I think this is a good film but not quite as great as some reviewers think. Mostly the problem is with the cast. The characterizations other than Liza as Sally are uniformly flat. Michael York is incredibly boring and the same could be said for the rest of the supporting cast. The two German actors and the beautiful though dull Marisa Berenson. Therein lies my problem with the movie. It's worth a look, the musical numbers are great but the plot somehow meanders, and is only of real interest because of the looming Nazi undertones. As for Liza, well, you either find her annoying or cute or perhaps annoyingly cute. The one truly magnificent element in the movie other than the musical numbers is the classic performance of Joel Grey as the emcee. For that the movie is worth seeing but unfortunately the rest of the cast Liza exempted (sort of) are not up to par.


A young English man named Brian(Michael York, in a character based on Christopher Isherwood's experiences) develops a relationship with a reckless young American girl named Sally(Liza Minnelli at a wonderful performance to the edge of tragedy) in Berlin during the 30s in which Hitler is rising to power and racism, anti-Semitism and determinedly amoral behavior are growing. They're both then seduced by a German rich aristocrat named Max(Helmut Griem). Meanwhile Brian works as English teacher for an elegant young Jewish(Marisa Berenson) and his friend Fritz Wendel(Fritz Wippel), both of whom falling in love. All the roles are linked by the Kit-Kat club where perform Sally and an androgynous master of ceremonies(Joel Grey , he deservedly won Oscar to best support cast).

It's a magnificent musical-drama well set on Germany where are increasing horrors of Nazism taking place on its grim moments. Atmospheric nostalgia piece from the stories of Christopher Isherwood and successfully creating a portrait of a nation falling into moral decay. It's one of the most perfect examples of accurate timing over a sustained period ever put on cinema. This dynamic film packs excellent musical numbers full of aggression, fire and turn out to be unmissable experience. Liza Minnelli, Michael York and Joel Grey give the acting of their lives. Glamorous and evocative cinematography by Geoffrey Unsworth . Based on the John Kander's hit Broadway musical and soundtrack by Ralph Burns full of classic songs. This story was formerly brought to life by Henry Cornelius (1959) with Laurence Harvey(Brian role) and Julie Harris(Sally role) in a good drama no musicalized.

¨Cabaret¨ is an impressive picture splendidly directed by Bob Fosse(1927-1987) and winning three Oscars. Fosse was a director, actor, choreographer and dancer. He choreographed : ¨My sister Eileen, The Pijama game, Damn Yankees¨ and directed another films with awesome musical sequences such as ¨Sweet charity and All that jazz¨.


Cabaret is an exceptionally well made film - the music, choreography, acting, screenplay and direction are all of very high caliber. Even after 36 years, it hasn't aged, and is as shocking and entertaining as ever. It deservedly won 8 Oscars in spite of competition from one of the most beloved movies of all times The Godfather. Although the academy is notorious for decisions based on emotions rather than merit, in this instance, I consider the splitting of best direction and best picture Oscars between the 2 films as a just outcome. It's therefore very surprising, it's not on any of the all-time-great lists - a great injustice, or could it be a conspiracy? It'll certainly be on my list of 100 all-time-great movies.


This film is set in Belin beginning in 1931. Despite the rapid rise of Fascism, you would never know it inside the bawdy cabaret where much of the movie is set. Here, it is all laughter and gaiety--no sign of the coming war. The apparent stars of this show are Joel Grey (a master of ceremonies who has no other role in the film) and Liza Minelli (an incredibly screwed up American singer and dancer). The utter banality of the cabaret as well as Liza's personal life are a deliberate counter-point to the seriousness of the day. Despite antisemitism running amok, Liza is oblivious to it all--living her hollow and self-indulgent life. How she screws it up and the bizarre relationships she has are makes up about half the film and the rest consists of song and dance numbers. In many ways, it's like two totally separate films fused together.

Surprisingly, I found I enjoyed the non-musical portion much more. Liza plays a fascinating character--a perfect film example of a borderline personality. This personality disorder is typified by love-hate relationships, self-absorption, self-destructive behaviors, magical thinking and an inability to accept that they are not the center of the universe. It's obvious that the writers had worked with some mental health professionals to nail this so well. While not fun to watch (after all, who wants to watch a self-absorbed idiot?), it was fascinating. Some of Liza's odd and self-absorbed behaviors included sexual relationships with gay and bisexual men which are destined to fail, extreme promiscuity, alcohol abuse, shallowness and magical thinking. Sadly, in some ways this sounds a bit like Ms. Minelli's real life, though I do wish her the best in her recovery.

As for the rest of the cast, they were mostly there for Minelli's character to play off of. Yes, Michael York and others are there, but most of the reason seems to be to provide texture to Minelli's life as well as to provide SOME semblance of normalcy. They see that Germany is slowly descending to Hell, but Liza's character is simply oblivious.

CABARET is a very good film, that I won't argue. But for the film to have garnered eight Oscars--that I find very hard to understand. Now it's true that many of these were for musical or set design awards, but still the film doesn't seem that exceptional. Perhaps I am just missing something or perhaps it's because I've seen other films about the Nazi period in Germany that just seemed better. Or, perhaps it's because I preferred the parts of the film where they were NOT singing--for as a musical, it's songs aren't all that memorable. Aside from the rather annoying "Money Makes the World Go Around" and "Cabaret", most people would have a hard time remembering the songs that play such a prominent role in the film.

Also, while I do agree that Minelli deserved the Oscar for her demanding performance, I was very surprised to see Joel Grey get one as well. Yes, he did also work hard, but he really had no lines at all in the film--everything he did was singing and dancing and clowning around on stage. With no life beyond the stage, it's very surprising that he won. I assume that part of this was because with three nominees for Best Supporting Actor from THE GODFATHER, the three actors split their votes--allowing the unusual performance by Grey to grab the trophy. I know Grey can act, as he's been amazing in other roles, but here he just sings, dances and acts bizarre---an odd choice for the award.

Overall, while this was a very interesting film, I didn't particularly enjoy it. I know MANY disagree with me and they may be right, but given my tastes I just didn't care for the film. In fact, had the film not improved in the second half, I probably wouldn't have finished watching.

A final note to parents. This is a VERY adult film with lots of sexual content and frank discussions about homosexuality and abortion. Think twice before showing it to the kids!


Two of the most successful movie musicals adapted from Broadway shows are The Sound Of Music and Cabaret. Of course what could Maria Von Trapp and Sally Bowles possibly have in common, other than the times they live in and how they dealt with them.

Cabaret takes place at the tail end of the Weimar Republic era as Sally and her crowd party on while Germany is surrendering its freedom to an authoritarian minded party and its leader. Liza Minnelli is Sally Bowles in what is her career screen role.

With the fading away of the musical genre, we don't get to see Liza Minnelli too often as a singer so be grateful that Cabaret is recorded and popularly available. Her role also calls for a great actress as well, so small wonder she won an Oscar in 1972 as Best Actress. Her award was one of eight that Cabaret received.

Cabaret ran for 1165 performances from 1966 to 1969 on Broadway and it was reversed there in terms of casting. On stage it was an English woman and an American man expatriate it Weimar Berlin and starred Jill Haworth and Bert Convy. Michael York took the role of the rather naive young man who while renting a room, falls in with Liza Minnelli and her hedonistic lifestyle.

Repeating his role as the Cabaret emcee is Joel Grey who was the Best Supporting Actor for 1972. I think it would have almost been impossible to do a film version of Cabaret without Grey. He's one fey and evil man who is quite willing to adapt to the new Germany. My guess is he found a boyfriend later on in Ernest Roehm's SA and later paid dear for it, either killed during the Night Of the Long Knives or died in one of the camps.

I've always loved the contrast between the Von Trapp family who saw what was coming to Austria and took measures to flee and Sally Bowles who kept on in her words, going like Elsie. York could see what was coming as did many others in her crowd. One can only hope she did eventually.

Liza Minnelli's best song was one especially written for the screen version by songwriters John Kander and Fred Ebb. With all the awards Cabaret won, amazingly that Maybe This Time didn't even rate a nomination for Best Original Song. In an era when good film songs were at a premium, that was inexcusable.

One other comparison with Sound of Music. The song sung by the young Aryan pure Germans, Tomorrow Belongs To Me is a frightening number. I could see young Rolf who became a Nazi while courting the Von Trapp eldest being part of that.

Cabaret is a film guaranteed to last forever, something that will never date and something we always have to be reminded about.


This film was made in the early 70s and I've probably viewed it almost ten times, but it still feels fresh and sharp in it's analysis of different people in a highly frustrated and controversial society.

The viewer is taken to the eventful atmosphere of Berlin in 1931. The focus of the film is on an interesting relationship between two opposites. Brian is a young newly arrived English teacher and Sally a cabaret performance artist. Brian seems touchingly innocent and uncorrupted, while Sally is the lively opportunist, who's not unwilling to sleep with producers in hope of a film career. Sally is a bit naive in a very lovable way.

We also get to follow the story of Fritz and Natalia, the gold-digger looking for a rich marriage and the daughter of a rich Jewish merchantman, and their difficult relationship. The Master of Ceremonies and Maximilian, a wealthy aristocrat, both illustrate a nonchalant and immoral life-style. I can't help to be charmed by the elegant self-confidence and "divine decadence" of these two characters. I guess decadence is seen as a stylish virtue in Western jet-set culture.

Any film with such ingredients and cast could be great, but Cabaret is however also a musical. The songs and performances support the storyline perfectly. Unlike in other musicals the songs seem like a very natural part of the story. The most memorable scene is when a youngster stands up and sings a patriotic song. Soon the viewer gets to see the swastika on his left arm and the audience stands up one after one and sings with him. The scene gives you cold shivers, because the emotional impact is quite scary. The scene makes you wonder what your own reaction would have been and helps to understand how vulnerable people are. Most other songs are great too. "If you could see her" (through my eyes) is both heartbreaking and hilarious. Is it a crime to fall in love?

