imdb_id
stringlengths 9
9
| title
stringlengths 1
92
| plot_synopsis
stringlengths 442
64k
| tags
stringlengths 4
255
| split
stringclasses 1
value | synopsis_source
stringclasses 2
values | review
stringlengths 119
19k
⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tt0080437
|
The Big Red One
|
The film begins in black and white in November 1918 at the end of World War I. A private (Marvin), using his trench knife, kills a German soldier who was approaching with his arms raised and speaking in German. When he returns to his company's headquarters, the private is told that the "war's been over for four hours." The 1st Division patch is shown in color.
The film then moves to November 1942, when the soldier, now a sergeant in the "Big Red One", leads his squad of infantrymen through North Africa, where they are initially fired on by a Vichy French general, who is then overpowered by his French troops who are loyal to Free France. Over the next two years the squad serves in campaigns in Sicily, where they are given intelligence by a peasant boy, and are fed by grateful women, Omaha Beach at the start of the Normandy Campaign, the liberation of France where they battle Germans inside a mental asylum, and the invasion of western Germany.
Throughout the film, the sergeant's German counterpart, Schroeder, participates in many of the same battles and displays a ruthless loyalty to Hitler and Germany. At different times he and the sergeant express the same sentiment that soldiers are killers but not murderers.
During the advance across northern France the squad crosses the same field where the sergeant killed the surrendering German at the start of the film, where a memorial now stands. The following short conversation takes place:
Johnson: Would you look at how fast they put up the names of all our guys who got killed?
The Sergeant: That's a World War One memorial.
Johnson: But the names are the same.
The Sergeant: They always are.
The squad's final action in the war is the liberation of Falkenau concentration camp in Czechoslovakia. Shortly after this, the sergeant is in a forest at night, having just buried a young boy he had befriended after liberating the camp. Schroeder approaches, attempting to surrender, but the sergeant stabs him. His squad then arrives and informs him that the war ended "about four hours ago." This time, as the squad walks away, Pvt. Griff (Mark Hamill) notices that Schroeder is still alive; the sergeant and his men work frantically to save his life as they return to their encampment.
|
bleak, pornographic, suspenseful, historical, realism
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
For all the hoopla created by "Saving Private Ryan" (another excellent film, which, in my opinion, had a better understanding of it's subject than a lot of it's critics gave it credit for), it owed a great deal to what Sam Fuller did a decade and a half before.Lee Marvin, an actual WWII veteran himself, holds the film together as the tough but exhausted seargent.
While other movies have focused on specific campaigns, "The Big Red One" deserves high marks for painting the broad canvass of the Second World War from the perspective of the guys who actually had to do the work..
Many of the scenes, especially one involving a group of older sicilian women who cook a big meal for the squad, ring very true, since a fiction writer would obviously try and spice them up--the film is very honest, and it is good that Fuller left this story for us.
Less than 5 years after the Vietnam War officially ended, Director and acclaimed (but aged) film writer Sam Fuller attempted to recount the experiences he encountered while serving as an infantry soldier in the European Theatre of WW2.
to make a film about the REAL story of WW2, about his own experiences in the Big Red One, or The First Infantry Division.Too ahead of it's time to be appreciated during it's birth, and too dated to be appreciated in hindsight.Some of the other user comments suggest this film is inferior to modern war films.
The Big Red One tells the story from a WW2 Vet's point of view, Sam Fuller, and is wonderfully acted by a WW2 vet, Lee Marvin.
The soldier is not a clean sterile fighter for the holiest do goodynest army of all time, he is a human being locked in a battle for survival, and most importantly, he hasn't lost his sense of humor, or his libido.Regardless of it's dated, almost 70's TV movie feel, I must mention that this film was first to show D-Day in a light other than that cast by The Longest Day, and uses some very clever cinematography to illustrate the violence.
Of course, the director is the famous Sam Fuller, who did a number of tough film noirs, among other things.Speaking of tough, the person who makes this movie a notch above average is Lee Marvin.
It was especially interesting to see baby-faced Star Wars' star, Mark Hamill, playing one of the soldiers in the unit called "The Big Red One."The story with narration by one of the soldiers, tells of Marvin and his handful of men who travel and do battle from North Africa to Sicily, then Italy, the beaches of Normandy on D- Day and into Germany in addition to a few other memorable stops such as "an insane asylum."It's long, but I never found it boring and the men never stay too long in one spot..
In that respect the film, in scenes like that, and in the little moments with the "four horsemen" and their episodes, are on the level (if not superior) to the emotional connectedness that Spielberg or Stone achieved.The script is a feat as a story of the stead-fast progression of the soldiers from North Africa to Germany.
In many ways THE BIG RED ONE laid the foundations for BAND OF BROTHERS but whereas that acclaimed mini series dedicates the first episode to jump school training followed by nine one hour episodes from June 1944 to the Summer of 1945 , this movie has a running time of less than two hours featuring a timeframe that lasts from Spring 1942 to May 1945 which seems a bad idea with hindsight: Cut to Algeria 1942 , cut to Sicily 1943 , cut to Normandy 1944 etc .
And looking back on this film 20 years later after seeing APOCALYPSE NOW , A BRIDGE TOO FAR , CROSS OF IRON , SAVING PRIVATE RYAN , THE THIN RED LINE and BLACK HAWK DOWN I can`t say the battle scenes in THE BIG RED ONE are all that impressive to me in 2003.THE BIG RED ONE does have a few good points .
But the best part of the movie is a moving segment featuring Lee Marvin`s tough Sarge befriending a child who`s just been liberated from a Nazi death camp , though once again this is skated over far too quickly in a film that`s got too many negatives and not enough positives .
The Big Red One is not only one of the greatest WWII films, it is also one of the greatest war movies.Sam Fuller's film, which was butchered by the studio, is the picaresque tale of 5 members of the First Infantry, known, because of their shoulder patch, as the Big Red One. The film moves from one story to the next without spending too much time on any particular tale.The individual vignettes, as they must, vary in quality, but on the whole are excellent.
Fuller's direction here, though not his best when compared to Underworld USA or Shock Corridor, is still better than most, especially considering that this was his first film in several years.All in all, I find the Big Red One to be an exemplary war movie, even in its emasculated format (I cannot wait to see the restored, 140 minute print, which should improve upon scenes that feel to brief in this version).
It's based on actual experiences that the Writer/Director, Sam Fuller, went through during his time in the war.The movie follows several soldiers in The 1st Infantry.
There are some very dramatic and intense scenes in this film, but it avoids making the viewer feel too depressed or saddened, thanks to a lot of light humour throughout the script.Although "The Big Red One" is not well known, it easily ranks up there with Saving Private Ryan, Apocalypse Now, and Tora Tora Tora as one of the greatest war films of all time.
