrated, obscure gem. I didn't even get any memorable lines or fun moments. It seems that what the film is trying to do is show a feminist view of sex, but the viewpoint doesn't go very deep or really seem that intriguing. It hardly even makes sense. The characters don't do much to support this attempt at deepness, and the acting is lousy all around. One of the main girls is trying her best to be an Angelina Jolie type, but she has zero charisma or screen presence. I think the best acting in the film was from a minor female character in a bar that one of the male characters was trying to pick up, and she had about three lines. Seriously, the acting is that noticeably bad. Thora Birch must be trying to earn indie cred by appearing in this right around the time her career was taking off, and she does have one of the better moments towards the beginning involving playing a Russian roulette-type game with an almost completely loaded gun, but the fact that the gun is loaded is the only fascinating part about this scene because her acting isn't particularly stellar. Dominique Swain doesn't even shine at all, and she has definitely saved some films I've seen in the past. The pot smoking seemed like a gimmick tacked onto the film. It's a shame. This movie looks good on paper, but suffers from weakness factoring in from all aspects that go into the making of it.


Completely laughable depiction of three private-school girls who, fed up with the domination boys have over them, decide on some violent revenge that ultimately backfires on them. At first, I assumed that the movie would be a dark-comedy satire -- which might have worked -- but instead it was a straight-up drama that will head directly to the Camp section of your local all-night video rental.

There is no one element of this movie that fails; the acting, script, cinematography, sound, music, and direction all stink. Busy Phillips as Karen is so over-the-top psycho you wonder why anyone else hangs around her. Keri Lynn Pratt simpers and whimpers as victim-for-life Lisa (take two big career steps backwards, Keri!). Dominique Swain as Jefferson is (I guess) the voice of reason between the two, and lends a completely unnecessary and ludicrous narration to the movie. Thora Birch attempts to out-psycho Phillips and succeeds, and both of them corner the market on Wal-Mart cosmetics. And those four were actually the best actors in the film!

The men were so much worse, especially Nicholas Loeb. He sleepwalks through his part as Jeremy the Dork Who Really Is A Great Guy and mumbles his lines and makes standing still and looking stupid a virtue. How did he get cast in this role, you may ask? Well, he did a gig as a waiter in "Primary Colors" ... and he was the producer for "The Smokers". Wow, a double whammy! He's a multi-tasking stinker! Oliver Hudson and Ryan Browning don't do a lot better, although one of them (who cares) gets to get shot by Miss Victim -- accidentally, of course -- after getting totally turned on by her secret identity as one of the three female rapists.

So our intrepid young female rapists don't actually rape anyone, but they wag their pistol in some male faces, which they deem equivalent to the way guys have sex with them. (This is the problem with sleeping with teen-age boys, by the way.) Karen flips out and gets more and more difficult to control, but it's Lisa who gets to blow someone away. While Jefferson attempts to create a diversion and Jeremy TDWRIAGG helps Lisa, Karen gets caught in a bathroom with a burning shower curtain and manages to die with the pistol. How convenient! How Deus Ex Machina can you get? Well ... the movie ends with narration as Jefferson tells us how everyone ends up ten or fifteen years down the road, despite the fact that everything in this movie looks like it's in present time.

In short, this movie manages to be misogynistic and demeaning while supposedly championing feminist impulses. Pseudo-rapes are eroticized to pander to hormonal audiences, while consensual sex is mostly portrayed as degrading. This film has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever, which makes you wonder what the New York Independent Film & Video Festival was thinking when it gave this crap the Audience Award. Dreck like this is almost enough to make you avoid independent films altogether. I give it a 2; it would be camp except that it's not funny enough, a la Battlefield Earth, one of the great unintentional comedies of the last ten years.


I wish I had checked the IMDB reviews for this movie before renting it.

Don't be fooled by the reasonably interesting summary on the back of the box, this is one of the worst films I have ever sat through. The acting is laughable, with lines being delivered in a horribly stilted, mechanical style by all but one actor (excepting Thora Birch, who only has about ten minutes of screen time). Of course, you can't fault the actors for having to deliver lines that are horribly cliched or needlessly dramatic. Finally, it appears to have been edited by fairly intelligent chimps, with massive skips in the story leaving you trying desperately to figure out what's going on. The last ten minutes are among the worst ever commited to celluloid in movie that is trying to take itself seriously.


I bought this DVD for a few bucks and am glad I didn't pay more. Busy Philipps should never be allowed in a film again. She is one of the most annoying, over-acting, no-talents ever. Even with Dominique Swain, Thora Birch, and Keri Lynn Pratt they are still not enough to save this movie. Birch basically has a glorified cameo, done up in "Whale Rider"/rave makeup. Swain is the reason I bought the film, she's always good, but gets plowed under by Philipps. Pratt is adorable but her character is uneven. The script is all over the place and the characters are such stoners, it is a hard movie to watch. One of the worst I've seen in a long time.


don't bother renting it!!! despite the fact that there was a female director, this movie seemed more like male fantasy masquerading as female fantasy. the premise of the movie is basically, "what happens when you give hot chicks who love sex guns?" the whiny statement which the movie is trying to make is "you don't know what it's like to be a girl!!!"

well, i do know what it's like, and i think it's pathetic that these girls pretend to be feminists when they define themselves by how many guys they've slept with or what sorts of guys they've slept with. they feel powerful because they're wielding guns, but they're weak without them. these ladies deserve our pity!!! no, wait, they don't even deserve our attention!!!


The biggest problem for this film was that it didn't know what it wanted to be. It started off as an absurd comedy but tried to turn into a powerful depressing drama by the end. Without a cleverly written script, it is set up for failure.

The acting is mostly poor. Dominique Swain does a respectable job. Which makes it more of a tragedy that she was actually in a film this bad. Busy Phillips is the other actress who can impress in a few scenes. Everyone else was forgettable to say the least. Except for Thora Birch, whose motive for starring here I can't begin to understand.

The directing was OK, it wasn't as bad as the script or the actors. The montage scenes were well done. They almost tricked you into forgetting that they were from a bad film. In the end its still an overproduced waste of film.


So these three girls are outcasts, because they smoke but mostly because they are infantile. There's Karen (Freaks & Geek's/Dawson's Creek's Busy Phillips), a scholarship girl who is as irritating but not quite as sexy as Shelley Winters in "The Poseidon Adventure", and Lisa (Keri Lynn Pratt who was Miss New Hampshire a couple years earlier), and Jefferson (Ms. Swain-everyone's favorite "Lolita"). So guess who the writer/director uses for her most erotic shots? That's right Phillips the screaming buffalo. And they wonder why these things lose money.