Few films I've seen involve as much depth and many different levels as Cabaret. The film is very entertaining, but also realistic, analytical and critical. My all-time favorite.


Under Bob Fosse's direction the cabaret numbers are all exciting. Joel grey as the Master of Ceremonies is outstanding. Liza Minelli as the brassy Sally Boules outshines everyone in her splendid "Come to the Cabaret" presentation.

It is amazing how much action can take place on the confines of the tiny cabaret stage and how soon one is completely absorbed in the solo acts. The cabaret audience and its reaction are left out of the picture most of the time, the camera concentrating on the singing and dancing. The choreography and costumes are top class and the acts soon become the most interesting part of the production.

Against a background of Nazi propaganda there are the continual rumblings of anti-Jewish sentiments in 1931 Berlin and a nervous anticipation of events likely to follow. But the MC invites his audience to leave all their problems, their worries, their cares outside and enjoy the cabaret where everything, just everything, is "beautiful".

Intertwined with the stage presentations at the cabaret are the off-stage relationships between Sally and her lovers. Understandably these scenes do not quite sparkle like the rest of the film. I do however enjoy the scene where Brian Roberts (Michael York) and Sally get a little tipsy, clink glasses and make a toast "Here's to you and the baby".

Liza Minelli has beautiful eyes which she uses to great advantage. She can give us a wonderful display of mixed emotions....laughing and crying at the same time with a tear-stained cheek. Great to watch and enjoy.


Less of an adaptation and more of a total reinvention of the successful stage play, the film version of Cabaret is one of the few movie musicals that is almost universally considered to be superior to the Broadway play that inspired it. Most unusual for the time, director/choreographer Bob Fosse made the ingenious decision to isolate the songs from the dramatic scenes, and keep all of the musical numbers on the stage where they belong. This proves to be a dynamic film-making device, as the terrific songs by John Kander and Fred Ebb create a harrowing juxtaposition to the haunting backdrop of the Nazi party's brutal rise to power in 1930's Berlin. From anti-Semitism and fascism to bisexuality and open promiscuity, there is no subject considered "off-limits" in this taboo-bucking motion picture.

In an Oscar-winning performance, Liza Minnelli literally radiates with an exuberance that she was never able to recapture elsewhere, and also takes time to belt out bravura renditions of exceptional numbers like "Mein Herr," "Maybe This Time," and, of course, the sublime title song. Englishman Michael York is slender and sexy as Minnelli's occasional love interest, and Joey Grey picked up an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his amusing and creepy performance as the Kit-Kat club's grand emcee. The German-bred actors Helmut Griem and Fritz Wepper both turn in seductive performances, and Jewish socialite Marisa Berenson is quite affecting as the film's sole ingénue. Berenson's Berlin accent is so convincing that I mistakenly assumed the New York-born actress was really German for years.

Winner of eight Academy Awards in all, including Best Director (the film lost the Best Picture Oscar to THE GODFATHER), CABARET is a remarkable film that successfully combines sexual titillation and wicked humor with grim social commentary and nightmarish realism (sometimes simultaneously and with music). The film is entertaining and enjoyable, but also contains a haunting aura that lingers long after the picture has ended. I have seen this film more than 30 times over the past 25, and I get chills during the "Tomorrow Belongs to Me" sequence every single time. That type of lasting effect is not common in art work of any medium.


When celebrating the cycle-of-life "Cabaret" sits on the spice shelf.

A town which is occupied by a sausage-factory which comes to life when the meat-plant workers come in for rest and relaxation and perform the lessons and morality-tales which are learned from safe and unsafe handling of food and objects around different life-forms.

That sex, love, and family must sometimes be sacrificed to perform and follow the foot-lights of the stage.

War is sometimes a bi-product of military-personal racing to their favourite performance venue(s) where "other" children and wives lived and worked in Europe and especially in Germany.

The cycle-of-life is the call for many to chase the memory and contact with those people and places which made them excel at something, namely war.

That in the end the only way to keep some of the universe's life-forms from racing to a celebration of war as depicted in other films such as "Wood Stock" and "Schindler's List" was to electronically engage and control the minds and movements of those who chase a special moment based on the destruction of others.

The difference in the end was the sausage and the workers.

Which are you?


"Divine decadence, darling," is what is served up abundantly in *Cabaret*. I was in junior high school when Liza won Best Actress for her tour de force as Sally Bowles  I was furious because I felt that Diana Ross got robbed. I knew, with my consummate adolescent insight, that Liza was merely playing herself in *Cabaret*, but that Diana was acting her little heart out in *Lady Sings The Blues*. Time has told a different tale, however, with *Lady Sings The Blues* being resigned to ignominy and *Cabaret* remaining as a sparkling achievement in movie-making. Winning 8 Academy Awards in a very tight race against such blockbusters as *The Godfather*, *Deliverance*, and *Sounder*, it is Liza Minelli's tour de force, a role of a lifetime. Even her mother, Judy Garland, never had a role like this, so exquisitely tailored to her talents, that even Liza herself had a tough time topping this performance. In fact, she never did, starring in some truly dismal choices such as *Lucky Lady* and *New York, New York*. In *Cabaret*, Minelli plays Sally Bowles, a plucky little trollop who sings at the Kit Kat club in Berlin, during the time of the Weimar Republic. Sally tries very hard to be "an international woman of mystery," but lives in a dream world in which her non-existent worldly and dashing father will soon swoop down and rescue her. She falls in love with Brian (York), a charming and bi-sexual scholar earning his living as a translator. They are both romanced by a wealthy and handsome suitor (Griem), who after stirring their dreams and passions, leaves them flat. The subplots of Brian's students, their fellow boarders at the rooming house, and Sally's various schemes provide an opportunity for wonderful music and staging. Most of the numbers happen onstage at the Kit Kat club. We have addressed the issue of performances within performances before  and the usual question is "Who would pay money to see this?" But in *Cabaret*, the staged musical numbers are spectacular and you would definitely pay good money to see a nightclub performances like those. "Money" and "Mien Herr" are incredible, and Bob Fosse's outre choreography is stunning. The costuming and makeup add to the heightened surrealism, and the Nazi threat adds an element of danger and desperation to a movie that would be hard to classify as a musical, drama, comedy, satire or war movie. The Nazi violence, with a few exceptions, is shown by implication and suggestion. The "Tomorrow Belongs To Me" number is roundly described as stunning and chilling, and after almost 30 years, remains so. The concept of the story itself is enduring, engendering 90s Broadway revival directed by *American Beauty*'s Sam Mendez


This incredible movie tells the story of Germany's slide towards Nazi rule in the late 1920s or early 30s. The world of pre-WWII Berlin is seen through the distorted mirror of the Kit Kat Night Club. While technically a musical, the movie does not use the contrivance of having people stop in the middle of a scene and burst out in song and dance. Rather, the songs and danges are integrated into the plot either by being performed on the Cabaret stage or in some other natural manner--including the bone-chilling Tomorrow Belongs to Me. Unlike most movies of the time (including the vastly overrated Godfather), director Bob Fosse does not keep the action entirely linear; rather event A will happen in scene 1, you then have scene 2 dealing with an unrelated issue, then the consequence of event A will be played out in scene 3. This lets the viewer draw his own connections, rather than having everything spoon-fed by the moviemaker. While the Godfather un-deservedly got Best Picture for 1973, it got a total of only 3 Oscars, while Cabaret got 8 (including Best Director)--making it the movie to have gotten the most Oscars without also getting Best Picture. It surely should have--in 1973 or just about any other year.


This globally acclaimed and masterful film was definitely one of the most risky and dared projects in cinema history and thus it also easily could have been one of the biggest failures ever. A cheerful musical about...Nazis?!? Especially during an era when films began to be very spectacular and explicit ("The French Connection", "Deliverance", "The Godfather"), a love-story set amidst the rising Nasism seemed like a very bad idea. And yet "Cabaret" is still standing as one of the most crucial films of the 70's, although it has to be said that the actual love story is secondary to the immortal songs and  especially  the portrayal of frustrated Germany during the years prior to WWII. Bob Fosse stylishly and appropriately alternates footage from inside the moody bar with scenes from the romantic life of variety star Sally Rowles (Liza Minelli). Sally is involved in a slightly peculiar triangular relationship with German industrialist Maximilian and English language teacher Brian. Meanwhile and all around them, supporters of the Nazi ideas become more and more numerous and their presence soon begins to have a direct impact on the lives of everyone. The acting performances are fabulous, especially Minelli and Joel Grey who plays the sleazy master of ceremonies who pretty much indirectly narrates the whole story. The songs are downright magnificent and masterfully choreographed, with great costumes, make-up and sound effects. The sequence in which Brian and Maximillian are in a public park where the majority of German citizens there seem to permanently turn to Hitler's ideas in intensely disturbing and powerfully highlighted trough an ambiguous song. A lot of film fans, especially around this website, will surely disagree, but Bob Fosse's "Cabaret" righteously stole some important Oscars from "The Godfather"...Maybe not even enough.


British man Brian Roberts (Michael York) comes to Berlin to teach English in the 1930's, at the time the Nazi party is rising.There he meets an interesting singer Sally Bowles (Liza Minnelli).The bi-sexual teacher becomes very fond of her.In between there's the handsome and rich Maximilian von Heune (Helmut Griem).In Berlin he also meets people as Fritz Wendel (Fritz Wepper) and (Natalia Landauer).They're both Jewish and attracted to each other.Joel Grey is the eccentric Master of Ceremonies.The cast is absolutely fantastic in this Bob Fosse's musical drama.I read about two years ago Christopher Isherwood's Goodbye to Berlin, which this movie is based on.This week I saw the movie and they're both great.In the movie you can hear the songs being sang and they're all marvelous.I truly recommend this movie to a whole bunch of people.