At no time is any serious attempt made to conjure up a realistic atmosphere; we always have the impression that we are watching actors on a set rather than soldiers on a battlefield.The lack of verisimilitude might not matter if we were presented with characters we can sympathies with, but the soldiers in this film are a fairly unsympathetic lot, with the partial exception of Mark Hamill's Private Griff, a semi-pacifist who is suspected of cowardice by his colleagues.
Particularly memorable are the shots of the dead soldier's hand and wristwatch sticking up out of the shallows off the Normandy beaches or the battered wooden crucifix which appears both in the main body of the film and in the black-and-white prologue about the sergeant's First World War experiences.
He really does become the experienced non-commissioned officer who shepherds the young soldiers of our greatest generation through war.These guys are not heroes by any means, but they are doing a necessary job and being led by the best when it comes to their survival.My favorite scenes are when the U.S. Army's First Division liberates a concentration camp in Czechoslovakia towards the end of the war.
It's what movies are all about.Mark Hamill straight from his iconic role as Luke Skywalker in the original Star Wars gets billing second to Marvin.
About half an hour into watching this film I decided instead to count the Hollywood cliches instead of trying to believe in the plot.For those lucky enough not to have seen this film they were in no particular order: 1.Persistent lazy Hollywood producers allowing non-Americans to speak English to each other, e.g. German soldiers.At least Joseph E Levine insisted in his film "The Longest Day" (1962) that the French spoke French, German spoke German etc, and this was 18 years before the subject film was made!For those not able to understand these languages sub titles are always available.This lazy habit immediately destroys a film's credibility and convinces you all you are seeing is acting.It seems if you are going to portray an historic event you might at least film it in a credible way.2.Untrained soldiers skilled in obstetrics in the middle of a battle field!3.You see a concentration camp boy victim apparantly unable to walk and is laid down on the commandant's bed.Almost immediately he is seen to walk out under his own steam and then eating looking almost healthy when he refused food before.Then he cannot walk again and finally expires while riding piggy back on the sergeant!
4.The usual 1940 and 50s method of soldiers dying on screen i.e. a sudden hand up to "the wound" and then keeling over.5.Usual portrayal of skilled German soldiers as stupid and unable to defend themselves.6.Omaha Beach on a shoestring budget on D-Day - the platoon wins the beach battle by itself!7.A superannuated sergeant (far too old for active service in WWII) going around Europe without any officer in charge of him and his platoon and when he asks for help from Brigade is told, "you're on your own".8.A female resistance guerilla infiltrates into a lunatic asylum and proceeds to cut the throats of trained German soldiers.All medical staff were vetted and under German orders and would not have been able to secrete her into this type of establishment.9.Little or no character development, so one feels no sympathy for the characters portrayed.10.An insurance actuary would not accept when assessing the odds on survival, that the principal characters would all come through unscathed at the end of the film after risking their lives at Sicily (1943), D- Day (1944) and sundry other combat engagements.
Some people have criticised Lee Marvin's lethargic performance but I thought that he was one of the few good things in the film, a reflection perhaps of his own experience of combat in the Pacific theatre (he was badly wounded on Saipan).
Too bad there weren't more of them in director Samuel Fuller's interpretation of service and survival during the Second World War.Despite the potential to be something memorable, this tale of American soldiers led by an aging (though still gritty) Lee Marvin suffers from weak characterization, unconvincing battle scenes, clunky editing and a lack of material to adequately fill its nearly two-hour running time.
And our star delivers a quintessential Lee Marvin performance, displaying a "I've seen it all before" level of perseverance.THE BIG RED ONE doesn't hold a candle to great war pictures of the past and present.
The scene where Marvin "comforts" the wounded soldier by reminding him "that's why you got two of them" sums up this film so well: war is hell but that doesn't you can't be human when you're in the middle of it.Interestingly, my top three WW2 movies are this one, _Saving Private Ryan_, and _The Longest Day_: all of which have major action on Omaha Beach..
I could could just go on and on about how absurd "The Big Red One" is, but here are a few which I remember off the top of my head:* This is supposed to be a "serious" war movie (not like "Rambo" or some Chuck Norris BS), and one based on the director Sam Fuller's real-life experiences, ostensibly, but how in hell do these boys go through combat behind enemy lines talking so much??
For a much better serious war film (though none is perfect, admittedly), try Sam Peck's "Cross of Iron" -- but DO NOT get the Region 1 Hen's Tooth DVD version, which is terribly done; screen the Region 2 French (with English dub) version instead!"The Big Red One" is "Saving Private Ryan" without any of the special effects or modern action and pacing which made the latter at least marginally redeemable.
It was supposed to be about the experiences of the men who fought but I didn't feel the film delivered that: none of the characters were really explored or given much depth, even the great Lee Marvin seemed distant and cold.
Marvin and his Four Horsemen fight their way through North Africa, Sicily, D-Day, and the European campaign all the while in clean uniforms, and clean shaven.The battle of the Kasserine Pass with 3 tanks, wow.Crummy dialogue, poor special effects.Hey, another new guy in the squad gets 3 lines - mildly entertaining trying to guess how soon he'll get killed.Ludicrous scene in an insane asylum where a Resistance fighter feigns insanity, dancing about to phonograph music, slicing the throats of the German guards with a razor.One of the worst war movies I've seen..
In one movie, with no remiss of detail!!!An ingenious way to tell the tale of America's involvement in the European war; instead of showing of an epic 3 hour movie, dealing with every facet of a major battle (The Longest Day, A Bridge too Far), they convey it through the eyes of men who actually experienced it, instead of the generals, making it seem all the more real!Believe me, if you are at all interested in WW2 history, see this movie.
Surviving is the Unique Glory in the War. A veteran sergeant (Lee Marvin) of the World War I leads a squad in World War II, always in the company of the survivors Pvt. Griff (Mark Hamill), the writer Pvt. Zab (Robert Carradine), the Sicilian Pvt. Vinci and Pvt. Johnson (Kelly Ward), in Vichy French Africa, Sicily, D-Day at Omaha Beach, Belgium and France, ending in a concentration camp in Czechoslovakia where they face the true horror of the war.I bought the VHS of "The Big Red One" many years ago and I forgot to watch it.
To compare this with Saving Private Ryan or Apocalypse Now is truly absurd - these movies have motion, purpose, but in "The Big Red One" actors just stumble through the scenery, with exploding trees, and a VERY thin story line.
It rides a great performance from Lee Marvin and nice soundtrack into the plus territory but overall it's a bit hollow.It bounces from one set piece to another without a unifying theme except for, "It's in WWII." It employs the usual war film cliches, the ethnic slurs towards an Italian GI, the bloodless combat, the sharp-shooter who develops a conscience, the drunken party with French girls, the orphan boy.The war scenes are low-budget and unrealistic.
Fuller was thus able to address certain issues with a directness unmatched by many A-movie directors; in fact, it is this directness that surprises many in Fuller's audiences, and befuddles some.The nearly three hour reconstruction of "The Big Red One" the crowning achievement of Fuller's career, is as good a case in point as any of his films.
