It's a fun action show, probably would have become a cross between Smallville, X-files and Baywatch. One of the problems with WB and UPN merging is that they are two totally different networks with a different feel for their audiences -- so I almost never watched UPN as they didn't know how to do action+fantasy+personal relationships made so popular with Buffy, Angel, Smallville and Supernatural. CW canceled the show, Aquaman aka Mercy Reef, WB had greenlighted. Luckily you can see the Aquaman pilot on iTunes and judge for yourself their decision to kill the show before it aired.

The fantasy bits are Bermuda triangle, Atlantis and a guy who swims fast and sense that he may be able to communicate with underwater denizens. Oh, yeah and the secret navy group investigating strange phenomena. You've got potential complicated relationships -- a young cutie guy who hits on all the bikini babes he can, finds out he's a lost prince, becomes an unselfish do-gooder when he'd rather party while still wanting to solve the disappearance of his mother. Add in a stepfather with Lou Diamonds Philip in the role--played nicey nice a lot like Mr. Kent in Smallville. A girl next door type as his best friend, a woman naval pilot with a chip on her shoulder, and a big tough black guy who gives him a Shakespeare play as training for his destiny (Aquaman is Mr. Action, mind you, not a reader so he is not as appreciative of the gift as he really just wants to learn to kickass). And a really wicked mermaid--I mean siren. Add bikinis and shirtless hunks for eye candy. Only thing missing from the formula is a wicked manipulator like Dan in One Tree Hill but that would have come later. And a close male friend who is either another hunk, a techy geek or a funny sidekick. Script needs a little more work, though, as occasionally the lines sounded a little comic- booky. CW canceled Aquaman in favor of Runaway and Hidden Palms (they both sound more suitable for the over 40 crowd who watch CBS) which I think they will probably regret. It's a pity the new execs at CW don't understand that Aquaman appeals to WB fans aged 30 and under. It's a pity more episodes weren't made -- could've started a new trend -- a canceled show never airs but becomes a hit while viewed on itunes and then becomes a major motion picture. After all superheroes seem to do better at the box office than the small screen. Oh well. Have a good time watching the pilot as sadly that is likely to be all we will see of Aquaman.


Although the story line may have been lame at first. I thought it definitely had potential. Justin the guy playing Aquaman would have been great if would have been allowed to develop his character more. He had the look and was Gorgeous. They should bring it back. We are living in a day when the world is in love with super hero's. And one saving the marine world, activist all around the world couldn't argue the fact that this show could send out a positive message. With a great cast Ving Rahmes and Lou Diamomd Philips the CW should have never turned it down. Regaurdless of cost. Take Smallville for instance, I'm an avid Smallville watcher and in the begging the show had weak story's and bad acting. Now in there going into there 6th season and has done a 360 in great story lines and improved acting. They should have fought harder for Aqua MAn


At last, the right show to revive the Atlantis myth.

I'm pretty interested about myths, more exactly the Bermuda triangle and sea monsters, mermaids... Actually, I've never found any interesting movies and/or TV show related to this topics. I'm well served with the Mercy Reef :P

It's pretty impressive for a pilot. It makes you get inside the whole story in a brilliant way. Actors are really impressive, they're strongly in their character, performing terrifically.The story on itself is well introduced. The decor is quickly planted, giving you time to concentrate on characters' role.

It seems that we're going to witness a kind of modern fairytale, involving an exiled prince from the legendary Atlantis, facing evil of his own people. Unnatural behavior, inhuman powers, morphing, and so on are at the rendezvous, deploying a minimum of creativity and imagination that should keep this show tuned, and satisfy the thirst of modern aquatic stories for more than one.

The FX are an undeniable part of the success, as sea creatures should be a big part of the buzz. We've imagine mermaids, but what'll see is more than a fantasy! It'll haunt your dreams ;)

This nowadays fairytale has began, beware to drown on it ;)


I can't believe the show didn't get picked up for the fall schedule. After seeing the pilot on iTunes I was hooked, and wanted more. In fact most people have commented that the CW has made a HUGE mistake by not picking it up (the average itune rating is 4 & half stars out of a possible 5). The casting was excellent (Justing Hartley without a shirt most of the series, what self respecting girl wouldn't watch?) the acting was superb, and the writing was amazing. The show was far better than some of the shows that got picked up, and even better than some returning shows. Who really needed "7th Heaven" for an 11th season when they could of had "Aquaman". The CW is making an incredible mistake and I hope other networks see the response that the pilot episode is getting and they snatch this gem of a show up.


Aquaman is obviously not the most recognised or popular superhero around and yet this show managed to give him a fairly cool edge. fans of smallville will love this, as i did, i would even go as far as to say that the pilot is a better show than the pilot for smallville (obviously the creative team have gotten better since the beginning of smallville) anyway, with smallville apparently coming to an end in a season or two i think it would be crazy for some network to leave Aquaman dead in the water (sorry) solid acting from all concerned and very cool FX all contribute to this pilot being an obvious hit, watch it anyway you can.


This show is amazing I cannot wait for it to be picked all the acting is great except for maybe Ving Rhames' character the special effects were veryimpressive for a pilot and the show did a great job of introducing the characters. Justin Hartley is an extremely talented actor and the supporting characters are great. It brings Aquaman into a totally new light and it will bring him from one of the lamer heroes to one of the most popular ones. I pray it becomes a midseason replacement on the CW or even a bigger network(Fox?!?!?!)Gough and Millar were ripped off when this show wasn't picked up I mean this is a high quality show it pains me to think it might not get picked. MERCY REEF IS ON ITUNES FOR 1.99 BUY IT MAYBE IT WILL BE PICKED UP


I just got this on iTunes and it was really amazing! Being that it is intended to be a television show, it was truly very interesting. I can see this doing well as a weekly series. Of course, only the pilot is available for viewing now...but it does leave you with many unanswered questions, hoping to see the rest of the story play out.

there are many possibilities that the characters and the plot line can follow. production quality on the episode that i watched was very good as well. the cast was very likable and the plot was believable. Aquaman himself, AC, was a very likable hero.

i would absolutely watch this show on TV every week if it were on.


I've just watched the Pilot of Aquaman from Itunes and must say that if WB doesn't pick up on this the guys who in charge cant possibly haven't had the time to watch the PILOT... The cast and the storyline along with the crew of small ville really knows what makes things interesting for the viewers... Usually aqua man is quite lame but they have already managed to make lots of fans who would love to follow the show..I really hope that they'll air the show in September... Nowadays it's possible to make great shows in this category due to experience and technology. They've got something here which would make quite a success SO they shouldn't hesitate.... Hope to see the show aired


This pilot was awesome. I downloaded it from CW. Too bad "jumpthesnark" didn't like it. This pilot reminded me a lot of Smallville's first episode and the excitement it created in me. I am so frustrated that CW isn't picking this up. They are nuts! I know this show would be a hit. If you haven't downloaded it on ITUNES... DO IT! It's really great. For every 1 person that says it's not that great, there's hundreds that have loved it...I thought the plot was very interesting and the characters that were being developed were ones that I wanted to know more about. I didn't get that feeling like I do in other Pilots where I'm like, maybe I need to watch a few more shows to see if I like it. This one I enjoyed so much I thought, I need to tell others about it!!! Anyway, go buy the pilot, it's only a buck ninety nine. It's worth it.


OK, I recently got the pilot off from itunes and all i have to say is if the CW does not pick it up, then they do not deserve to be a network because this show is absolutely amazing.

I love superhero things, and Aquaman has always been like the lamest superhero, but this show brings a whole other side of Aquaman to the surface (no pun intended). Mercy Reef is so great because it provides us with a history of Aquaman and starts out by showing his past and talks a lot about his mother and father and how he is connected to Atlantis. They also tie in a lot about missing people in the Bermuda Triangle and how these people return. The battling of the sea creature named Nadia is also a cool plus. Finally Aquaman has some sort of past and coolness brought to him The story line is very interesting as there is so much involved, but not so much that the viewer has a tough time following along. The acting is great, no one i can say did a poor job. Even the effects were great, especially for a pilot. If this show is picked up, or should I say when this show is picked up, it will be an instant success because audiences love superheros and this show brings Aquaman to the level of any other great superhero rather than just being the loser one that talks to fish.

Ten stars for Aquaman and I know I am joining the many already fans of this show!!


Being a long time fan of all which is remotely related to the comic book genre, i feel this has the potential to be as good as Smallville (which in my opinion is one of the best shows on TV today). Justin Hartley makes a good Aquaman much better than the smallville actor, the show has suspense, excitement and has the appeal which makes a viewer want to keep watching time and time again, i would be greatly disappointed if CW or any other television company did not pick it up. It should be and hopefully CW will realise the attention just 1 episode is getting and air it. I think it was a good move from Apple to be able to download this from i- tunes, this grabs peoples attention. Another reason why i would like to see Aquaman on TV is because i don't know how much more they will be able to do with Smallville.


I just downloaded the Aquaman pilot from iTunes and I cannot believe that it never got picked up for the CW fall schedule. This show easily beats One Tree Hill, Supernatural, and 7th Heaven. The acting was superb, the plot was amazing, and it got me hooked. By the end I was furious that there were no more episodes to watch, because it is just that compelling. There's so much that could be explored in later episodes... the actual extent of his powers, if he is able to find his mom, is Lt. Torres from Atlantis, and how A.C. is able to save both the world and the sea. I hope that Miles Millar and Al Gough keep pushing for this show to air. Maybe the CW will pick it up next season, or mid season next year if enough of a following develops. I've read nothing but good things about this show; everyone that's seen it seems to love it and I think that should send a message to the network to pick it up.


