***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** The first Godzilla movie in the third movie series, whereas GODZILLA VS. DESTOROYAH, the previous entry, aptly ended the second series. What else can I say? Well, let's break it down.

I once liked the 2nd series of Godzilla movies (1984-1995), even though I found something annoying about those movies (as either the bad or good guy, Godzilla was so sympathetic that the human characters came off as obnoxious). Then, in 1995, along came a movie called GAMERA: GUARDIAN OF THE UNIVERSE and its two successful sequels, all directed by master filmmaker Shuusuke Kaneko, who singlehandedly changed the face of Japanese monster movies forever. I was spoiled!!! The Series 2 Godzilla movies were suddenly looked down as half-hearted, heavy-handed, auto-piloted and lazy attempts at recreating the "original" Godzilla, and end up being an insult to the memory of genre masters Ishirou Honda and Eiji Tsuburaya. GAMERA 3: THE AWAKENING OF IRIS, released the same year as this film, was simply incredible. Once Hollywood moviegoers saw that movie, they would never look at Japanese monster movies the same way again.

Then, along came Tri-Star's 1998 GINO (Godzilla In Name Only), which was understandably met with bitter hatred by true Godzilla fans the world over. The worst portrayal of Godzilla seen by the human eye, making Marvel's 70s comics and Hanna-Barbera's cartoon look better. Then, MOTHRA 3, released later that year, bombed at the box office. Toho was in deep crap. They felt as though Godzilla was about to lose his fans, because of this red-blooded American box-office disaster, so to make up for it, they made this movie, GOJIRA NI-SEN MIRENIAMU (Godzilla 2000: Millennium), which was a "take that" to GINO. This movie is definitely better than GINO, which isn't saying much.

Is it the BEST Godzilla movie? Nope, not by a long shot. In fact, it quickly bombed at the box office in Japan (starting out at 4th place, and sinking to 8th in the second week!). A lot of Godzilla fans in Japan didn't like the movie. Is it entertaining? Not if you're spoiled by the Heisei Gamera trilogy, but if you don't take the movie too seriously, yes, it is very entertaining. In fact, I hadn't been entertained like this since TERROR OF MECHAGODZILLA (Toho; 1975), and despite the movie's MAJOR flaws, GODZILLA 2000: MILLENNIUM is still very entertaining.

First of all, Godzilla has never looked better! His design has been in a rut since 1989, where his design was great, but once they stuck to it, he began to look slapped-together in each new film, but finally, a NEW Godzilla design! As Riverdancer Michael Flatley once said, "It's important to change, because if you stagnate, you die." I think this is a very good change, and one that stays true to Godzilla's spirit. Godzilla's design is a streamlined version of the Kin-Goji design from KING KONG VS. GODZILLA, with jagged DARK CRYSTAL-style dorsal fins that give him an evil look. I was neither bothered by the orange-colored Radioactive Heat Beam (most fans are used to blue), nor Godzilla's green tone (this is the first time Toho made Godzilla officially green, whereas he had an ambiguous green-gray tone). I was very happy with this Godzilla. For the first time, Godzilla was played by former JAC stuntman Tsutomu Kitagawa (a veteran of Toei's Sentai Series), who just started out in the Toho Monster genre (he played King Ghidorah in MOTHRA 3).

The UFO and the Millennian Alien/Orga were excellent and unique ideas (which the previous movie series wouldn't have allowed, for fear of being "over the top," but this was the cleverest portrayal of aliens in a Godzilla film), but half the time, they are poorly handled on film. That brings us to the story part. The Millennian, Toho's first CGI monster, is a really bizarre creation, and Orga reminds me of GINO (the intention) as if over-mutated by comic-book artist Todd McFarlane! Definitely not your average Japanese monster!

The story has great ideas, and a more "realistic" feel than the previous Godzilla movies since the 90s. However, the main problem is that things were not spelled out for the viewer (mostly because production was rushed in the second half). As a result, lot of people did not know what was going on. After reading about the plot/story and having purchased both the Official Movie Compendium (which has TONS of useful info that Americans don't know about the film) and the manga adaptation by Mondo Takimura (which is a MUCH better version of the film than the film itself!), I've seen critics/reviewers make up their own conclusion. Read the plot below so I'll help out.

Throughout the film, there are parodies of both GINO and INDEPENDENCE DAY (one scene had a taxi driver in Shinjuku getting out of his taxi, staring dumbfounded at the UFO while his car gets smashed by another! Part of this was cut out in the US version; It shouldn't have been)!

As of 1999, the special effects are probably the best in any Toho Godzilla film since Teruyoshi Nakano's breathtaking work in the 1984 GODZILLA. Kenji Suzuki's FX are a vast improvement over Kouichi Kawakita's work in the films from 1989-1995. This is his second FX direction job (his first was MOTHRA 3). Definitely not up to Shinji Higuchi's work in the Heisei Gamera trilogy (which Toho had been trying to keep up with), but definitely not too shabby for a Toho Godzilla film! The downside is that some of the FX looked rushed (especially in the climactic fight scene between Godzilla and Orga; Toho was definitely behind schedule).

As for the human characters, after 1975 (and probably 1984), we FINALLY get characters from all walks of life! Thus, they may not be the BEST characters, but very amusing ones (and thankfully, not too many of them, whereas previous Godzilla movies had byzantine amounts of important characters you didn't care for). Takehiro Murata, no stranger to Godzilla films (he appeared in 1992's GODZILLA VS. MOTHRA and 1995's GODZILLA VS. DESTOROYAH), takes his first lead Godzilla film role as Yuuji Shinoda, who runs GPN (Godzilla Prediction Network) with his little daughter Io (Mayu Suzuki), and wants to study Godzilla to discover the secrets to life. Actress Naomi Nishida very well plays the part of O-Parts magazine photographer Yuuki Ichinose, who joins GPN to get pictures of Godzilla for the magazine. TV & movie heartthrob Hiroshi Abe totally steals the show as the ruthless Mitsuo Katagiri, who runs CCI (Crisis Control Intelligence Agency), the faction that wants Godzilla destroyed, period. Godzilla's rooftop confrontation with Abe at the film's end is a shining moment! And there's actor and longtime Godzilla fan Shirou Sano as Shirou Miyasaka, Shinoda's old college buddy/CCI executive, who provides a conflict between the two factions.

The music by Takayuki Hattori is an improvement over his own score for GODZILLA VS. SPACE GODZILLA, but in the film, it was done absolutely no justice. When one listens to the CD soundtrack, one finds that some of the best tracks aren't even used in the film, thus Toho's music editors do the same slapdash job of cutting & pasting tracks all over the place, but some of the important tracks are left in the right place. And as much as it livens the film, Toho's throwing in a token stock track of Akira Ifukube's "Godzilla Theme" (just to tell us that this is a Godzilla film) does detract from the film. It seems the fogeys over at Toho have a problem with simply doing new arrangements of Ifukube's music (cost-effective, maybe?).

Then, there's Takao Ookawara directing his last Godzilla film before quitting the series. Ookawara doesn't care much for Godzilla, though his work is actually okay. He's better than Kazuki Oomori (not only the worst Godzilla director, in my opinion, but he is completely embarrassed with monsters and stuff), though.

And last, but not least, Tri-Star's US English-language version. Well, I've seen the Japanese version on tape, and when comparing it with the US version, the Japanese version actually makes more sense. Some of the US editing patronizes the original material by cutting out some important scenes and changing parts of the dialogue for PC reasons (like changing "Organizer G1" to "Regenerator G1," and editing out all references to "Millennium"). However, the US version makes up for it with tighter pacing and some really fun dialogue, not to mention one bit of profanity ("Nice try, a**hole!")! About time Godzilla movies started growing up! The US music by J. Peter Robinson is okay, but really cheesy most of the time (noticably, much of the score was recycled from the 1998 TV movie, GARGANTUA, which was made by Fox to one-up GINO). Hattori's original score is about 50-75% intact, though. Robinson actually rearranges Ifukube music with two tracks, the best in the scene where Orga makes his appearance, the worst being the scene in the end (after which, said token stock Ifukube track is repeated before cuing the complete original ending credits track). Speaking of which, the worst part of the Americanization was the tacky "THE ? END" title card at the end of the theatrical version of the film (blessedly removed for TV/Video/DVD versions). I was really embarrassed.

Speaking of embarrassing, a lot of people in the US seem to have lost sleep over the closing dialogue, the last part of which is a direct translation in the US version: "Godzilla is . . . inside all of us!" And yes, Japanese fans were pretty embarrassed with that scene! I didn't mind it, though. The US version is still fun to sit through, and still manages to have respect for the original film. I did hear, though, that the US version was put together at the last minute (to meet a tight deadline), which explains a lot.