My sense is that our natural response - somewhat amused, slightly bewildered - is exactly what Fuller wants from us; and that's what makes him such an interesting director, he is intentionally eliciting audience responses most other directors fear."The Big Red One" is indeed a masterpiece; it is at once all war films ever made, rolled into one; and yet it is also one of a kind.
In the words of Sam Fuller himself, "The only way to make a truly realistic war movie is to fill the theater with smoke and flame, the sound of explosions, and to have someone shoot the person sitting next to you."Quite.And aware of that limitation we should take The Big Red One for what it is...
A private (Lee Marvin) kills a German soldier but he finds out that the war is already over.
It's then WWII as the same soldier now as Sergeant of a squad in the 1st Infantry Division nicknamed The Big Red One. They land on the North African shore but Private Griff (Mark Hamill) is unable to kill.
Still he oozes roguish charisma, which is probably why his chemistry with the cast is so sharp.Mark Hamill is a ticking timebomb of twisted emotion, Robert Carradine is delightfully cocky and Bobby Ciccone and Kelly Ward wear their uniforms like they were born for the battalion.True to even the most frank of real life WWII stories such as Band of Brothers, this unit is comprised of men who thrive off each other, which makes The Big Red One feel so refreshingly authentic considering the time of its making.And considering what we know now what we didn't know all those decades ago, and most certainly what I couldn't have known as a child, what we witness in the movie's final scenes make it all the more heart-wrenching to come to terms with.This is a must see for all connoisseurs of war cinema!.
The film will follow him and four infantrymen as they fight across North Africa, the Mediterranean and Western Europe, right up until the eventual German surrender in 1945.I like Sam Fuller's war movies.
This happened all of the time during the war; how often did we see it in WWII films before "Saving Private Ryan" rolled around 18 years later?
Along with several other war tributes to the generation that served our country during the 1940s, Fuller's version is another good film to see.Starring as the main character is Lee Marvin.
For a war movie from 1980, then "The Big Red One" was actually quite good.
Samuel Fuller adds his voice to the countless others who have recorded WWII stories, yet manages to create a movie that's completely original in its vision.The largely autobiographical story follows the Big Red One, the nickname for an infantry rifle squad, through many of the war's major battles.
It concentrates on the 5 main characters, four soldiers who survive through the whole war and their tough as nails Seargent (with no name) played with great humanity by Lee Marvin.
Released in 1980, BR1 is one of the earliest war movies to feature a cast that at least resembles the age of the actual WW II soldier, Lee Marvin being the obvious exception.
I'm sorry, but if you want to see the life soldiers really live and what they talk about, you can't bring your kids, and you might not like what you see, it's not like life in peacetime.Now I know there's a lot of people, like me, who watch war films for the gratuitous battle scenes.
|
tt1757746
|
Extracted
|
Tom, a scientist, invents a machine that can insert a person into the subconscious mind of another person. Desperate for funding to complete his prototype, he is forced to accept money from an anonymous investor. When the investor threatens to pull out, Tom reluctantly agrees to a demonstration a month ahead of schedule. The investor turns out to be an official at the Department of Corrections who wants to use the machine to extract involuntary confessions from convicts. Initially repulsed by the idea, Tom's friend, an entrepreneur, convinces him to proceed, and Tom enters the mind of Anthony, an addict who is suspected of having killed his girlfriend Adrienne. Though Anthony volunteers in order to prove his innocence, Tom is able to walk through Anthony's fractured memories and prove his guilt. However, when Tom tries to return his consciousness to his own body, the machine malfunctions and traps him in Anthony's mind. Unable to leave, Tom passes the years by watching Anthony's memories, while his body remains in a coma.
Meanwhile, Anthony returns to jail and, despite his father's lack of faith in him, still maintains his innocence. When his father gives him a box of photographs, Anthony happens to recall a memory as Tom watches it. Inside the memory, Anthony stares in shock at Tom, something that Tom believes to be impossible. Convinced that this will allow him to communicate with Anthony, Tom haunts a commonly-recalled memory and waits for Anthony to stumble on him again. When they make contact, Tom explains his situation and asks for Anthony's help. Anthony agrees and sets up a meeting with Tom's wife, Abbey. With Tom's help, Anthony is able to convince her to set up another experiment with the machine, though she must agree to give the technology to the Department of Corrections in order to get authorization. However, Anthony delays the experiment and demands another chance to prove his innocence. Although angry at Anthony's betrayal, Tom is powerless to refuse. With Tom's help, Anthony pieces together more details and remembers being attacked by a former accomplice.
Encouraged by this breakthrough, Anthony escapes from custody and tracks down his friend, who reveals that Adrienne was sleeping with him for drugs. His friend maintains his innocence and suggests that Anthony killed her when she revealed this to him. Unwilling to accept this, Anthony attempts to kill him, and both are wounded. Understanding that he is dying, Anthony abandons his revenge on his former friend and instead drives to Abbey. With Tom's help, Anthony is able to guide Abbey through the process and extract Tom from his unconscious. Anthony dies from his wounds, but Tom is finally reunited with his family.
Haunted by merged memories, Tom makes contact with Anthony's father, Martino, who reveals that he set up his son for Adrienne's death, in the belief that jail would finally allow Anthony to clean up from his addiction. Finally realizing that Anthony was innocent all along, Tom pieces together the last few parts of the repressed memory: Adrienne breaks up with Anthony because of the guilt she feels over cheating on him, and when Anthony confronts her, she commits suicide.
|
psychological, psychedelic, alternate reality, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0080161
|
You're the Greatest, Charlie Brown
|
Charlie Brown decides to enter the Junior Olympics at his school after it is revealed he is not going on vacation after all. The decathlon is the only thing left open, and Charlie Brown accepts the challenge (of course after everyone else there refused to take on such a tough event before Charlie Brown showed up).
Peppermint Patty, who is the school's coordinator for the Junior Olympics, oversees Charlie's rigorous training for the event. Marcie also watches (and gives encouragement) and Snoopy works out with him (showing how in-shape he is and how out of shape Charlie is in the process). During a review of the ten events, Patty worries of whether or not he could win, and decides to enter Marcie to back him up.
On day one, Charlie is introduced to his competitors; Marcie, Freddie Fabulous from Fremont (defending Decathlon champ and smug egotist who calls Charlie Brown "Pumpkin head"), and The Masked Marvel (who is Snoopy from Ace Obedience School). He places well in the first five events, enough to place him in third after the day is over. Lucy states she is annoyed that Charlie Brown cannot be a total blockhead by his third-place ranking, as the Masked Marvel came in dead last (even after winning the final event of the first day, the 400m dash).