My guess is a no-talent and soon to be pornmaker woman happened to see a 1968 movie called "Three In the Attic" (which has never been released on video) and thought that she could get away with stealing the story. So she began to remake the film without buying the rights or acknowledging that it was a remake. Her boyfriend, who financed it so he could co-star and drool on "Lolita", panicked and ordered her to make last minute script changes to avoid a lawsuit. At least this would account for the totally nonsensical storyline.

One easy and generally reliable way to avoid dogmeat stuff like this is to check out the industry experience of whoever is credited with art direction and production design. If it is their first credit you know the picture will be horrible.

Watch this only is you are determined to see everything Thora Birch has done. She made this between "American Beauty" (before its release) and "Ghost World". Although I am sure that she would like it off her resume she actually does a good job in a small role. You recognize her voice more than her face and it takes a while because you are struggling internally with disbelief, like if Emma Thompson had made an appearance in "The New Guy".


I saw "Saint Maybe" on the Hallmark Channel. I don't know what I was thinking. It's a wonderful cast, including Blythe Danner, Mary-Louise Parker, Edward Herrmann, and Thomas McCarthy. I haven't read the book by Anne Tyler, so I can't comment on the transfer from book to screen.

It's the story of a young man named Ian (McCarthy) whose brother Danny (Jeffrey Nordling) marries a flighty young woman named Lucy (Parker) very shortly after meeting her at his post office window, when she wants to mail a bowling ball. Lucy has two children by a previous marriage, and 7 months after marrying Danny, has a third. The baby is said to be premature, but Ian isn't buying it, and is pretty sure the child isn't the deliriously happy Danny's. Constantly called on to babysit, Ian grows more and more suspicious of his sister-in-law over time - she is constantly going out with her girlfriend Dot and coming home with jewelery, scarves, and new clothes, and she seems to need a sitter an awful lot.

One night, when his own date is ruined because Lucy doesn't come home as promised, Danny returns first and drives Ian home. Ian loses his temper and tells Danny all of his suspicions. His brother is very upset and, after dropping off Ian at home, crashes into a tree and dies. If that isn't bad enough, Lucy dies not long afterward of a sedative overdose. Now the question is, what to do with the three orphaned children. The elderly grandparents (Danner and Herrmann) do their best, but guilt-ridden Ian stumbles into a church one night and realizes that he has to make a decision.

I said I don't know what I was thinking because I became very absorbed in this story and cried through most of it, hating myself every step of the way for watching it. It's a very warm, sentimental story with some lovely scenes. It has Hallmark stamped all over it - it's perfect family entertainment about a man who, in looking for forgiveness, finds that he can't undo what happened, but he can create what happens now.

Very good, but have some tissues nearby. Get a bunch ready for an especially poignant scene with Edward Herrmann. Blast him. He's fabulous.


This is a very poor attempt to translate a marvelous book to the screen. Hallmark should have made this a multi-parter, and definitely should have left elements of the book alone. "Saint Maybe" is a very long book, and may well be Tyler's masterpiece. Condensing it into a "movie of the week" format dilutes the vivid images painted by her. "The Accidental Tourist" was much better and kept as faithful to the book as possible. If you haven't read "Saint Maybe" you should. Once you do you'll love it and ask "why did Hallmark change so much?!?" I was very disappointed. The actors try very hard to win us over, but the script is just too weak. Perhaps someone will attempt to make another of her books into a movie with better results.


i have seen "touch me in the morning" and "trailer town", and this is personally my favorite; it's Andrew's "Amacord"; it's his "Pink Flamingos"...

watching it expecting anything at all is not advised. you must dive into this movie blindfolded, and remain blindfolded for 80 minutes. i'm going to jump to my own conclusion and say there's no message, nor a theme one may glean from this film. however, i can say it is honestly unlike anything i've seen. it always takes me a few scenes to re-acclimate to his home video style. but it isn't as if Andrews is trying to make a polished indie - he holds a consistent aesthetic between technique and content, subject and style. he makes you cringe unlike any cringe you've experienced from any other movie (no gore nor sex can top what he achieves).

Andrews will obviously never reach "the masses" with this style, and most of those he reaches will dismiss it as "shock for shock's sake". however, he is making movies unlike anyone ever has before; he takes his audience on a no-class induced hallucination through motel room and trailers, unveiling a world utterly no one is accustomed to. now there's something to be said for that. he's taken "verite" to a whole new level, and all the founding fathers of cinema would, after a series of gag reflexes, applaud him enthusiastically (except Orson Welles, cause he lacked a sense of humor....), but that's just one man's opinion.


An ambitious piece of work from a man who seems to genuinely want to create original art. Whether his ambition is fueled by true inspiration or just pure delusion is uncertain but whatever its source I am happy to have seen this movie and look forward to showing it to friends. This movie attempts to do what all good art should do, which is offer the experiencer a new perspective on humanity. This additional perspective can then be added to the innumerable other perspectives that a person has accumulated and which ultimately serve to expand his or her consciousness. Or maybe not, I don't know really. But it bothers me when people see movies like this and label them as being weird just for the sake of being weird. Instead of determining the validity of the piece based on its actual substance, this type of person uses a cheap character attack on the artist by bringing into question his motives for creating. This is an argumental fallacy and is not a valid criticism of the movie itself.


Many highly original metaphors for the depraved state of our society has come to decorate this film, which is probably the best portrayal of the loneliness that our so called civilized world drives many unique persons to if they are no longer of any use. The cast is made up of professional actors who seem to be very close to the subject matter in real life, and as is the case with other films of Giusseppe Andrews, the fact that the entire feature is filmed with a small digital camera rather than expensive equipment adds a whole extra dimension of grittiness to the already dread atmosphere. Andrews is known for his acting in such films as Independence Day, American Histoy X, Cabin Fever and his own Touch me in the Morning, but also makes his own unfortunately rarely seen unique films. Period Piece is not only directed by him, but he also produced it, wrote it, scripted it, photographed it, acted in it, edited it and composed and recorded the musical score for it. And in the process proved that he is a one-man-film studio and deserves nothing but the deepest respect for daring to show a truly original view on the world we live in by delivering us this stunningly personal masterpiece. The DVD comes with a load of extra's that do this unsettling but beautiful film justice, including a second feature film by Giusseppe Andrews, "Jacuzzi Rooms", which is a daring as the main feature, but totally different in style. The interview Lloyd Kaufman conducts with the director adds more depth and gives more clues to understanding this genius filmmaker. We will definitely hear more of Giusseppe Andrews in the future, and owe the fact that we are introduced to his work to Troma.