Before I close this review, well, everyone pretty much knows the plot, but here's my version anyway: It's basically Godzilla crossed with QUATERMASS AND THE PIT. This movie is a direct follow-up to the original 1954 GODZILLA, but HOW Godzilla came back is unexplained (a MAJOR weakness for the film). For what it's worth, GPN (Godzilla Prediction Network) led by Yuuji Shinoda and his daughter Io, try to predict Godzilla's city attacks so that he can evacuate precious lives in advance. In foggy Nemuro, Godzilla crunches a fishing ship with his powerful jaws in front of a lighthouse, smashes a bar, attacks a city and for some reason, destroys a power station (all this being among the best highlights of the film). According to Shinoda (in the Japanese version), "Does Godzilla hate the energy that mankind produces?" Meanwhile, CCI (Crisis Control Intelligence Agency), led by Mitsuo Katagiri, discovers a HUGE rock fragment beneath the Japan Trench, and try to transport it, but the rock transports ITSELF by floating to the surface of the ocean! CCI member Shirou Miyasaka suggests that the rock might contain an alien life form, and to their surprise, it does some weird things like stand right side up over the ocean. At the same time, despite Shinoda's warnings, Katagiri, CCI and the Japan Self Defense Forces prepare to attack Godzilla in Tokaimura (where, at the same time of filming, a nuclear accident happened in real life) with a new set of super-missiles called Full Metal Missiles (Yes, they're called that in the Japanese version! No doubt a tribute to Stanley Kubrick's FULL METAL JACKET). The weird thing is that when Godzilla appears, he does absolutely nothing! He just lets the JSDF hit him with everything but the kitchen sink, to no good effect, although the Full Metal Missiles did kinda' do a number on him. Just then, Miyasaka finds that the giant rock follows the sun, so it starts to fly away and heads toward Godzilla, the two titans shoot rays at each other, and in the process, Godzilla is defeated, and the rock is revealed to be a huge, solar-powered metallic UFO! It flies to Shinjuku, where it lands on a network building (same building as O-Parts Magazine!), and starts draining info from the Internet so that it can find out more about Godzilla (it discovered that Godzilla has quick-regeneration process; Upon further study with Miyasaka, Shinoda calls it Organizer G1). It also starts transmitting message words such as "Millennium," "Kingdom," etc. Come evening, Katagiri even suggested blowing up the building with the UFO still on it (where a crazy mix-up gets Shinoda into DIE HARD-style hijinks), but guess what? The UFO stands triumphant and destroys the rest of the building! Shinoda emerges a survivor, and shows everyone why the UFO wants Godzilla: The Millennium Aliens (Millennians) want to start an empire on Earth by converting our planet's air to make it more suitable for them. When they crashed on Earth in prehistoric times, they lost their solid composure and were reduced to anti-matter in the process. They need Godzilla's cells to regenerate their bodies. Then, Godzilla shows up from Tokyo Bay, and has a fight with the UFO, which overpowers him (telepathically using underground cables to lasso him) and clones Organizer G1 from his body, thus, the Millennians emerge from the UFO, regenerating into their original form, a single giant squidlike alien! But unfortunately, Godzilla's DNA overtook the alien's shape and causes a painful Hulk-like transformation, thus Orga (named from "Organizer G1" - Get it?) was the tragic result. After Godzilla trashes the UFO, Orga proceeds to beat him silly (also telepathically controlling what's left of the UFO to bash him around with it!). Can Godzilla destroy a giant alien mutant with many times his own healing speed?

Whew! That was a lengthy review! Well, I still think that the next Godzilla movie, GODZILLA X MEGAGUIRUS: THE G ANNIHILATION STRATEGY, is even better, and that it was the type of movie Toho should've made (and the movie that should've been shown in US theaters)! Nevertheless, enjoy GODZILLA 2000: MILLENNIUM, either in its more straightforward Japanese version and/or the campy-but-fun US version! A VERY flawed, yet entertaining step back in the right direction.

"GOJIRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!"


Considering the critical and financial flop of the US-made Godzilla (1998), I am very surprised that anyone bothered to release this movie stateside. I am also very glad they did, since this shows exactly how to make a G-movie...you use the original Big G himself!

Even though a lot of the effects in this film still involve the "man-in-a-suit-a-saurus" style of monster, they are excellent! There is a lot of fairly good CGI eye candy and the revamped Godzilla suit is truly a sight to behold. The big guy hasn't looked this good since his initial escapade back in 1954.

It's always hard to figure out where the movie exists in the Godzilla canon (there are basically four eras: The first two movies, the movies after that up until the initial series ended in 1975, then the revivial in the eighties that began with Godzilla 1985 and ended with Godzilla Vs. Destroyah, and now this film), but it seems to begin another era of G-films, with no apparent links to any of the other ones, other than the original movie Gojira.

This is basically just a fun movie...full of action and a bit of suspense and a lot of crunch time! Just what a G-Fan wants!


I like Godzilla. Because of this I can enjoy most godzilla movies.

This is of course not high art. It is just campy fun that people like me enjoy from time to time.

I will rate this movie a 7. Based on the IMD rating scale this makes it a movie worthwhile to see. ONLY if you like Godzilla!


I saw this movie on about 3 hours of sleep and was desperately hoping for a pleasant surprise to keep me awake. I snickered when I saw the horribly dubbed Japanese and the debut of Godzilla, the spaz in a rubber suit. I tried to appreciate the nostalgia but eventually my eyes started to glaze over. This is why I gave the movie a 9 instead of a perfect 10.

Then followed the excitement. Yes, everyone tries to destroy Godzilla. I don't want to spoil the movie, so I'll just say that with everything they threw at Godzilla, practically for the rest of the movie, constantly, it was extremely fun to watch. I could've skipped my next night's worth of sleep just seeing Godzilla get pounded. However, if you can't appreciate that, this movie's not for you.


When I heard Godzilla 2000 was coming to American theaters, I was really excited. For the first time ever, I'd get to see Godzilla on the big screen. I was not disappointed. Godzilla looks great with a meaner, leaner look. The special effects, although not without their bad shots, are generally very good. The enemy UFO/Monster is really cool and the final fight is fantastic and exciting. The dubbing is fine, but it did have its bad moments. Tristar's edits were fairly unobtrusive, so I didn't mind. Would've liked it if the they did make a few shots grainy. Oh well. And the movie dragged a little. Despite its bad points, though, Godzilla 2000 is a very fast paced and exciting entry into the Godzilla. It's one of my favorite Godzilla movies. And I the movie left me with a big smile on my face. I can't wait to see it again. 10/10

(kaiju = monster)


this is a fun movie. it's got some corny lines, and a few weird bits, but hey, the fx are good, the monsters are funky, and the human drama is entertaining. so shut off your brain and enjoy the ride.

also, though the middle 40 minutes has no godzilla, what many people fail to mention is that it has a big ol' UFO that flies around and blows things up, plus a pretty good bunch of plot advancements. And it's all worth it to see the final battle, which quite frankly is one of the best ever.

go see it now!


Godzilla 2000 Millennium is the dark, but eerily beautiful updating of the Godzilla saga. It features stunning SPFX, passionate performances by a well assembled cast and great action. Takehiro Murata as Yuji Shinoda and Hiroshi Abe as Mutsuo Katagiri give inspired performances as men in opposite camps regarding Godzilla. In fact, the drama between the human characters is just as satisfying as the effects scenes- which are great. The score by Takayuki Hattori is moving and effective in conveying the various moods of this well-made kaiju eiga (Japanese monster movie). Godzilla 2000 Millennium also has moments of humor as well as scenes which give us insight into the lives of the people tracking Godzilla and who must then deal with an even greater threat. The scenes between the father/daughter team of Yuji and Io Shinoda who head the Godzilla Prediction Network (GPN) are entertaining and moving, especially at a very dramatic moment in the story. The monster battles are well done as are the confrontation between Godzilla and the Japanese Self Defense Forces. Godzilla 2000 Millennium also vindicates the traditional Japanese way of making giant monster movies. Made with a fraction of the budget for the American Godzilla movie of 1998, it delivers a more authentic, satisfying product. Godzilla 2000 Millennium is probably the second greatest movie in the entire series, exceeded only by the original "Gojira."


I love Godzilla but I really think that the U.S. should not have made a Godzilla of their own. I like the original a lot better. I also love the new look of Godzilla he looks meaner and more destructive even though he's a bit smaller.


Under the influence of fabulous Gamera movies, and as an answer to Hollywood crap, Toho proudly presented this Gojira 2000 Mireniamu.

And they don't understand the point of monster story, as always.

Visual effects are the best of the series. Some scenes maybe better than Gamara and Hollywood Godzilla, and of course, others are not. But you know, it is not the point.

You know, the point is the screenplay. Some details of the screenplay like "Gojira detecting network" are relatively good, and of course, others like careless approach to dangerous monster and unconvincing escape are not (They tried to match against Emmerich's farce? Idiots!). No, not details. Plot.

The plot of this movie is totally pointless. Screenwriters (They did that blasted Gojira VS Supesugojira and Gojira VS Mekagojira !) are lost their way in maze of details and forgot to build solid main story line. Especially, Oruga pointlessly appeared, pointlessly transformed twice or three times and was immediately killed by Gojira. Effects for this lame scene were not bad. What a waste, of talents and characters.


I netflixed Godzilla 2005 and started to watch the movie with the Commentary on, because there was no Japanese language track. No Japanese track was a disappointment to begin with but then as the commentators just glad handing themselves about there edit's, re-written dialog and complete disregard for the original film I realized this was just a ruined film. They went for Camp of the old 50's sci-fi, which you can't write camp. You can only play it as straight as possible and the silly things pop out. For instance, how the one researcher is racing to the scene and two plant workers are just strolling by, not at all aware of Godzilla. Also they cut important scenes because they felt the audience wouldn't get it. Don't dumb things down. Or try to explain things that don't need explaining. One of the worst things is the suped up sound effects. A tell tale line of commentary was that when they said about the original subtle missile hits to Godzilla were more real and the suped up ones sound more fake. And they kept repeating this is a movie that shouldn't be scary for kids. Like they were tring to tone it down into a comedy. I love the camp of the Godzilla movies that comes from this straight serious movie that is just unbelievable. All they needed was Raymond Burr as an American reporter to totally ruin a good Godzilla movie.


Disappointed with this one. Let's start with the dubbing...it's terrible, I know Godzilla movies are supposed to be badly dubbed but they actually used professionals. Godzilla is missing for most of this movie and we have to watch boring characters we care nothing about blabber on and on about Godzilla but I want to see him fight and stomp Tokyo! The plot was even better in the American version. The ending is by far one of the worst and cheesiest I have ever seen and don't even get me started on the horrible CGI.

Overall, this was pretty crappy. Monster fights were minimal and there was even less stompage. **/*****


Same old standard Japanese production Godzilla movie that tries to get back to basics with a little bit of newer CGI effects here and there.An ANTI-RADICAL CHANGE for Godzilla movie if you will. Only for big fans of this genre. They could have done much better for this movie. I have seen much better production for the TV Series POWER RANGERS compared to what was presented in this B-Movie......


This was painful to watch as a Godzilla fan. There are five main reasons. 1) It was 'mushy'. (Godzilla is in all of us!- the stupid little girl) 2) The one fighting sequence lasted way too long. 3) The plot was not really that good. 4) The special effects looked like animation. 5) The character setup sucked. They either came or went quickly or stayed around to the point of exhaustion. I guess there's six. 6) the fight was commentated...*shudder*. Better alternatives include: every other Godzilla movie. nobody even died in this movie. I recommend watching a completely different movie. I think I'm going to retch just thinking about this crappy movie. Please may the studios who did this stop and go out of business.


I saw this movie the other day. My eyes are still recovering from this painful experience. I truly hated it. I read through all the comments and realized that this will be about the first negative comment submitted about Godzilla 2000. Why is that so? People love this movie. I don't understand...