Day two starts off bad for Charlie. First he feels nervous due to the increased pressure, then he performs badly in the 110m high hurdles (knocking down all but one hurdle and finishing last by a mile). However, after a tough talk from Peppermint Patty, a great showing in the pole vault and first-place finishes in the discus and javelin throw catapults him into first place. Now it's all on the 1500m run to finish it all off and be the school's hero. When Charlie Brown gains the lead over Freddie Fabulous, Lucy is aghast that the world must be ending as Charlie Brown is coming in first. Unfortunately after taking the lead, Charlie Brown closes his eyes and dreams of his victory and winds up running off the track, off the school grounds...and out of contention.
It is learned afterward that their school still wins the Junior Olympics, due to Marcie winning the 1500m (and thus the decathlon) and the disqualifications of Freddie Fabulous and The Masked Marvel (for fighting on the track). Peppermint Patty consoles Charlie Brown, telling him that everybody knows he did his best. Marcie arrives and Charlie Brown congratulates her on the win. Marcie, in turn, replies, "You're a great competitor and a real gentleman. I think you're the greatest, Charles." Uncharacteristically, she then lifts her glasses and winks at Charlie Brown, who blushes.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Rooting for Charlie Brown!. We had a little brown-bag luncheon at work and an employee decided to play this cartoon short for some fun and laughs. Even though there were just six to seven of us adults in the room, it appeared that we all enjoyed the cartoon (I could hear a lot of chuckles) for its innocence, family-friendly theme and message.Here, Charlie Brown signs up for the decathlon at the School Olympics. After much challenges in his training, Charlie faces arrogant Fred the Fabulous, Snoopy as the "Masked Marvel" and friend Marcie in the competition.It's not an entirely riveting story with unending adventures and suspense, but it is an innocent and charming cartoon that includes some sports scenes that will have you cheering for Charlie Brown and for some laughable moments from the entire Peanuts gang. The voice acting was good and the animation, while may not be as hi-tech or advanced by today's standards, was simple but refreshing.It is a nice little movie for everyone to enjoy and reminds us that winning is not much as being first place as working hard and having good sportsmanship.Grade B. A typically funny and enjoyable Peanuts TV special. Peppermint Patty persuades Charlie Brown to participate in the school decathlon. Charlie undergoes a grueling exercise regimen in order get into shape for the big event. He competes against Snoopy as the Masked Marvel and mean, cocky and fearsome jerk Fred Fabulous from a rival school. Meanwhile, Marcie cheers Charlie on and serves as his back up. Once again beloved Peanuts creator Charles M. Schulz delivers a bright and witty story with a pleasing blend of true warmth and good humor complete with a right-on central message about how it's more important to do your best and be a good sport than it is to win. The decathlon itself is a delightful set piece: Fred Fabulous makes for a deliciously hateful foil, Snoopy shows off some fancy moves, and Charlie Brown has you completely rooting for him as he pours his heart and soul into each demanding round of the game. Among the nifty highlights are Snoopy wiping out on the pole vault and Marcie giving Charlie Brown a sweet wink at the end of the show. The bouncy score by Ed Bogas and Judy Munsen neatly alternates between the folksy and the funky. The animation might be pretty rough around the edges by today's more sophisticated standards, but it does the trick just the same. Charlie Brown's undying optimistic spirit and fierce determination are an absolute joy to behold. A solid and satisfying little hoot.. The Peanuts Gang. When it comes to Charlie Brown and the Peanuts shorts it's hard not to enjoy them.There is always something special when it comes to these short films of the Peanuts gang.This one is quite different as it centers around Charlie Brown accepting the challenge to compete in the Junior Olympus when the decathlon was the only thing left Charlie Brown agree to train for it.The characters that were feature in this one were Charlie Brown, Snoopy, Lucy, Linus, Peppermint Patty and Marcie with new comer Freddy is a bully from the start of the games.Being that this is a short film it is still clever how they manage to do a whole story in under 30 minutes for a cartoon like Charlie Brown. The animation is pretty good and you shouldn't expect nothing less from these shorts as they normally had good smooth animation and simple but good back ground.The voice acting does take some time to get use depending on what voices you grew up with in terms of Charlie Brown and Peanut characters you grew upSpecials always have their share of humor and sharing a message and these one does it well and I recently watch it again for the fan that I grew up with Charlie Brown Snoopy and the Peanut gang.To better enjoy this you have to be a fan and it's a good film for the familyI give You're The Greatest Charlie Brown an 8 out of 10
|
tt0029475
|
Renfrew of the Royal Mounted
|
In the summer of 1937, a dangerous gang of counterfeiters are transporting illegal money from the United States into Canada concealed inside frozen trout. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police assures the United States Treasury officials that they will cooperate fully in helping to apprehend the criminals. RCMP Constable MacDonald is sent out to assist in the investigation. While riding near Deer Lake, he sees a suspicious Indian rowing a canoe. When he calls to him, the Indian flees into the woods. MacDonald investigates the strange block of ice left behind and soon discovers the counterfeit money hidden inside the frozen trout. The Indian Pierre, who works for the counterfeiters, sees what has happened and kills MacDonald with a deadly throw of a knife.
Meanwhile, RCMP Sergeant Renfrew (James Newill) arrives with his men at the Deer River Annual Picnic where he competes against the Greek owner of the Totem Pole Lodge George Poulis (William Royle) to see who makes the best barbecue sauce. Renfrew meets nineteen-year-old American Virginia Bronson (Carol Hughes) and invites her to join the picnic festivities and barbecue. Their fun is interrupted by news of the killing of Constable MacDonald. Later Inspector Newcomb challenges his men to do everything they can to bring the killers to justice. That night Renfrew comforts MacDonald's grieving family, especially his son Tommy (Dickie Jones).
At the Deer River Hotel, Virginia returns to her room and finds Pierre, who gives her a note from her father asking that she meet him at the Totem Pole Lodge. Unknown to her, Virginia's father was tricked into coming to the lodge, which is being used as a center of operations for the counterfeiters, to provide new counterfeit plates for the gang. Bronson, who was once a counterfeiter, just returned from serving a five-year sentence in prison. The next day, while Virginia and Pierre are rowing to the lodge by canoe, the Indian spots Renfrew following them. When he reaches for his rifle, Virginia struggles to take away the gun and the two end up in the water. Renfrew jumps in after them and is able to rescue Virginia, but Pierre manages to escape.
While they dry off around a campfire, Renfrew and Virginia get to know each other. While attracted to the Mountie, Virginia discovers her father's picture in his possession and does not mention that he is staying at the Totem Pole Lodge. Later that night while Renfrew is asleep, Pierre shows up and Virginia sneaks away with him to the lodge. Meanwhile, her father is being forced to complete a set of counterfeit plates. He finally meets the head of the counterfeit gang—the Greek lodge owner, George Poulis.
Meanwhile, Pierre and Virginia make their way slowly to the lodge. On the road they're met by two of Poulis' thugs, and Virginia tells them they are being pursued by an officer named Renfrew. Shortly thereafter, the two thugs encounter Renfrew and try to kill him, but the Mountie and his trusted dog Lightning are able to disarm the criminals and arrest them. When Renfrew examines their new counterfeit bills, he discovers a secret message from Bronson etched in the bill's design indicating that he is being held prisoner at the Totem Pole Lodge.