Wow, I really enjoyed this show! The acting, story and effects were great. The cast seemed to work well together, it's too bad that Justin Hartley is now on Smallville. For a pilot, the show was great and showed a LOT of potential! Wow, what was the CW thinking by not picking it up?! The pilot had action, mystery sex appeal. People were expecting great things from this show and the CW screwed it up without even getting it on the air. They're crazy. Hopefully the huge success and huge number of downloads on i Tunes will make them change their minds... hopefully. With an average rating of 4 and a half stars, I don't know what CW is waiting for!


this show was blurry to watch on the comp, but has a lot of potential if ever aired, i don't get why they spend time to make it and then tease people like this. HOW bout play it on TV and give it a shot before u take it off. The show will be much better in the later episodes when the characters history and importance is gone more in depth. Like said before this show has the potential to be as good as smallville if not better. How can the Execs at CW not run a show that the audience has never seen yet. Justin Hartley plays a good AC, he has a nice attractive co star Eva and Ving Rhames does a good job as a wise mentor for Ac. Whois judging it a bunch of middle aged people who the show isn't targeted for.


This show is the very sort of program that is needed--desperately. How many shows out there deal with the looming global catastrophe growing from the abuse of the ocean's resources? Human beings are having a devastating effect on life in the sea and few are even paying attention. Along comes a show that hints at the potential to address these vital issues and it never gets holds water. I guess it is like Dr. Chomsky says: television is not about the programs, it's about the advertising. In the television world, what they call "content" is the commercials they want us to watch while the "filler" is just the show that comes in between the ads. Maybe if more viewers understood this and were more discriminating and vocal about their television viewing, Hollywood and advertising sponsors alike would get the message that it is better to have a show that interests a lot of people than try to get advertisers that want or don't want to sponsor a particular show. (Though I can see how a company that sells tuna fish would not be so tempted to sponsor a show with a superhero character that makes fishermen out to be the (ofttime) bad guy.)

I don't know that it was a sponsor that influenced this show to not get picked up but it makes sense that if not enough companies were willing to sponsor this show, its chances of getting on the air would sink straight to the bottom like a lead weight in water.

Aquaman was one of my favorite superheroes in childhood and I would have very much liked to have seen this show become a regular series. I do believe it had good potential to float although the pilot in some ways felt weak to me. The acting was not particularly good and the scripts could have used more polish. I see that often in pilots and then the show gets better as time goes on so that could well have been the case here. Looks like we'll never get the chance to find out. What a shame.

Perhaps if viewers show enough interest, this pilot might be further developed into a TV movie or a mini-series. I would certainly be one of the first in the water to buy it on iTunes.

I rate this 7 out of 10.

Wordcount: 392


I thought it was pretty good. I was surprised to see some people gave it a low rating and downright hated it. I would guess you have to be a fan of this type of genre. I think it should have been picked up by a network. I liked the lead actor Justin Hartley. I've seen his work on Smallville. In a pilot you are just looking for potential and I think the show has it. Ving Rhames and Lou Diamond Phillips were a nice touch. Ving Rhames did a good job and I would watch just to see what he can bring to the show. At this point the two female leads haven't done anything to stand out to me. The writing could be a little better as far as dialogue. You would think that AC would have had a friend or someone that he let know about his powers, but I think they were going to do it the way they did in Smallville with his friends finding out slowly over time.


Imagine what this show could have done if it were picked up by the idiots that run the CW.

I watch the pilot over and over on iTunes simply because I like to imagine that maybe one day it will take off. And Justin brought new life to the Aquaman character.

Seeing him on Smallville as the Green Arrow was mildly satisfying, but not enough. I Want More. I want to see the story line evolve as it should have and get more of those 10.0+ special effects. They were excellent for a television show. Pray for a miracle that some one with more interest in bringing it to television does so. If only...


What is up with WB canceling this show it was the bomb.I liked everything about it if anyone hears if anything has changed about this show please let me know I just watched the pilot on iTunes and you should have seen all the good reviews about Aquaman. W.B. is super retarded for canceling this show. I mean is there a reason at all for canceling this show I mean the story line is so good the actors was good everything about this series was good and they just dropped it it makes no sense to me at all somebody should say something to the company about restarting this series and do something else and maybe the will listen this makes me furious but please contact me at liljc1991@yahoo.com if anyone hears any changes about this show.


I was really impressed. Obviously the pilot had a lot of loot dumped into it, and I imagine that subsequent episodes would have to be scaled back a bit, but ultimately I really enjoyed it.

I am a Smallville fan and I felt like they really nailed the 'Smallville' feel with Aquaman. There is real potential for a great show here. I honestly hope the people at the top reconsider and green light the series.

Miller/Gough have developed a fantastic formula for this type of show. There is a quality to the shows that they work on that is simply missing in other productions.


From the pilot, I'm enthused about this new version of Aquaman. I was particularly impressed on how the creators captured Aquaman's (A.C.'s) underwater life.....IMDb lists the pilot under 2006...It's 2007 now...I hope they didn't drop the show; otherwise, the channel's executives have their heads up their asses.

When the grown A.C. first comes into the show, looking like a California beach dude, I was like "Oh No....This is going to be some Dawson's Creek, contrived teenage drama..." But actually, A.C. shows some depth in his character to make it interesting (although all the characters are pretty simple). The writing needs help being predictable, but they've done a good job at leaving the following plot open and mysterious. The acting needs serious work as well although I was glad to see Vin Rahmes and Lou Diamond Phillips bring some seasoned professionalism to the show. The directing also needs to improve...Emotionally it's "tacky." The director takes the viewer from suspenseful scenes to carefree, bubbly scenes immediately afterwards...taking away from the continuity of the plot.

Overall though, I enjoyed it...There's a lot to work with, but I fear if certain aspects (as mentioned above) are not payed attention to the show will end up being mediocre while it could be GREAT. It really does have great potential I think, but I fear if the show continues, it will get stupid with the writing, acting, and directing, and I'll get bored and tune out.


Wow. I was really impressed by the pilot. After seeing the Smallville episode 'Aqua', and later hearing about a pilot being developed, I was very excited. I'm a pretty big Smallville fan, and I believe that Aquaman has the potential to be a very good series.

Arthur 'AC' Curry (Aquaman) has his mother taken from him at an early age when their light plane crashed over the Bermuda Triangle. Arthur is raised in Tempest Keys in Florida, with more-than-special aquatic abilities - and the curiosity of what really happened to his mother.

The pilot is set in present day and Arthur is a dive shop owner with his friend Eva. In the beginning of the pilot Arthur is actually arrested for supposedly freeing a bunch of dolphins from a theme park. Arthur later attempts to persuade Eva to believe him that the dolphins were some how 'calling' to him.

I don't want to give too much away, but another character - McCaffery (who will try and convince Arthur of his true destiny), soon reveals himself, and Arthur will also encounter a creature from the deep. Another fantastic storyline is the matter of numerous missing persons from the Bermuda Triangle showing up around Mercy Reef.

The pilot is very interesting and I really took a liking to the cast, in addition, the special effects were surprisingly impressive. It is just heartbreaking that Aquaman was not picked up in 2006. I can only hope the network will see the true potential in this series sometime in the future.


Mercy Reef could be the ultimate example of how to make a really bad pilot. It appears as if the recipe that was used to create this show was:

1) Get a bunch of good looking ex-swimsuit models who can't act: Apart from Ving Rhames, the entire cast combined couldn't deliver lines for a gum commercial. Sure, they all look cute, but their expressionless, bobble-head deliveries look like first year high-school drama.

2) Forget about a plot, just throw lots of poorly thought out action scenes together: The writers seemed to have missed the boat on coming up with a decent enough reason for the audience to stick around. Sure, let's just believe that the sea baddies can tell when Orin is flying above, but can't find him when he's floating outside the door of a wrecked plane. Let's make it so that he'll be out and about in the sea and completely defenseless, but instead they go pick on a jet plane and then be so kind as to leave him alone when he goes to save the mandatory hot female pilot. Okay then...

3) Let's embody every character with every cliché trait you can throw at a wall. Upstanding military man with angst ridden, surfer attitude son who has no sense of responsibility. Lone female pilot (did I mention it's mandatory she be hot?) who is up against the world being given the top assignment. And should we talk about the lovely, bar-tending brunette trying to give the main character a sense of purpose? What is this, Dawson's Creek?

4) And should we throw in some dark-suited government baddies as well? That always goes over like... like... well, something. But I wouldn't leave it in the hands of these writers to think up what?

Seriously, I have to thank the maker for this show being passed over. It is one of the most poorly crafted series I have ever seen. I can't believe that people are actually giving this garbage a rating of 10 out of 10. If this is quality television to some people, then some people need to get out more. This is not Battlestar Galactica level quality. This is not even He-Man quality. This show reads as if it were written over a weekend because the pay looked good, not as if it was a lovingly developed and nurtured work.

Maybe the show's creators should have just used the energy involved in turning this show out to make Smallville a better series. It obviously wasn't a lot of energy, but every little bit thrown back to a half-decent series is energy better spent.


Too bad this didn't get picked up. The plot was pretty interesting, and they set up a lot of potential story lines from the first episode. It didn't seem like they felt at all bound by the Aquaman mythos from the comics, but that's fine with me.

The guy playing Aquaman was so-so, but his gal-pal Eva was smokin' hot. She would have quickly become a real 'it' girl -- hopefully she still will. Heck, even the evil monsters were drop-dead gorgeous.

I wish we could have seen where this show was headed. They put it up on iTunes, though, so maybe if there's enough outcry for it, they'll reconsider.


Aquaman a.k.a. Mercy Reef sucks! Don't know where where these good reviews are coming from, mass hysteria maybe? Acting isn't bad, Ving Rhames is the stand out but the lines the writers have them saying are dreadful, and the exposition is simply pathetic. The scene introducing the obvious love interest, Lt. Torres, made me laugh it was so bad. "These orders come from way above my head" (what, to do a flyover?) "This is not the LPGA Torres, you tee off with the men!" Glad it wasn't picked up for a series, from the same folk that brought you Smallville but nowhere near as good.

Watch it if you want to see how not to make a TV show.