I like cheesy b-class horror movies. Any movie with a Troma stamp on it is great. But, this was beyond bad. There was no plot, no effects, nothing to keep even my son's interest, and no refund at the end.

I immediately ran to the local video store and gobbled up a copy of the Hollywood version. Ahhhhh ... relief. And that one isn't even that great either.

The only part I liked was the last line where our stunning pit-faced hero looked into his heart and proclaimed that Godzilla is in us all. At that point, the big green rubber guy continued to wreak havoc on the Japanese city, theoretically incinerating thousands of people within whose hearts he lives. Touching indeed.


I went into this movie with pretty high hopes, honestly, I did. My guess was, after the American destruction of Godzilla a couple of years ago, the boys over in Japan would take up the reigns and crank out a Godzilla movie unlike any other seen before. BOY WAS I WRONG. I remember back in the days of saturday childrens matinees, when they would show all of the old Godzilla movies, I mean I've seen them all! GUESS WHAT? They are all the same! It's like Friday the 13th, you can't do anything with a non-talking star like Jason, Same basic story except you put new bodies in the way to get killed. Godzilla, it's a new monster. I've always hated the humans in the Godzilla movies, this is no exception, they think they know it all, but they don't, they stink, and they are on screen way too much, the human scenes always kill the movies. If you go knowing there is nothing special about this show, and it like all of the others, you'll get what you expect. If you want more, sorry, as long as these movies make a ton of money in Japan, they aren't required to raise the standard on GODZILLA. BUMMER!


I am a huge Godzilla fan and have seen all of the movies. This was an utter disappointment and I don't think that I will be alone after the release of the movie.

The special effects are all over the map from being respectable in one or two scenes to being just downright laughable in a lot of the others. If Toho had just carefully watched how the creators of the new Gamera films had taken care of business, this would have been/could have been a great movie.

Godzilla's history is abandoned. That isn't a bad thing, but there really isn't an explanation of where this Godzilla comes from either (actually it is almost treated as an enigma)

The effects make you wish for seeing wires as they will leave you shaking you head in amazement. If you think I'm making this up or am being too harsh, just wait until you see the movie, then go rent some of the movies that were made from 1991-1995 and tell me that they were honestly far more advanced. It is the year 2000 for crying out loud - I expected more. I think that they detracted from my enjoyment of the film.

If you're disappointed in this movie, see the new Gamera series which is far more powerful than this film. If you want to see good Godzilla, rent them from your local video store. You'll be glad you did.


Chintzy effects, lousy dubbing, I can't begin to itemize all the ways this movie was horrid. It looks like it was produced by Grade 3 boys with their parent's video camera. Your time is better spent watching your neighbor's vacation video.


I am not pleased to say this, but so far, this is the first movie ever that I was completely unable to finish. I could not finish this film. I rented it, sat down and watched it, and then, three quarters through, I just turned it off, ejected it, and returned it. It was just insulting that a character this great should be abused in such a crazy film. Perhaps in Japan it was more popular, I dont know.


Oh, no! Here comes another dubbed "Godzilla" export! There's so much about this movie that's easy to complain about. If Japan's supposed to be wizards in the video game/electronic industries, why are the special effects so bad? Second of all, the acting is terrible, the plot is pointless, and the ending line is just plain embarrassing..."there's a Godzilla in every one of us." I laughed at most of this movie when I should be biting my nails. A monster movie fan may enjoy this, but I didn't.


"Godzilla 2000" is easily the worst movie of 2000, easily the worst movie of the last decade, and easily the worst movie of the century. I don't know why it was ever made. It's a waste of money, a waste of film, and a waste of time. The special effects are the pits. Okay, so I know "Godzilla" flicks are supposed to be cheesy, but come on! This is really pushing it. Lame, lame, lame. The worst film I've ever seen in my entire adolescent life. Wretched and beyond.


This movie was sooooo bad that i cant believe i sat throught it all. The only good parts of the movie? The special effects.Dont waste your time or money!! As for a alien creature from outer space? what the hell was the writer thinking?? The dialouge that was terrible!! You can see it wasnt there real voices just poorly done computer work.


The Japanese need to give up. They need to do everyone a favor and just stop making movies. They obviously can't do it right or they'd have it down by now. Why? Why would you make this kind of movie and who would watch it? The old Godzilla movies were at least funny in their cheapness but I couldn't even laugh at this one and that's pretty bad. I would rather watch the bible channel than this crap that's just terrifying. If you took a handful of nails and scratched them repeatedly up and down a chalkboard you could have more fun than if you watched this foreign trash. In other words, do not support the creators of this 'movie', if you could call it that, by spending money on it.


I am kicking myself for not getting to a theater to see this when it was out last Spring. But at least the video came out. I've just watched it for the second time and it just gets better!

The new Godzilla is definitely edgier than his father. The look is more bestial, the creature's actions more savage. After victory, the earlier Godzilla would walk off to the sea. THIS one kills the human who tried to kill him and then burns down another half mile of Tokyo as an afterthought!

Traditionally Godzilla is considered a metaphor for nuclear warfare. With the new one, I wonder if Godzilla is more a metaphor for the gods we worship. This Godzilla knows who you are and can kill you any time he wants. Just like a god.


You could do worse for Bad Movie Night.

The great fun is catching all the swipes it takes at Emmerich and Devlin.

First there's the huge saucer that sits atop a building; then there's the pseudo-Godzilla monster the aliens create (with a funny-looking jaw that reminds one of the Emmerich-Devlin Godzilla). But of course it hasn't a chance against the real thing.

Tons o' fun.


This movie is terrible. How else can I put it? At least American Pie was entertaining and the comedy was raunchy yet interesting. This movie is a disgrace to the motion picture industry. How was this atrocity released? I spent 4 bucks on this trash! Holy crap I could have spent that money on a quarter pounder with cheese and had some sort of temporary satisfaction. There's not even a good sex or nude scene! The acting is just BAD, the story is just Cliché, the directing is just CRAP. There's nothing funny about this at all. I can't believe you IMDb users gave this a 4.8, why? Why is this not sitting on the bottom 100? Did you think it was cute? Oh my lord.....why? 2/10


This film has a great soundtrack all the way through! Most of the artists are not well known, but deserve a second listen. Great soundtrack!

The film was pretty bad. Cheesy plot, goofy sophomoric dialog, poor and clichéd acting, clichéd characters, pretty bad all around. If you take this film seriously, you will hate it, but going into it, you should know that it is not to be taken seriously. This film is worth seeing, but not worth paying to see, so only rent it if you have the Movie Pass lol. If you wade through all the goofiness, there a few funny moments. Although, if you are amused by farts and masturbation (God help you! lol), you might love this film lol.

Danica McKeller is not in the film near enough. She is a secondary character. Being the only talented actor/actress in the film, they should have given her a bigger role. And she is still cute as can be Winnie! I guess she will always have a special place in most people's hearts as Winnie Cooper from the Wonder Years. Great show! Richard Karn is the next closest cast member to being well known, and he is terrible in this film. What would expect though?

Yes it is clichéd constantly. The geek is in love with the most popular girl in the school, who dates the football star. The geek has a fat, somewhat effeminate friend, who always has a crazy plan. The geek stands up for the girl, and receives the ire of the jocks. The geek is clumsy lol. etc, etc.

SPOILER! One major problem I have with this film is at the end. We are all happy that the geek finally got the dream girl, and that he beat up the jock, and the dream girl realized how great a guy the geek was, and then all of a sudden, the geek wakes up, and the whole crazy plot we watched was just a dream, it didn't happen. WHAT? Then he goes and does the same things over again, and we are left to believe it happens the same way the second time. This was totally pointless and stupid! Why? Really bad move!

One question about this film: Why did they remove the nudity, if the film had an R rating even without it. The 2 scenes with breasts would not have raised the rating to NC 17, so why cut them out of an R rated film? Plus, why cut them out on the DVD release, if they are going to be in the Deleted Scenes anyway? I can't imagine this film had much of a theatrical run, if any, so the DVD would be the main release, so why cut it out, if 1. it's already rated R, and 2. they are on another part of the DVD anyway. Don't get me wrong, I could care less if a film has nudity, I just don't understand the logic here. Plus, the extended scene with the 3 girls in Debbie's bedroom displayed some of Danica's best acting, but it was cut in half for the feature.

Anyway, goofy film worth seeing ONLY IF you can see it for free, because of a FEW funny moments, a great soundtrack, and Danica McKeller's cuteness lol.


We all know how it goes. Cheesy music, ridiculous plot, terrible acting...

But it's all good! Because stomach that and you get some hardcore action and you probably get off.

Not this movie, however. Here, you will stomach the crap, all ninety minutes of it, you will be ready for the great cinematography at the heart of every porno, and you will get the end credits.

Zilch. Zip. Nada. Ninety minutes of warm-up and no final product. Not even an exposed tit. Super Bowl XXXVIII had more action than this movie.

A few random comments:

1. Danica, WHY?!

2. Michael Ray Bowers, leave Hollywood. Get in your car and drive for a very long time. Get out of your car, and set it on fire. Don't come back.

3. Why does a 2002 movie look straight out of 1992? Everything from the fashion to the technology is completely outdated. Danica's hairstyle, in particular, looks stolen from the valley girls in the official Baby Got Back music video, circa 1994. And that's just within the film; for the actual picture quality, it appears to be a slightly improved version of Technicolor. Which, come to think of it, is another porno trait.

So basically, if you like watching porn intros, rent this movie. If you're like the rest of us, just stay away.


This is a typical attempt to make a sequel movie to others that have rocked the box offices, such as the American Pie and Road Trip series.

The plot is stereo-typical, the acting is bad - not necessarily on any one actor's experience, but more on poor script-writing, bad editing and poor direction. There are some very accomplished actors in this movie, but unfortunately they were given sleeper roles.

In my opinion, this movie was not worth the $3.99 + tax I paid to rent it. I would have been very disappointed if I had paid theater price to see this movie (if it had a theater run even.)

If you don't mind paying to download movies from an authorized download site and viewing them on your PC or renting "sleepers" from your local Movie Rental location, then its up to you to see it. I would however, recommend viewing a movie like "Guess Who" or "The 40 Year Old Virgin" as an alternative.