Soon after, Renfrew obtains an aircraft, flies over the Totem Pole Lodge, and parachutes down to the lodge property. Poulis is surprised to see his "friend" and offers him a room. Later when Renfrew sees suspicious men loading up a car with blocks of ice, he chases after them on motorcycle. When the car crashes, the Mountie discovers the frozen trout filled with counterfeit bills. Back at the lodge, Renfrew and Poulis finally confront each other, and in the ensuing gunfight, Poulis is shot and taken under arrest.
That night on moonlit Deer Lake, Renfrew serenades Virginia in a canoe while his trusted dog Lightning looks on.
|
violence, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Before Dudley.... Renfrew Of The Royal Mounted sure is a curious movie. I mean I'm not too sure who greenlighted the adventures of a singing Mountie, but here it is, and while it's entertaining, it sure makes some highly amusing factual errors. James Newill stars as Renfrew, the dashing figure in red, while not singing songs about Barbecue sauce (!!) he helps out a woman who gets inadvertently caught as bait while going to see her father, who unbeknownst to her, is being forced to work as a counterfeiter for them bad Amerikans. Got all that? Good. Actually, the plot is not too hard to follow, and builds up some suspense along the way, I wasn't really convinced with Renfrew as a gruff hero though.Watch for Renfrew casually littering in his home country at the end. lol. Cold Storage for Hot bills. When Nelson Eddy sang Rudolf Friml songs to win the heart of Jeanette MacDonald in Rose Marie he forever got his signature role as the singing Mountie. In his nightclub act toward the end of his life Eddy would come out in tuxedo and Mountie hat.Grand National Pictures decided a singing Mountie series was apparently what they needed and they hired James Newill, a good operatic baritone, but a guy whose acting skills made Nelson look like Spencer Tracy. But he looked good in a Mountie uniform and sat the saddle well. In the first film of the series Renfrew Of The Royal Mounted, there are certain elements similar to Rose Marie. There's an American counterfeiting outfit operating in the Canadian woods and they have a really ingenious way of smuggling their bogus currency into the USA. Won't reveal it, but the title gives some clues.Anyway a Mountie is murdered and that makes it personal for the RCMP and Renfrew. Also an American engraver just released from prison is forced to work with the gang under threats of killing his daughter who is played by Carol Hughes.Newill and Hughes aren't exactly MacDonald and Eddy mainly because she sings not a note. And the songs Newill sings aren't top drawer material like the score from Rose Marie.But the series was shot on location at Big Bear Lake so that makes it a cut above most B studio series of the time. And the story isn't a bad one.. "You better watch your step with Renfrew!". So you might be asking yourself what would possess a film company like Grand National to come out with a picture about a singing Mountie. Actually, Mountie films in the mid to late 1930's were quite popular, and the singing cowboy craze was pretty much in full swing with the likes of Gene Autry. James Newill himself performed as a big band singer, and even though a lot of his career remains unknown, he did appear in a series of these films which began with "Renfrew of the Royal Mounted".Quite honestly, you probably won't find another Western type genre film with a similar plot element. In this one, smugglers are moving hot money on ice, that is to say, a counterfeiting ring goes to the trouble of smuggling forged bills inside the body cavities of rainbow trout that are frozen in blocks of ice! Yes, you read that right. You'll have to see it to believe it, but once the story got going, I had to give the writers some credit for the ingenuity shown here. Of course, if this ever happened for real I don't know, but it seems to me that counterfeit money traveling inside fish would have been difficult to pass the smell test, let alone whether determining if the bills were real or not.It might not seem on the face of it that this story would be remotely entertaining, but James Newill does give a spirited rendition of the Barbecue Bill song in the early going. It seems that he's a top contender for the best barbecue sauce in Canada contest, and wouldn't you know it, his number one competitor is the mastermind of the counterfeiting ring, George Poulis (William Royle). It's better not to try to understand all this stuff, just go with the flow of the story.Renfrew winds up with a romantic interest in the picture, Virginia Bronson (Carol Hughes), who's father is one of the counterfeiters but is attempting to go straight. I find it interesting that Hughes was also the leading lady in Roy Rogers' first starring film the following year, in "Under Western Stars" for Republic Studios.Also on hand as a henchman for the bad guys is Chief Thundercloud, who's earliest claim to fame might have been as the original screen Tonto in the 1938 serial "The Lone Ranger". The Chief would team up with James Newill's Renfrew once more in 1940's "Murder on the Yukon". I haven't seen that one yet, but I can just imagine.. More of the Same Ain't Bad. This is one of a series of Renfrew films. Renfrew is a Mountie -- actually, a Singing Mountie, so he's bound to burst into song during the course of the film. The story is not profound, and has a tad of the science-fictional invention in it. A gang of crooks has a member who's invented a kind of ray gun, carefully explained as a gun that sends out a tight beam of microwaves to short out the magnetos of an airplane. His invention works, but not well enough, so a university professor is tricked into helping them upgrade the device. The professor is led to believe that he's helping to perfect an antiaircraft device for national defense.The crooks have planted a bug in the offices of a gold mine, and thus can overhear the plans for gold shipments. However, these are relayed to them by a person who pretends to be an amateur radio operator, with the information buried in children's stories.Sgt. Renfrew is multitalented, being among other things, an airplane pilot. He and his sidekick, Constable Kelly, have been assigned to find out why the airplanes from the mine are mysteriously vanishing without a trace, so Renfrew goes airborne, with his sidekick either airsick or asleep.Naturally, the professor has a pretty young daughter, who comes up to Canada ti visit him, and who is intimidated by the crooks into keeping quiet for her father's safety.The Mounties finally figure out what's going on, and Renfrew goes aloft to pilot a gold shipment while Kelly goes to the crooks' lodge. The chief of the crooks, through the bug, determines that Renfrew would be flying an agglutinate route, and goes aloft himself to lure the Mountie into chasing him into the ray gun's range. The average viewer can figure out the end of this one.The film is full of light comedic moments and a lit of fistfights. And of course, Renfrew sings a few songs, one in the airplane he' s flying on the supposed gold shipment.You could do far worse, but it's not a film to take seriously.
|
tt0095122
|
The Expendables
|
The Expendables—leader Barney Ross, knife specialist Lee Christmas, hand-to-hand combat specialist Yin Yang, heavy-weapons specialist Hale Caesar, demolitions expert Toll Road, the unstable Gunner Jensen, and sniper Billy the Kid, the team's newest recruit and Ross' protégé—are deployed to Nepal to rescue Dr. Zhou, a hostage. They also rescue the captured mercenary Trench, Ross's rival. Yang leaves the group to escort Zhou back to China.