Lloyd Kaufman personally recommended this film to me because I said that my favorite filmmaker was Jodorowsky -- and while this isn't really anything like Jodorowsky, it is still absolutely genius and is essential viewing for anyone interested at all in "avant-garde cinema".

First and foremost, you will hate this first 10 minutes or so of this film. Everyone I've showed this to has agreed with me on this: This film looks like crap when you first turn it on. And the odd pacing and questionable plot points make it that much harder to love. However, as the film goes on, you find yourself actually enjoying the look of the film and the weird pacing. And you might even find yourself laughing a bit....

Honestly, this is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. At the same time, there is a quiet darkness at work here. Though it's easy to laugh at a senile old man shoving pork rinds in his rectum and having sex with an imaginary porn star, eventually you realize that we could very well be that same 90-year-old man one day; alone in a hotel room and having no idea what is happening inside our minds. That's the brilliance of this film: Nothing here seems to necessarily be played for laughs or drama or anything like that; the film simply presents a few unconnected stories and lets you interpret them how you like. It helps that every story is extremely interesting and absurd.

Something no other reviewer has noted on here yet is how well-done the whole thing is. It's easy to make shot-on-video stuff look and sound like complete garbage, but everything is well-lit and in focus. All the actor's lines are clearly audible, and the music is fitting and well-made (I love the slide guitar theme every time the Frenchman comes on screen).

Talking tater tots with toothpick penises, full-frontal nudity from 90-year-old men, sex with teddy bears, smoking dead pigs, munching on raw hamburger meat -- it's all here. An absolutely uncompromising gem of a film that I give my highest recommendation to. As much as I hate Harmony Korine's films, I always respected the ideas behind them -- this film pushes those ideas even further and actually makes compelling cinema out of it. A must-watch for fans of absurd cinema.


This disjointed tale of the strange (sex) lives of strange people is amusing, nay hysterically funny for about ten or fifteen minutes as the oddness and non sequitur nature of the story telling and cheapness of the film bombard the viewer in an almost overwhelming barrage of weirdness. Then the film begins to drone on as we settle into naked old people, the violation of stuffed bears, and cross cut sequences that don't really add up to much. Whats the point of all of this? Your guess is as good as mine. I'm some how of the opinion that the point of the film is simply to push buttons for good or ill, and push buttons it does. I have yet to meet anyone one who's actually made it all the way through the film, most abandon it somewhere along the way as simply too much to take. Film as endurance test? perhaps. I for one suspect thats probably the case with out humble director trying more to put one over on his audience rather than enlighten them. I of course could be wrong, but with out some sort of guide to the true "meaning" we're left to deal with the shock visuals which is all anyone will probably talk about anyway. For those who want want disturbing images and don't mind them wrapped in a boring confection.


It's nice that this film exists, but as it stands it's a major disappointment. Director Leslie Hiscott and cinematographers Sydney Blythe and William Luff get some nice proto-noir compositions into the first and last reels, but in between it's a very claustrophobic movie that seems to take place entirely indoors, either in the home of Ronald Adair or in Sherlock Holmes' and Dr. Watson's digs at 221B Baker Street. We know the film is set in 1930 instead of the 1890's because Holmes deduces that Watson is having trouble with his car, but we never see any cars  or much action of any kind. It's just eight reels of dull, ill-paced talk (where was Alfred Hitchcock when they needed him? Actually working at a bigger, more prestigious British studio than Twickenham!), sloppily recorded by Baynham Honri, who for some reason gets an on-screen credit in type as big as the director's. And though I usually respect the critical judgments of the late William K. Everson  who said Arthur Wontner was one of the two best actors ever to play Holmes  he's never convinced me in the role. He's perfectly adequate in the scenes showing Holmes as a cerebral "armchair detective" but utterly wrong for the neurotic man of action Sir Arthur Conan Doyle also intended Holmes to be. But then to me (to paraphrase the opening of the Conan Doyle Holmes story "A Scandal in Bohemia") Basil Rathbone (who looked uncannily like the Sidney Paget illustrations for the original Holmes stories and did both the cerebral and the active sides of the character consummately well) will always be THE Sherlock Holmes.


In the 1930s, Arthur Wontner made several well-made Sherlock Holmes stories. Unlike the others I have seen, however, THE SLEEPING CARDINAL is not based on a Conan Doyle tale but was created for this film. In addition, this movie makes quite a few references to contemporary thingsthings you would not have heard about in the original stories (such as cars and the German Reichstag).

The story begins with a young well-to-do man doing extremely well at Bridge. In fact, in recent months, he's been unbeatable. In light of this AND that the man had been on the brink of bankruptcy before this leads many to think he must be cheatingbut how? When the means of cheating IS discovered by the evil Moriarty, he wants to use this man's position at the Foreign Office to do some "bad things"and he will blackmail the card cheat into doing his bidding. The man's nice sister, incidentally, has contacted Holmes with her concernsthough she is not yet aware of the blackmail attempt. When this man is later found dead, Holmes announces that he was murderedthough the evidence seems to clearly indicate that he killed himself.

While I am a Sherlock Holmes purist and this is NOT an original tale, I appreciated this film quite a bit. Sure, Inspector Lestrade was only a minor character in a small number of Holmes stories and Moriarty was actually killed at Whisteria Falls in the Conan Doyle stories, but the spirit of the stories is intact heremuch more so than in most of the Basil Rathbone versions of Sherlock Holmes. The way he deduces, the character of Watson and the entire style of the film fits very nicely into the Holmes cannon. Worth seeing and a very interesting taleshowing Wontner was quite capable in this role.

By the way, the Ian Fleming in this film who played Watson is NOT the same man who wrote the James Bond storiesthough they share the same name.


This movie left a very bad taste in my mouth (bad pun intended.) The characters were uninteresting. The story went nowhere for me. Some times goofy is funny, but this over the top attempt to follow the "zany" antics of pizza delivery men couldn't hold my attention. I'd give it 1/2 star out of 5. The writing was weak. The direction was vacant. The acting was so-so. Overall I would not recommend this to anyone out there unless you like throwing your money away. I guess I would say this pizza movie should have been kept in the oven a little longer. I am a huge fan of independent film , but this film was in a word boring.