(Hey! Judge for yourself by watching for free the whole show - yea fair use vs greedy itunes - some good sam uploaded at a livedigital video link I found: http://livedigital.com/content/637821/ )

This wasn't picked up by CW network for good reason. After several strong seasons of Smallville, the same producers failed to learn how to create a strong pilot. The Smallville pilot was weak, but after some tweaks they strengthened the characters and improved on production values of that show. Luckily, Smallville wasn't dropped because of a poor start.

Aquaman: Mercy Reef, however, began with a somewhat weak beginning. Mostly, the show's creators tried to cram too much of a plot into the first episode. Instead of starting with less is more, they felt that the audience needed to know everything up front.

The pilot in a nutshell: Aquababy is born floating in Caribbean waters, Aquaboy is flying in a seaplane with Aquamommy piloting, seahorsey necklace glows to indicate underseabaddies close and causing trouble with glowing waterspouts shooting up from a dead calm sea, plane ditches underwater, Aquamommy with superwaterstrength yanks Aquaboy free from seat-restraints and kicks heavy plane door open, Aquaboy floats to surface while watching slithering seaSirenbaddie attack Aquamommy in shadows of sinking seaplane, Aquaboy is brought traumatically to surface by a pod of whales; cut to present day, Aquamantwentysomething (who looks younger/punyer than his teen Smallville predecessor) goes through a weak reveal as an angst ridden man who can't let go of his past and fears wrought by his Aquaboy incident.

Now comes the really dumb part: everything in Aquaman's life is tied to the war in Atlantis just beneath the Bermuda Triangle where all this trouble began. Ving Rhames's character is also from Atlantis who tries to teach AC (Aquaman's stupid carryover monicker from Smallville). They both eventually trap the siren (played by Kara/evil Supergirl from Smallville) that we saw in the opening sequence and they kill her. End of pilot. Really, the very praise-be-to-Poiseidon end!

Miller and Gough: next time, consult with me if you ever try another superhero/teen show. Don't pull this kind of stuff with Flash. My fingers are tired of typing poor reviews.


Having been a comic book fan for a very long time, I was gradually excited about the new Aquaman (Mercy Reef) series. But.... After seeing the pilot, I wanted to growl up, since this wasn't what I expected. Let me elaborate a bit... Reconceived as an environmentally-minded perpetual screw-up, A.C. is a well-meaning but callow young man who must learn to take responsibility once he is told of his Atlantean heritage. As dramatic as this sounds, that's more of a set-up for where the series might have gone. Throughout most of the pilot, A.C. comes across more like a smirky fratboy on spring break. At times, Hartley has the look and bland charm of Ben Affleck. Perhaps his upcoming turn as Oliver Queen on Smallville will better suit him. What's odd, though, is that A.C. knows he has superhuman abilities underwater and yet never once questions where they came from. It's one thing to know that you were adopted but to understand that you're amphibious should at the very least provoke some introspection. When you can swim fast enough to keep up with a fighter jet racing overhead and become stronger when exposed to water, you're going to respond with shock when told that you might hail from some place other than South Florida?! A.C. even has the audacity at one point to exclaim, "I'm a dive shop owner! I'm not the protector of the Seven Seas!" The boy just ain't right.

Ving Rhames channels Marcellus Wallace in his performance as McCaffrey, bellowing such lines as, "The only way to kill those scaly bitches is to nail them between the eyes!" McCaffrey fulfills the Basil Exposition role necessary for A.C. to find out who he is, even admitting at one point, "You don't think I know how absurd this sounds?" What attracted Rhames to such a thankless part remains a mystery.

Aquaman drowns in poor dialogue. Along with the aforementioned gems, the pilot contains atrocious lines such as, "Maybe someday the fish will have their revenge," the future campaign slogan "This is not a foolish crusade; this is a matter of national security," and McCaffrey's poignant, "Destiny is like a riptide. You never know it's pulling you in until it's too late."

At least the special effects were serviceable, if not superior to some recent feature films (although is it really saying much to proclaim that it looks better than Catwoman?). Had Aquaman been picked up as a series, the combination of its effects budget and on-the-water filming surely would have made it one of the most expensive series on TV. That daunting prospect alone may have been a reason why The CW didn't pick it up.

Ultimately, Gough and Millar had some good ideas for making Aquaman work as a TV show but it was the poor execution of them that made this mediocre pilot flounder.


Are these comments real? Seriously? Now I know why there are so many crappy movies and TV shows out there. Most of these posters must have been high on something.

I watched this pilot with two other friends and we all agreed that it was horrible. Everything bad that could be put into a pilot was here. Every cliché was in full force.

The writing was horrible. The directing was horrible. The entire story was horrible.

It's not even hard to back up my position. I know nothing about Aquaman, really, so I went into it with an open mind. It didn't matter if anything was changed because I didn't care. Here are some points:

-- The narration in the beginning was silly. Just get into he story already. Let the audience THINK instead of being hand fed everything.

-- Ving Raymes' character was ridiculous. His nickname should have been Exposition. What happened to unearthing backstory through action and bits of dialogue here and there? I guess that isn't needed when a menacing Ving Raymes can say choice bits like "A storm is coming" or whatever the heck he said. All of his dialogue was so on the nose, it isn't funny.

-- A.C. tells his "gal pal" that he can talk to fish. Let me repeat this ... he tells her that HE ... CAN ... TALK ... TO ... FISH. Her reaction? It barely fazed her. She just went along with her day. And then later, he tells her about Atlantis or the sirens, something incredible, and she has the same reaction. Where were these kinds of girls when I was in college? They'll believe anything.

-- A.C. scoffs at the idea of Atlantis and pretty much everything else. This guy can breathe underwater and swim at the speed of a jet and he thinks Atlantis is too fantastic? Compare this to Clark being told that he's an alien ... an ALIEN ... and compare how they each reacted.

-- I don't want to pick on the FX, because I'm sure they weren't finished. But the flapping his body thing looked stupid. Yeah, I get it, he's swimming like a fish, but it looked dumb at that speed. Does Clark flap his arms like a bird when he flies?

-- The one cool thing was when they killed the girl. But, oh not, wait ... she survived. So not only is our show terrible, we have no guts to do something out of the ordinary. Like I said, cliché.

That's just a few things off the top of my head. There was nothing redeeming about this pilot, and it would have been an embarrassment to CW. I give them a lot of credit for having the guts not to put it on the air despite being created by the creators of Smallville.

I am amazed by how bad this was. Don't writers know anything about quality anymore? This is stuff that I learned to avoid in my first creative writing class. I can't believe that someone high up in the production didn't say "You know, this is real crap." They should be embarrassed to be a part of it, I'm sad to say.

And don't come back and say "Yeah, but it was a pilot." If anything, a pilot should stand out. Check out the pilots for Angel, Firefly, Lost, and Rescue Me, just to name a few. Those all set up stories that would be fleshed out later, and they were all good. I can understand being easy on a pilot, but not when it is this bad.

But please don't avoid downloading the pilot. Get some friends together, order pizza, have some drinks, and try to count how many times they repeat plot points that have already been stated. Or how many times A.C.'s hair comes out perfectly mussed up after being in the water.


Well what to say about Aquaman, First I thought it was some kind of Joke after watching the Aquaman silliness in the super show Entourage. Where it is seen as an absurdity but with a super director and a house full of cash unfortunately Justin Hartley probably didn't see that much cash thrown his way in Mercy Please Aquaman the TV show. Rubbish is a good one word to describe the show awful is another so no surprise's there for what is a terrible concept. It's not even as good as Baywatch meets Buffy nether of which I a fan of, but if you like that kind of childish sci fiction you may like this but its definitely not for everyone its most positively not for anyone who likes to think about what there watching or enjoys rich provoking story lines. Give it a miss in the hope that the money may be spent on a better idea.


I'm ashamed I watched it and everyone associated with making it should be ashamed they helped create it. I had hopes that it would be at least entertaining, but it didn't even go that far. I watched all the way through to the end, but it was only because I couldn't look away, like seeing a car wreck on the side of the road.

I like Ving Rhames in everything I've ever seen him in, but he was given such awful dialog in this that even he couldn't save it. Aquaman and some other folks were cute & shiny eye candy but that's all -- they came up with wooden acting and eye-rolling delivery. But waaaay beyond anything the actors did or could have done was the horrible screenplay. Plot and dialog were written at about a fourth-grade level. Nothing made much sense. I'm going to see if I can get my money back from iTunes.

One day when I'm on my deathbed I'm going to look back and regret that I wasted an hour of my life with this stinker.


"The Untouchables" is in my opinion De Palma's greatest work, with his other masterpiece, namely "Scarface", coming a very close second. In "Scarface" the focus is on a paranoid and self-destructive gangster who rises to meteoric heights and then falls; in "The Untouchables" the focus is on a very honest man with a noble mission, Elliot Ness (Kostner), who is prepared to do anything to clean Chicago from the corruption and mayhem caused by the notorious gangster Al Capone (De Niro). His quest is really tough, as his opponent is determined and powerful, but he has the help of three invaluable partners: Malone (Connery), a no-nonsense experienced cop, Wallace (Martin Smith), an accountant who will try to help bring tax charges against Capone, and Stone (Garcia), a great shooter.

As I noted before the film is brilliantly directed, with some scenes such as the one with the baseball bat, or the one with the baby in the train station, having become classic. The acting is superb, and while Connery was the one who received his well-deserved Oscar, Kostner and De Niro made Oscar-class performances too.

Although belonging to a typical genre, this film certainly stands out. Don't miss it! 10/10.


Quite a few words spring to my mind when I think of The Untouchables. Words like: Excellence, entertainment, larger than life and Sean Connery. These words basically summarize the entire film from my point of view of course because in my opinion (which I don't expect people to agree with) this is the best gangster film there is. Obviously people aren't going to agree because people prefer the likes of the operatic Godfather trilogy or the ultra realistic Goodfellas but in my head The Untouchables is the best.