After returning to New Orleans, Billy tells Ross that he intends to retire at the end of the month and live with his girlfriend Sophia. Later, Ross is forced to accept a mission from CIA operative Mr. Church to retrieve an item from a downed airplane in Albania. Church sends technical expert Maggie Chan with the team. In Albania the Expendables retrieve the item, but are then ambushed by international criminal and arms dealer Jean Vilain, his right-hand man Hector and his mercenary group (the Sangs), who have captured Billy. Vilain demands the item in exchange for Billy's life. The team gives up the item, but Vilain roundhouse kicks a knife through Billy's heart and flees with the Sangs by helicopter. Ross recovers a note for Sophia from Billy's body; the team buries their fallen comrade, swearing vengeance on Vilain.
Maggie tells them that the item is a computer, with the location of five tons of refined plutonium abandoned in a mine by the Soviet Union after the Cold War. Vilain intends to retrieve the plutonium and sell it. The Expendables are able to weakly track the computer's signal and follow Vilain, which leads them to Bulgaria where they stay overnight at an abandoned Russian military base. The next morning, the team is ambushed by the Sangs and a tank. After the Expendables run out of ammunition, they are saved by Ross's old friend, Booker, who quickly eliminates both the Sangs and the tank. Before he departs, Booker informs the group of a nearby village whose residents oppose Vilain. Meanwhile, Hector and Vilain dig up the plutonium and begin collecting it.
In the village, the Expendables find several armed female villagers guarding their children from Vilain's forces. The local inhabitants are taken and put to work as slaves in the mine, never returning, and the women ask for the Expendables' help. The Sangs arrive for more villagers, but are ambushed by the Expendables and killed. After locating Vilain and the mine, the team assaults the area with their plane before deliberately crashing into the mine. The team saves the enslaved miners from execution, but Vilain and Hector escape with the plutonium. Vilain remotely detonates explosive charges in the mine; it collapses, trapping the miners and the Expendables.
Church and Trench arrive, freeing the miners and the team, and join the Expendables to pursue Vilain. The group intercepts Vilain and his men at an airport as he prepares to leave by plane. Joined again by Booker, the Expendables, Trench and Church engage the Sangs in battle. Christmas decapitates Hector, while Ross and Vilain fight hand-to-hand. Ross defeats Vilain, stabbing him and avenging Billy.
In the aftermath, Ross is given an old Antonov An-2 biplane by Church; Church, Maggie, Booker and Trench then leave the team. In France, Sophia discovers a box on her doorstep with a large sum of money and Billy's letter. As the Expendables depart in the plane, they propose a final toast to Billy.
|
cult
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Utilization Of A Vivid Background Does Not Help A Scenario Having Flawed Logic.. This watchable melodrama, having a full share of fairly savage moments, avoids being one of Philippine schlockmeister Ciro Santiago's most flagrantly weak efforts, although it is recognized as a bald remake of the Robert Aldrich directed 1967 thick ear, THE DIRTY DOZEN. As with all of Santiago's films, this unexpectedly effective affair is shot in the Philippines, being the third of his efforts having a Vietnam setting, and not intended as a crude shocker, as are the prior pair, while nonetheless offering a great deal of screen time for stuntmen and demolition specialists. The film opens with United States Army Captain Rosello (Anthony Finetti) leading a platoon into an enemy village to destroy a munitions depot. This is explosively accomplished, although many U. S. casualties are a result. Since few return from this adventure, other troops refuse any association with Rosello, who is then reassigned to lead a squad made up of generally felonious scapegraces. Beneath his guidance, the men gradually begin to work as a team, in spite of the cinematically guaranteed mishmash that they are (Hispanic, negroid, bigot, doper, religious fanatic), the lattermost performed by Loren Haynes, who writes and sings the film's closing song. For the miscreant squad's initial mission, they are tasked with capturing a Viet Cong colonel, along with the destruction of a strategically significant bridge. Success with this assignment will sanction Rosello's aspirations to proficiency in leadership. However, it soon becomes clear that the squad is not yet functional as a closely-knit unit, and Rosello decides to take his charges into a local brothel in hopes of improving their general attitude. Unfortunately, while there, they become engaged in a drunken brawl with some Marines, resulting in their winding up in jail, from where they are released specifically in order to tackle their most dangerous duty assignment, involving recapture of the since-freed Viet Cong colonel, while at the same time rescuing several Army nurse hostages captured by the V.C. during as assault upon a U.S. military hospital. Naturally, none of this has any apparent basis in fact. A good deal of battle action is found here, characteristic of any Santiago film, and many players of his stock company are at hand, as virtually all of the cast have appeared in other Santiago movies. Additionally, stereotypes prevail among the characters. Perhaps Santiago's greatest strength as a director, well-constructed build-up sequences, merely lead here to his primary weakness, a failure to develop impact from these episodes. This film is, in sum, unpersuasive hokum from the bottom barrel of imagination. If a viewer will not be interested in seeing a superfluity of gunfights replete with many bullet squibs, and explosions, it would be better to spend one's time elsewhere. However, it should be noted that Santiago has refined his endeavours to the point that this work will garner one's attention throughout its 90 minute length. It can still be found upon a Media Home Entertainment VHS tape having good audio and visual quality, but is not available as a DVD and it is unlikely that it will be released in that format.. If we were to rate this on a scale from one to ten, it would be a five.. Back in 'Nam, Captain Rosello (Finetti) is assigned a rag-tag bunch of misfits to take under his command. Under Rosello's leadership, they become "The Expendables", soldiers specifically meant to take on dirty and extremely dangerous missions. These include capturing a V.C. Colonel (Diaz) and saving nurses that have been taken hostage. Will these men accomplish their difficult missions - and will they be able to get along with each other long enough to survive? Find out today! Man, look at the cast for this one...Stallone, Statham, Dolph, Gary Daniels, the list goes on and on! Wait a minute...you mean in 1988 there was a movie called The Expendables...and it's a CIRIO SANTIAGO movie? Wow, who knew Cirio was so ahead of his time? Well, this Expendables may not have the starpower of the newer one, but it does have Anthony Finetti. So take that. It also has Nick Nicholson in a tiny cameo role and the ever-present Vic Diaz. So this outing can obviously hold its own. Well, maybe not.What we have here is your typical jungle/exploding hut/helicopter/machine gun fire movie. Cirio has made more of these than most other directors, and this does have all the standard clichés, such as the barfight, the religious soldier, and of course the ragtag team. This is a standard-issue movie. It's not great, it's not bad, it just kind of floats somewhere in the middle.The movie has enough little moments to keep it afloat, but it doesn't really distinguish itself in any significant way. It doesn't have a forceful drive and energy moving it forward. Special mention should go to Peter Nelson, the actor who played Sterling. He did a good job and managed to stand out a bit. He obviously couldn't get enough of the jungles of the Philippines so he returned for Cirio's Eye of the Eagle III (1989). Anthony Finetti could have had a long career making movies like this, but it seems he did not. It's a shame, he could have been the next Tony Marsina.If we were to rate this on a scale from one to ten, it would be a five. This is what you might call a "neutral" movie, something that's not one thing or another. Hence, while we can't wholeheartedly recommend it, we shouldn't say to totally avoid it either. Cirio has done both better and worse movies, so The Expendables will have to be something of a midway point in his career.For more action insanity, drop by: www.comeuppancereviews.com
|
tt1566637
|
The Afflicted
|
Hours after his daughter Carla's sixteenth birthday, Hank attempts to run off in the middle of the night, but is caught by his mentally unstable wife, Maggie. The two argue and accuse each other of infidelity, and when Hank threatens to take their four children away from her, Maggie snaps and beats him to death with a baseball bat, and after hiding his body tells the rest of the family that he has absconded with his mistress. Maggie subsequently becomes a shut-in and descends into alcoholism and religious mania, spending most of her time obsessing over Pastor Jon Stackwell, an unscrupulous local televangelist nicknamed "the Cowboy Prophet."