OK, the acting is good, the direction superb and all the music numbers are great (especially "Maybe This Time" and "Mein Herr"), but the movie is depressing (the Nazis slowly taking power), overlong, and the sexual politics are VERY dated (having bisexuality a subject of a musical was revolutionary in 1972--now it's old hat). I know many people love this movie but I was bored silly after the first hour or so. Minnelli and York really started to grate on me. Still, when Minnelli sang, the movie was fantastic and Joel Grey was slimy and scary as the M.C. So, while I agree it's a good movie (and changed the face of movie musicals) I can't say I enjoyed it.


Cabaret was far different that the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical films like The Sound of Music or Mary Poppins or Oklahoma. This film was decadent for the time of Berlin before Hitler's rise to power. As the Nazi movement was gaining power, Berlin residents like Sally Bowles played by the one and only Liza Minnelli had relationships with men and lived on her singing at nightclubs until she meets Michael York (When will he be knighted?) anyway he plays the writer. Joel Grey won an Oscar as the Maestro. I loved the movie and won't bother to see the musical whether it's Judi Dench or anybody else playing Sally Bowles. THere was only one person who played Sally Bowles to me and that was the divine Liza with a Z. She totally becomes the character. When you see this film version, any musical whether the West End in London or Broadway in New York City will always be second rate to this cast. Of course, the fact that Bob Fosse directed this gem and changed the musical films forever from light and happy to dark and sad like in Cabaret. It's eerie to think that the people in the Cabaret have no idea of the horror that lies ahead with World War II and that's terrifying in general. I won't give away much but that this is Liza at her finest and best.


This film looks at the lives of an American cabaret performer and a British writer in 1931 Berlin as the Nazis are coming into power. The musical numbers, which are confined to a nightclub, are excellent, brimming with energy. Most of the film, however, is devoted to the vapid love life of Minnelli and York, and it is not very interesting. Minnelli performs with gusto, but she and York have no chemistry and their relationship is not believable. They become the best of friends hours after meeting. While Fosse gets credit for the musical numbers, what was the Academy thinking in giving him the Best Director Oscar over Francis Ford Coppola for "The Godfather?"


Oh whoopie, look at this- I get 100th comment.

Right... my original interaction with this movie was last May (2005) when I was given a CD of various Broadway songs... one of them being the revival (1998) version of the song "Cabaret," from "Cabaret" of course...

So when a production of the show came to my city this last month, I was eager to see such. I adored the show, and a week later I had the soundtrack to the 1998 revival.

Well you know, I couldn't exactly see the show every night, and my friend had told me how strangely different than the play the movie was, so of course I had to see it.

This was a VERY WEIRD remake.

I see that people have already picked up that "Married" was left out... but the thing is that it isn't just "Married" (at one point, we can also hear a record of "It Couldn't Please Me More" and "Sitting Pretty"), but the entire plot line between Fraulein Schneider and Herr Shulz was left out.

In the play, these two are humongous characters, and very good characters might I add. These two are completely dropped. In the play, Max is hardly a character, but in the movie he's humongous.

However, I am not saying that this was a BAD remake- but a very odd one; and so much different than the play! I could babble on and on about this, but I do have other things to get to.

VERY inappropriate as well- the film has been rated PG, which surprises me, for "A Chorus Line" (which came out not much later) was rated PG-13, and this was much worse. In short, don't let your children come anywhere near it.

Ooh gawed, hated Sally's hair.

The styles of Sally Bowles were atrocious; whereas in the play they were a bit unappealing, but not as exaggerated as in this version.

One thing I'm quite surprised I haven't commented on- I was very bummed by the amount of the Master of Ceremonies bits they took out... the Emcee was one of my very favorite characters in the play, and yet his part was so much smaller in the movie...

However, this is not to say I am not impressed with this- as an original idea picked up from a very impressive play, I am quite fine with it. However, as a remake of a play, it is terrible.

If you haven't seen the play, and you're ready for an extremely ironic, dark, somehow amusing, extremely disturbing movie, go ahead- watch Cabaret.

If you've seen the play and want to see it again, don't expect it of this movie version.


Yes, I rated this a 7 out of a 10....I only gave it a 7 because I haven't seen it since I was 7 years old......don't know if it's the 10 I used to think it was hee hee I loved Roller Boogie hee hee...I must have watched that movie a million times when I was a kid.

When I was a kid I also didn't care about the plot...All I thought was beaches, skating, pretty girl, pretty boy...happy ending.

I'm afraid that if I see it now I'll be supremely disappointed by my childhood innocence like I was with Saturday Night Fever...whew...I had no idea what was going on there until I saw it when I got older..again I had tunnel vision as a kid. I could only think about the dancing.

If you want to see Linda Blair not controlled by the devil and have some campy fun...go for it!!!! Don't be a snob:)


It'an innocent final 70s movie, where Linda Blair moves to skate with her boyfriend, expert roller skater Jim Bray and her friends making a plan to safe the disco palace where a devilish business man tries to build a Shopping Mall there. At the end of the night is the roller skating championship. Evertything must go perfect. The movie is bad, but you cannot denied to be amazed about the disco music, the roller skates and Linda. There's innocence in this movie. This kids loves sport, to hangout with girls not only for sex and loves have fun drinking a soda in the roller boogie place. This are times hard to get now, and the nostalgia wins a 10. Maybe will bore some, but still got it's cheesy magic.

Directed by Mark L. Lester.


A popular trend can be a great subject for a movie. Trouble is, not all trends are timeless. One trend that I believe will never go out of style is the cult film. Thanks to this little part of cinema history films that didn't do so well the year they were released finally found an audience, even if what happens in the movie is very different than what we see in the present. 'Roller Boogie' is one of these movies. It was somewhat of a hit at the time because roller disco was a big thing in the late 1970s, but this film came at the end of the decade and was a critical failure. Over the next few decades it would develop a small cult following and after seeing it for myself I can see why.

Pros: The cast is game. A fun disco soundtrack. Great job on the costume designs, bright and colorful. Fast-paced. Some excellent skating scenes. Made with a real sense of fun. Some of the dopey humor is amusing. Nice beach scenery. An exciting chase scene. Director Lester injects much energy and style into this.

Cons: Terribly dated. Cliché and predictable.

Final thoughts: Won't win any awards for best screenplay or acting, but so what? This is pure unpretentious fun! A real feel good movie and must for cult film buffs.

My rating: 4.5/5


This was made to cash in on the then hot roller disco fad. Rich girl Terry Barkley (Linda Blair) inexplicably falls in love with skater Bobby Jones (Jim Bray). Then she, Bray and their friends try to stop nasty businessman Thatcher (Mark Goddard) from tearing down the local roller disco rink.

I realize a lot of people find this campy and fun. It's campy alright but I didn't find it fun at all. I was mostly bored. The script is pretty awful--full of idiot characters (all of Brays' friends act like Three Stooges rejects) and stupid dialogue. There are continuity problems galore too--notice how Goddard and his goons look pretty clean after being pelted with tons of fruit. As for the acting...what can you say about a movie where Linda Blair gives the best performance? The acting on display here is abysmal. Bray easily is the worst but (in his defense) he was chosen to star at the last minute. No wonder this was his only film. Also that feathered hair does him NO favors! He also looks pretty unattractive (but that's just my opinion). Goddard is pretty good though--he (wisely) underplays his role. This gets a 3 because it isn't totally unwatchable--it's definitely better than "Xanadu" and the opening sequence with the kids skating through the streets IS fun. Also I admit--I LIKE some of the songs and the skating/dancing was actually pretty amazing. Years ago Blair was asked out of all the bad films she did what was her favorite. She said, "Roller Boogie. It was good for the kids." So I didn't like it but it is harmless.


This film became an icon for me from a very young age. I was just nearly five when this movie came out so I didn't get to see it until a few years later when Channel 4 showed it as a retro late night film. I was an avid skater. I longed for a local roller rink near me, but there was Nothing, only Ice rinks. I took ice skating lessons to help alleviate some of the frustration and then went back and applied some of the knowledge to my skating. Roller Boogie was brilliant for me, because it was cheesy , but most of all one of the very rare films that focused on roller skating - a tough subject to inject into a movie! Terry's car in the movie is beautiful too and those white roller boots! I remember finally getting a pair of all white-leather roller boots, hard to come by over here, but they were the best present ever - I still have them and they still fit and I hope to be wearing them when I teach my niece how to skate too! Roller Boogie as a movie cannot be taken too seriously! It has a feel good factor about it, no obscenities, the music is so retro ( to us nowadays anyway) and I love the skate line at the beginning of the movie - I just wished we had skate lanes like that in the UK! This is a film for those who like skating - don't bother to watch if you are a football fan - you wont get it - its simple teenage, roller skating , good vs bad and I have spent years trying to find a copy to replace my fuzzy VHS-taped from TV-copy. Mine came today, I've watched it, and I will probably watch it in the future when I'm snuggled up on the sofa, full of cold or maybe a hangover and just watch it - it is my feel good movie and one that few will ever enjoy as much as me! xx


To watch this film and enjoy it you either have to enjoy the skating shows put on, the disco music, or fancy one of the cast.

I watched this film and enjoyed it. I suppose I fancied Linda Blair in it, but other than that the only reason I liked it was because it was simple fun, not to be taken seriously. It's easy on the eyes, and easy on the eyes. Eye candy, if you will. :-)


Linda Blair reached her peak in "The Exorcist", this film is scarier than that one in my book. The acting was dreadful, the soundtrack frightening, and the story non-existent.

Where the hell did they find these other 'actors'? I think most must have been taking time away from the adult film industry, judging by the prowess displayed here. Terry's love interest/skating coach (?) was pathetic on screen. His delivery made him sound as though he was slightly impaired somehow.

This movie represents the final nail in disco era's coffin. Avoid at all costs.