Here are a few reasons why. First reason is that The Untouchables is just so darn entertaining. All the other films had completely different aims and even though I love a deep and brilliant story my main objective when I see a film is to be entertained and basically no film does that better than The Untouchables. That does not mean, however, that The Untouchables is just some half baked action comedy. No. There is genuine emotion and real story in this film. The story is, as most people know, loosely based on the actual events during the prohibition era in USA in the 1920s (the story is also based very, very loosely on the series that go by the same name) which to some extent means that what we see on the screen is real making the characters and general story seem that much more believable. This also adds greatly to the already very high entertainment value of the film because it draws the audience in. To add to the realism of the film the dialog is also very memorable and there are some great one-liners including some of my all time favorites in this film.

The acting is nothing short of brilliant. This is without a doubt Kevin Costner's best role. Some people have remarked that he seemed stiff and unable to portray the emotion of the character and to that I can only ask: Were we watching the same movie?! He is a hundred percent believable all the way through. In the beginning he seems a bit too much like a square I-wanna-do-some-good kind of character but as the story progresses he really evolves and becomes more and more emotionally involved in what he does. Both in his friends and in the cause. He even bends some of the rules he initially tried so hard to uphold. Brilliant. Charles Martin Smith does a good job as well and even though his character is very limited he still manages to pull the audience in. Andy Garcia appears in this film in a very limited role as well and he serves his purpose brilliantly. He is the sharpshooter of the group and he is perfectly believable in that part. He doesn't get to say much but what he does get to say is said with as much passion as I have ever heard from him (he seemed a little stale and lifeless in Godfather III). Robert DeNiro is great as Al Capone. He steals every scene he is in and he really brings the larger-than-life quality to the character which is extremely fitting. The film's best performance belongs to Sean Connery though. The film is for lack of a better expression a Sean Connery tour-de-force. Not only does he steal every scene he is in but he also brings the certain indescribable something to the character that he always does and in every situation you feel with him (as you do in all his films whether he is a villain or a hero). He also got a well deserved Oscar for his performance. People have claimed that the Oscar wasn't as much for this particular performance but an Oscar in recognition of his contributions to the film industry. This belittles his performance which I can safely say is the best of his career and one of the best displays of acting that I have ever seen.

The film also has a memorable score made by the legendary Ennio Morricone who is perhaps best known for the work he did with the equally legendary western director Sergio Leone (who doesn't know the score from The Good, the Bad and the Ugly) and in my opinion the score he did for The Untouchables is the best he has ever made. The score is very unlike most scores from the 80s which does that the film doesn't feel like an 80s film as much as Scarface which I find inferior to this masterpiece. The score is grand and epic just like the story and the effects. For an 80s movie the effects are pretty amazing. Once again everything works.

All in all The Untouchables is a riveting story which is highly recommendable to all fans of crime/gangster movies.

10/10 - on my top 10 of best films


It's Prohibition-era Chicago, and mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) controls the illegal shipment of alcohol into the city. Federal Agent Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner), vows to bring him down. Assembling a crack squad consisting of: Seasoned Cop Jimmy Maloy (Sean Connery), dead-eyed rookie George Stone (Andy Garcia), and bookish Accountant Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith). It is with this simple story that spawns a beautifully crafted piece of film-making. Sean Connery gives a compelling performance as Maloy; he's dedicated, determined, and dangerous. Kevin Costner is great as a man, just out to "Do Some Good". And Finally, you can't forget Robert De Niro. It must be his general calm that's so unnerving about him, as if you never know what he'll do next. I would definitely recommend this movie to anyone who likes movies. This movie had me on the brink of tears, had me standing up and cheering, and had me deeply satisfied and entertained.

My Final Rating: 10 out of 10 - A Must See!


In 1919, over the veto of President Wilson, the Volstead Act was passed, which made provisions for the enforcement of the Eighteenth Amendment, and successfully ushered in the era of Prohibition; what it did not do, was keep people from drinking, or more significantly, keep certain `businessmen' from selling it, which opened the flood gates to a billion dollar industry of illegal alcohol. And in the larger cities, the mob bosses jumped onto the bandwagon with both feet, the most notorious of which was Al Capone, who by 1930 had a thriving business and the city and the people of Chicago in his pocket. From the cop on the beat to the judges sitting on the highest courts, everyone seemingly had a price and could be bought. And that's the way it was until Treasury Agent Eliot Ness showed up for work and hand picked a squad of honest cops to help him get Capone and clean up the City of Chicago. `The Untouchables,' directed by Brian De Palma, is the story of Ness and his men, dubbed `Untouchable' because they couldn't be bought, though from the beginning the odds were stacked against them. They were a handful against an army of hoodlums who wielded grenades and tommy guns, and they could trust no one outside of their own circle, not even the cops with whom they shared the streets. Many looked upon what Ness was trying to do as an exercise in futility, but he never gave up, and went after Capone with everything he had, which wasn't much beyond his own guts and determination to `do some good.'

	Ness's initial efforts were a disaster-- Capone had informants everywhere and always knew ahead of time whenever a raid was going down-- so he quickly realized that the only way to do this thing right was to get men he could trust and keep everything quiet. The bureau responded by sending Ness (Kevin Costner) an accountant, Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith), who first had the idea of going after Capone for income tax evasion. Ness then recruited Jim Malone (Sean Connery), a veteran cop who walked a beat and was well versed in doing things `The Chicago way,' and George Stone (Andy Garcia) a crack shot recruited right out of the Police Academy.

	Connery gives an exemplary performance as Malone (for which he received the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor), the tough, Irish cop who becomes something of a tutor to Ness, letting him know from the start what he's getting himself into. How do you deal with someone of Capone's ilk? According to Malone, `If he pulls a knife, you pull a gun. If he sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way-- that's how you get Capone.' It's a perfect part for Connery, whose rugged appearance and demeanor are entirely convincing; he's got that somewhat cynical, world-wise and weary manner of a man who has seen it all, but lets you know that underneath he still holds out hope that some day in some way, right will win out after all. And Connery plays it with a hard, uncompromising edge that makes it so believable, and makes Malone a memorable character. De Palma brings it all vividly to life, building an underlying tension from the beginning that he maintains throughout the film, aided by the intense, sometimes haunting score by Ennio Morricone. Costner gives a solid performance as Ness, but he is somewhat overshadowed by the actors and the characters who surround him, especially Connery as Malone, and Robert De Niro, who as Capone is absolutely menacing and larger-than-life. De Niro captures the ruthlessness that indelibly marked Capone's infamy forever in the annals of criminal history, with a portrayal of him that is arguably the best in cinematic history. De Niro plays it as it lays, presenting Capone as the brutal criminal he was, without attempting to airbrush away any of the attributes that made him so despicable. It's a terrific performance, for which he should have received at least an Oscar nomination.

	The supporting cast includes Richard Bradford (Mike), Jack Kehoe (Payne), Brad Sullivan (George), Billy Drago (Nitti) and Patricia Clarkson (Ness' wife). Extremely well crafted and delivered by De Palma, who had a great screenplay (by David Mamet) and a terrific cast with which to work, `The Untouchables' is a powerful, intense film that successfully evokes this particular period in the history of America. And it subtly underscores the true heroics of men like Ness and his crew, who through their fearless dedication possibly made it a little safer for someone to walk down the street, or for an honest man to simply go about the business of making a living-- things too often taken for granted in our busy world today; things that are important, and which makes a film like this so much more than merely entertainment (though it definitely is that). And that's the real magic of the movies. I rate this one 9/10.


An absolute classic. These three words describe this masterpiece. De Palma and his supreme cast give us what we want. An intense drama about good and bad. A towering performance by Connery as an Irish-American cop with a Scottish accent stand out but Costner, De Niro and the rest of the cast, down to the baby in the Potemkin inspired scene at the train station, deliver great performances. Another reason for loving this movie is, that it is full of really bad editing mistakes. The best one being the roof top scene, where Ness helps Niiti to his car. If you haven't seen it I feel sorry for you. Whether you rent it, or buy doesn't matter. But it is a MUST SEE!


When I was 11 or 12, I thought that this was the coolest movie ever made. And why not? It had some great action scenes, extremely good heroes, and extremely nasty villains. On that level, the film is perfect. Now that I'm a bit older, I still enjoy the film a lot, just not as much as I used to. It certainly isn't on my top ten list.

In the 1930's, Prohibition is in full swing, and Chicago mob boss Al Capone (Robert De Niro) rules over his empire with bombs, bribes, and machine guns. Since Prohibition is very unpopular with the American people, who's going to stand up to Capone? Enter straight-laced young Treasury Agent Elliot Ness (Kevin Costner), who wants to do the right thing but realizes that the methods required are much more unorthodox, what with the corrupt police department and all. He enlists the help of an aging beat cop (Sean Connery in an Oscar-winning performance), a nebbish accountant (Charles Martin Smith) and a young police cadet who's a crack shot with a pistol (Andy Garcia) and begins taking down Capone "the Chicago way". After many shootouts, liquor raids, and assassinations, it all comes down to a climactic showdown - on the roof of a crowded courthouse! - between Ness and Capone's chief henchman, Frank Nitti (Billy Drago).

The movie is, as has been pointed out, much more faithful to the original television series with Robert Stack than the historical record, of which it bears virtually no resemblance, not that that is necessarily a problem. In real life, there were up to a dozen "Untouchables", whose success was very limited, and never got into any actual shootouts with Capone (though Capone did try to kill Ness himself on at least two occasions). Capone thought of Ness as a publicity seeking nuisance, nothing more; the two never even met face-to-face. Frank Wilson and the IRS had a LOT more to do with Capone's indictment than Ness and the Untouchables ever did. And of course Frank Nitti lived for over a decade after Capone was jailed.

That being said: who cares? This was intended as a fun, classy action movie, not a historical documentary. The movie is extremely authentic in attention to period detail, and though a bit over-the-top, it succeeds in its primary objective: to entertain. The movie was meant as a cross between a classy gangster film and a good old-fashioned cops'n'robbers shoot-'em-up, and was highly successful at that.