What a great movie! I've delivered pizzas on and off for about 5 years and can easily relate to many things in this movie. From the nice lady who wants her pizza delivered to her window to the ass who thinks a dollar tip is gods gift to PizzaDude. No Hollywood lights, no glam or special effects, just the honest display of the b.s. drivers must go through to earn a couple bucks. The characters make this movie, especially with Mang being in his own little world, and Little Debbie's honesty. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who has delivered pizzas. Pizza delivery is a bittersweet job and takes an overwhelming amount of patients and humor. I will be watching this one over and over again.


Drivers Wanted is absolutely hilarious! I don't think I laughed that much all summer... definitely on my top 10 list of funniest movies ever. It had a type of brutal honesty (quite charming in and of itself) and real-life quality that is, sadly, only found in independent films these days. Its independent nature allowed it to get its message across without being weighted down with a large studio's insistence of mainstreaming it. It was very well thought out, and overall, creatively original - it has it's own spark that screams unique. In any event, we took my friend's father, (a cardiac surgeon in the area) to see it, and he was so inspired by the film that he now delivers pizzas part-time on his moped in addition to his surgeon gig. (no lie) Proof of pizza power!


I've had a chance to see Drivers Wanted a couple times in the past few years. Each time I'm struck by its natural warmth.

Ordinarily, "warmth" means that the actors, director, and crew have done their job to create a theatrical experience that simulates "emotional warmth." In this case, however, it feels much more genuine.

It's the warmth you feel when you get a gift from your best friend that says they really know you as opposed to the "warmth" of getting exactly what you asked for on your Christmas list.

But it's this warmth that's much harder to analyze because it is not carefully calculated.

In addition, Drivers Wanted ends up feeling complete but not perfect. It's someone's creation that they completed as far as it needed to be.

They didn't hire a crew to come in and apply a dozen coats of paint and polish it to a glass-like shine -- while that result is appealing and good, there is also merit in an artwork that is deemed "finished" by the artist but for which the audience knows it could be done differently.

Having met the director on several occasions, let me add that this film is a reflection of his personality. And it's probably that which gives it its warm feel most of all.


Drivers Wanted is probably the funniest movie I have ever seen. It's light-hearted and feel-good, yet the humor is definitively and enjoyably "R-rated". How often do you get that combo? This movie follows the lives of some pizza delivery guys as they delve into what makes their job absolutely craptastic (and occasionally why it's not so bad, too). The premise and dialogue are so original, as the indie flare really makes this movie believable and not corny or forced. You have never seen a movie anything like this before, and unless you see Drivers Wanted, you never will. It's playing right now at the Regal in Henrietta, NY and you absolutely must see this movie if you are in the area.


This is one of the finest and lowest budget indie films I've seen recently. The comedy is far better than that of the over-acclaimed Napolian Dynamite, I recommend trying to find this at a local theater. Its showing in Rochester NY at the end of June. Much of the film was shot in the director's home town of Rochester, its worth seeing if you live there because of all the recognizable land marks. Drivers wanted defines itself with a distinctive comedy style, very character based, very easy to relate to. Anyone who has worked as a delivery boy would love the film, it touches on every sort of ridiculous moment that you've probably encountered on the job.


A frequent remark that Policemen encounter is something along the lines of, "You don't look like a Cop!" Another one is, "You don't seem like a Cop!" You can ask a Cop and see if it isn't true (as a question, not a condition). These questions certainly are a peculiarity to the job or vocation of being a Policeman; that have no counterparts in other fields.

TO sort of turn the tables, we can ask some well known Second Story men to participate in an experiment with a control group consisting of a fine cross section of the Public. In all likelihood, a good number of the participating citizens of this panel would say something like, "Gee Mr. Breakandenter, you sure don't look like any old Burglar!" AND so we are left with the question of just what causes there to be such uniformly wide spread attitudes? Quite simply put, the responding people are the end product of some outside influence. The name of that great and influential force is our popular fiction; which does by the way, cut as a double edged sword in both directions. The fictional persona of the Tough Talking', Ass Kickin', Rough and Tumble Street Copper is also propagated by our popular literature, film, Radio and Television. This is particularly true of Police assigned to quiet residential areas or central business districts; who have never worked in some of the hell holes of precincts/districts where the low guy on the lowest rung of the socio-economic ladder collides with the most brutal, unspeakable street crime.

IT was this idea of portraying Cops as individuals who have their own varying personalities that was a central founding premise of HIGH INCIDENT (Donwell Productions/Dreamworks/ABC TV, 1997-98). The show presented us with about 'everybody' as being Policemen. Other than David Keith's portrayal of Sgt. Jim Marsh, all of the rest of the characters were a real mixed bag of nuts. We had not one, but a whole bunch of characters and the actors cast in the parts seemed to quite against type.

AGAIN as a standard to measure all others, Mr. Keith's Sgt. Marsh is at once both the prototype and yet the quintessential of the Super Cop. He is experienced, incorruptible, tough, and strong, quasi-militarily disposed, physically fit and cuts a fine figure of a man in his uniform. His holding the rank of Sergeant also places him in that small, select circle of people who truly run the operations on the street. His demeanor and obvious knowledge of both Police Procedure and the Law are readily observable in any of the scenes featuring any of those "High Incidents'. This puts him on the same plane as Jack Webb's Sgt. Joe Friday from DRAGNET (Mark VII, Universal TV, 1951-59, 67-70).

HIGH INCIDENT is set in a fictional Southern California town of "El Camino", in English literally, "the Highway". All things about the Department and the town are very Los Angeles-like. (Boy, what a surprise that is!) The town seems to be a very "upscale" slice of suburbia, yet still displays areas of blight and economic depression.* This afforded a wide variety of possibilities for story lines.

THE Production team** was not afraid to take the stories all around the full spectrum of emotions. We saw a virtual out and out farce in one episode with a couple of the guys taking an expensive recovered auto for a brief cruise; only to have it come up missing and then clearing up the whole mess. Another very different sort of fare, Officer Len Gayer (Matt Craven) has a brief (once only) fling with the widow of his slain partner. The situation is complicated with her being a Black Lady with a young Son. Fearing his discovering the relationship, she selflessly and boldly puts an abrupt end to it. In a short, but highly emotional and literate few scenes, HIGH INCIDENT reminds and demonstrates us of how complex these situations are and how there are many unintended consequences that could be far reaching and hurtful to our loved ones, even far down the line.