I thought this movie was great! It was very cute but kind of cheesy, I think thats what made it good. It had a great love story in the middle of a mildly sensible crime story.

The story of a rich prude, bored with her life, who finally finds something interesting to fulfill her time: skating. But when a man comes to replace their beloved skating rink with a mini mall, she will stop at nothing to stop him. Her skating friends and boyfriend are the only ones who will stick with her. All the while, she has time to practice for a roller boogie contest with her boyfriend and blow away her fellow contestants. Classic!!!


As silly as those "Beach Party" movies from the mid-'60s could get, at least they had energetic casts and funny screwball comedy. "Roller Boogie" does have a curly-topped Linda Blair, but backs her up with a bunch of long-in-the-tooth teen-nobodys and awful disco music on the soundtrack. Jim Bray, real-life skater and debuting romantic lead, works well with Linda and they have a few engaging scenes, but the romance is so shallowly presented that one can only scoff, and the film's big climactic chase is botched by sloppy editing. This one is truly hell on wheels.

*1/2 from ****


This is absolutely one of the worst movies ever made. And contrary to another comment on the movie, having lived in Southern Cal during this period and being the age that this movie was aimed at, it was meant to be taken seriously for the disco crowd that was running rampant just prior to and during its release period. The acting is horrible, the milieu it represents is horrible, the writing is horrible, and the premise is horrible. Let me say that a LOT of people went to see this film upon it's release--the superficial, appearance oriented, self-centered disco freaks. Pure commercial slop intended to capitalize upon a temporary and silly craze.


This is a truly awful movie and it reminds me of a part of American history that many of us would rather just forget. Yep, the time when Disco forged an unholy alliance with roller skating! This craze lasted about a week and a half and spurred on the creation of this terrible film. The movie is less a musical and more a teenagers save the roller disco from the evil corporation--all set to a disco beat. Linda Blair seems to try hard enough, but the horrid script, direction and the idiotic supporting actors they paired her with doomed this movie to oblivion. BUT, it's so bad, it's good. In other words, it will provide hours of laughter and the ineptness of the film.

In addition, you should be aware that 1979-1980 also gave us perhaps the WORST musicals ever--not just Roller Boogie. Can you remember the horrific and big budget mess that was XANADU (Gene Kelly's body is STILL spinning in his grave for having appeared in this film)? Or, perhaps the West German sci-fi disco religious musical THE APPLE (where the good hippies were saved by a Cadillac driving Jesus at the end of the film)? Well, my advice is watch these terrible films to relive your past OR watch them so you can laugh at your parents who actually paid good money to see them!


Linda Blair has undergone quite an amazing transformation since the first "Exorcist", but this inconsequential, goofy, utterly predictable comedy is easily forgotten a few hours after it's over, because it has no plot and no weight whatsoever. Meaningless stuff. (*1/2)


First things first: somebody needs to officially release this film in the United States. I see three thousand copies of Dude, Where's My Car every time I step outside, but when I want to see a beautiful and interesting film like Gemini, I have to track down a dubious bootleg on eBay. Pitiful.

The plot concerns a rich doctor suddenly thrown into a well by a man who looks exactly like him. The mysterious doppelganger takes over the doctor's identity, his household, and his wife, all the while laughing and taunting down the well at his imprisoned twin. As the mysterious lookalike gradually reveals the truth to the doctor, it becomes less and less certain which of the twins is the "hero" and which is the "villain."

Shinya Tsukamoto isn't a great director yet, but he's getting there. With Gemini he reveals a tremendous versatility, combining moments of sedate drama with hyperkinetic sequences of terror and joy. The actors are all magnificent (especially Masahiro Motoki in a complex double role), the cinematography is stunning, and the story is thoroughly intriguing and well told. It's not the best movie ever made by any means, but here and there Tsukamoto manages a few moments of real greatness, scenes where we genuinely become one with these characters and their needs. Watch the doctor, defeated and filthy at the bottom of his well, beg for a release from his suffering; watch the wife burst into tears as she remembers her past existence.

Tsukamoto knows what he's doing. He hasn't quite achieved true greatness yet, but one day he may just break through.


After having been impressed by the Tetsuo series, Gemini was all I was hoping for and much more. The cinematography is some of the most beautiful and evocative I've seen, with wonderful use of colour, light and design. Though I'd been told this movie was not "cyberpunk" like testsuo, in a way it had a similar ethic, questioning "what makes a person a person", although in this case it's more about what makes one "good or evil". I saw it the same night as I saw another popular Japanese horror, "The Ring", which curiously also features a well, but I found Gemini much more sinister and frightening.


A film of extremes.

"Tetsuo" and its sequel were ripping bouts of cinematic mayhem. This film, "Gemini", represents a stunning turnabout for the director who applies a sure, delicate hand to an unnerving mystery.

A doctor in 1910 Japan lives a seemingly perfect life; he is handsome, he is married to a beautiful (albeit perplexing and inscrutable) woman and he is a renowned doctor.

The deaths of his parents send the doctor down a spiral of madness and violence. His wife grows more distant and enigmatic. He loses his grip on reality but the nightmarish events seem to spring from his own hand...

Frequently the imagery is rigorously symmetrical, composed with a great deal of poetry and ethereal beauty. Many of the shots are masterpieces of Japanese design. The effect is like a spiderweb where all the strands are perfectly aligned and no two edges seem to deviate from the basic construction. Even in the most tranquil image, the director creates a sense of palpable menace, as though the air is tinged with the smells of blood and gore even though the shot may be of a perfectly kept garden.

On this elegant framework the director lays on stunning moments of violence and revelatory mayhem. Besides the visceral elements, there is a great deal of psychic violence in the film. The audience witnesses the mental descent of the doctor so delicately and precisely that it seems that we can see the hairs rising on the back of his neck.

An unsettling and very rewarding film.


Shinya Tsukamoto's take on a Meiji era "Cask of Amantillado", and the parable of Cain and Abel, is possibly one of the best Japanese horror-films ever lensed. There are no supernatural-elements, only the landscape of tormented human-souls. This was a for-hire film for Tsukamoto, and was released through Toho studios. For a director who has often expressed his love for the Toho monster films, it was a dream-come-true, and it did well in Japan. The film was originally slated to be less than feature-length, but because of the director's resourcefulness, it was lengthened to a running-time of 83-minutes. I originally thought the film was a little short, but there-it-is. More amazing is the fact that Tsukamototo was director, editor, writer and cinematographer! Perfection is achieved in all-areas.

While based on a story by the noted Japanese author, Edogawa Rampo, Tsukamoto has made a tale that is more his own. First, he changed the setting of the period-piece from the Showa era (1920s), to the late Meiji era when poverty was more-obvious in Japanese society. He also changed a major plot-point: in Edogawa's original, the doppleganger-brother (Sutekichi) murders his brother, throws him into a disused-well, and steals his identity permanently. Tsukamoto's revisions allow-for much more by the survival of the brother (Yukio), and is more realist since the Sutekichi would have to learn all the medical-knowledge Yukio knows. This would push the story into the realms of the supernatural or the absurd. But, the truth is, this is the oldest-story told. The real trick is making it one's own, and the director achieves this with his running-theme of the love-triangle, and a feminine-wisdom that teaches the male-protagonists something they could never learn otherwise. As-usual, there are also the themes of class and one's standing and honor in Japanese society.

It should be noted that the Japanese have been very-obsessed with an aesthetic for purity and order (like Germans?), and this extends to people. Even today, survivors and the children of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are discriminated-against for being "contaminated" and "impure". In the late Meiji era, it was much-worse. The children of the wealthy would be abandoned, just as the brother, Sutekichi. His serpentine-birthmark causes his removal by his purity-obsessed parents, and he is the "bad-seed" to them. The story isn't a long-stretch, and one has to imagine how the real outcasts reacted. And yet, this is still a parable about Japanese society, which has a strangely universal-appeal. Gemini has a tension to it that resembles Poe's stories, and it is also about the psychology between people.

Sutekichi is the monster of this tale, but he was created-by his parents who abandoned-him near the slums. Sutekichi is raised, and taught by a thief to survive, much like an animal. His visage, covered in filth and rat-pelts, is terrifying. He scarcely looks human, a shadow-image of the successful doctor, Yukio. Sutekichi represents the oppression of Japan's violent, disordered-past from the eras of the Shogun and the Samurai. Yukio represents the emergence of a modern Japan, with his work as a doctor and his bourgeois life with his new-wife, Rin. He toils helping cure the rich and the poor alike, and is a hero as a field-doctor in the Russo-Japanese war (1904-1905). This is important: it was the war that ushered-in Japan as a modern nation, and was the first time that a Western power was defeated by an Asian one. This is about a new Japan.

And yet, the story is creepy. Sutekichi murders his mother and father dressed as a shaman or ghost from traditional Japanese-lore. Also, Yukio and Sutekichi are identical-in-appearance. He is an apparition of the past. Also, the doppelganger is universal as an occult-symbol of death and the unknown, and this is perhaps why the film has a wider-appeal. By the end, it's clear that Yukio must absorb his brother to become whole. In killing his brother, there is a union of the past and present. He has understood the depravity of the slums by festering in the well, and he has understood the crimes of his parents. Rin also plays her part in educating Yukio what it is to be poor and desperate--to live like an animal. The doctor will return to his practice a full-man, but there is an ambivalence, as he also looks menacing striding towards the camera. It is very-much like the ending of Scanners, and so, the connection with Cronenberg remains.


Stunning cinematography, moments of serene bliss cutting effortlessly to shocking scenes more akin to his earlier Tetsuo imagery. Tour de force and evidence of a rapidly growing range and depth. So so plot though, the beast within, Jekyll and Hyde, Janus, that sort of thing.