I should have immediately known this was a bad movie when the biggest names in it were washed-up sitcom co-stars. This was by far, the worst thing I have ever seen. I could tell it would be a stereotypical teen comedy, and in fact I only watched it because it had Winnie Cooper in it, and I've been in love with her for as long as I can remember. Not anymore! I cannot believe anyone would sink so low as to make this movie. Every character is a stereotype, it has terrible acting, an atrocious script, and the most predictable plot I've ever seen in my life. There where characters that just stopped showing up halfway through the movie, scenes that contributed nothing to the plot and never went anywhere, and every sort of gross-out gag you can imagine. I could only suggest this movie if you feel like torturing yourself for an hour and a half.


I just blew 2 hours of my life watching this wannabe-American Pie. It's hard to even begin to describe the horror of this shallow piece of teenage melodrama. Some movies just should not even be available for the safety of the public's sanity.

1) Is there anything redeeming about any character? Main guy, dorky and hormonal with a serious klutziness. Main girl, shallow and cheats on tests. Supporting guy, fat with no hope of ever getting laid and an even worse way with comedy. Supporting girl, even more shallow than main girl who goes after said girl's guy because girls like that just love to be treated like sh*t (DANICA, WHAT ARE YOU DOING IN THIS MOVIE??? FIRE YOUR AGENT!!!!!)

2) Ending makes you sigh in relief, it's like the writer realized the last two hours of crap are enough for the poor audience and decided to *boop* end it. Not that I expected something more than that, but why have a sense of reality then? Why not in the first three minutes?

3) Moral: eh....uh....mhhhh....

4) American Pie began the raunchy teen movie conquest. BTW, why make movies that are so raunchy that only the 17older crowd can see them? These movies don't even appeal to a crowd that has actually had sex without pies, bananas, or wannabe barbie dolls with no acting skill (beg pardon to those of you whose first times really were like this, you have my sympathy). This movie has no scrap of comedy to it and should be burned.

5) Sorry, I just like the number 5.

In short, I'm sure more people have chuckled or even smiled at this entry than they will at this movie.


I have often heard people claim that they could create a better movie than the one which they are watching, but I have never seen a movie actually validate such a claim. Sex and the Teenage Mind is presented as a serious attempt at a teen comedy, but appears more as a series of marijuana-inspired scenes brainstormed by people devoid of a sense of humor and completely out of touch with today's generation, which unfortunately happens to be their target audience. I truly think that the plot was made up as the movie progressed. It features many random scenes which not only detract from the movie's bare skeleton of a plot, but in addition coax the words, "was that supposed to be funny?" out of your mouth- already open in awe of how bad the movie is. During the movie I was actually amazed at how whoever was responsible for this piece of crap managed to make a cliché out of everything. The jock carries a football around for crying out loud, a character trait missing in Not Another Teen Movie, which intentionally overused such clichés. It really says something when a serious movie has more clichés than a parody on the same subject. Keeping in line with the theme of "last minute paper due the next day", profanity and nudity are placed into the film like similes in order to make it look more convincing that actual work was put into the project. They are put in such random context that it is glaringly obvious that their only purpose was to garner an "r" rating in a shallow attempt to appeal to teens. The only thing this movie succeeds in doing is boosting your self-esteem; not because of the nerdy characters, but because of the miserable effort put forth by the producers. One thing that really irritated me were the scenes which became awkwardly long for no apparent reason. Dialogue was repeated, the same points were emphasized, and I glanced at my watch a few more times. In one such scene we watch the main character drive to a girl's house for a good 45 seconds, as if we would be confused at how he got there if some of the driving was cut out. This becomes extremely frustrating when the first time is revealed to have been a dream sequence, and the scene is repeated. The main character is supposed to be a dork, but is portrayed to be so socially inept that it borders on mental retardation, and is so extreme that Napoleon Dynamite would point and laugh. The main character has difficulty walking without tripping, accidentally exposes himself to nearly every other character in the movie, and finds it necessary to practice putting a condom on a banana around his friend's waist while receiving direction, despite clearly labeled instructions provided with all condoms. Seriously though, good fun for the entire family... if your family has an average IQ of just under 14.


We just finished watching this.

We figured it would bad, but there would probably be some nudity...so why not. (By the way there is next to none and it's not good.) DON'T WATCH THIS MOVIE. This isn't even funny bad. There isn't a plot, it uses clichéd parts from other movies, the acting is the worst I've ever seen (that kid was way better as Donkey Lips from "Salute your shorts").

I'm not sure where it was trying to go. Now I know why I had never heard of it. It should be burned so no other person has the misfortune of wasting minutes of their life that would be better spent doing ANYTHING else.

Pure garbage.


The best part of the movie was that i rented it expecting a stinker but the library was shutting and my friends were getting irritated and as last choice i got this movie.

Well even though this movie was predictable, lacked the hotties that i come to expect in good teen comedies and most of the jokes were very creative but badly executed i really didn't dislike the movie.

The 86 minute or something movie was short and sweet and one never really gets bored nor does one have to much fun.

The stereotypical fat and horny guy comes across as the only winner in this otherwise listless film.

Don't rent this movie in a hurry but if there's absolutely no choice then rent this one at least none of your friends will insult you.


This must be the worst movie I've ever seen. There is no plot, aside from the lead character trying to score the hot girl, which I can safely say has been done before. The acting is just awful, I haven't spotted one true emotion. The movie was cut together in a very unorganised way (and I'm not talking Pulp Fiction style) and seemed to just stop before the story was over (and I'm not talking Lock Stock style).

Don't get me wrong, I liked American Pie, all three where a good way of passing time. Road trip was funny, and so was Euro trip. I'm not an enemy of the genre, just an enemy of this lousy movie. . out of *****

Don't say i didn't warn you.


When watching this film, Sex and the Teenage Mind, one must ask themselves this question. Is Sex and the Teenage Mind a great film or the greatest film? It is truly one of the great tragedies of the 21st century that this amazing masterpiece was overseen for the Academy Awards. Never in all my years of viewing cinema has such a tremendous film been brought before me. It portrays the life of a young boy, Virgyl and his struggle with puberty, hormones, and even worse..............girls!!! Virgyls very sexually active parents suggest that he tries to find a girlfriend and become more sexually experienced. Virgyl is also helped out by his good buddy, the great film actor Michael Bower, and is taught how to sweet talk the ladies, master the difficult art of putting a condom on, and what are the best magazines to 'jack off to'. Virgyl then finds the girl of his dreams and stands up for her in their US History class. But oh no Virgyl, watch out. The girl of your dream's girlfriend, Scott, is a real jock jerk. But oh no, what's this? To repay Virgyl, Kelly hires a hooker to have sex with him. An all too common plot scenerio. This movie has laughs, love and most of all a great soundtrack. From the impersonations of the bee gees to the girl band cover of 'Doctor Doctor'. This movie has it all. A must see for any horny boy that wants to see a movie with one scene of a naked lady or a boy that has rapist thoughts when they look at a girl. This movie was definitely 90 sweet minutes in hump city


The saddest thing about Robert Benton's "The Late Show" is that it has gotten lost in the shuffle when discussing the great movies of the nineteen seventies. This is a terrific piece of film noir that is paying homage to the great detective mysteries of the forties. Benton's sharp screenplay is sensational in creating colorful, likable, and original characters. Benton beautifully connects all the points of the complex plot by the end, leaving the viewer completely satisfied.

The all around acting in the film is terrific, with Lily Tomlin supplying comedic support to Art Carney's lead detective Ira Wells. The film however belongs to the late, great Art Carney. Carney gives quite simply an amazing tour de force performance as the aging Ira Wells. He is a sad and lonely character who is socially awkward yet surprisingly tough. He is a great underdog character, who with Carney in the lead role, the viewer cannot help but to root for. After showing his dramatic range and winning an Oscar for Best Actor for 1974's "Harry and Tonto" (a personal favorite of mine), Art was offered some terrific roles and gave some great performances. In many ways Carney's performance in "The Late Show" is better then his performances in his other two great films of the seventies, "Harry and Tonto" and "Going In Style". It is a treat and pleasure to watch him in "The Late Show" because it shows a legendary and extroadinarily talented actor in full force.

Thankfully Warner Brothers has released "The Late Show" on DVD (now if only Fox could release "Harry and Tonto" on DVD). For years it was very difficult to get on VHS. While the film may look a little dated, it hooks the viewer with its story and acting that you will be glad that you took a trip back to 1977.


Over-the-hill gumshoe in Los Angeles seeks to avenge the killing of an old pal, another detective who had gotten himself involved in a case concerning a murdered broad, stolen stamps, a nickel-plated handgun, a cheating dolly, and a kidnapped pussycat. Art Carney and Lily Tomlin are amazingly well-matched playing the convincingly mismatched pair who unravel the tangled mystery, and Bill Macy is equally fine as a friendly bartender-cum-talent agent. The plot of this modern-day paean to the age of Raymond Chandler is perhaps too convoluted to follow in-depth, but that's rather easy to overlook considering it is the least important part of the picture. The begrudging, barb-filled relationship between Carney and Tomlin carries the show, and the friendship that slowly grows between them is thrilling for fans of this type of cinema. A lovely character study/comedy-drama richly deserved--yet did not get--Oscar nominations for all three of its acting principals (it did receive one nomination, for Robert Benton's original screenplay). The chatty film is charmingly askew and lingers in the memory like warm nostalgia. ***1/2 from ****


The Late Show is one of the most underrated films of all time. It's somewhat convoluted detective plot has raised comparisons to Chinatown, which is both unfair and unfortunate. This is a film that stands out on its own.

The acting is generally very good, and the performances by the leads are particularly strong. Dialogue which might have seemed forced or corny with less assured actors is believable and often funny here. Art Carney and Lily Tomlin are fun to watch as a bickering detective duo brought together as much by mutual loneliness as by anything the plot throws at them. Both are able to keep their characters interesting without overdoing it. It would have been especially easy for Ms. Tomlin to go over the top with her depiction of the rather flighty Margo, but she manages to balance her character's peculiarities and make it look effortless.

Robert Benton received an academy award nomination for his screenplay, but he really deserved more recognition for directing a film in which he gets the mood just right, and trusts his cast to do their jobs well. This was no mean feat for a work that needs to be film noir with some comic timing.

I saw this film when it first came out nearly 30 years ago, and then watched it again recently. At a time when so many films rely on computer generated images, and plots that seem dreamed up by marketing departments, it was refreshing to rediscover a film that relies on strong direction, and outstanding acting.