ONCE again, in HIGH INCIDENT we find a Cop Show about Uniformed Policemen, which managed to strike fine balance between being character-driven or incident driven, storyline and action, Police Work and Soap Opera. It was hanging in there with the ratings game when the axe fell. In total, they did 32 Episodes over parts of 2 Seasons. It would sure be great if we could get those in DVD, VHS, even Beta! NOTE: * We recall a Dr. Kosinar in lecture at The City Colleges of Chicago, Woodrow Wilson Branch, saying that many areas of future urban blight will appear in some of those quick-sprouting hunks of Suburbia & the American Dream. Now, 40 + years later, we can clearly see that the Good Professor was right! NOTE: ** The series also boasted of having Charles Haid on board. He is the guy who portrayed Officer Andy Renko in HILL STREET BLUES; but he was not cast in front o the camera. He was one of the Producers on the Series; as was some guy named Steven Spielberg.


I have it from an inside source the reason the series was canceled was because Eisner and Katzenberg were having a pissing contest. Katzenberg at the time was suing Eisner (Disney) for money he felt he was owed while working at Disney. The series was being reported as picked up in all the tabloids. On the weekend that the season line-up was to be announced, in NYC, Eisner dropped 'High Incident' from the list at the very last minute, without any warning, so nobody could do anything about it.

I was told that Spielberg had said that if he'd known that this could possibly have happened he would have been in New York that weekend. A couple of years later when 'Schindler's List' was to premiere on network TV Spielberg pulled it from ABC and gave it to a different network.

Spielberg got some measure of revenge. Katzenberg got his money. Eisner got to throw his power around. The people who really paid were the cast, the crew and the fans who loved the show.


GREAT NEWS! Someone is selling DVDs of the entire series on sell.com ($55 plus shipping) and I bought the series. She obviously spent a lot of time on them, since the discs are really well done. My husband & I had forgotten lots of details of various episodes and it's like seeing old friends again. It's hard to believe that 10+ years have elapsed since the show ended....

We love(d) various other police shows such as Homicide and we're also devoted viewers of Law & Order and Law & Order: SVU, but *nothing* can compare to High Incident. We've remarked that not only was the acting superb (and very *natural*, which was rather amazing when considering that many of the actors were relative "unknowns" at that time), but also the *action*; it's like we're literally right there with the officers. There's not one fake moment in that series and every episode is terrific, with one exception; the foggy highway episode, which we thought really dragged. But all is forgiven when we consider the other episodes. :)


I watched this show on Sky in the UK and was instantly hooked! I'd previously enjoyed watching CHIPS, T J Hooker and COPS. High Incident was like a godsend, as it was like watching COPS but with awesome actors and story lines (something the average cop show always seems to be in desperate need of!). It was unlike any other cop show I'd ever seen, in that it captured not just the exciting car chases and gunfights, tense moments and drama, but also the average day-to-day calls that a police officer might receive.

There was humour as well as drama and I think the viewers posts here speak for themselves, this show should NOT have been CANCELLED so soon! As I saw in a post earlier, this is the kind of cop show that cops watch! And that really says a lot! If this ever is released in some form on DVD, I'm sure I'll be spending insane amounts of money to get hold of it!


It has been over thirty years since I first saw this movie and I still remember its effect on me. I bought the novel soon after and read it until the pages fell out. Someone asked me at a job interview who my most influential person and I said Jacquelyn Helton because she had the courage to do what she thought was right all the while knowing what the outcome would be. This movie is an inspiration to anyone who takes life for granted and makes you realize that no matter how long you live whether it is 20 years or a hundred, its not the length but the quality of that life, make it count, and above all else, love.


I saw this movie when I was a teenager and I absolutely loved it. I remember that I cried like a baby. Like so many others, I only saw it once, and I have since scoured everywhere looking for a personal copy to keep. I have just watched Love Story with my daughter, and I was telling her how good "Sunshine" was, compared to Love story. We both want to see it now, me because I loved it so much originally, and her because I've told her about how great it is, and how sad it is, and how its the type of movie that never leaves you, once you've seen it, it just touches you. I recall seeing it with a boyfriend in Perth, and we both walked out of the cinema crying our eyes out. He was a very blokey (macho)man, very tough, and I think its the only time I ever saw him cry, not only over a movie, but over anything. I just want to see it again. If anyone knows where I can get a copy, please put a message here. I will be eternally grateful. If anyone reading this has the power to get it on to DVD.... please do so. I imagine there are a lot of us out there who are waiting to see this fabulous movie again.


I saw the movie right after its release, in Europe. I was so impressed that I went to see it again in theaters. I learned all the songs and I discovered John Denver through this movie. The moment I arrived in Canada I tried to look for a tape, later on for a DVD. I see that is rated 7.4 and I don't understand why that many bad movies with bad ratings are on the market but this isn't. Shirley is right. To release another movie with the same name and totally different subject is deceiving and not right. What happened? Why can't we find this movie in the stores or at blockbuster? I join all the voices that ask for this movie on DVD. In a world flooded with movies full of violence, bad language and hatred lets have "Sunshine" (1973) for a change!


I saw this movie when it first aired on television many years ago.I was around fourteen years old.My sister was sick with breast cancer,and it made a huge impact on me.I read the book later, after I had seen the movie.This movie was beautifully filmed, and I thought that it stayed close to the original book.The script was very intelligent, and the actors portrayed their roles perfectly.I love the sets.To see the beautiful countryside in some of the scenes was fantastic.The music in this movie was one of the wonderful attributes to the story.I find myself humming the songs all of the time, after all of these years.I found the soundtrack, and I listen to it all of the time.Cliff De Young, Christina Raines,Meg Foster,Billy Mumy and Brenda Vaccaro were excellent.The other cast members were great too.I always cry when I watch this movie.I recommend this movie highly to people that have never seen it,I have this movie.


I thought this movie was excellent.I have been looking for it for a long time, since it has not been on TV. It took place in a time that was a very much a part of my lifestyle in the 60's and 70's. The music and whole hippie atmosphere is very dear to my heart. I wish they would have made a sequel to sunshine Christmas which was done after sunshine and told the story about SAM and Jill. I was always curious as to what happened to both of them since this was a true story. It was a real love story and definitely a tearjerker but it also showed a mother's true love for her daughter. She knew she would die and wanted to leave her something. The journals were a brilliant idea and I think she showed a lot of courage to not do drugs or chemotheraphy so she could keep her head clear. She loved that little girl so much that she died earlier than she had to.


this movie is filled with the songs of john denver, hence the name "sunshine".

kate is dying of cancer and doesn't want to take medication or chemo to prolong her life. she is an earth mother and loves the mountains.

this movie was based on a true story.

she leaves behind a tape recorded diary for her daughter of things she wants her to know about as she's growing up.

her husband sam is a struggling musician and plays the guitar.

it has romance, tears, and humor.

there was a short lived t.v. series based on this movie and a sequel called "sunshine Christmas".