This film is based on a story by Edogawa Rampo, a japanese writer who was so enamoured of Edgar Allen Poe that he even took on his name. This Film is the best evidence I've seen of Poe heavy influence. The twins, the well, the wife.... at times I was reminded of "Tell-Tale Heart", "Cask of Amontillado" and "Fall of the House of Usher". Yet the film's art direction and directorial style took these themes in brilliant new directions. I loved the sound design in the early part of the film using Bulgarian(?) female chorus voices to punctuate the terror of the dark house as the wife searches for the father-in-law. The hair and make-up on the wife made her both beautiful and poisonous at the same time. A uniquely creepy film.


Shinya Tsukamoto, the man behind the Tetsuo films, Snake of June and Tokyo Fist takes on Edogawa Rampo story and turns in one of the most perfect marriages of sound and image I've ever run across not to mention one of the creepiest films I've seen in a very very long time.

Yukio is a famous doctor who won fame treating the war wounded. He is much in demand by the wealthy and so has little time for the poor in a nearby slum where the plague has been running rampant. Yukio is also recently married to a young woman he met by the riverside and who is suffering from amnesia.Soon a dark figure is lurking about and after Yukio's father dies under mysterious and unnatural circumstances things begin to take a turn for the worse.

What can I say? This is a creepy little thriller that will haunt you and keep you feeling off balance. Every shot seems to have been perfectly designed for maximum beauty. The soundtrack is a wonderful mixture of sound and music calculated to give the sense of things being not right. The effect of the sound plus the image is a sense of dread and unease even when there is nothing out of the ordinary in the frame, few thrillers or horror films have ever been able to make you feel so off by doing so little.

Adding to it all is the plot which I'm told takes the Rampo story as a jumping off point and then spins it out with new complications. Give it big points for its ability to keep you guessing as to what is going on even if you know whats going on. Having read on the film I knew what was happening and yet I still had to entertain numerous other possibilities. This movie masterfully makes you wonder about what is real and what is not.

I really liked this movie great deal. I don't know if its fully on its own terms or simply that its not another Japanese or Asian horror film with a long hair female ghost lurking about, honestly I don't care because the film is just so damn good it wouldn't really matter anyway.

See this movie.


Based on a novel by Edogawa Rampo, a Japanese author whose name transliterates to "Edgar Allen Poe". This story is very Poe-like, covering the subject of doppelgängers much like "William Wilson". Gemini is somewhat confusing, but overall it is a haunting film that actually generates fear and a deeper feeling of uneasiness. A rich doctor marries an amnesiac whose origins are unknown. Soon, her former lover  who happens to be the doctor's twin brother who was abandoned and then raised in the slums  comes back to claim what is his. The doppelgänger throws the doctor into a well and tries to win back his former wife. Soon, the twins begin to exchange personalities until, by the end, it's not entirely clear which one is the victor  or even if the final version of the man doesn't share the minds of both brothers. The film is slow to start, but it climbs to a high level. The technical aspects are especially amazing here. The makeup, the sound, the editing  everything is top notch. The acting is also great. Masahiro Motoki  whose other starring roles include Miike's exceptional The Bird People of China as well as a tryptich of Rampo adaptations named after the author  plays the doctor and his evil twin. A woman simply known as Ryo plays the doctor's wife. She's got a particularly intriguing face. She also starred in Ryuhei Kitamura's Alive. Gemini is not an easy picture, nor is it entirely satisfying. But it is great.


Class *warfare* I felt was at the heart of this thriller from acclaimed cult director Shinya Tsukamoto regarding unstable Sutekichi(Masahiro Motoki) with a scar on his leg(..who was abandoned by his parents, found floating across a river and brought up by a theatrical troupe performer, living as a thief in the slums) who tosses his successful, respected and prominently regarded doctor twin brother Yukio into his family's well, assuming his identity. Sutekichi is essentially responsible for the deaths of their parents, but his ulterior motive is re-entering the life of Rin(Ryô)who was once his lover and partner in the slums, with them separated after their thievery leads to possible trouble for the troupe when a man comes seeking revenge for what they did to his family after stealing jewels. Sutekichi has studied Yukio's mannerisms and habits, perfectly embodying him with no one, except Rin(..who has been manipulating Yukio into thinking she's an amnesia case with no history she can recall)knowing who he really is. Sutekichi visits Yukio from time to time, to drop food scraps or for to torment and ridicule him. Over time, Yukio, in a sense, switches roles with Sutekichi, understanding what it was like from his point-of-view. There's a choice Yukio makes regarding whether to treat a drunken mayor who stumbled onto a spike which plunged into his chest, or a dirty, possibly plague-infested mother whose child needs help. Choosing the mayor, symbolically siding with the higher class instead of the poor, Yukio will swallow a bitter pill when his brother takes him away from the comforts of living, placing him in a horrifying situation of confinement, hunger, and filth..there seems to be no escape as he looks up at his brother, who teases about ruining his practice and making love to his wife. And, among the pile of burdens is the knowledge that Sutekichi may've been responsible for the deaths of his parents. Tsukamoto has always brought a collection of directorial styles, his camera can sit still, smoothly glide, follow the actions of a situation feverishly..whatever is taking place in the story, Tsukamoto has a certain way of conveying it. We get a look at two worlds, the proper, quiet life of a man of prestige and wealth, and the ugly, loud and scuzzy world of the slums..quite a contrast that really benefits the story as the lives of the twin brothers come full circle and both get an understanding as to what life is like in the other's shoes. Rin is the middle woman, who left the old world through an identity switch reaping the benefits of a much more healthier world, but inside longing for the life she once had, her love for Sutekichi just as strong as ever. As always Tsukamoto brings an uneasy atmosphere and the character arcs are stunning to behold, exploring the psychological terrain of what can transform a person when placed in a difficult situation(..all the three of the principals)whether it be for the betterment or detriment of their existence.


Beautiful camera work from the director of Tokyo Fist and Bullet Ballet. Shows that he has come a long way from his small budget days. Plot gets a little predictable midway through which is ironic as you would expect a little more ingenuity from the director who brought us Tetsuo.


Director Shinya Tsukamoto of Tetsuo fame returns with something very different than his hyperkinetic cyborg technophilia mindtrip: an almost sober costume drama cum doppelganger thriller. This man has versatility, I must say.

Now the story is decent, though not as great as it could have been. As strange occurrences and the feeling of an alien presence start plaguing a successful doctor's life, he suddenly gets trapped at the bottom of a well while a mysterious person who looks just like him takes over his life, including his house and his wife. Through dialog and flashbacks we learn that the mystery man is his long-lost brother, abandoned by his family because of a snake-shaped deformity on his leg. After he got separated with his wife Rin, he searched for her to find that Rin had married the successful doctor twin. Wanting revenge for his rejection from society, plus to get back at and back together with his old wife, the stranger decides to taunt his doctor brother by forcing him into the most abject of conditions.

It's not particularly effective for horror or thriller approach, but it is a good movie in the way the one actor plays the double roles and the color and movement Tsukamoto captures. Apparently he hired actors from a certain local theatre to play the roles, and the approach they have to their characters is certainly very physical: the doppelganger and Rin snake around each other while making love, the way he cartwheels around to scare the brothers' mother, the level of distortion each character puts on their face in order to project their emotion. Add an extremely acute focus on costuming and you get something almost out of Noh theatre: demonic expressiveness, bright colorful motifs, paced and structured movements.

--PolarisDiB


The many Shinya Tsukamoto's films (such as "Snake of June","Tokyo fist","Tetsuo" and others) appears psychological exploration of "love triangle" situation.Unusial in "Gemini" absence urban constituent.Therefore "Gemini" is not hypertrophied as "Tokyo fist",not surreal as "Tetsuo" and not so atmosphere as "Snake of June".Total is not so intensive as others Tsukamoto's works.But it is a good movie because qualified lighted , acted and cinematographied.Pleasant momentary turn (by using equipment in manner sci-fi movie) from "historical film" to "modern" (plague child scene).Synthetical music soundtrack is the part of "urban" instruments of director Tsukamoto.


With the exception of his little knock-off horror/comedy "Hiruko The Goblin", I have loved all films I've seen by Shinya Tsukamoto and this is probably one of his best. It takes a while to understand what's going on, but the build-up is quite good and is creepy, bordering on disturbing. A doctor and his wife are staying with his parents, and the parents are not sure about the new bride, who claims to have amnesia but may be other than what she seems. When the father passes away, there is much mourning, and then when the mother arises to use the bathroom in the middle of the night she encounters a VERY strange character that literally scares the life out of her. And then there's the kindly doctor who is puttering about the garden who suddenly is attacked and ends up at the bottom of the well, only to realize that it seems to be himself that put him there? For he has an identical twin, it seems, and the twin has assumed his identity. Sure, there's a lot more to it than that, but you'll have to watch it to find out. Good use of eerie and unsettling music too. This is a bit more "arty" than earlier Tsukamoto films, but well worth seeing and very unsettling. Ryo as the wife Rin is quite good in her role and she seems almost "other-wordly" and to an extent, she IS from another world, of sorts. Well worth seeing for fans of creepy Asian cinema and if you've seen and liked other offerings from Tsukamoto (like Tetsuo, Snake of June), you'll like this. 9 out of 10.


Ok, first of all I have to say that I am a Tsukamoto fan. I've been calling Tsukamoto the lovebaby of Lynch and Cronenberg for years now. His visual style is excellent! People who don't like films without a story can never appreciate a Tsukamoto film. His movies are film in it's purest form. No story just images put together like you have never seen.

The thing about Gemini is that this is the only Tsukamoto I can think of which has some kind of deeper meaning to it. It's telling something about the rich and poor diversities. The moral seems to be that you can't judge someone based on his financial position...... at least that's what I made of it. With Tsukamoto you never know what the story means (if it has a story), but this is the only film of his which looked like it had at least some kind of a plot. Also his directing style was somewhat calmer. Not many slowmotions and shaking camerawork. The film still is all about the images though, and right from the start you know it's a Tsukamoto when you see his trademark: Maggots eating some rotten flesh.