Maggie begins abusing her children, and pulls them out of school when one of them, Cathy, tries to get help from the incredulous Principal Walsh. When they run out of money, Maggie coerces her son Bill into becoming a day laborer, and starts pimping Carla out to a man named Randy. Seeing herself as overweight and hideous, Maggie takes her frustrations over this out on Cathy, and one night forces her to eat canned foods blended with lard; when Cathy stands up to her, Maggie shoots her in the shoulder, and leaves her shackled in the bathtub after making an inept attempt at treating her wound.
When Cathy begs to be released, Maggie agrees to let her go, but only on the condition that she be allowed to remove the bullet from Cathy's shoulder. The "surgery" that Maggie performs on Cathy exacerbates the girl's injury, and she dies from the combination of it and the mixture of vodka and pills that Maggie had given her as an anesthetic. While Maggie is asleep and Bill is out disposing of Cathy's body, Carla tries to run away, and stumbles onto her father's remains. Maggie catches Carla, brings her home, and threatens her other children into bludgeoning their sister with a wooden paddle before locking her in a closet, where she is left to die.
After Carla's death, Maggie pimps Grace out to Randy in her place, and orders Bill to dump and burn Carla's corpse. Carla's charred body is soon discovered by the police, and recognized by Pastor Jon, who races to Maggie's home. Grace, traumatized from being raped by Randy, shoots Maggie to death with her own gun, and then fatally stabs Bill, unaware that he had also been planning on killing their mother. Pastor Jon arrives at the house, and tries to talk the suicidal Grace down, offering to take the blame for all of the murders, but Grace shoots herself anyway.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0105612
|
Tokyo Babiron
|
The plot is told in a series of substories, published monthly or as 2-3 per volume. While it begins with a monster of the week approach, with somewhat independent running chapters, the plot gradually becomes continuous and backstory is introduced. It focuses on the development of the characters and the relationships between them.
Sixteen-year-old Subaru Sumeragi, the main character, is a very powerful magician, the thirteenth head of the foremost family of onmyōji in Japan, which has served the Emperor for centuries. As such, he is called upon to solve various occult mysteries, or stumbles himself on people whom his kind nature compels him to help. These occurrences form the main plot of most chapters. He lives in Tokyo with his twin sister Hokuto, an exuberant girl whose chief occupations are to design eccentric clothing for herself and her brother, and to egg on their mutual friend Seishirō Sakurazuka, a kindly, 25-year-old veterinarian, when he declares his love for Subaru.
There are early hints that Seishirō may not be all that he appears. Hokuto jokes about him being a member of the family of Sakurazukamori, a clan of assassins who use onmyōjitsu to kill, and are pronounced to be the Sumeragis' opposite. Also, Subaru has dreams about having met someone under a cherry tree blooming out of season when he was but a small child, but he cannot quite recall what was being said. This person was actually Seishirō, upon whom Subaru stumbled when he had just performed a kill. According to the rules of the Sakurazukamori, Seishirō should have killed him, but impressed with the child's purity, he made a bet with him instead: He would meet Subaru again, and would then spend one year with him, protecting him and trying to love him. If, at the end of that year, he felt something for Subaru which distinguished him from a thing he could easily destroy, as he could not with any other person, then he would not kill him. To recognize him, he marked him with inverted pentagrams on both hands, the sign of the Sakurazukamori's prey. These marks are for most of the story hidden beneath the gloves Subaru continually wears on the direction of his grandmother, the previous family head, who recognized the marks and so hopes to conceal them with her magic.
Things come to a head when Seishirō loses an eye protecting Subaru, and Subaru realizes that he is in love with Seishirō. But the year is over, and Seishirō declares himself the winner of the bet. He breaks Subaru's arm and tortures him, but does not succeed in killing him, as Subaru's grandmother breaks his spell - an action which leaves her crippled. Subaru's shock and heartbreak leave him catatonic. Hokuto, feeling guilty for her promotion of Seishirō, whom she knew to be dangerous, but also believed to be the only one who might touch Subaru's heart, leaves to find Seishirō and confronts him, asking to be killed by him and casting a spell with her death. Subaru, seeing her in a dream, is shocked out of his catatonia by her action. He vows to find Seishirō and take revenge for his sister's death.