As many who have left comments before me have observed, this film echos the detective stories of the 1930s and 1940s. I would go a little further and suggest that the premise of the movie is what would the case be like if Philip Marlowe were roped into a mystery when he was pushing 80? Howard Duff's scene early in the film and even his character's name evoke The Big Sleep while Chandler allusions continue through the film. Art Carney's superbly underplayed Ira Wells is unquestionably an avatar of Marlowe surviving into the late 1970s and into his late 70s. He's a bit deaf, a bit slow, a bit more crotchety but he's still that one moral man walking down "these mean streets" of L.A.

Benton has done some extraordinary work, but this is his elevation to the sublime, a movie that one can watch again and again. It's a minor masterpiece. If producer Altman's own The Long Goodbye had been as good a Raymond Chandler film as this is, Goodbye would have risen to the level of the other two incomparable films of Chandler novels: the Howard Hawkes, Bogart and Bacall The Big Sleep and the Robert Mitchum Farewell, My Lovely.


**SPOILERS** Nostalgic 1977 movie that's more like a 1940's film-noir crime suspense/drama with an over the hill private eye Ira Wells, Art Carney, teaming up with a middle-age hippie Margo Sperling, Lily Tomlin, to solve the murder of Ira's long-time friend of over 30 years, and also private detective, Harry Regan, Howard Duff.

Harry coming to see Ira at his rooming house one evening collapses and dies right in front of him from a 45 slug in his chest. At Harry's funeral Ira gets to see his friend Charlie, Bill Macy, who has this young woman Margo Sperling with him and want's Ira to find her missing cat Winston. Having no patience to go looking for cats at his age Ira changes his mind when he finds out that Harry was on the case, in finding Winston, at the time of his murder and feels that Harry trying to find Margo's cat may have had something to do with his untimely death. Ira was right dead right.

The serious Ira teaming up with spaced-out, on ideas about life not drugs, Margo realizes that Harry's murder was but a small part of a series of crimes, including at least four other killings, involving big time L.A gangster Ron Birdwell, Eugene Roche. Brdwell's wife Laura, Joanna Cassidy, has been missing for some three days and was involved with a Mr. Whiting who together with his wife both ended up dead.

It takes a while for Ira to get to the bottom of what's been going on between Birdwell and the Whitings but with the help of screwy pseudo-philosophical Margo, who turns out to be a lot smarter then Ira at first thought, he puts all the pieces together. Ira comes up with not only who killed both the Whitings but who murdered his friend Harry Regan as well and, on top of all that, Ira finds Margo's cat Winston. The cat it turns out has been sitting on the evidence, a .32 pistol, to connect all the killings as well as it being used to blackmail Laura; in keeping her mouth shut about who's responsible for a sting of unconnected and unsolved murders in the L.A area.

Art Carney giving the performance of his life as the broken down PI Ira Wells takes it on the chin and in the gut throughout the entire movie from hoodlums like Birdwell and his sadistic bodyguard Lamar, John Considine. Ira also has to puts up with the New Age Guru-like Margo, who he gets to like despite her almost talking him to death.

Lily Tomlin is perfect as the over-age hippie Margo Sperling who also begins to take life seriously when she realizes that she and Ira's lives are in danger in an elaborate scheme to distance the Whiting murders away from those responsible for them and make them look like a robbery gone wrong.

Ira who really got on the case to find who murdered Harry Regan finding Winston was only secondary for him and gets a lot more then he bargained for including a brutal beating by Lamar ,who he later pays back with interest. In the end he finds not only who killed Harry but a new place to stay, Margo's place, after his landlady kicked him out of her house for giving her more headaches and excitement then his rent could compensate her for: $42,50 a month.

Art Carney besides having ulcers problems in the movie as Ira Wells walked with a limp, because of a bum leg, which in real life he really had from being wounded in France, by an exploding German artillery shell in World War Two.


"The Late Show" is the unexpected combination of several things. Unexpected, not because of the genre, but because of the era. The isn't a very reaching film, and certainly not totally straight-faced compared to the film noirs it is very openly influenced by. Just like the B movies that were once churned out monthly with nothing more than a good lead and a fast-paced script, Robert Benton creates his film in much the same style.

The surprise is Art Carney, giving one of his many more impressive performances. He makes the character real, in a lean script that begs for that kind of focus. Lily Tomlin is certainly convincing, a jumpy personality that would never be present in a classic film of this type, but feels perfectly at home here. I like the look of "The Late Show", the feel and attitude of it. It's a passing thing, but a good time and a thing or two to think about.


Before I saw this film I read an interview with Donnie Yen where he said that he puts his blood and passion into everyshot. I think he was indeed very passionate about this film. While I don't think it is perfect it is a great stylished modern gun-fu action film. Hardcore action fans maybe bummed about the pace. I think it is just right.

The improvement from Donnie's first two films is right on the screen. I do think his other films are good, don't get me wrong. Having recently seen princess blade on the big screen I think what I like about Donnie yen's fight scenes is they are very much a part of the film. The fights come from a balenced sense of cinema and Kung Fu.

Miramax needs to give Donnie the budget and put him behind the camera on a high brow Iron monkey 2. Watching blasstic kiss should give them faith.


Chances are, I probably would have been disappointed if I thought this was going to be an action packed slam bang ride like HARD-BOILED. I knew ahead of time that BALLISTIC KISS was refered to as an "arty" action film. Donnie Yen is one of the best movie martial artists out there. I had no idea that he had such a cinematic eye though. After seeing SHANGHAI AFFAIRS and LEGEND OF

THE WOLF, I noticed his real passion for film making, so I could only imagine what BALLISTIC KISS was gonna be like. From the beginning of the movie, it was obvious that this wasn't a typical HK production. The intro to the movie was like an american noir film with the way the lighting and camera shots were used when Donnie Yen is talking to the radio show host. The cinematography was of particular note. Donnie used a lot of blues and reds. Everything was shown as being gloomy. Wong Kai-Fai was a great collaborator with Yen. Many things about this film are unconventional. The action for instance is shot with neo noirism , and the editing works. Some people may find the editing to be too choppy/fast, but it worked for what Yen was trying ot present. Even the undercranking (Which I normally disapprove of) was appropriate. I didn't even mind that guns in the film shot more bullets than they really do. The editing and sense of action made the movie look sureal. BALLISTIC KISS is kind of like a combination between what John Woo and Wong Kar-Wai would do. The story is also something. This isn't about a killer trying to go straight. In this movie, Donnie's character of Cat Lee has no sense of redemption. He just wants revenge against his partner who betrayed him, and if he dies while doing it, so be it. The only thing that would probably save him from that fate is his attraction for a cop played by Annie Wu. While Cat thinks about her and how wonderful things would be if they were together, he doesn't have an optimistic view of the future. One of his sayings is "No one is innocent." He thinks the world won't get better, and his sense of peace only exists in his mind. But the gloomyness of the film is not what the theme is. It doesn't mean that the rest of us have nothing to look forward too. In fact, it tells us the opposite. The lives these people lead are not the lives we have to leave. Even though it also expresses a common theme of "even trusted friends are capable of betrayal," there's no reason to be sad from seeing this movie. Bey Logan (Who I've had the honor to meet.) wrote a great script. Many people hate this film. But the strange thing is that the reasons for why people hate it are the reasons why I like it. It's self-indulgent, the editing is sureal, like I said: it's unconventional. This movie is definitely not for everyone, but if you're an "arty" type person with an open mind, you may like it. It's not fully arty though. There's a good combination of mainstream film making to go along with it. This is Donnie Yen's best performance. He gives of a great sense of a tragic hero without having to go over the top. Annie Wu plays off him very nicely. The relationship that develops between them is more like mutual respect than "deep romance." But there's still romance there nontheless. While Donnie Yen's best martial art performance is in IN THE LINE OF DUTY IV, his best film overall is BALLISTIC KISS.

10 out of 10


There's something about movies that are produced by, directed by, and staring the same person. Maybe it stifles the rest of the cast and crew from giving any honest input. It would have been helpful if someone would have spoke up and mentioned the totally unrealistic gun fights were a bit much. Gunfights can be cool, but please, even the most squeamish pacifist would understand guns need to be reloaded from time to time. Shotguns don't hold 100 shells nor do 9mm hand gun clips provide that kind of firepower. Also, bullets follow a straight trajectory and don't do their best to avoid the target.

This is the type of film that leaves one wondering if the producer-director-actor thinks the audience is so mental as to take the movie seriously. I ended up giving this film a 4/10 because it had it's moments. Annie Wu did a decent job with what was available. She was even able to sprint, without favoring her bad leg, minutes after being shot in the thigh. It could have been a decent film with a bit more character development and shorter, more realistic gun fights. I could only recommend viewing to have a few chuckles.


Wow, this film is utterly UNFORGIVABLE.

Donnie Yen is an incredible martial-arts talent who should utterly claim this film as his alan smithee masterpiece. God knows he couldn't be bothered to remove hisself as the film's lead. Usually, when watching an HK actioner you should suspend your disbelief to an unbearable degree. John Woo's HK films made this easy and fun to watch. But here the viewer is utterly dragged kicking and screaming into utter garbage. The acting was top notch, for most HK flicks, and thought he story was essentially striving to free itself there was no resurrection. Instead what we have here is a failure to entertain as we are subjected to uninspired fights, mingled with shameful gunplay, and some bad guys/heavies that are so happy go lucky that I'd probably play "Yut, Yee, Sum!" drinking games with 'til dawn. THESE BAD GUYS WERE SO UNTHREATENING THAT TRIX BUNNY ON MY TV RIGHT NOW LOOKS LIKE CHARLIE MANSON, IN COMPARISON.

Did I come into this flick wanting to hate it? HELL NO! Donnie Yen is cool, he's cooler than cool. This guy is action nitro glycerine times a thousand plus infinity. But here, in a film he directed no less, it's a heartbreaking waste. I encourage those who get caught up with the flashy title to instead search for something meaningful, like John Woo's earlier films. Hell, even Mission Impossible 2 was better than this. Yowza!

Donnie, let other people direct. I have only so much respect for you, buddy. Don't make me lose any more.


SPOILERS (eeeeeee!)

"Blackenstein" is an unbelievably amateurish romp that cannot even be considered true blaxploitation. It's got no action, and even worse, no attitude. Instead, this simply was designed to capitalize on the trend of inserting "black" into the names of famous monsters, like "Blacula" or "Dr. Black & Mr. Hyde". It's the kind of movie that was intended to play on the second bill of a drive-in feature, or draw people into a sleazy theater based on the title alone.