My name is Jo-Jo (Ernie is my husband but I can't seem to be able to erase his name from this site - just thought I would clarify that!). I first saw this movie in 1982 on TV in Scotland, which is where I grew up, and I immediately recognised it as the story of Lyn Helton, which I had read in a magazine at the library. I was totally moved all over again; I thought the movie was beautifully made, and the songs complimented it perfectly. I have only seen it repeated once since then,and that was several years ago while living here (in New York). I would love to have a DVD or video of it to share with the four children I now have. I cannot begin to imagine what Lyn/Kate went through as a mother of such a young child, having to face her own demise. I totally admire her for standing up to the doctors and not letting them bully her into doing something she felt was the wrong decision for her. After seeing the movie I was inspired to try to find out about the real Lyn and her family (we didn't have the internet then): I found out from the library that there was a trust established for her daughter Jennifer, and I sent them a donation but never heard back from them. Anyone out there know anything? Her daughter must be about 36 now, and I'm sure she is really proud of her mom. One final thought - I noticed how many people on the board mentioned having read the book by Norma Klein: did anyone else read the two sequels "Sunshine Christmas" and "The Sunshine Years" and realise that they were totally inconsistent?! It's like two different people picked up from where the first book/movie left off! It was a little bit disappointing. Maybe its time to do a remake of this film? It was nice to discover that there are all these other people out there who were so inspired by this film.


I saw this movie as a young "hippie" woman and just loved it. It captured the times of 1973 perfectly. The subject matter, young love, family, illness, free spirits were right on. The photography was beautiful as well as the John Denver music, which was at the height of his popularity. I felt the lead character to be very brave. I now have a stepdaughter the same age I was when I first saw this movie and I only wish she could view it too. Who says great movies are not written for television?


This film made a huge impact on me when I saw it as a child. The relationship between the two protagonists was realistically portrayed and helped me have a more mature attitude to love and the sacrifices it may involve, as I was growing up. The beautiful songs 'Sunshine on my Shoulders' and 'My Sweet Lady' (sung by John Denver) stayed with me long after the film vanished off circuit. Many images from the film persist in my memory too. It was an authentic representation of the effect of a terminal disease on loved ones, and although a tear-jerker, ended with hope. I also learned that cats can sense death - a useful fact I guess.


I have been haunted by this movie ever since I saw it at age 8. The baby sitter let me stay up with her and I was forever saddened by this movie. It wasn't until this night ( 8/19/05 ) that I decided to see if there was any information on this movie. I heard the John Denver song : "Sunshine on My Shoulders" and just had to look it up. I always wondered what happened in this story. I was too young to remember and I don't think it has been shown again on television. I'm not sure how many other people my age saw this movie, but it sure made an impact on me at the young age of eight years old. My parents were not too pleased when they came home to find me watching this real life sad story. I now realize it was the first time I ever heard of this terrible thing called cancer. Unfortunately, I was soon to see the very real effects of this disease.


AND the soundtrack CD too!!!! I watched this BEAUTIFUL movie twice at the Cinema. It has NEVER been on TV here, that I know of.... I used to have the LP record soundtrack but 'lost' it years ago before going overseas (Grrrrr)

How do we go about getting a petition or whatever for the film company to release a DVD and CD soundtrack???? Another I'd buy five (5) copies for sure... one for each of my three daughters, (only one was born when the movie was made) and keep two for myself!!!

I too discovered John Denver through this movie, but MUCH preferred Cliff De Young singing the Sunshine songs!


I saw this wonderful movie in the early 70's with my best friend Sally at the age of 20. We cried so hard! Through it we discovered John Denver's music and it influenced us deeply in terms of appreciating nature, love and life. Sadly, several years later, a close friend of ours, Kathy, then lived the story, so similar it is haunting, she died in 1979. Her daughter is now pregnant (due late 3/2K6) and so wishing her mother was with us to enjoy and experience her grandchild. I think of this movie quite often, the characters, the story, the lessons, the beauty. It affected me deeply and probably always will. I was touched to read so many others with such similar reactions. Hearing John Denver music always reminds me of it. There is a line in his song, "Home Again" in which he sings "Your mother called last Friday, "Sunshine" made her cry" that I am pretty sure refers to the movie. I have no idea if the movie would hold up to my profound memories of it but I would love to see it, own a copy. I just emailed nannysue33@hotmail.com and am waiting for an answer to see if the movie can be obtained. Has anyone found it? I would love information! I don't think they make them quite like this anymore.


I saw this movie as a young child and I cried, but I love that movie. That movie had such an impact on me. I think it did on everyone who watched it. I had no idea that little Carrie Ingalls played Jill in that movie. Although I don't think that I have seen this movie since 1973. I have looked at the library and the video stores. I just cannot seem to find it anywhere. I would love to see it again. Maybe someone can help me find it. Please let me know. I would appreciate all the information that anyone has. Any ideas I welcome them. I can be emailed with the info. Any idea where I can find it? I have looked for that and Go Ask Alice. Please email DAWNDDMACK@AOL.COM


I have seen Sunshine a few times and loved it each one of them. I wish the movie would be put out on video. I would certainly buy this one so I could view it often. Hopefully it will appear on TV again soon. It's a great movie .... maybe a little bit of a tear jerker, but good.


"Sunshine" is a rare piece of art. Based on a true story, it contains a ton of emotion. Produced in 1973, I caught it one night on TV and left it in the back of my mind. In 1988 I began to live this story right down to Christina Raines similarity to my wife and the taffy colored cat. The only difference was that our love held us together ...she, and the cat, passed on in 1994. Recently I saw an old battered copy of "Sunshine" and how close this "movie" is to the truth. I highly recommend this film as one of the greatest attempts at understanding the love and sadness in life, what it is like to die, and the legacy it leaves in the heart. It is unfortunate that it is not available on VHS (Hello, Amazon.com) or shown more on TV. This is the compassionate type of media our society and civilization needs so badly to survive.


This was the most touching movie, I loved every thing about it. I find it very hard to believe this movie has been taken out of circulation. I know its out there somewhere. My husband and children deserve to see this movie,and I've vowed to find it somehow. The actors,the music,the script were all exquisite and I can remember even as a young person the profound effect it had on the way I viewed and still view the value of life.