The acting is great all around, with Costner and Connery in particular giving one of their best performances. Costner does a creditable job at making Ness go from a greenhorn do-gooder (the scene where he yells at the corpse of a gangster he's had to kill is one of the movie's few weak moments) to a tough, hard-assed veteran in a little over two hours, no mean feat. Connery does a great job as Malone, the aging, guilt-ridden cop who becomes Ness's mentor (though his death scene is a bit overdone, I must admit I actually cried the first time I saw it!). Garcia and Smith have somewhat less to do, though each have their moments (Smith sipping bootleg whiskey during the bridge ambush, and Garcia's initial confrontation with Ness and Malone). De Niro, who made a career playing gangsters, takes the logical step of playing THE single most famous gangster of all time, Al Capone, and DeNiro, Method actor that he is, does a great job managing to look, sound, and act the part, despite very limited screen time (does ANYONE come away from this film not remembering the infamous baseball scene?). Drago fits the part of a sneering, one-dimensional villain, and manages to make Nitti a menacing and even charismatic character despite having little to work with. Other talented character actors - Richard Bradford, Jack Kehoe, Patricia Clarkson, Brad Sullivan, Del Close, Clifford James - round out the cast.

Where the movie excels, however, are its action sequences. The ambush of Capone's bootleg convoy at the Canadian border is simply exhilarating, and the suspenseful rooftop shootout between Ness and Nitti is extremely memorable as well. But what steals the show is the wonderfully done "Potemkin" homage in Union Station, where Ness and Stone try to apprehend Capone's book keeper, take out his bodyguards, AND save a baby carriage pluming down the stairs. Virtually the whole scene is done in slow motion, and is indescribably intense and even beautiful.

Ennio Morricone provides a wonderful score, and I'm not sure why he dislikes it so much, as he's said in interviews. True, it's not up to par with his works for Sergio Leone's films, but what is? He provides an exhilarating, heroic score which captures the feel and tone of the movie perfectly (though for my money, the heartbreaking "Death Theme", played on solo saxophone, is the best track).

Overall, "The Untouchables" is NOT a great gangster film, like "The Godfather" or "Once Upon A Time In America", nor is it an accurate account of the real-life events it portrays. But it's a fun, extremely stylish, well-made and enjoyable film, and on that score, I can wholeheartedly recommend it.

Score: 8/10.


As good a gangster movie that has ever been made as DePalma does justice to Mamet's electric script. The acting on show is right out of the top draw, the inevitable ease that DeNiro puts menace into Capone is quite impressive, whilst the fresh faced pugnacious tenacity of Andy Garcia's George Stone is something of a delightful watch. Yet that is not enough because we still need the central actors to carry the film if it is going to triumph. Connery is a given performance wise {accent aside of course, but then again who cares when the character portrayal is as sharp as it is here ?} but it is Costner as Eliot Ness that shines like the star he was soon to become, it's a magic performance that manages to fuse genuine tenderness of family love with little trips to the dark side in pursuit of making good triumph over evil.

I love that the film is showing how violence and fear affects families, mother and child is a theme that is central to the films heartbeat, notice how some of the more violent scenes are followed by tender scenes of Ness and his family. The set pieces here are attention grabbing entertainment, a roaring Canadian border rumpus and a smashing roof top pursuit and face off are top value, but it's something of DePalma gold watching a brilliant Battleship Potemkin homage at the train station that takes the cake as the film enters its last quarter. Surely historical facts does not matter when film's are as sharp as this one is,? it's frightening, touching, and even witty. So for me at least, the film is 10/10 in every department {yes, even Sean's accent}.

Footnote: The academy saw fit to nominate Ennio Morricone for his wonderful score, yet strangely he used most of it for John Carpenter's 1982 film The Thing, they must have missed it that time I presume! Must be the genre angle one thinks....

10/10


The Untouchables is a well-made, well-acted gangster story from director Brian (Scarface) De Palma. One thing you can virtually always guarantee from a De Palma movie is flamboyance, and this is no exception. Not content with a compelling story, the director has thrown in a series of his typically bravura set pieces, the best of which is a truly outstanding railway station shootout.

Treasury agent Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner) is working in Prohibition-era Chicago when he realises that a fair bit of crime, particularly bootlegging, is going unnoticed. Most of the city cops either haven't realized it's happening or have chosen to turn a blind eye. Ness soon learns that the criminal underworld is controlled by ruthless gangster Al Capone (Robert De Niro), who men on both sides of the law fear to tackle. Aided by a trusty band of three loyal pals, Irish cop Malone (Sean Connery), suave George Stone (Andy Garcia), and reliable Oscar Wallace (C.M Smith), Ness wages war on Capone and his gangland cronies. While other law enforcers pretend nothing is going on, Ness and his men swoop into action against the smugglers, bootleggers, and gunmen terrorising the city streets. Capone is not pleased - he turns his attention to stamping out these troublesome law enforcers who have put a dent in his lucrative criminal empire.

Unsurprisingly, the acting here is high-class. Costner does what's required as Ness, but Connery and De Niro go a few steps further. Connery's experienced Irish cop is a wonderful role (indeed, the role which deservedly won the big Scot his only Oscar), while De Niro demonstrates how to portray evilness as only he can (his baseball bat slaying of an associate is shocking and disturbing in the extreme). Also memorable is Billy Drago as Capone's most psychopathic henchman Frank Nitti (not only does he get some powerful scenes; he also dies the most extraordinary death in the whole film). De Palma provides numerous flashy sequences, including a smuggling raid on the US-Canadian border, the rooftop skirmish between Ness and Nitti, and the afore-mentioned railway sequence. Ennio Morricone's music score is exciting and well-suited to the events on screen. There are occasional misjudgements, like Connery's ludicrously prolonged slaying (any more bullets and he's be a walking hunk of lead) and some slushy "family" interludes with Ness which are intended to show his loving, caring side but which only interfere with the proceedings. On the whole, though, The Untouchables is a fine movie which probably represents De Palma's best work of the '80s.


I don't understand how on earth this movie gets a 7.8 rating. It's terrible! I've always been interested in Capone and the gangsters of the 30's, but this movie has the worst direction I've ever seen. It's pretty... they did a good job with the cars, outfits, locations, etc., but the dialogue is laughable and the way the story was crafted left nothing to suspense. I understand that they had limits because it was an account of a true story, but they still could have told us certain things and saved some things for later. The way the little mousy guy kept referring to his tax problems... we all know that's how they brought him down, but they gave that away in the first 20 minutes! And the music... terrible! I actually perked up when I saw Ennio Morricone's name at the beginning because I loved his work in "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly". But the director never used it to build suspense. They didn't build any dramatic scenes with it, and when they did, he used all the wrong music.

I am terribly disappointed with this movie. I want my two hours of life back. I've seen better documentaries on the Discovery Channel, and if I really want to learn anything, I'll take one of the tours here in Chicago.


The historical novel format in literature is a popular way to tell a fictional story against the background of real events that actually happened. This type of format can be very entertaining in the medium of film also provided that producers and directors are honest with the audience and do not deliberately mislead viewers into thinking they are watching something that resembles real history.

The problem of unintentional misrepresentation could have been easily solved in this film if there had been a simple disclaimer statement at the start of the movie to warn viewers they are watching fiction, not history. The Untouchables is a very entertaining and skillfully produced film that succeeds wonderfully in offering viewers an enjoyable movie and memorable characters such as the fictional police officer played by Sean Connery. But at the same time the film fails miserably to offer the necessary warning that it is only a work of fiction.

It is just plain wrong to imply that this film is even "loosely based" on real events or people. The screenplay by writer David Mamet is almost completely fictional. It is not based on the 1957 book with the same title authored by Elliot Ness and Oscar Fraley or the 1959 TV series starring the late Robert Stack as Ness which followed the book a little bit in its first season. This film has no more connection to the original book than the recent Steve Martin fictional "Cheaper by the Dozen" has to the original 1940s book by Ernestine Gilbreth. The title is the same and that is all.

Except for using the names of a few people who really lived, there is almost nothing in this film that remotely tracks real historical events that happened in Chicago between the formation of a special Treasury Department task force called "The Untouchables" in January 1930 and the federal trial of Alphonse Capone in October 1931. As long as viewers understand that it is fiction, most people will find the characters enjoyable and the action exciting.

Movie fans can enjoy this film at the level of entertainment alone and not worry about the bad history but for one problem where the first defect also intrudes on the acting. Most of the characters seem real enough and Sean Connery gives a fine performance. But unfortunately the characterization of Al Capone by Robert DeNiro is that of a cartoon character.

Here is where the historical dishonesty interferes with the entertainment value of the film because DeNiro makes a ruthless gangster seem almost appealing as a warm and fuzzy colorful character. Make no mistake, the real Al Capone was an amoral monster who ordered the murder of many people who got in his way and civilians were hurt also. He was not colorful or clever as DeNiro portrayed him.

The worst slander of the film and its artistic defect as well is a dramatic climax in which Elliot Ness murders Frank Nitti for revenge by tossing him off the roof of the Federal Court House in 1931. The real Frank Nitti died 12 years later in 1943 at the hands of fellow gangsters on Chicago's west side. There was no motive for revenge by Ness since there was no Sean Connery character in real life.

Writer David Mamet grew up in Cook County and presumably knows local history. So it is hard to see why he chose to so severely distort historical events to provide him with a dramatic crutch for his convoluted plot device. The real Elliot Ness was a fine law enforcement man who later became Chief of Police in Cleveland, Ohio and he never murdered anyone in cold blood.

Many entertaining movies take great liberties with history for the sake of dramatic impact. There is nothing wrong with that by itself just as long as producers are honest about what they are doing and the audience members do not walk away from the film thinking that they now know the true history of an era.


Director Brian De Palma is the son of a surgeon, and perhaps this explains his high tolerance for the bloodshed that has translated into brutal, raw scenes in 'The Untouchables'. Then again, this film is set during one of the bloodiest chapters of American history and demands unflinching depiction accordingly. Zooming in on prohibition-era Chicago, a dirty, dingy, crime-infested retreat of mafia, the film lets us know a special unit headed by Kevin Costner whose objective is to frame the super villain himself  Al Capone (Robert De Niro).