Hilariously terrible on every level, this is compellingly awful viewing. In terms of film-making, "Blackenstein" is a great example of a half baked cash-in rushed into production with only vague ideas about what the final product was supposed to be like.

Consider, if you will, the plot: Dr. Winifred Walker is a young woman seeking to continue her studies with one of her college professors, the cleverly-named Dr. Stein. She just shows up on his doorstep one day (at his suitably cardboard-Gothic style mansion) and he immediately takes her on as his assistant. Winifred is devoted to her boyfriend, Eddie, who has lost all of his limbs (and apparently his personality) after stepping on a land mine in 'Nam. Coincidentally, Dr. Stein's experiments involve DNA and the replacement of lost body parts (or something like that). Dr. Stein's injections miraculously restore Eddie's limbs, seemingly within hours, but fate interferes. Dr. Stein's servant, Malcomb, takes revenge on Winifred when she spurns his love. Malcomb alters Eddie's injections and they turn him into a monster, complete with a square forehead and a huge afro. Whatever.

Since the makers of the film seem to feel as if a "Frankenstein" flick needs a dungeon, Winifred & Dr. Stein inexplicably banish Eddie to a basement cell after his results start turning out badly. They are also oblivious to the fact that he gets out at night to embark on nocturnal rampages.

The story takes every liberty to work in any type of Frankenstein/mad-doctor cliché possible, even to the point of absurdity: bubbling beakers, crackling electrodes, inappropriate thunder & lightning, and a monster with confusing motivations. The dialogue, terribly stilted, is delivered by non-actors on all counts. One hilarious sequence involves Liz Renay as a victim who appears for a few minutes, only to be ripped open by Eddie, who eats her intestines. Her performance is the only believable one in the entire film.

The absurdities don't stop there, though. An incredibly silly soul song floats over the title credits. The Halloween-style sound effects are not to be missed, and also don't miss the scene inside a nightclub that features Cardella De Milo, prefaced by an emcee who delivers a painfully unfunny joke. And ah, let's see...I can't leave out the hilariously inappropriate music that pops up from time to time, offering shock and suspense cues while actors walk leisurely through hallways or glance around aimlessly. The attack scenes are also executed with a complete lack of suspense or logic, with many of the "victims" hurling themselves directly into the monster's outstretched arms. One especially stupid victim somehow eludes the monster, yet suddenly forgets how to climb a ladder, allowing the unbelievably slow creature to sneak up behind her.

The editing is inept, and goof-spotters usually notice the phenomenon of Winifred's hairstyle changing drastically from scene to scene. I'll be damned if one of the victims didn't have on the same dress as Winifred, too, as if nobody was supposed to notice.

The film's one innovative idea? The credits roll from top-to-bottom instead of bottom-to-top.

In spite of all of this, I don't agree with everybody who commented on this film and said it is not worth watching. It's not every day you come across a movie THIS bad. What did you expect with a title like "Blackenstein"? I adored it.


WOW! Watching Blackenstein the Black Frankenstein (what a title!) is a one of a kind experience. It's a unique spectacle that must be seen to be fully appreciated. I can truly say that I've never seen a film quite like it. Is it as bad as everybody says it is? Oh yeah! Absolutely! It's horribly edited and extremely incoherent. It's INSANE and that's the beauty of it! The abundant and endless flaws are all a part of this flick's crazy charm. I loved it! Watch this one with your Z Grade movie loving friends and plenty of cold beverages. It's perfect for that kind of viewing. Invite your friends, serve some drinks, laugh your butt off, and enjoy!


Nothing's sacred in the world of exploitation cinema, not even Mary Shelley's legendary novel or the classic Universal make-up effects on Boris Karloff. And thank the heavens for that, otherwise we never would have seen this wondrously demented Blaxploitation interpretation of Frankenstein. "Blackenstein" is a delightfully inept movie, some would even categorize it under so-bad-it's-great, and the script goes far beyond simply copying the original Shelley tale. There are even flashes of "The Island of Dr. Moreau" to be found here and there's another mini sub-plot about a rejuvenation serum. The actual Frankenstein plot is moderately altered as well, since the mad doctors (yes, two in this case, black & white brotherly messing with Mother Nature and God's creation together!) don't intend to re-insert life into dead body parts, but supply a wounded Vietnam veteran with new arms and legs. The procedure doesn't go as planned, due to the sabotaging of a jealous assistant, and a monstrous creation arises from the operating table. The genetically altered Brutha goes on a murder rampage but his endearing wife still doesn't give up on him. "Blackenstein" is original and funny because of its ineptness, but after a while it nearly becomes unendurable to sit through. The pace slows down fast and the story reverts to boredom, the dialogs are horrible, the make-up effects are miserable and the acting performances are lamentable. Especially Roosevelt Jackson, as Malcomb the assistant, is the hammiest performer I've seen in a long time. The DVD states that the operating sequences were shot with the same and carefully persevered scenery and sets of the original Frankenstein film. That's quite difficult to believe but, as said, everything's possible in the 70's exploitation industry. "Blackenstein" is definitely not a good film, but nevertheless recommended to people with a morbid & insatiable curiosity for weird film-making.


This kitschy blaxploitation film was originally intended as a serious movie, which (ultimately) earns it some points in the camp department. However, the movie's slow starting pacing pace, wooden acting, and (periodically) decent production value make for a largely uneventful ride. Using sets from the original 1931 "Frankenstein," as well as similar art direction, "Blackenstein" was a movie that tried hard to be legitimate, and the first half of the film rises above typical exploitation schlock. However, once the Blackenstein monster is created, the film begins to fall apart, and what follows is a terrible, "Blood Freak"-style horror movie, with laughably amateurish scene direction and gore effects. The result is a very uneven film, and a difficult one to recommend without reservations. The highlight is the awful acting, (particularly of Blackenstein himself), which makes for decent joke material, but I can't say we consistently laughed our way through this one. Fans of H.G. Lewis and Ray Dennis Steckler should be pleased, as the film has a somewhat similar feel, but most others can give it a pass. ---|--- Reviews by Flak Magnet


BLACKENSTEIN is a terrible movie and its title wouldn't suggest otherwise. Like ABBY (sort of like a Black version of THE EXORCIST), BLACKENSTEIN has practically no budget whatsoever and the acting is just terrible. Believe it or not, the two Blacula movies aren't that bad--BLACKENSTEIN, however, is abysmally bad--so bad that bad movie fans might (but probably won't) love it. Others with taste, however, won't!

One of the first things you'll notice on the DVD is that the print is really, really bad--though it does get a bit better later. This is because there just isn't much money to be made from this film and adding closed captions or digitally restoring the picture just isn't going to happen! You also will probably notice how odd Los Angeles is in the film. Most nights, there seems to be thunder and lightning and often there is an eerie fog about as well (perhaps this is just smog). Regardless, it's pretty funky weather for sunny Southern California! As for the plot, it's really not like the traditional Frankenstein story. There is no mad scientist and no dead people are reanimated. Instead, a sane researcher and his assistant work to attach dead limbs to living people who lost theirs in accidents. However, instead of working in a hospital, they work in the doctor's home which is more like a castle (in Los Angeles, okay?). Heck, the place even has a dungeon and Frankenstein-like laboratory! The assistant is a young Black lady whose boyfriend lost his limbs in an explosion in Vietnam. While the transplant looks promising, no one realizes that the doctor's evil butler switches the genetic formulas and the poor Black man starts to mutate and become evil. He, of course, goes on some obligatory rampages and since this is a so-called "Blaxploitation" film, you see two ladies' breasts--though it really made no sense at all and was very, very contrived. It's amazing to see how this made no sense at all, but given that NONE of the film makes sense, it's understandable.

So what is to like about the film......well,....nothing really except for the small sequence involving the comedian. One of the jokes, though a bit crude, is funny and he was pretty cute. The acting is purely amateur, the script is amazingly static and dull (something you'd never expect in a horror film--even a bad one) and the sets are cheap and make no sense. It's really too dull for bad movie fans to enjoy and I found myself falling asleep from time to time--it was that unexciting. By contrast, even the very worst Hammer horror film was light years better.


After the huge success of "Blacula", Sam Arkoff made plans for a similar knock-off called "Blackenstein". In the meanwhile, write-producer Frank Salteri decides to beat him to the proverbial punch by taking the Black Frankenstein concept, dashing out something resembling a script, gathering together a considerably less than stellar cast (including ex-mob moll Liz Renay and a couple of 40's has-beens who appear to have needed some extra bucks to pay the phone bill that month), and spending what appears to be about $30, slaps out one of the worst pieces of cinematic drek to have ever played inside the confines of a movie theater. If the wooden acting and laughably inept gore effects don't get you, how about the inappropriate musical and stand-up comedy routines (such as they are), or the long-shot camera work during crucial scenes, or how the title character shuffles about with his arms outstretched, just like every parody of Frankenstein you've ever seen.

For years, Sam Arkoff has taken the blame for this cinematic blunder. Sam: A lot of people owe you a hell of a big apology!!!!


The 70's blaxploitation horror craze hits its entertainingly sleazy nadir with this supremely trashy flick that somehow manages to be oddly endearing in its very low-grade cheesiness. Noted scientist Dr. Stein (stolid John Hart) and perky assistant Dr. Winfred Walker (a winningly spunky portrayal by Ivory Stone) try to restore dismember Vietnam veteran Eddie Turner (an engagingly earnest performance by the hulking John De Sue) to his former self. Alas, smitten and jealous servant Malcomb (deliciously overplayed with deep-voiced hammy brio by Roosevelt Jackson) tampers with the serum, which turns Eddie into a grunting grotesque monster who breaks out to embark on the expected murderous rampage. Director William A. Levey, working from a shamelessly trashy, albeit too talky script by Frank R. Saletri, manages to produce a reasonable amount of brooding gloom-doom atmosphere (the Gothic castle main location is an eerie beaut) and totally cuts loose with oodles of tacky excessive gore in the second half with Eddie killing various hapless folks. The scenes showing Eddie tearing apart people are simply hilarious; the definite sidesplitting highlight occurs when our hideously malformed maniac disembowels a shrieking topless woman in an alley way. The legendary Liz Renay has a funny bit as a shrewish victim with a horrendously humongous beehive hairdo. Robert Caramico's grainy, but fairly polished cinematography boasts a few neat fades and dissolves. The lively ooga-booga score by Cardella Di Milo and Lou Frohman and several get-down groovy R&B songs on the soundtrack both hit the right-on funky spot. A real schlocky hoot.