What can I say, I love his movies. This is not his best work though. I think Tokyo Fist was his best, but this is a strong second. Tsukamoto is one of a kind!!!! 10


I have a confession to make: I hate "evil twin" stories. There have been, to date, 750,899 versions of the "sinister sibling" on American television alone. Add in the innumerable feature films that feature "terrible twosomes" and we're talking 4.5 million times that this hackneyed approach has been used. Even George Romero, an otherwise mostly original filmmaker, used the doppelganger (in his version of THE DARK HALF, Stephen King's hackneyed retelling of The Evil (br)Other story). Enough, already. Anybody who thinks this is anywhere near Tsukamoto's best simply hasn't got a clue. It's better than A SNAKE OF JUNE, but that's not saying a whole lot. How does it stack up against his earlier films? It don't. Period.


"Die Hard" is the prototype type for the modern action film. Since it's also one of the best action films ever made, that happens to be a very good thing. "Die Hard" is lean, mean, and doesn't contain a single second of wasted screen time. The direction, the action, the story, the acting . . . every aspect of this film comes close to big-budget action movie perfection. Since "Die Hard" was first released in 1988, it's difficult to think of a blockbuster action film that doesn't follow the basic structure and format of "Die Hard" . . . or, for that matter, is better than "Die Hard".

"Die Hard" is about John McClane (Bruce Willis, in one of his all-time best film performances), a basically good, honest New York cop with a penchant for annoying authority figures. Traveling to Los Angeles in a last ditch attempt to patch things up with his estranged wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia), John McClane suddenly finds himself involved in a hostage situation. Terrorists, led by the enigmatic Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman), have taken over the office building in which Holly is working, and with Gruber holding the upper hand over the LAPD and FBI forces in Los Angeles, it's up to John McClane to save the day . . . .

Kudos should be given to both director John McTiernan and screenwriters Jeb Stuart and Steven DeSouza -- the film is tight, electrifying, and clever, which is something few action films can ever claim. The story isn't completely believable, but it's believable enough, and it manages to move along at a quick enough pace to where the most glaring plotholes can easily be glossed over. There's also enough twists and wrinkles thrown into the story to keep the audience guessing as to what's going to happen next . . . and the surprises don't come out of left field, but are actually clever and well thought-out. (The fact that McClane often relies on his brains instead of his bullets to get out of his predicaments is also a big plus.) Simply put, "Die Hard" is one of the smartest and savviest action screenplays ever written. McTiernan holds up his end of the film admirably as well -- he uses the claustrophobic nature of the office building to great effect (particularly in any scene involving an elevator shaft), and he keeps the film rolling at a rollercoaster pace, building up the anticipation of the audience before unleashing the action. A lot of recent action films just fly along at a mindless, breakneck pace, without ever allowing the story to breathe or the suspense to build . . . unlike those films, "Die Hard" knows how to maximize the impact of each and every scene, and that's why it stands out so clearly from them all. With "Die Hard", John McTiernan puts on a perfect clinic as to how to pace an action movie.

As for the acting, it's darn near close to perfect. Bruce Willis is awesome as John McClane. As played by Willis, McClane's a smartass with a distinct disdain for being given orders . . . but McClane's also clever, and knows how to keep cool under pressure. There's more to McClane than the stereotypical tough guy hero. Fortunately, the role was given to Bruce Willis, who infuses McClane with the perfect mix of cocky arrogance and stone-cold heroism. The fact that Willis plays McClane as a man often in disbelief of his own situation, and who struggles in his fight against bad guys instead of just killing bad guys with ease, like most stereotypical action heroes -- well, not only does it make the character much more believable, it's darn brilliant. (The fact that Willis also knows how to deliver a deadpan one-liner better than anybody else in Hollywood makes the character all the better.) There's only a handful of movies where both character and actor are a completely perfect match; Bruce Willis as John McClane is one such perfect match.

Also worthy of mention is Alan Rickman's performance as the villain Hans Gruber. The Machiavellian Gruber would've been an easy villain to turn into little more than a scenery-chewing Bond villain . . . fortunately, Rickman doesn't travel the easy route. Gruber, as played by Rickman, is cold and calculating, and actually acts smart, instead of merely claiming to be smart and then being thoroughly outwitted by the hero. He always appears to have an ace hidden up his sleeve, and is so convincing at giving this impression, it's hard to tell throughout the film whether he or McClane truly have the upper hand. Other actors probably could've played Gruber fairly well, but Rickman makes Gruber one of the all-time great villains. As for the rest of the cast, they're all pretty good. Bonnie Bedelia does a nice job as John's soon-to-be-ex-wife Holly -- she plays her with enough smarts and feistiness to break the usual "damsel in distress" mold. It's also worth mentioning that Paul Gleason, who plays the obstinate police chief Robinson, pretty much sets up the modern action movie stereotype of the authority figure who refuses to heed the advice of the maverick hero. The character is stupid to a fault, and he's wonderful because of it.

"Die Hard" is a terrific example of what happens when all the pieces of a film fall together perfectly. There simply are no weak spots or dull moments in the film. Is "Die Hard" one of the best overall movies ever made? Probably not. But it's undeniably one of the best action movies ever made, and it just might well be the perfect modern action film. Grade: A


One could claim that 1988's "Die Hard" is one of the most influential action movies ever made because it basically revolutionized one of the most copied (but never matched, at least in terms of quality) formulas: a loner, by some unique twist of fate, battles it out with an "x" number of terrorists in an enclosed environment.

By the time that "Die Hard" was released, the action movies were most often dominated by the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, and Chuck Norris. Star Bruce Willis, whose only notable credits at the time were television's "Moonlighting" and 1987's "Blind Date," which was released the year before, was the unlikeliest of them all.

Willis was a wild card - an unlikely choice for the role of our hero "John McClane" - since he didn't have any action credits on his resume' and let's face it: Bruce Willis just didn't have the bulging biceps required for a role like this. But that's the beauty of his performance in this movie: he's an everyday guy, caught in a not-so-everyday situation.

On Christmas, McClane's estranged wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) invites him from New York all the way out to Los Angeles to spend the holidays with the family. But it requires him to make a stop at the Nakatomi offices, which is having an after-hours Christmas party. Riding for the first time in a limo, he's introduced to the suave driver, Argyle (De'voreaux White), who gives him some pretty useful advice on trying to win over the wife.

At Nakatomi, things of course get off to a rough start for McClane, as he gets into an argument with the wife and is left to wallow in his misery. However, those problems are about to take a backseat to the real "party" - twelve terrorists, led by Hans Gruber (all-purpose bad guy Alan Rickman, perfectly cast) - seize control of the building and proceed to rob the Nakatomi building of its assets, most of which include negotiable bonds and other valuables. But they didn't count on the "fly in the ointment" (pain in the a**) to make things hell for these so-called party crashers.

Certainly one of the best known action movies ever, "Die Hard" did receive the scorn of critics upon its 1988 summer release, but the audiences sung a completely different tune.

The film was most often praised for the production, with the brand-new Fox Plaza office tower serving as the fictional Nakatomi building. It was also praised for the energetic and skillful direction of John McTiernan, whose most notable credit was the action-sci-fi thriller "Predator," which was released the year before and starred Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Bruce Willis was the perfect actor for this performance, since he brings the wit and vulnerability to a role like this one. If Stallone or Schwarzenegger were in this movie, I'm sure the effect would have been a lot different.

Personally, I think "Die Hard" is one of the greatest action movies ever, up there close to my favorite action movie of all time, "Raiders of the Lost Ark." Like Indiana Jones in that film, "Die Hard" had an Everyman cast in the role; McClane, like Indiana Jones, wasn't a larger-than-life musclebound grotesque: he was a real guy that you cared about, who got hurt, and had real feelings.

That's why I think both of these movies have sort of stood the test of time as becoming what they are best known for today: action classics, and they're here to stay, ladies and gentlemen.

10/10


On the night that John McClane (Bruce Willis), an NYC cop, is visiting his estranged wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia) in a 40-story skyscraper, terrorist thieves seize control of the building. McClane manages to slip away unnoticed and singlehandedly works to take out the terrorists and save 30 or so hostages.

Fantastic! This ought to get anybody out of their seat and make them take notice! Once it gets going there is non-stop action and violence, and even entertaining exchanges between McClane and terrorist leader Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman). The picture offers some good dialog, good thrills, some impressive special effects, and some good performances. I think this movie and its equally macho sequels would be a must for any action fan's video/DVD library.

McClane does sort of turn out to be a one-man army, but he's not exactly superhuman. He suffers wounds and injuries just like any normal human being, and he talks quite a bit. McClane's efforts are not appreciated by either the L.A.P.D. *or* the F.B.I., and his only support outside the building is from weary street cop Al Powell (Reginald VelJohnson). The relationship between McClane and Powell is a well-developed one, and Willis and VelJohnson have good dialog as Powell offers McClane words of encouragement.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention the superb performances by Rickman and Russian ballet dancer Alexander Godunov as the primary bad guys. These are thoroughly entertaining action movie villains, and Hans is actually more than one-dimensional. On the one hand, he's cold-blooded and cruel, yet he also enjoys dressing well and seems very cultured.

The only sour note is the abundance of the F-word (although, in retrospect, I might be swearing a blue streak if I were in the same frustrating situation) and the variety of truly moronic supporting characters in the film (the self-serving, coke-snorting yuppie Ellis (Hart Bochner), the foolish and brain-dead deputy police chief Robinson (Paul Gleason), the equally self-serving and pompous TV news reporter Thornburg (William Atherton), and the ignorant and overconfident FBI men (Robert Davi, Grand L. Bush).

But what a film it is. Entertaining for over two hours. While on the surface it seems like a real "Guy's" film, Bonnie Bedelia, as the estranged wife, has a decent role, although hers is the only prominent female role in the picture.