There are, in effect, three or four things that truly stand out about The Untouchablesan otherwise standard crime by-the-numbers rompand at least one of them should be attributed to the surface of the spectacle; the costumework and settings are superbly breathed life into, as is De Palma's accolade, with a screen that is awash with lyrical colours and accompanied by a swelly, jazzy moonlit music score. Another worthy accolade is of course Sean Connery as detective Malone  an American-Irish cop on the beat and down with the ways of the street  who may deliver one of the worst accents in film history, but makes up for what he lacks in verbal power with heaps of charisma. Malone is given, by far, the best dialogue in David Mamet's script as when he instructs Kevin Costner on how to get to Capone: "He puts one of yours in the hospital, you put one of his in the morgue."

Another worthy staple to The Untouchables is its strong individual scenes. In the front row for these sits the notorious baseball bat scene in which a furious Al Capone beats one of his associates' head into a bloody pulp with a bat, right in front of all the guests at the grand dinner table. Robert De Niro gained weight for his role as the crime-lord Al Capone and approaches his character with commitment, but sadly he is ineffective in the film as De Palma does not quite know what to do with him. Instead he craggily intercuts Capone's boisterous speeches and monologues with the template storyline of Kevin Costner's special unit, and the former are incongruous to the key story of 'The Untouchables'. Here it regrettably becomes apparent that the film possesses all the necessary ingredients but no blender in which to stir it  and De Palma is largely to blame for lacking the necessary skill.

Having said that, The Untouchables keeps up the appearance of an epic crime film so rigorously through seamless costumes, stinky Chicago accents, vivid chases and a swarming taste to its sets that for a long time we are led to believe that De Palma has truly done it with this film. Certainly there are many scenes that testify to this and aptly camoflauge the shortcomings, such as the suspenseful pre-battle sequence at the Canadian border in which the Western-loving Costner is up on horseback to ambush the incoming shipment. Another is the first meeting between Andy Garcia and Sean Connery, in which the latter decides to recruit Garcia's Italian character in spite of racial feuding (Connery's supposed to be Irish), and instead because he likes his mouthy, bold attitude. Finally there is the unspeakably epic climax scene that plays on operatic in length through a long, glorious slow-motion capture by a staircase, politely nodding to The Battleship Potemkin's 'Odessa Steps Sequence'.

The whole film is in fact an operatic affair with technicalities deluxe. With its mindboggling ensemble (Kevin Costner, Sean Connery, Robert De Niro, Andy Garcia and Patricia Clarkson) it is easy to see how it is cuing us in to like it. To some extent it succeeds well, for it is suspenseful, but it is not well sewn-together. What good is a De Niro if you are not going to use him opposite the rest? What good is a Kevin Costner (who has never looked so ridiculously handsome in his career for that matter) if you are not going to let him emote? And lastly, what good is a large handful of fully-fledged wonderful scenes if you are not going to juxtapose them with something, instead of dishing them out every now and then to keep our interest?

7 out of 10


How Mr. De Palma can go from sublime to ridiculous, from Masterful to Childish in just a few seconds is beyond me! Always luscious in his obsessive photography, a visual standard-bearer of 'americana', in this film, "The Untouchables" what most annoys about Mr. De Palma is his almost pathological need to arouse our applause at all costs and at all times! And this obsession seems to 'infect' his actors... De Niro in particular, who really 'hams' up Scarface Capone. His hand mimicry makes him resemble an Airline Hostess giving Emergency Exit Instructions more than the notorious Italo-American Gangster. Unintentionally Funny! The 'final' rooftop chase scene is awkwardly childish, the 'Potiomkin' re-make goofy... Are we in Scorsese/Coppola/Naked Gun land? 3 out of 10 may seem very mean for so much time, trouble money and genuine talent put to waste but... When will baby Brian grow up, and cater for grown ups?


I was not expecting this movie to be this bad. With Depalma, De Niro, and what looked to be a huge budget with a story that is already compelling enough in real life, there's no reason to make a film this absent of quality.

You can tell within the first ten minutes of the movie that the score is going to ruin the movie. The music was either cliché (smooth touching melodies in every single last moment of vulnerability in the movie) or "action music" that feels like it belongs in homeward bound, not a crime movie. Music was even put into places where it make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Indeed, it sets the tone for the movie itself, which is a tone of farce more than grit.

This movie just reeks of farce, from the accountant mowing down people with a shotgun with the nerdy grin symbolizing his transformation from mild mannered nerd to empowered bad-ass to the completely arbitrary scene of Robert DeNiro hitting a guy with a baseball bat (no back story,no plot movement, seemingly no reason for it to be in the movie whatsoever)to Sean Connery getting blasted with seemingly dozens of machine gun bullets, bleeding enough to have died three times over, and yet still having the power to gasp a few more words just as Elliot Ness gets there before finally dying. This movie is filled with enough corny commercial movie tricks and clichés that it just cannot be taken seriously. This is not a bad thing if you're making a Disney movie, but when you're making a crime drama, (especially one based on real life) realism is probably the way you want to go.

This is not even to take into consideration the awful acting throughout the movie. This actually may be why the movie so heavily relies on cheesy music. The actor's performances were so weak that it required cheesy music to make them look better. Kevin Costner is just not a great actor and none of the supporting cast is exactly Daniel-Day Lewis. Sean Connery won an academy award for his performance somehow. I suppose his acting may have not been particularly bad, but his character seemed so manufactured and out of step with reality that he simply couldn't be taken seriously. Maybe in a completely fictitious story it would have worked, but again, not in a story based on real people and real events.

If you want to see a farce that tries to be serious, every movie cliché in the book (this is no exaggeration, just look for them) an out of place and overdone score, and substandard acting, then this is the movie for you. I somehow doubt, though, that the target audience for this movie were movie watchers who enjoyed this type of film. Take out the violence and this movie belongs next to Pete's Dragon on the movie shelf. It's a disgrace to Al Capone and Elliot Ness both and to anyone who likes good movies.


The Untouchables is a horrible movie. David Mamet wrote the script but one couldn't tell unless reading the credits. It lacks Mamets natural flare, that great dialogue and those undertones that made Mamet who he is. I wont get into the historical aspect of the movie sufficive to say there is little. The direction of this movie is crap. Needless to say it was Brian DePalma. He focuses more on the costumes, cars, and scenery of the movie than the acting or script. The best moments in this movie were improvised by Connery (ie. the dead guy shot) and the rest could have been written by anybody who has ever been to a screen writing class.


I never could quite reconcile Kevin Costner's somewhat-high and weak voice with some of macho characters he played when he was younger, but I can get past that after a film has settled into the story. Costner is a good enough actor to make me believe he's anyone after awhile.

However, after years of growing up watching Robert Stack playing "Elliot Ness" on TV on the hit series, "The Untouchables," it took me a bit to accept Costner in that role. That part will always belong to Mr. Stack.

At first, he just did not speak with the authority of a tough Chicago cop out to get Al Capone and the racketeers from the Prohibition Age in Chicago. His partner, "Oscar Wallace," played by the little nerdy-looking Charles Martin Smith as a gun-toting T-Man, is even harder to believe. Of the "good guys," Andy Garcia is the only likeble and believable guy. Sean Connery has the best character in the film ("Jim Malone") and is the most interesting to watch.

Nonetheless, it's a good story with good characters and just about he right amount of action. It moves very well, which tells me the movie is entertaining. There are a few memorable scenes, such as the shootout at the train station with the baby carriage descending the stairway and a memorable scene with Robert De Niro as Capone.

This is a tough, very violent and bloody movie.....nothing like the old TV show.


This movie was horrible and I don't understand what all the fuss is about. I heard that it was supposed to be something great (having Robert De Niro as Al Capone seemed very fitting, but he only had about 10 minutes of screen time.) Far too much time was spent focused on Ness and his wife, which I saw as totally irrelevant to the story. Also, Kevin Costner's acting was terrible, as always; Ness' 'team' was extremely lame, and the scene with the baby on the staircase was just asinine. Malone's death was the most ridiculous overly dramatic death scene I have ever seen and was to this movie what Billy Preston's "You Are So Beautiful" was to Carlito's Way: The rock-bottom part of the film; (except for the fact that Carlito's Way was actually halfway decent compared to this hyped up garbage they call a 'good film'). I don't know anyone who's seen this movie, let alone liked it, but I would like to seriously ask anyone who has how they could ever watch this and enjoy it.


I just bought this on dvd the other day allthough i must admit i wasn't looking for it as i wanted to buy ghost world but the shop didn't have it(DAMM YOU WOOLWORTHS IT'S A GREAT MOVIE NOW I AM GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO VIRGIN IN CARDIFF)anyway i went across to w.h smith and even though they didn't have it, they did have this gem on the shelf, so i bought this instead. I remember seeing this when i was a young kid and even though i didn't totaly understand it at the time, i thought it was so cool. It also could have been the first gangster film i ever saw. brian de palma is a master at suspense and say what you want about him for riping off other film makers,the pram down the stairs at the train station is a nailbiter. the performances are also impecable too with sean conerey's secne taking,giving him a much deserved oscar. A mention should also go to ennio moricone's wonderful score and stephen h burum's elegent cinematography making you believe you are in the 1930s. couple that with excelent pacing and you a well crafted piece of entertainment. It may not have the same kind of depth that the godfather has,but to be fair it dosen't try to and everything it try's to do it succeds at

a faultles 10/10


phew!! what a gripping movie. brian de palma one of the masters of the whole gangster flick scene pulls off this stunner. easily among the best in the genre. the untouchables is a really tight and slick movie. i dont much care for historical accuracy in movies. well, thats why its called a movie, truth be damned.

kevin costner is good, but obviously the scene stealer is robert de niro in his small but devastating role as al capone. why sean connery won the best supporting actor oscar will remain a surprise. except for the fact that malone is pretty much the people's hero in the movie.

technically the movie is streets ahead of de palma's hard-hitting scarface and being told from the side of the good guys makes it maybe more fun to watch, more acceptable, if you will. the costume, the music, the cinematography, the editing everything is incredibly slick and all these terrific production values come together in a very slick manner.

apart from these, the script is what really steals the show, it is very tight, just the right amount of humour and ruthlessness. there are many obvious references to past classics. particularly the staircase scene a retelling of the classic scene form battleship potempkin is brilliantly done. brian de palma later uses a similar scene - stairway in the station in his other classic movie carlito's way quite effectively as well.

but this is the movie when all of brian de palma's tricks became treats. the movie where everything gels perfectly, forget historic accuracy, nobody goes to a movie to study history, this is a terrific retelling of an interesting historic episode.

a tight and slick 9!!


the untouchables to me is one of the greatest action movies ever. all the untouchables from Sean Connery ( who won an oscar for his role by the way), to Andy Garcia, and the hero of the movie kevin costnar is brilliant.but this movie belongs to Robert Deniro's captivating perfomance as the villain al capone. yes al capone the greatest gangster of all time. "spoilers ahead" this movie is about the untouchables, four men and thier quest to bring down the crime lord al capone. with an ending that will leave you cheering the untouchables is definately an American classic.