I wanted to originally call this the original "Malcolm & Eddie" but apparently the guy's name in this movie is Malcomb. Whatever.

The blaxploitation phenomenon of the early 1970's yielded some very interesting and memorable product, albeit low-budget. There were a number of black themed horror films that were made. Many are aware of the Blacula series that probably gave ideas to Eddie Murphy and Wes Craven when they made Vampire In Brooklyn during one of Eddie's many low periods. Of course, they also decided to remake Frankenstein.

The movie begins as Dr. Winifred Walker has come to her mentor Dr. Stein in Los Angeles asking for his help. Her boyfriend Eddie Turner is a Vietnam vet who came back to the U.S. with both his arms and legs amputated due to a landmine explosion. Dr. Stein is one of those "mad doctors", although he's not "mad" in the sense. His experiments in healing and DNA are only known to a select few. He agrees to help Eddie.

During the operation, which takes three steps, Dr. Stein's assistant Malcomb falls in love with Dr. Walker. He professes his love for her. Winifred tells Malcomb that she can only like Malcomb as a friend because she loves Eddie and wants to marry him once he's recovered. Malcomb then switches Eddie's DNA with the DNA of someone (something?) else and when they keep injecting the DNA in him, he mutates into the title character: BLACKENSTEIN! Of course, Blacky goes around killing his victims; although he seems to have an agenda when it comes to his slayings. The first one who dies is a male nurse that would verbally assault him for going to Vietnam and wouldn't give him ice cream. His slaying is done behind a screen and we see him pounded into hamburger and then having HIS limbs torn apart. All this while the doctors try to figure out why Eddie has mutated to this form.

The acting in this movie is atrocious. It is obvious none of the actors were naturals. Malcomb, played by Roosevelt Jones, does come off as effective due to Jones' wooden acting since he is playing a simple but sinister man. I did like the spiel of victim Number One, played by Bob Brophy; it's kind of a rant that was expected by the former hippies by 1973. The lighting is terrible, the sets are cheap looking and the script for the most part is on the level of George Lucas' efforts. There's too much dead time and the movie lurches from scene to scene. And boy, does Blacky move slow and look silly with his afro and threads.

If you do like bad movies, this is worthy, but it is missing that special ingredient that something like Plan 9 From Outer Space or Showgirls offered. There is better in every genre (blaxploitation, horror, so-bad-it's good or a mix) so you should look elsewhere.


I and my friends had a great time watching this collection of dismal performances, tacky set design, a confused patchwork script, and completely unjustified invocation of serious themes like Vietnam and racism in support of exploitationist trash. The things we couldn't figure out were little things like: why does a black female physics student do graduate work with a white male medical doctor? Why this same woman had one hairdo in the lab and a completely different one two seconds later outside of the lab? Why do the doctor and the woman have dinner by themselves at opposite ends of the world's biggest dining table with the world's biggest (and ugliest) centerpiece smack in the middle? Why does the movie just stop dead right in the middle to present a couple of nightclub acts, then just pick up again like nothing had happened? And why "Blackenstein" anyway? The story has nothing to do with the Frankenstein story or anything like it. If anything, it's closer to Jekyll and Hyde....well, kinda, sorta....well, not really.....


A rather abysmal, plodding Blaxplotation reworking of the Frankenstein myth - sort of - best describes this 70s offering. Probably trying to latch on to the success of Blacula(a rather good film), Blackenstein tells the story of a limbless Vietnam vet named Eddie returning only to be the guinea pig of a Nobel Peace prize winning doctor. Strange that he won the Peace prize for his work with DNA, but let's push logic aside for now. The director of this film sure did. It seems that Eddie's girl, winsome Winifred Walker, a doctor with a PH.D in physics once worked under the renowned Dr. Stein. She appeals for help with her man, but things go awry when manservant Malcomb tries to thwart the romance because he is in desperate love with Winnie. The result - a hulking limbful(OK, I don't think its a word either)"creature" wearing a black suit he inexplicably picked up somewhere in just his size and styling around with a square-cut afro emerges with a zest for killing and ripping entrails from the bodices of newly slain women. Although on the surface this might seem like grand entertainment, the director and cast do an amazing job of breathing as little life into this film as possible. The site of the good doctor's work is seemingly in a country estate, but later we hear from two policeman, not unlike members of the mob, that murders have been happening in the nearby vicinity. Nearby vicinity - a hospital, residential homes, and an ethnic night club are all in the vicinity as well as a power plant(?). Scenes are very hard to see as there is virtually no lighting of any real value. The music score is dreadful. Clanging and suspenseful chords can be heard when nothing happens. And just wait until you hear that ridiculous heartbeat! The actors are dreadful. None of them are very good. The guy playing Dr. Stein looks casually interested in his role. Roosevelt Jackson is interesting as Malcomb, but he is definitely no actor. The special effects consist of the old lab equipment of Kenneth Strickfaden that was used in the 30's Frankenstein films. It looks very out of place in a modern setting. The worst part of this film though is its relentless plodding from one uninteresting scene to another. Nothing really is ever explained, the victims and their slayings are awfully executed, and the ending - what was that all about? It definitely had gone to the dogs at that point! If you are looking for something akin to fun "trash" from that decade famous for just that, I think you will be greatly disappointed with Blackenstein.


A few of the 70s drive-in movies I've seen were a lot of fun. This one is not. I appreciate Xenon in bringing back the "blaxplo" heydays through their video releases, but man, why not leave that scratchy looking print on the shelf and make it stay forgotten? BLACKENSTEIN is downright awful in its dreadful glory. Not a whole lot can be said about the horror elements other than the removal of body parts. How about shoving down people to make them die? A lot of your fun goes to scenes of mad scientists playing with liquid formulas and having to sit through useless scrap footage. The way our stiff-looking creep in an afro walks around and spreads his arms defines the most horrendous acting performance I've ever seen. It's that bad! Naturally speaking, don't confuse this one with the much superior BLACULA. The two are not the same. Dreadful!


I like bad movies as much as the next guy but this one is just BORING. When i first started watching it I was under the impression it was about 70 minutes. I got up to the part where he was about to turn into "BLACKENSTEIN" and looked at the box again to read the time. I saw that it was about two hours long and i decided that 45 minutes of torture is enough for me. It's just so BORING the gag of the title wears off quick when you see what it actually looks like on screen.


This movies is absolutely awful. I truly feel like every copy of this movie should be destroyed to prevent additional people from wasting part of their lives on it. Trust me, this movie should not be viewed, even to laugh at how bad it is.


When her boyfriend Eddie Turner (Joe DeSue) returns from Vietnam without arms and legs, Dr. Winnifred Walker (Ivory Stone) appeals to former teacher and Nobel Prize-winning Dr. Stein (John Hart) for help--and Dr. Stein, who has been fiddling with DNA, accomodates them by growing some new arms and legs. Unfortunately, the experiment goes awry, and Eddie suddenly develops a square afro, takes to wearing ankle boots, and sneaks out at night... and one of his first victims is an ugly white woman with a really bad hair-do and bad taste in pink nighties.

On the surface, BLACKENSTEIN would seem everything a cult-movie fan could ever wish. And it is true, there are about six "howlers" per minute in this film--actors who can't act, ridiculous dialogue, bad cinematography, awful special effects, extremely silly make-up, you name it, this flick has it. Trouble is, BLACKENSTEIN is also incredibly, unspeakably dull. In fact, it is so dull that after about ten minutes its dullness overpowers the giggle factor and you are left to sit in slack-jawed exhaustion.

The DVD release of this film offers nothing in the way of extras and the print is bad to boot--not that it makes any difference where this film is concerned. If you have to buy a gift for some you don't much like, this would be a perfect choice. Otherwise, steer clear.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon reviewer


This has got to be the worst movie I have ever seen, an hour and a half of my life that I will never get back. There were many scenes where Blackenstein's shadow walks around for no reason, and to cap it off a bottle only marked "DNA" turned him into Blackenstein.


Out of all the Scorsese films - I would have to admit this ranks in the top five. After Hours draws you into it's dark and surreal world with fantastical wonder. The characters are all interesting, the acting superb - especially Griffin Dunne - and the pacing is great.

It was made in 1985, and I can already see the techniques Scorsese used in Goodfellas - and the quick editing. It is directed and edited really well. So if you were a fan of Scorsese's frantic camera work in Goodfellas and Casino, this film is for you.

It really does put you on edge - as a viewer, you really want Dunne's character to get back home - but everything possible that could happen to him - happens. This is not just a evocation of soHo in the early 80's - it is a deeply black comedy. All the rules go out the window for Dunne's character, because after all it is after hours.

Scorsese really is the best living director at the moment - so do yourself a favour and watch this movie - it's fantastic.


This wasn't a big hit when it came out, but it should have been. Martin Scorsese is a master of creating atmosphere and exploring a specific setting, and he has proved that in movies like Taxi Driver and Gangs of New York. In this film he brings the SoHo of the early to mid 1980s to life in brilliant and surreal fashion. Griffin Dunne is a great Every Man character. You like him from the very first scene and you follow his adventures with excitement and dread. The tension in this film is also intense, and that is amazing for a light hearted comedy. I am always surprised to hear that people have not seen this movie, or that people don't like this movie. I urge all Scorsese fans to see it. It's one of his best, even though many critics did not like it when it came out. It's a cult hit, but it deserves to be more than that too. It's a masterpiece.


'After Hours' is a really dark, nightmarish comedy and is one of Martin Scorsese's most enjoyable films. Griffin Dunne is perfection as the computer operator who meets lovely but ditsy Rosanna Arquette in a diner and arranges to meet her late one night. His journey to downtown New York goes hideously wrong when he loses his taxi fare and spends the rest of the evening trying to get home. Along the way we meet feisty Linda Fiorentino, whimsical Verna Bloom, Gorgeous but hysterical Teri Garr and Dusty Springfield look alike Catherine O'Hara. We also get to witness suicide, murder, robbery and vigilante mobs in this tale of big city madness. The camera-work is stupendous and features every trick in the book. There is much to admire in this film and thankfully it now has a DVD release with a commentary by the Director and star.