This movie showed in the small cinemas in South Africa, around the time that "Love Story" was a big hit here, and I found it to be vastly superior. The more I saw it, the more I cried, until I had to stop seeing it! The music was a wonderful addition, and I was lucky enough to be able to buy a long-player with the soundtrack, which includes Cristina Raines reading from her diary. Brings it all back. Should be on video for purchase.


A heartwarming story about a young woman, her daughter, her boyfriend (then husband)...and her battle with cancer. Christina Raines plays a young woman who is diagnosed with cancer, and rather then choosing to live her life handicapped, she chooses to live the rest of her life to the fullest. She sees life as we all should, for all it's beauty. She leaves her daughter her legacy on a series of tape recordings. Wonderful music by John Denver, sweetly performed by Cliff DeYoung. A real heart warming, tear jerking movie. I would love to obtain a copy of this wonderful film! If you can help, PLEASE email me.


I have also been looking for the movie "Sunshine" for years. Thank-you so much for the link to the site where I have just ordered my DVD of this awesome movie! I saw this movie when I was 16 years old in a theatre back home in Saskatchewan and have never forgotten it! I started my search a few years ago, inquiring at movie rental joints and department stores, with no luck! I was reminded of the movie each time I listened to John Denver song (he also happens to be my favorite singer)and also could remember that the young dark haired lady that was dying of cancer. It drove me crazy as I was anxious to watch it again!

I can hardly wait to get my movie and watch it again!!! Thank-you so much, I am so grateful to YouTube, cause that is where my search started tonight and the rest is history!!! Best day, ever!


I'm a guy. I first saw this film in bar full of bikers. And STILL I cried! I've only seen it one more time since then, and that's not nearly enough. Look, let's start a letter-writing campaign to TNT or TCM or SOMEBODY to broadcast this movie again. It's a crime to let it fade away into obscurity! Seriously, we need to get organized about this. We should choose a cable channel, find out exactly who schedules the programming, and bombard that person or those persons with hundreds of hard copy letters, not e-mails. Address them by name, be polite, make very sure how much this means to you, and convince them that this film can attract a huge cult following. This is a movie for future generations, not just the 70s generation! Don't you want to be able to share this with your kids and your grand kids? Let's get started. We need to save this film.


I saw this movie on TV in the 70's and it had a tremendous impact on me. It was brilliantly acted and the chemistry between Christina Raines and Cliff De Young made their on-screen relationship very convincing and very tender. A real tear-jerker! I bought John Denver's album just for the songs 'Lady' and 'Sunshine' which featured in the movie and were used in a very poignant way to show the wonderful love that Cliff De Young's character had for his wife. Her smile as he sang 'Lady' was captivating! I can see it now in my mind after all these years. My sister and I recorded ourselves singing 'Sunshine' and 'Lady' for fun after seeing the movie only to discover just weeks later that she too had a terminal illness and died very soon after. I still have the audio cassette, which is a constant reminder to me of the film. I've tried to find this movie on video or DVD but to no avail. How can we get someone to put this excellent movie onto DVD? It needs to be 'out there' or at least repeated on TV or Sky so we can record it! One of the most memorable little movies I've ever seen.


I cant believe I am not the only one who remembers this awesome movie. I have told others about it over the years and now one else remembers it. I was only 8 years old and cried harder than I had ever cried before when I saw this movie. I have been searching like the rest of you. I wish we could find it on DVD. I loved this movie and obviously it had an impact on so many of us if after all these years we all still remember it and are still searching for it. Could there be a way to locate which studio made this movie and beg for release on DVD? Wasn't the woman played by Kay Lenz??? I think but am not sure..I was only eight years old after all.


Yes, another Sunshine fan. I'm an old hippie. This movie has stayed fresh in my heart and mind and I would really love to be able to purchase it. I bought the audio "tape" of the film years ago after I had seen it and wore the poor thing to death. I know all the words and songs and just cant get enough. It is indeed a most beautiful heartfelt movie that is timeless, as it touches aspects of life that cannot be lost with changes over the decades. A niece of mine found a copy of it for me on Ebay but it turned out to be a really really poor copy that had been taped from the TV (with ads!) Argh! Anyway if anyone at all can help me out to point me in the right direction as to where I may purchase the DVD, please please please let me know. Cheers good people.


I too saw this movie, possibly 6 times as a teenager at the movies, my friend had the Album soundtrack, which we listened to and cried. I've also been searching for this movie, if anyone knows how or where to get it, please let me know. I'd love to share this story with my daughter and nieces, I've recently lost my sister to cancer and this story brought back memories for us all. If only they would release this on DVD, I have a feeling there would be a lot of sales, perhaps someone could release it with the proceeds to go to the fight for cancer, there's a thought for someone. It's an inspirational movie that would be good not only for the cancer sufferer but for the family of the victim as well.


I like all the comments that Ihave read praising this wonderful film the tear's just flowed from my eye's when I first saw this beautiful story being so brilliantly portrayed and with such wonderful music of john Denver I still have the sound track of the film MCF 2566 ON VINAL Ilove to sit and listen to the song Sunshine on my shoulders. and it still brings a tear or two you see friends I myself Iam just getting over ''bowel cancer '' and am waiting for the results of a '' biopsy '' for a prostate may we soon all be able to buy this film on DVD soon

Mr A Wynne

N/Wales UK.


I just turned 18 and I've had a rough last two years and I've been kind of depressed. Anyway, i was never much of a reader and one day, about a week ago my mom bought me this old book. It was from when she was a kid from in 1974, a way long time ago, so i really didn't think much of it. It was one of those 50 cents things at the library. She went on to explain how it was such a good book and it was based on a true story and she had many memories of it from when she was about my age. But like everything else i own i tossed it on my bedroom floor, but one night i couldn't sleep, so i picked it up and gave it a shot. OH. MY. GOODNESS!!! This is the best book I've ever read, I'm just about finished it, but I really want to see the movie and I was very upset when i found out they never made a tape of it or anything and you cant find it anywhere, not on ebay, or amazon, or at blockbuster. All I found was reviews and this message thing. This book really touched me, a lot. Also there are so many things in the book which relates to my real life one of them that is less personal is how in the book the girls name is Kate, which is my name, and her daughters name is Jill, which is my moms name. Well anyway if anyone can find out a way to get this movie i would be so grateful to have just seen it once. Please, please let me know if there is a way i can get this movie!!!! Thanks!