Ps: listen to the score by Ennio Morricone, the same guy responsible for the unforgetable score of the man with no name westerns (Clint Eastwood).


Brian De Palma is known as a director who likes to let the blood flow, but he does more than that in this film. This film outdoes his earlier Scarface in nearly every way - namely, the actors have more of an opportunity to act, the score is better, the action is less drawn-out, etc. One notable difference in his style is his reliance on the perspective of the Untouchables, and not of Capone's men. In giving more screen time to the good guys, he allows some beautiful shots to enter the foray; but don't think that he has completely abandoned violence. It is here as well, and plays a vital role in the film, but is pushed to the background most of the time.

Kevin Costner (in one of his early roles) stars as Eliot Ness, the leader of the so-called Untouchables, a branch of the government responsible for nabbing the bootleggers in 1930s Chicago (and elsewhere, though the Windy City is the sole focus here.) He is very convincing as Ness, and De Palma does a great job at showing his early rejection, his first triumphs, and his ultimate success. De Palma also makes Ness' work seem more personal, because he has a wife and children for whom to care.

Sir Sean Connery gives one of his best performances in recent times as Jimmy Malone, who somewhat reluctantly joins Ness in his crusade against the bootleggers. As a hard-nosed cop with decades of experience, he is essential to the Untouchables and their mission. His performance understandably earned him an Oscar.

The other actors are also well-cast, especially Robert De Niro, who is famous for his mobster roles. His part as Al Capone does not get much screen time, but the time that he is in the picture is perfectly captured.

Special mention must be made of the score by Ennio Morricone, surely the greatest and most prolific composer of film music. As in most of the films that he scores, the music becomes an essential part of the work; not only do certain scenes become firmly implanted in your mind, but also his music for each scene. He received an Oscar nomination for this film, but did not win (he has never won, despite six nominations.)

I cannot recommend this film highly enough. It is unique in its perspective, the images are not excessively violent, and the score is outstanding. Consider this De Palma's good-guy gangster film, and a must-see.


A really good movie. The strongest side of the movie is the acting and what a great actors play in this movie indeed. Robert De Niro well he certainly hasn't made a bad roll in his hole career. Kevin Costner and Sean Connery were good, but I don't think that Connery was worthy of an oscar, he has made better roles. In my opinion the script wasn't very strong, but the acting made this movie a good one. The tagline was nothing new, it's a basic good vs. bad and guess who wins. If you think about it then it's a real life story and that's the real ending... well not quite actually Al got out of the prison few years later because of a disease and lived happily ever after. For the ending I must say that overall it was a movie highly above the average. I'll give this movie eight out of ten and at least five of it is the acting.


Start with a budget of $16 million (in 1987). Add Brian De Palma and David Mamet, chuck in Sean Connery and Robert DeNiro, then slowly add Kevin Costner, Andy Garcia, Charles Martin Smith and Billy Drago, and whaddya get? THE UNTOUCHABLES! This testosterone-driven movie is my all time favourite, and as it was the first gangster movie I ever saw, it was a perfect introduction. By the time they were filming the climatic shootout, the film was $8 million over budget. The studio told De Palma "Forget the stopped train,forget the helecopter shots, just make it quick and simple." The end gives no evidence of this.


Updated version of the old tv series and based on the novel by Oscar Fraley, "The Untouchables" is fresh, smart, and "extremely" tense. The film's story follows Eliot Ness (Kevin Costner in his best role and perfermance), a Treasury officer who is sent from D.C. to Chicago during Prohibition to enforce the law and discovers after a raid that there's corruption in the city's police force. Ness begins the crackdown when he enlists the aid of three men: Jim Malone (Sean Connery), a Irish cop, a very raw and curious police recruit named George Stone (Andy Garcia), and Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith), an accountant who Ness meets in his office. In that scene, Wallace tells Ness that one of the city's most notorious mobsters, Al Capone (played by Robert De Niro in an amusing yet in wicked fashion) has committed tax evasion. Besides that scene and the one where Ness and Malone are together in the church, the film never shows any serious signs of letting down. De Palma, who is also known for directing the classic bloodfest known as "Carrie", wisefully mixes in the sequences that either have action or Hitchcock-like suspense and squeezes in the ethinc conflict (Italians and Irish). Besides that, two lesser known actors, Billy Drago and Richard Bradford are good here as Capone's swift and vicious enforcer Frank Nitti and the police chief who tries to convince Malone to stay out of the battle between Ness and Capone. Screenwriter and Pulitzer-prize winner David Mamet wrote the maverlous script, Ennio Morricone conducts a priceless score, and Stephen H. Burum shows magnificant camera work. The movie is nearly made to perfection and shows De palma at his finest.


Brian De Palma is a great director and this is one of his best movies. The Untouchables has everything a good gangster movie should have. This starts with a great cast: Kevin Costner is good as Elliot Ness, but surprisingly, the rest of the cast is even better. Connery is excellent, as always, and DeNiro is very convincing a Al Capone. Andy Garcia, an actor which hasn't played in a good movie for a while is perfect for his "tough new cop" role. But two of the best actors in the movie, right behind Connery, are actors I had never heard of: Billy Drago, which is absolutely perfect as Frank Nitti, giving him a cold, and Charles Martin Smith is well cast as Oscar Wallace. Ennio Morricone's score is incredible... And David Mamet's script is very good. But what steals the show is certainly Brian De Palma's directing and Stephen H. Burum's cinematography. This movie is full of suspense, great action scenes and an involving story which never loses steam. This is a very entertaining and well-done movie.

84%


Sticking Robert DeNiro in your movie almost assures you good reviews. Sticking Sean Connery only increases that. So when all of them join with David Mamet and Brian DePalma,the result can be nothing short of explosive.

Kevin Costner plays a naive cop put on a mission to arrest Al Capone (DeNiro). Right from the beginning, this movie is a thrill ride. DeNiro is superb as Capone, Costner is good as Elliot Ness,and Andy Garcia is entertaining as a sure-shot young Italian. But the real gem here is Connery,in an Oscar-winning performance.Connery plays an Irish cop who joins up with Ness. He plays the role very well,and deserved his Oscar.Also joining the group is Charles Martin Smith,as a accountant who shows a deft knack for shooting at stuff.

However,that's not to say that the movie is without flaws.Some scenes are very unbelievable (especially the one where Connery meets his demise) and some parts (especially at the beginning) seem to go on too long. This,however,does not stop this movie from being fun. 8.5/10


Kevin Costner as Eliot Ness didn't shine in this film, but Sean Connery did. His depiction of Malone, a tough Irish cop, is right on the money. This is the story of Eliot Ness and his small band of men against Alphonse Capone and his empire. The film depicts the "Feds" in some of their raids on Capone's empire. Some of them weren't successful and Ness and crew were the subjects of much ridicule in the press. This is no spoiler, but eventually they got Capone on a tax evasion charge. There is plenty of violence if you like that sort of thing. The film is told almost totally from the law's side, but, in the end, that was the only side that mattered. Robert De Niro shows how great an actor he is and is downright scary as Capone! Charles Martin Smith and Andy Garcia also star. I don't know how factual this film is, but I truly enjoyed it.


The Untouchables is easily Brian DePalma's most accessible piece of filmmaking. It is beautifully filmed and photographed and Mamet's screenplay is sharp and to the point. Although this movie isn't necessarily considered one of DePalma's personal films (e.g. "Dressed to Kill," "Body Double"), it is still, nevertheless, extremely well-crafted and never seems to be overcome by DePalma's indulgent tendencies. This telling of Prohibition-era Chicago, with Costner in the lead, boasts a tremendous performance from Sean Connery as the wise, old cop who teams with Eliot Ness to stop Al Capone. Some viewers may note the obvious lack of historical accuracy, but no one can doubt the pure craftsmanship and beauty of this period piece.


The main character may be a bit boring, but there are some terrific performances by Connery, DeNiro and i even like Garcia, (normally i can't stand the guy). Also great action sequences masterfully directed by DePalma, and some great setpieces. Watch for the dinner-table sequence with DeNiro holding his baseballbat: an instant classic.


A fairly humdrum retelling of the Chicago gangster wars of the 20s & 30s and in particular Elliot Ness' long term battle bringing top gangster Al Capone to book on a range of charges from murder, prohibition & bootlegging to his eventual downfall of simple tax evasion.

De Palma does a pretty bad hash with this movie. Firstly, he is hard pushed into thinking of any original cinematography he can genuinely call his own. The most blatant rip off is the "Odessa Steps" scene at the train station which was originally done so masterfully decades ago in the Russian film Battleship Potyomkin (1925).

And I doubt if the real Ness swaned around in designer clothes back in the 20s either. But then again this is the yuppy 80s we're talking about when this film was made, so I suppose it wasn't cool to be wearing anything less than a Label.