Perhaps one of the Scorsese minor masterpieces that sometimes get lost when considering "Goodfellas" or even "Mean Streets," films that get the bulk of the chatter. This, along with "King of Comedy" run in a very different vein, combining black comedy with tension and suspense as a central spine to the piece. Sure, Goodfellas has some black comedic moments, but on whole, it stands as a "drama" rather than a comedy. This is a VERY different film and will cause you to laugh and to shake your head in sympathy and mutter "Oh NO" more than once. I rated it a 9, I have no idea why this got lower marks than that. See it more than once.


N.B. Spoilers within.

This is an underrated, sublimely realized black comedy by the (at the time) struggling Scorcese. There is a perfect balance here between the big picture-uptown white-collar insurance guy out of his league in night-time bohemian SoHo-and infinite numbers of details within. Scorcese has taken a great script by Joseph Minion and crafted a piece of comedy, suspense, self-exploration, plenty of twists, and interpersonal discovery. Our lead, Paul Hackett (the subtle and brilliant Griffin Dunne) is the most hapless "hero" to grace the screen in a long time. Whatever can go wrong does go wrong. As Paul steps into the next venture, there is no telling what will come of it. The script keeps the viewer constantly on edge and clueless as to what to expect next. Paranoia becomes rampant.

The music that frames the picture-a youthful symphony by Mozart-defines the outwardly tidy guidelines of Paul's world (number crunching and computer interfacing). But even the small glimpse we get of that world says that all is not right. The trainee whom Paul is overseeing (a small part for Bronson Pinchot-see "True Romance") hates the job and wants out of it. Then there is that telling moment where Paul looks around him and watches everything flow by in its idiosyncratic motion. The quick vision is both sexy and unsettling. He's having a momentary insight, but exactly into what? Is his whole life here empty and pointless? Is he bored out of his mind? Scorcese never lets us know for sure. But then Paul meets Marcy in the diner and the fun begins.

We can't know if Murphy's Law applies to Paul all the time, but it certainly does on this fateful night. There is a flat-out poetic shot of Paul's sole 20-dollar bill floating from the cab into oblivion, and this is just the beginning. This brings up my first observation, though, on Scorcese: his stunning and beautiful camera work. It flows, it jumps, it's liquid, now it interrupts jarringly. The whole effort contributes to the anxious nature of the story and of how Paul never feels completely grounded while he's out of his territory.

The multitudes of characters that Paul meets are all convoluted stories unto themselves. Kiki (a smoking-hot Linda Fiorentino-where has she gone?), Marcy's artist roommate, and the ultimate 80s bohemian; her leather-bound friend Horst (a menacing Will Patton); the "nice" waitress (Teri Garr) with more baggage than Paul can handle; Gail (the hilarious Catherine O'Hara) who will turn on Paul in a big way; Tom the bartender (John Heard), himself a ticking time-bomb; Cheech and Chong, industrious through the long night, and the solution to who the bad SoHo burglars are; but especially there's Marcy (the luscious Rosanna Arquette). She is sweet, good-hearted, ditsy, but full of dark secrets. A lot of these are spilled, others only suggested. The rape story, for example...hard to understand until you've seen it, but it's full of comedy. Arquette plays Marcy just right, a girl who is just short of being completely unhinged, but who still stumbles ahead smoothly and confidently if not a good bit clueless-ly. This is one unique character. Her suicide contributes much to Paul's emotional weight-how exactly did he contribute to it?-and also to the comedy's being so black.

"After Hours" occupies an era that is pre-ATMs and cell phones, but there are Checker cabs, subway tokens, gritty artists' lofts, and rotary phones. Punk is king. The picture strikes me as being linear, yes, but also kaleidoscopic: Paul meets and re-meets the same characters throughout, but each time this happens, his circumstances have taken a new turn. The story is also full of strange details that help knit the whole together. An example: the subject of burns and scars. There is this brief focus on burns and burn treatments. Marcy's cream, her trip to the drugstore to get it, the book of gruesome pictures that Paul can't keep himself from...then Marcy floats back in (he slams the book shut) and what is she holding? A candle with a huge flame! Ha! It's details like these that make the movie feel so integrated. (Even Kiki tells Paul she has "horrible, ugly scars.") Finally, and this part is truly sick, once Marcy is dead under the sheet, Paul can't help but inspect her body for those suspected burn marks. Ugh

I have to mention the last of Paul's meetings, when there is absolutely nowhere else to turn: June, at the club (Verna Bloom), seems to be the only person who truly understands his predicament and who helps to finally "rescue" him, but her means are highly suspicious. Is she also trying to kill him? What a stroke. One of the key themes of the flick is that everyone Paul encounters is for the moment his savior, but who soon leads him into more trouble than he already has. It is Paul/Upper East Side/trying-his-best versus the nighttime/living-on-the-fly/Downtown mentality, and "After Hours" places the two mindsets at opposite ends of the universe.

Scorcese, temporarily abandoning the beleaguered "Last Temptation," hit the mark spot-on with this wonderful comedy. In the process he proved his love for the medium, not to mention loving all the memorable characters that inhabit the wacky, unpredictable story. I also think this is Griffin Dunne's pinnacle: he perfectly inhabits a role where everything is falling apart around him but where he hangs on and finds something inside that keeps plugging on until the sun rises again. Polished, inspired, funny, and disturbing film making. Highly recommended.


While reading the Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer in a coffee shop, the bored word processor Paul Hackett (Griffe Dunne) meets Marcy Franklin (Rosanna Arquette), and she gives her phone number to him. Close to midnight, Paul decides to call her and she invites him to visit her in the loft of her friend, the sculptor Kiki Bridges (Linda Fiorentino), in Soho. Paul gets a taxi and loses his money through the open window of the cab. Paul arrives in Kiki's place, where begins his surrealistic adventure along the night.

I do not know how many times I have seen this movie along my life, maybe ten times, but it still attracts me and now I have just seen it for the first time on DVD. I love it and it is one of my favorite cult movies. The surrealistic 'saga' of Paul Hackett trapped in Soho without means to return home is fantastic and fascinate me. The cast, direction, soundtrack and camera are excellent. I believe it is the best role and performance of Griffin Dunne in his career. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): 'Depois de Horas' ('After Hours (literally)')


To get an understanding of the caliber film we're dealing with, you have to imagine some of the finest elements of other films being wound into a tight 95 minute package and directed by the incomparable Martin Scorsese. After Hours reminds this critic in many ways of Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. But somehow it seems to be about the best elements of that film. Our film deals with a mild-mannered Manhattan office worker taking a late night trip to the Soho district to meet up with a beautiful woman he first encountered earlier in the evening. So, much like with Tom Cruise in EWS, we have a protagonist searching for love in a world completely foreign to him. But instead of a never ending and overly talky film, we get a tightly wound and much better paced film from Scorsese. When the film does slow down for conversations, the ones we're treated to are comparable to the best Tarantino ever wrote for any of his films. Fortunately we don't get too many of them, like we would in a Tarantino film, however.

Griffin Dunne plays Paul Hackett, who is bound and determined to hook up with Marcy (Rosanne Arquette) whom he met in a restaurant earlier that evening. Once he makes it to Soho, Paul quickly realizes this spur-of-the-moment rendezvous may have been a terrible idea. Apparently Soho is (or was in 1985) a macabre place full of eccentric artists, bondage enthusiasts, and vigilante mobs made up of mostly gay people. Not only does Paul fail to score with Marcy, he ends up being stranded in the neighborhood with no money to get home, and being blamed for several apartment break-ins by a crowd that wants his blood! Every place or person he turns to for help seems to get him deeper and deeper into danger. There are all kinds of famous or soon to be famous people popping up in little roles here and there. Will Patton as a leather clad bondage enthusiast may be the most odd. Also look for Scorsese in a nightclub sporting a beard and shining a spotlight down on the rowdy patrons.

Unlike many Scorsese films, this one does not rely much at all on violence to get the point of danger across. I believe there is only one violent death, and the victim is not a main character. But in true Scorcese form, the scene produces a laugh! More than anything else, this film has a claustrophobic feeling. It's as if the world is crumbling all around Paul Hackett, and the next door he walks through may be his last. By the final fifteen minutes, he finds himself in the apartment of a gay man he picks on the street. To the man's obvious disappointment, Hackett simply wants someone to tell his story to. Before the scene has any type of logical conclusion, Hackett finds himself back on the street running for his life once again. His momentary attempt at finding compassion shattered in the blink of an eye. The whole film is kind of like that.

After Hours may not be for all tastes, but this critic first saw it back in junior high and never forgot what a treasure it is. 10 of 10 stars.

The Hound.


Martin Scorsese's After Hours is so unique and interwoven that repeat viewings are almost required. The film is completely over the top in every respect, but that is part of what makes it so compelling. Funny, smart, and imaginative.

Griffin Dunne is brilliant.


After Hours is a classic, highly original and bizarre movie that reveals its greatness only through repeated viewings. It all takes place over one night, and becomes a surreal, unpredictable journey through the Manhattan underworld. If you like cleverly written, unpredictable stories then this film is for you. There are great cameo performances from the likes of Rosanna Arquette, Linda Fiorentino and Teri Garr among others. The film begins like a gentle romantic comedy, but as soon as Paul gets into the taxi to go to Marcy's Manhattan loft apartment, everything begins to go wrong and the film turns more sinister.

Scorsese is a master at creating a sense of unease, with scenes cleverly set up to make you fear the worst, and share Paul's growing paranoia. This happens particularly with Marcy's character, with the suggestion that things aren't quite right, and why was she visiting the all-night drug store? "It's under control" says a guarded Kiki. The plot twists are often difficult to predict but the clues are there, and by a bizarre sequence of events, (SPOILER) Paul is unable to return home and ends up being persecuted by a vigilante mob with a Mr Softy truck.

These scenes with actor Griffin Dunne running through the streets in the middle of the night are the highlights of the film - he witnesses a shooting while hiding up a fire escape, and says almost to camera: "I'll probably get blamed for that." It's vintage comedy of the darkest kind, and a journey into one man's soul on a search for love and acceptance. The sad thing is that most of the characters he meets are also just looking for a soul mate too, but the yuppy world that Paul comes from makes him too prejudiced and unable to see through their apparent weirdness to the lonely person underneath.