I am a woman of almost 50 years of age. I only saw the movie once and it left such a lasting impression on me. The movie was so beautiful. I have been trying (with absolutely no luck) to find this movie on VCR tape or DVD to purchase. Like others have commented, I too cannot believe with all the terrible movies that have made their way on to DVD why this great movie is not available. To be honest with you I cannot remember it all completely but I remember the basic story and more importantly the "feeling" of the movie. I remember some kind of sequel or TV show or something that followed the original movie. Something about the life of the father and the little daughter. I must have been about 14 or 15 yrs. old when I saw the movie and I do remember being deeply touched. I now am going to attempt to get my hands on the book. I am a real sucker for reading books. The book usually brings out nuances that the movie cannot really show. Although I do remember the movie being very well written and acted. I wish that many of us out here who loved the movie so could unite and bring this to someone's attention that has the power and means to bring this movie to the public. I will buy it and I will tell my friends and family too. Even if it were to be broadcast again of television and I could watch it again, I would be so pleased. I am going to try to think positively and I will keep checking this site.

Another "Sunshine" fan


I saw this movie in 1974-75 and have never forgotten it, I would please please like to obtain a copy , so if anyone can help me it will really be appreciated. I have trawled through the internet over and over again, and this is one of the most promising sites. Please help or advise. Would anyone have a copy or know where I can buy one from. At the time I saw it I was in South Africa and it was shown in the Cinema. I have told my 2 daughters about this Movie an I am sure they would love it. I have tried E-bay , Amazon and Yahoo for help but have never uncovered this movie. One of the things I remember well is when she is dying, and her cat stays with her on the bed all day , she comments that the cat will stay until she is ready to die. This is what happens, the Cat disappears one day and you know, (I cried buckets) that the end was near. I now live in the United Kingdom and have search old Library files for information on this Movie. One of John Dvener's songs was included in the Sound Track. ( I think it was Sunshine on my Shoulder), and that song still brings tears to my eyes. I can see Was her name Jill as clearly as if I had watched this yesterday. Not 30 odd years ago

Thanks

Margaret Macpherson


Like you, I would love to find this movie on video. I never got to see the movie, myself, but I fell in love with the song the Cliff de Young released from it and searched for it for many years. I wanted to see this movie! One day I was thumbing through the cut-outs bin in my favorite record store and found an album that had been made from the movie. The album contained exerpts from the film as well as all the music from it. If there is a place where I can go and request this film, please tell me so I can add my voice to yours because I agree this is a story worth hearing and Cristina Raines is one of my favorite actresses.


Sunshine is my all time favorite movie in the entire world.I also have been looking for The Sunshine Years TV Series that aired as Sunshine for half a season. I have been searching for years and years. I have the DVD sunshine, I have the DVD Sunshine Christmas.. I have all three Norma Klein books ( Sunshine, Sunshine Christmas and The Sunshine Years)... I have the Soundtrack on Cassette and Cd and LP.. I am desperate to see the TV series again... I watched it as a kid and remember every episode... Also there was a movie called My Sweet Lady Sunshine part 11, It was shown in London. I have desperately been trying to find a copy of that... Have you had any luck? Maybe we can work together.. Please write me at Gina104220@aol.com Gina from N.Y.


This is an unanticipatedly imaginative TV terror movie revision of Cinderella, all the more effective for being guided by the same directorial hand that gave us the unrelenting physical horrors of 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' and 'Eaten Alive' in his 70s heyday.

Amick (of Twin Peaks domestic violence 'Shelley' fame), in a standout performance is the lowly collegiate struggling to juggle her studies with the demands of caring for both her home and her decrepit grandmother, whilst her Aunt and cousin live it up night after night. Cue a reversal of fortune when she lands the job of props mistress in a production of 'Romeo and Juliet' and falls under the spell of a sensuous red cloth which, as spooky professor Perkins points out, is an original Aztec witchcraft cloak; and which she transforms into a dress, with murderous results.

Clearly a waste of time for the underwritten Perkins and sad to see such a talented and perennially underused actor ill and jaded in a career on the wane, although far worse was yet to come (ie 'In The Deep Woods'). The film is also bereft of the sort of shock value that one would need to swallow the tall tale being presented at face value. Still, it does sort of work on a surprisingly engrossing level of creepy subtleness, and this is aided by a slinky visual quality and the billowing symbolism of the red dress; captured on film stock in what must have been one of the very last TV movies to be shot this way.


I'm Dangerous Tonight is a functional piece of entertainment. Being a made for TV movie it is kind of bland and toothless. The blurb on the back on the case made me think it would primarily involve the Madchen Amick possessed by the evil dress for the course of the movie, sort of slowly turning her evil, kind of like Christine but with a dress instead of car. It doesn't quite work like that with the dress being worn or possessed by various different people throughout the film and turning evil to varying extents. The central premise of a dress, or a cloth that eventually gets turned into a dress, that turns those who wear it evil is one of those silly concepts that could provide cheesy entertainment and would require some really good scripting to work as a genuinely good film. I'm Dangerous Tonight does kind of try but ultimately does not succeed. There is some claptrap that is never really explored about inanimate objects being mystical focuses of belief and power, which is thrown in as an explanation for the Aztec cloak/dresses' power, which is quite forgettable. It does seem an enormous coincidence that the girl who comes into possession of the dress (No pun intended) just happens to be studying this very esoteric and specialised topic as part of her college course. There is also some stuff about the dress affecting different people in different ways, depending of their existing strength of character and their psychology etc. It isn't delved into very much, other than as an explanation as to why some people seem to turn more evil than others, but it is a fairly interesting plot idea. As it is the concept of a random object or artifact which turns people around it evil or makes weird stuff happen has been done a few times by now- I'm looking in your direction Amityville sequels.

What we do get on screen is okay but nothing to write home about. Tobe 'One Trick Pony' Hooper rattles through the proceedings with a predictable lack of flair. Madchen Amick is easy to watch, especially in the red dress, and Anthony Perkins provides the best entertainment in the movie with his giggle inducing scenery chewing. His histrionics and overacting are b-movie gold. By this point in this sad and sagging career it looks like he was just having fun. R. Lee Ermey has a small but amusing role as a gruff detective. There are quite a few plot contrivances and some scenes toward the end which are very choppily handled. There is one part where our heroine wakes up after being rendered unconscious to find the situation has changed in a way that doesn't make in sense in terms of plot logic or pacing. There is also a lame twist ending that everyone will see coming from miles away.

Bland, as one would expect for a made for TV movie but there is enough to at least hold your interest.