9/10


Quite possibly the best modern action movie since the classic "Dirty Harry", "Die Hard" simply rocks. Based on the interesting novel "Nothing Lasts Forever" by Roderick Thorp, "Die Hard" made headlines for its combination of a terrific cast, excellent script, amazing action sequences and superb direction. Headed up by screen favorite Bruce Willis (The Sixth Sense), "Die Hard" also features the talented Alan Rickman (Galaxy Quest) and Bonnie Bedelia (Needful Things). Directed by action veteran John McTiernan, the mastermind behind such action spectaculars as "Predator", "The Hunt For Red October", "The Thomas Crown Affair" (1999), and "Die Hard With A Vengeance".

In the role that shot him to stardom, Willis plays Detective John McClane, a hard-hitting cop from New York on Christmas Vacation in LA. He is there to visit his wife (whom he is separated from), Holly Gennaro, who recently got a great job working for the Nakatomi corporation and has permanently moved to Los Angeles with their two children. John arrives at Nakatomi Plaza expecting a fun Christmas party and a relaxing night. Man was he wrong! A few minutes after getting settled, twelve gun-toting Eastern Europeans take the entire 30th floor hostage. The supposed terrorists are headed up by the brilliant megalomaniac Hans Gruber (Rickman), who actually wants the $640 million dollars inside the floor's vault. Somehow, McClane escapes upstairs armed only with a handgun and starts causing a ruckus, slowly hunting down each well-equipped thug.

"Die Hard" succeeds is because it presents every challenge McClane has to face realistically and clearly. As the tension mounts, the ordeals for John become increasingly harder. First, it's just a terrorist. Then a whole slew of them. Later, it's the NYPD and even the FBI! Director McTiernan gives the film a good pace and makes the film work by showing that John isn't superhuman; he only uses his brain more than his gun. Also, screenwriters Jeb Stuart (The Fugitive) & Steven E. De Souza (48 Hrs.) add touches of humor that lighten up the viewer and classic one-liners ("Yippy-Ki-Yay, !@#$") that ignite the screen. Their subplots actually add to the story instead of overcomplicating it, especially one featuring good cop Sgt. Al Powell (Rejinald VelJohnson of TV's "Family Matters").

Overall, this movie was awesome. Willis is very believable and has significant screen presence. Character development is superb, and even though Stuart and De Souza leave some loose ends untied - like how a man gets hung with a chain and still comes back for more - the film remains to be an action classic. Note to Parents: the nudity, drug use, continual profanity, and extreme violence would make this a bad choice for kids under 13. Otherwise, see "Die Hard" ASAP! Overall Rating: *** Worth 9 out of 10 dollars ***


Every so often,a film comes along that resets the standard for it's genre.Die Hard did just that very thing for action films.Any film that inspires copycats and wannabes really does it's job well.Bruce Willis made a very successful transition from the small screen to the big screen as the everyday Joe forced into being the hero.This film has all the necessary ingredients to qualify it as a great action film.All you have to do is see it for yourself.Particularly well done is the performance of Alan Rickman as the chief villain,Hans Gruber.You can come up with good arguments for many action films as to which is the best all time,and this one is no exception.Well done.


So many things made this movie great.

This movie made Bruce Willis immortal. He soaks up this character so well, it was him. The wise cracking cop who is entertaining because he is sarcastically funny not uttering stupid catch phrases. He is a cop who looks like a normal guy, middle age, loosing some hair with wife problems. (no faked up pretty face with shaved chest and oiled muscles). He is cool without pretending to be cool. He manages to thwart the bad guys while barefoot, man that is a great twist.

The plot is great because it does not fall perfectly in line for the hero. He stumbles, gets stuck and survives only by last minute thinking. It has plenty of action without getting ridiculous.

And the bad guys are great, smart sinister and well acted.

It is one of those movies that could play every weekend and would still be watched. Is one of those top 10 movies every guy should own.

Die hard 2 was OK but not as good as the original, I wish they would have stopped after 2. Die Hard 3 is poor.


1988 and the undisputed number one action star was that Austrian body builder with the funny name with that monosylabic guy from ROCKY in second place . The thing I hated about Arnie and Sly is that their action movies were uninvolving with over blown battle scenes where the good guys never seemed to be in danger of dying . I was also going to bring the James Bond franchise into the conversation but the series became a parody when Bond stopped speaking with a Scottish accent sometime in the early 70s

DIE HARD is different to the other 80s action fests with John McLane being a fairly believable genre character . Okay he`s two dimensional but that`s got to be one dimension more than John Rambo who only exists to kill a lot of nasty commies so Americans can flock to the cinema . It`s also interesting to note that McLane`s wife is used in the plot which is slightly different from how most action films work out where the hero is normally single , but that`s probably because DIE HARD as more depth to it than many contemparies. Perhaps the biggest difference is that McLane is slightly flawed as we`re shown one scene where the hero gives the bad guys something they want , not something you`d see in a Arnie or Sly movie . I won`t mention the stunts or the tightly written set pieces or how compelling they are because everyone else has beat me to it , except to say that big explosions and gun fights often overwhelm an action movie ( Bond movies are a good example ) but here they occur from the narrative instead of someone cramming them into the script in a vain attempt to thrill the audience .

Normally I`d have a fit that an action blockbuster is well inside the IMDB top 250 but DIE HARD does deserve to be there since it`s the best movie of its type of its era .


In the Sixties, author Roderick Thorp wrote a novel, The Detective, which was turned into a movie, starring Frank Sinatra in the title role of Joe Leland. A sequel was written, in which Joe becomes trapped in the Claxxon Oil Corporation skyscraper after it is taken over by German terrorists and he has to rescue his daughter and grandchildren. Two decades later, the skyscraper becomes Nakatomi, the daughter becomes the wife, Leland becomes John McClane and the title becomes Die Hard.

To say that Die Hard sets new standards for action movies is like calling Bill Gates well off. The movie was so innovative and groundbreaking that dozens of rip-offs followed - Passenger 57, Under Siege, Cliffhanger, Sudden Death, et al. Hostage/terrorist movies were all the rage in the early Nineties.

Very few came close, because Die Hard had so many strong points, not least of which was Alan Rickman's marvellous performance, as Hans Gruber - also the name of the villain in Our Man Flint - the classically educated, smartly dressed terrorist leader. This is not some hammy guy in a chain-mail shirt with spikes on his gloves (Commando). Gruber would have been well at home on Wall Street.

His plan is to break into the vault on the 30th floor of the Nakatomi Plaza and take away $640million in negotiable bearer bonds. When he and his 12 European henchmen round up the office workers, who are enjoying a Christmas Eve party, one man slips away unnoticed. He is John McClane, a New York cop who has come to LA to settle down with his estranged wife, Holly (Bonnie Bedelia). The odds are against him. But that's just the way he likes it.

The terrorists even have names. And we remember them. Most action movies these days have unidentified heavies, played by stunt men, who are lined up and knocked over.

In his battle to save his Holly, McClane is scorched, torched, beaten and blown up. He jumps off the roof and falls through air ducts. He uncovers deception and double-cross and picks broken glass out of his bare feet. No help comes from the naive and incompetent police, who are unable to get inside, and even less from the FBI.

McClane is not a supercop. He is an ordinary guy, who doesn't want a fight. When he is shot, he bleeds. He hurts. All he has are his pants, his vest, his gun - which runs out of ammo. This is the first realistic connection the audience has. When you don't want to be in McClane's position, it makes for much excitement.

John McTiernan, who's only previous mainstream movie was Predator, uses awesome photography and technical skills to give the film a truly polished and sophisticated look - it was nominated for four technical Academy Awards. He also allows for enough time for decent character development, most of which comes between McClane and a cop (Reginald Veljohnson) he makes friends with on a CB radio.

Die Hard manages to be heart-pounding and teeth-gritting every single time. And if you are one of those many people who have only ever been able to watch it on TV then now is definitely the time to rediscover a cool, classic and creative action picture.


When you see this in the shops you can only think of that line, it's one of the true films to be an Action film from start to finish. The best part of this film is it's ages really well, you would think it was made only yesterday, it has one of the biggest stars in history of films Bruce Willis.

OK so on to the film, it starts like any other film and sets the scene for what is a roller coaster ride that will leave you wanting more at the end. In the beginning we see John Mcclane (Bruce Willis) on a plane on his way to Los Angeles, the reason he is going there is to meet his wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia who looks really attractive in this film) and it's Christmas Eve.

He goes to the Nakatomi Corporation building which is where Holly works to see her and be there for his kids who he hasn't seen in a while, but during the time there he has abit of a fight with her and she gets called to give a talk, anyway John is in the bathroom insulting himself in the way how Bruce Willis does, and he ends up taking his shoes off (the person who he is sat next to on the plane says the best way to get over flying is to take your shoes off and walk bear foot and make fists with your toes...personally never tired it). During the time little does he know that a group of terrorists are planning on taking over the building (this all happens in the first 20 minutes or so).

The film then really starts to go into its own as we follow an average police officer from New York in LA trying to just to get home for Christmas, still more about this film. Upon noticing that the building is being taken over by terrorists John escapes and heads to the top floor with work is still going on, and sets off the fire alarm in an attempt to get the police there. When the terrorists find out that hes set the fire alarm off from the top floor they phone the police and tell them that its nothing to worry about and send someone up to kill him, John pleased with his attempt to get back up there looks out the window and swears at them for coming to his aid, then notices they turn around.

At this point they send someone up to take him out, and the person ends up getting killed, John having a wicked sense of humour (on both levels of the word) sends the dead body down the lift and takes as much as he can like the machine gun, and cigarettes as you do when your in that sort of situation, and tries on the shoes only to find they are too small. He also writes an amusing note on the persons jumper, meanwhile hes in the lift above the one that stopped taking notes on what hes up against.