Then we have the actors. Connery really does amaze me sometimes. He plays Malone a bit like Office Dibble out of Top Cat, unsure of what accent to use and always coming out with words of wisdom but never really convincing us with any true conviction. Although his death scene was quite moving otherwise he was as wooden as a beer keg.

Costner again excels as a man with a total charisma bypass. He sparkles from time to time but generally he just plods through the story in his customary dot to dot style.

The only shining light would be De Nero as the Big C himself. Totally convincing, totally ruthless, played just right - never drifting into characature, never falling into cliche, De Nero is excellent. And of course who can forget his little baseball story around the dinner table!

The only criticism with De Nero is that we don't get to see enough of him; we don't get the chance to absorb his character or understand his evil mannerisms. De Palma offers simple sign posting telling the audience that this guy is all bad and that's all you need to know.

The supporting cast give a good account of themselves, especially Garcia & Martin-Smith.

The production values are obviously high & lavish but all this eye candy & stylish camera work doesn't make for a good film with an underworked script. De Palma is too heavy handed with his character development with regards the good guys - hense the heavy emphasis on Ness being a good family man, doting wife, child & baby on the way. All done in about 10 minutes.

The same with Connery, simple explanations so that we can feel for this old time cop and then the scene is set to do battle with the invincible foe, who we don't get to know much about.

The musical score is very upbeat & concise which is perhaps the only good thing about the movie; that and some decent lighting & 2nd unit camera work.

Overall, a film full of other people's ideas packaged with 80's designerism & style over content but with nothing new to offer. **/*****


The movie takes place during the Al Capone gangster era. Elliot Ness (Kevin Costner) and his untouchables wage war against Capone who ran prohibition and other various illegal activities in Chicago.

This is a very well made and exciting movie. Connery, Costner, and Garcia deliver excellent performances as The Untouchables. One of the best things is that all the characters stay true to form and are easy to like throughout the whole movie. Definetely worth watching!


This is the first time I've seen Jerry get all this physical abuse, at least for the first three minutes of the cartoon. Why he chose to live inside a pool table in a pool hall in the first place is puzzling. What happened to his normal "house" inside the wall the house where he and Tom live?

Whatever, he starts taking a pounding the first time a billiard ball goes into a pocket and winds up crashing on top of his little bed. When he comes out of the corner pocket, Tom spots him and really abuses him, even using him at the end of his pool cue. He takes a number of beating from the balls on the table. It's brutal but rare to see the mouse get it like this.

However, enough is enough and he starts to fight back At that point, Tom gets brutalized but Jerry still gets it, too.

This might be the most violent Tom and Jerry cartoon I've seen. Being a fan of this series, I am used to it and know it's only cartoon and much of the slapstick- violence is funny. However, some of things here are unbelievable, like Tom getting the entire cue shoved down his throat and Jerry getting an eight-ball rammed into his butt. For anyone who is a little leery of too much violence in cartoons, for either them or their kids, you are forewarned.


"Cue Ball Cat" has the typical violent gags of these cartoons, however it is different because, for one thing, Tom is playing pool. Second, Jerry is living in the pool table. This cartoon focus mostly on the pool game and table, combined with Tom having his own way of fun with Jerry (obviously, much for Jerry's disgust). The result is minutes of fun, amusement, entertainment and slapstick gags.

It's funny to see Tom and Jerry tormenting each other at times, but sometimes it can also be revolting. Anyway, it isn't surprising when it comes to Tom and Jerry, because they were always like that, right?

Without being their finest, nevertheless this cartoon deserves a high rating from me. It doesn't disappoint me and it doesn't fail when it comes to the main ingredients of these animated shorts. It also has good artwork, despite the fact that its backgrounds are nothing special or exotic. Simplicity is the key-word.

Overall, a different and simultaneously traditional Tom & Jerry's cartoon.


I was shocked to be watching such an awful rip off of puppetmasters. Dolls that obey and kill. yeah hate to tell you but its been done before and much better. This movie was awful and i am glad that i didn't watch the end of it. The man with a little head was too much, really don't think that was real since his body never moved from a frontal shot. At least it has it comical value.


I'm going to start by saying that I entered Blockbuster with a group of friends, looking for a terrible horror movie so we could laugh at it's terrible acting and mediocre special effects. Unfortunately, Blood Dolls wasn't even a movie terrible enough to laugh at. If you want a terrible horror movie but still want to be entertained, check out my personal favorites 'Rodentz' and 'Screaming Dead'.

Anyway, the movie starts out with two business consultants who enter this crazed billionaire's house who somehow manages to cage a female-rock band, control the band with a pirate-midget, and attend to your every need with a butler who paints his face to look like a stupid clown. Did I mention this clown's name is Mr. Mascaro? So, these business consultants enter this mansion and here, the director slips in a cheap scene of brief nudity, where one of the ho's in the rock band flashes an unsuspecting business consultant. Apparently, they did things to anger this billionaire (Who mysteriously wears a mask because he has a shrunken head, which is never explained. How the hell can he breath in that mask, anyway?). Since the billionaire is angry with these two consultants, he drills through the first's chest and electrocutes the second into a Blood Doll. However the hell he did that.

Not much happens until some weak guy with a lame laugh is introduced, along with his mistress wife. He's pretty much a fairy and nobody likes him.

Moving on..the shrunken head billionaire (Who I'll call Southern Shrunk-Head from now on because of his annoying Southern accent) orders some Chinese food (the box of food is tiny too, to match his tiny head) and gets angered at this one security guard because the electricity goes out. So he gets his Blood Dolls to go kill him with a miniature knife and a dumb-bell. This is particularly hilarious because the dolt just sits there as a puppet pokes at his foot with a freaking toothpick until he falls down, at which point a big fat Blood Doll pushes a dumb-bell off a coffee table, killing him. In the mean time, an electrician arrives to solve the electricity problem. Too bad he's evil (he strangles a security guard with some wire), but it doesn't matter because the Uncle Sam Blood Doll throws his toothpick knife in his eye which immediately kills him. The electrician had the best quote in the movie though, which is right after he strangled that security guard. "There are two kind of people in this world...people who pee their pants after getting strangled, and people who don't." He then promptly checks the dead security guard for urine.

The humor dies down at this point, but that fairy with the mistress wife gets killed in some S&M trap (by the Blood Dolls, I might add) WHILE HIS OWN WIFE SUPERVISES OVER HIS DEATH. Then the mistress falls for Southern Shrunk-Head, and Mr. Mascaro turns from a strange butler turned clown turned professional priest (he becomes the priest and marries Southern Shrunk-Head and the mistress.) Shortly after a stupid ending, in which a midget flies across the room, Mr. Mascaro comes onto the screen and announces he particularly didn't enjoy that ending and thus an alternate ending comes up. In this even-stupider ending, even after the mistress finds out that Southern Shrunk-Head has an extremely small head, she declares her love for him. Too bad Mr. Mascaro and Southern Shrunk-Head kill her anyway.

This is a terrible movie and is not even funny. Don't see Blood Dolls.


I'm not sure if the movie was initially meant to be a HORROR movie or a COMEDY.

With that said, this movie one I would never recommend - EVER.

I enjoy the horror genre, and even the "funny" ones but why movies like this were ever made frightens me.

This one particularly lacks acting skills, the director needs to go back to school and the special effects artists work here is an utter joke.

Back to the drawing boards guys.

Hope this movie was your FIRST attempt.

Thank you drive through.


I can't believe that this is supposed to be made after the early 70's... I mean even a twelve year old with his home PC could do better in special effects - I will not comment on the story since there isn't any but I think you could see this movie as some kind of messed up modern art what at least would explain why it was made. So if you think you have already seen the worst movie ever - check this out !


I was completely amazed by this fantastic movie. I am not sure why - it isn't any much funny, the plot is unnecessarily complicated, there are few unnecessarily long scenes ... but still, the characters, the atmosphere, and the great musical score almost made me cry in the last scene where our three heroes are leaving together. All the actors do great work - from Spencer/Hill duo and Wallach himself to the black boxer champion, who gets beaten by Bud Spencer for $50. Another funny scene is where Wallach talks about his Greek ancestors, and thus makes his guards sleep. Or, when he breaks the bank in the casino. The movie is definitely worth seeing, and it does not disappoint even when watched more times. Nice!


(aka: ACE HIGH)

Eli Wallach plays Cacopoulos, a generous bandit who gives away all he steals to those less off than he is. That is, until he steals $300,000 from bounty hunters Cat Stevens and Hutch Bessy (Terence Hill and Bud Spencer) who then come trailing after him all over the southwest (or in this case, Almeria Spain) and want their money back.

When they catch up with him, Cacopoulos let's them in on his primary motive. To get back at three men who double-crossed him 15 years before, letting him get caught and sent to prison. He already killed one, and the other was killed in a Mexican shootout earlier in the film. That only leaves Drake (Kevin McCarthy) and since Cacopoulos had already gambled all Hill & Spencer's money away in Drake's gambling establishment, it's only natural that they help Cacopoulos out in getting their money back.

Reluctantly, Hill & Spencer agree and with the help of circus tightrope walker Thomas (Brock Peters), they stumble onto the fact that Drake's establishment has the roulette wheel fixed, with lookouts in the ceiling and a magnet in basement room under the roulette wheel itself. Needless to say, Drake will get his just reward for ripping the town off with his fixed gambling tables and Cacopoulos will get his revenge. I won't say how so you'll have to see for yourself.

The first half of this film is pretty standard, but the second half involving Drake is where the film really distinguishes itself, imo. It turns into a caper yarn. It also has it's funny moments but isn't as humorous as Hill & Spencer's later spaghetti western; THEY CALL ME TRINITY (1971). Btw, this is their second appearance together, the first being GOD FORGIVES, I DON'T from the year before.

The anamorphic Paramount DVD uses an excellent print although I think the widescreen is a bit too cropped on both top and bottom. Sound is also good with English subtitles (if necessary) and another excellent score by Bruno Nicolai.

If you like the genre with a little humor thrown in, then you might like this one. I did. Above average.

7 out of 10 -