Later on John goes to the roof of the building to transmit a cry for help to the police and has a fairly amusing conversation on to the police, anyway at this time he gets cut off due to being attacked by the other terrorists, and they choose to send a police officer to search to see if John was telling the truth, anyway the terrorists and John are having a shoot out in one of the offices, and to get the attention John uses his head he throws the body out of the window.

Now that he has some help the film moves onto a new level and the action increases more, as police road bloke outside and the FBI get involved the scale of this film (which by the way was made in 1988) starts to show. As John gets in situations and the action increases and has loads of twists and turns.

In my view this film has everything to be one of the best if not they best film out there, the scale of it is amazing and the cast is true great. Words cant really describe this film, you really have to watch it, but the film does leave you wanting more and does leave you wanting to watch the next one in the series. I could talk for days about this film and it's action sequences from the very small gun fights to the massive C4 explosion and the plot which doesn't seem to lose it's appeal even after watching it infinite times, and also it's feel good factor at the end when John is back with Holly and they are in the snow (lets face it you knew they would live) but it's got something that does make you want to watch it over and over. If they made more films like this then people would probably remember what cinema is about and we may have really memorable hero's like we use to.

This film should be a benchmark for ever other film that is out there trying to be an action film with a strong story, lets face it on paper it's a simple story terrorists want a building for money, they take it over, then John gets caught up in this mess...it's not hard really.

But then maybe people like it because it's simple, however I think they like it, or i I like it because it's so original and has never been done before, even Die Hard 2 and 3 they push the idea of films harder and further than before. They go that one more to make it fun and try to make the story still remain simple. It's one film you have to watch and it really should be in the top 250 on IMDb.


I'm a great fan of Bruce Willis and the fifty odd films which he has starred in, but his role as John McLane in the "Die Hard" series would have to be on the top of my list for the best Bruce Willis movie of all time. After watching and probably enjoying the film immensely, you realize how corny, but good the film was. The first few action sequences involve the ultimate bad guy, Hans Gruber (played by Alan Rickman in one of his more solid performances) and are great viewing. They really do set the tone for the rest of the movie, and even for the sequels to follow. But these first few scenes are upstaged by the brilliance of Bruce Willis in his many fight scenes, usually involving gunfire, glass breaking or some kind of explosion! These scenes are enjoyable and all lead to the explosive finale, which leads to a chopper going down, the roof of a building exploding, and a man falling 70 stories to his death. There's also plenty of comic relief in this film, with Argyle, McLanes' limo driver, being oblivious to the anarchy occurring above him whilst he is in the underground car park listening to music and chatting up ladies. Officer Powell, McLanes sidekick outside of the building, also provides a few good laughs. But the two main performances of Willis and Rickman take up mos of the screen time, and rightfully so, as these two characters are brilliant to watch. The Plot line is quite good for such an action-packed film, and it doesn't ever lose any of the intensity it starts out with, if it doesn't gain any that is! All in all, this is a film I recommend for anyone who doesn't take films too seriously, or just wants a good action packed film. Definitely one to put into your DVD or video collection at home.


Ahhh... There's nothing like the holiday season! Family reunions around the big table, presents for everybody and the kids playing all night long after Santa Claus' visit. Movies set in Christmas are always the kind of production which enhance our mood, touch us and make us feel better... Is it?

Not anymore. Because "Die Hard" is set exclusively on Christmas Eve, but it has nothing to do with Santa, elves or Frosty the Snowman. It simply is the catalyst of the blockbuster generation of the 90s and it's also one of the best action movies of all time.

The movie is about a group of European terrorists (they're German, actually) who plan to steal $600,000,000 from Nakatomi Plaza's vault, in Los Angeles. By the way, for those who didn't know it, the Nakatomi Plaza building is exactly the same than 20th Century Fox headquarters.

The group is led by Hans Gruber, one of the most interesting villains portrayed for a while and Alan Rickman's best role to date. What distinguishes Gruber from the other master criminals is his great intelligence, his apparently high level of education and erudition and his careful plotting of the heist. He always seems to know what he is doing, what he has to do, what is gonna happen and what to do if there is any hitch. He looks like a modern Phileas Fogg. This is almost scary, because we can ask ourselves: "How could we beat this... machine?"

Unfortunately for Gruber, there is only one little thing (and a considerable one) that he didn't count on: John McClane (the one and only Bruce Willis, in his breakthrough role). McClane is a NYPD cop who came to L.A. to visit his wife Holly (Bonnie Bedelia), but he was able to escape himself from the terrorists when they invaded the building. Now, he's the only one able of defeating the terrorists and he's gonna have to use his brains, his guts and his muscles in order to stay alive and save everybody.

McClane is first depicted as a mildly-reclusive, word-avid cop, but he quickly becomes wild after the terrorists' takeover. And his heroic actions throughout the entire movie make him one of the coolest heroes of the last years, along with Indiana Jones and James Bond.

The action scenes are greatly orchestrated by action maestro John McTiernan (known at the time for "Predator). Not only do they figure bloody battles, explosive gunfights and eye-popping pyrotechnic effects, but they're filmed in unique and interesting ways. Here are some examples: After Harry Ellis is shot, we can watch Gruber talking to the police via walkie-talkie... throughout holes made in Ellis' head. And there's also these scenes where McClane shoot two terrorists in the legs, making them literally blow out with blood.

Gunfights are unrelenting and we could believe that there were as many bullets shot in this film as in an entire war.

And for dessert, what about two great bombings inside the building itself? First, there is that unforgettable and visually-dazzling massive explosion made by McClane with a 'bomb chair' and, second, that epic roof bombing, which can be visible from the far other side of the city.

This is the great part of the visual. The less shining part is the light circles and ovals which constantly appear and disappear during nearly all the movie. This is very annoying and disturbing.

Other than Gruber and McClane, there are only two very interesting characters. The first one is Gruber's henchman Karl (Alexander Godunov). Just looking at him is dreadful. His eyes are aggressive, cold and piercing. And his indelible grimace render him menacing and serious. He's that kind of guy with whom it is preferable not to make angry.

The other interesting protagonist is Sgt. Powell (Reginald VelJohnson). He's the only contact that McClane has with the exterior from inside his glass pseudo-prison. Together, they develop a close relationship with each other during the operation although they never see each other until the end, in a very heart-warming scene.

"Die Hard" wins points for what it is and for what is has become. In 1988, it showed a whole new kind of action sub-genre: the die-hard genre, which is an action picture taking place in a restrained place, such as a skyscraper, a plane and so on... The hero was a real human being, instead of being a reckless soldier, a suave spy or a martial-arts expert. It is a great example of the near-perfect action picture. It's "Die Hard" that launched a wave of big-budget action pictures, making the 90s what we could call the 'yippee-ki-yay' generation.


This movie is one action-packed ride. Bruce Willis (John McClane) is a New York cop coming to see his wife who has moved to L.A. with their children, hoping for a relaxing Xmas vacation. Instead, he gets a bunch of bad guys who have taken over the Nakatomi building which he and his wife are located in. He hides out, and takes out the bad guys one by one, all while trying to get police attention from the outside world. This movie is tense and full of action. Bruce Willis and Alan Rickman put in outstanding performances. Willis manages to kill all of the bad guys and throw Rickman off the building. If you haven't seen it yet for whatever reason, now is the time to do so.


One of the best action thrillers ever made, Die Hard still rocks like a thunderstorm nearly twenty years after it was first released; often copied and arguably never, ever equalled, this film introduced the set-up of the lone cop/soldier/tough guy against a team of terrorists who have taken over a secured area. We'd get airports, airplanes, ships, buses, trains and many more, all in inferior films, but in Die Hard the action is set in a skyscraper, and director John McTiernan handles the claustrophobic tension with breathtaking skill. Bruce Willis also introduced the action hero as tough but eminently, realistically woundable; by the end he's a bloody, torn, shot and beaten mess. Obviously he survives near-impossible odds, be it falling through lift shafts, jumping off of exploding roofs and such and such, but he's no invincible Schwarzenegger type, and that's what makes him more likable and it's what gives the film real tension. Also, in Alan Rickman, we have the very best example of the refined European master criminal who would become a stereotype very quickly; funny, dangerous, clever and sophisticated, he's a villain you love to hate. The script is a dazzler, the action is brutal, effective and extremely exciting and the final half hour in particular cranks up the adrenaline to maximum effect. A classic.


Die Hard, one of the greatest action movies of all time, still to this day, it's more impressive than ever. If you were to look in the dictionary and look up the word action, this movie would probably be shown, lol. My mom was just absolutely in love with this film and told me how much I should see it if I love action movies, also I had become a Bruce Willis fan, so when she mentioned that, I decided to sit down and watch it. It's not just Bruce Willis that makes this movie, although he does a fantastic job as the ultimate hero, his line delivery is always perfectly on cue and he's just such a cool guy that anyone could love. But for me it was Alan Rickman who truly steals the film, he is the ultimate bad guy and his voice was just so creepy, I love him. But all together the cast and special effects truly make this a memorable film for generations to come.

John McClane is a police officer who has taken his career very seriously, a little too seriously since his wife is about to divorce him and he's about to loose his children. When John comes to see his wife, Holly, at her office building during the company Christmas party, he asks if he can be given a second chance, but that gets slightly interrupted when terrorists enter the building. Hans Gruber, the leader of the terrorists, wants 600 million dollars of bonds from the company's owner. But with John in the building, he's gonna have a hard time because John is on his case will make sure to give him a roller coaster of a crime bust.

This is without a doubt the most exciting action movie since The Terminator. I love the whole idea of this taking place around Christmas, it just adds a little more dark humor. Especially the way that Alan Rickman says "Now I have a machine gun. Ho...Ho...Ho", it was just so perfect! I really love Die Hard, I am officially a fan, this is just the most awesome movie to watch. Believe me, it's that good, I highly recommend this movie for anyone, it's a lot of fun, I guarantee you that you will not be disappointed.

10/10