|
violence, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A Fascinating, if Limited, Side Story. This is a little-known gem from CLAMP (the superstar all-woman manga team) and (at the time) young director Kôichi Chigira. Chigira would later go on to work as an animator on the 'X Movie' (to which 'Tokyo Babylon' is a sort of prologue) and to direct 'Full Metal Panic!' and 'Last Exile.' CLAMP, after finishing the 'Tokyo Babylon' manga (on which the show is based) in 1993, immediately started their greatest work: 'X.' So this show, which is actually two separate 45 minute episodes (made in 1992 and 1994), comes at an important time in CLAMP history: just before they hit it big. As a result, what we have is an enjoyable but unfortunately limited OVA (Original Video Animation, known here as Direct-to-Video) that acts as an interesting side story to anyone who has read the 'Tokyo Babylon' manga or seen the X television series or film (as there are some shared characters).The first episode, unceremoniously called 'Tokyo Babylon 1' on the DVD, takes several elements of the manga and adapts them to a new story. Several 'accidental' deaths at a high-profile construction site have drawn the attention of the local authorities. Perplexed, they turn to Subaru Sumeragi, a young practitioner of the Onmyouji arts (an ancient type of Japanese sorcery with roots in the tantric magic of China and India). Subaru uses his powers in a way similar to other anime characters to solve the mystery, but what is interesting here are the unmistakable chants and unusual references. One who is not familiar with the Onmyouji might think this is all made up, but it has roots in Japanese history. Onmyouji were imperial court officials who determined official policy. In a modern context, they link the dark and dreary modern Tokyo depicted with a richer and somehow more 'true' past filled with mysterious powers. Though this can pass by the casual viewer, for those interested in mythology, it is intriguing.Subaru works with his twin sister, Hokuto and a family friend, veterinarian Seishirou. Although seemingly lacking in Subaru's powers, as the story goes on, some new (and for Seishirou, perhaps darker) facets of the supporting characters are revealed. Hokuto meanwhile has the 'fun' idea of trying to get her brother fixed up with the handsome veterinarian, much to Subaru's chagrin. However, this element of the manga is kept to a minimum in the anime, so those averse to homo-erotic relationships need not fear. As he continues to puzzle over the mysterious 'accidents,' Subaru encounters a woman who seems bent on revenge against the head of the construction project, who himself seems to have a secret power. The finale of the episode, while at the time (remember, this is 1992) well-animated for an OVA, looks somewhat dated now. However, if one is forgiving of this and is willing to approach the episode as a product of its time, it is enjoyable.The second episode ('Tokyo Babylon 2') is also on the DVD and is the real reason for buying the show. Animated two years later with an improved budget, this is one of those shows that is really great, especially late at night with all the lights off. Subaru this time has to investigate a series of midnight subway murders. Nearly the entirety of the film takes place at night, complete with garish lighting and run-down environs that seem more at place in one of 'Patlabor 1's' decrepit neighborhoods. Indeed, there are many parallels between this and the Patlabor film, including an overworked and seemingly sleep-deprived detective who is on the verge of burnout and a mysterious killer who seems more dead than alive in his emotionless actions. Rounding out the cast are two fascinating supporting characters: the 'precognitive' Mirei, who helps the police by sensing the events of past murders using her fingertips, and Miyatake, a young man who collects the fragments of old buildings that are being knocked down. It is eternally fascinating to me that, upon meeting Miyatake out on the street in the middle of the night with a killer loose, Subaru and his group (led by the intrepid Hokuto) happily go up to his apartment to see his collection. Although this is a dark city that seems taxed by its lack of sleep, it is not so dark so as to keep friends from being made. The second episode tells a good story in a short amount of time, second only to the 'Magnetic Rose' segment in 'Memories.' Watching it together with 'Patlabor 1' is also an interesting experience.All in all, these stories could be better and more accessible than they are, but for what they set out to achieve, they succeed well. I asked Kôichi Chigira at the 2004 Anime Expo about his experience directing these episodes, and he said that it was his decision and not CLAMP's to make the stories shorter and smaller. CLAMP of course approved everything and saved their money to make the spectacular 'X Movie.' In all the many versions of 'X,' both Subaru and Seishirou appear again, this time with a very different relationship. What these episodes are great for is their portrait into the character's lives. For those who've read the manga (and believe me, it is well worth it), the episodes are particularly special as they are two complete 'extra' stories. The English dub should be avoided at all costs, as it was done extremely poorly and Subaru was voiced with a very fake and very obnoxious gay accent (and not at all in a good or respectful way). The Japanese language version has wonderful acting by all, in particular Subaru (who is voiced by the great Kappei Yamaguchi). The reissued DVD version (which comes in a blue case and sells for $10) is a very good deal for the money and has improved subtitling over the previous release. As an enjoyable title, especially for fans of the manga, 'X,' or CLAMP, 'Tokyo Babylon' is highly recommended.. Enjoyable all round, if not completely breathtaking.. Adapted from CLAMP's popular debut manga, this is mainly aimed at fans of said manga. As such, it holds little interest for people who aren't familiar with the manga. To them, this will probably seem like a nicely stylised sort of LSD-induced X-files episode. If that sounds like your kind of thing, then give this a try, as it's a really rather nice video. But keep in mind that the second video (with the killer in the subway) is far superior and a better buy overall.The story revolves around a building project where several mysterious deaths have occurred. Subaru is called in to have a look, and eventually meets a young woman out for revenge on the man she believes to have murdered her brother. However, the man in question seems to be able to avert any disaster that may be drawn to him, and abuses of this ability, making him a very dangerous force indeed. Subaru and Seishiro eventually have to face off with the human disaster repellent atop the nearly-finished building.What we have here is mostly typical Tokyo Babylon fare; Subaru apologises a lot and Hokuto shouts at him. Only Seishiro is different from the Seishiro we know from the manga. His "dark side" is never explored, and instead of rampantly flirting with Subaru, he shows more inclination towards Hokuto in the videos. No doubt many fans will feel the video version of Seishiro is rather...wrong (a large part of Tokyo Babylon -is- a homosexual love story, learn to live with it). Instead of a proper adaption of the manga, these videos seem more like extra filler episodes to go alongside the manga.Nevertheless, it's good fun, with pretty character designs and backdrops (even though the overall animation quality isn't really breathtaking), a well-paced and interesting story, and some cool psychic fighting at the end, backed by a very good music score. The appeal of this video will only be very limited for those who haven't read the manga, and they'll also miss out on a lot of the finer points of the story. But even for them, this can still be quite enjoyable as a little something different, or as a way to sample some CLAMP-style artwork. Give it a go, and you might find yourself growing very fond of this elegant little psychic romp.. Beautiful, sad and touching. Tokyo Babylon is a manga series created by CLAMP.I only had the chance to read 2 volumes, so what I am going to write mainly is about the OVA series. Subaru Sumeragi and his twin sister Hokuto Sumeragi are both mediums and magicians who protects Tokyo from spirits by exorcising them. They two are very close, good friends and extremely cute, but their personality are very different( In''Tokyo Babylon'' Subaru is still a young teenager, so don't panic if he is too different from ''X'') They two will later meet the veterinarian Seishirou Sakurazuka, that will always be flirting with Subaru. (And while the time passes, Subaru will be in love with Seishirou as well) The end of Tokyo Babylon is one of the saddest things I already saw.Ps: Subaru Sumeragi, Hokuto Sumeragi, and Seishirou Sakurazuka play important roles in ''X'' movie , manga, and anime series.
|
tt0041374
|
Flaxy Martin
|
The drama begins with a murder and a screaming witness. The witness to the crime tells the police that she can identify the murderer and will never forget his face. Mob attorney Walter Colby (Scott) is called by crime boss Hap Richie (Douglas Kennedy) in the middle of the night to arrange the release of Caesar (Jack Overman), one of his mobsters arrested for the murder. After Colby does so he tells his girlfriend, the unscrupulous mob-connected showgirl Flaxy Martin (Mayo), that he wants to quit the organization and become respectable.
Meanwhile, the syndicate arranges for Peggy Farrar (Helen Westcott) to falsely testify on behalf of Caesar. After Caesar is cleared of the charges, however, she changes her mind. Flaxy and Caesar go visit Peggy at her apartment to force her into silence, and Caesar ends up killing her.
Due to circumstantial evidence, Flaxy is suspected of murdering Peggy. Not realizing her involvement in the killing, Colby tells the police that he did the killing. His plan was to defend himself and get him and Flaxy off. Unfortunately, Flaxy and Hap Richie set him up during the trial and Colby is sentenced for Peggy's murder. As Colby awaits transportation to prison, Sam Malko (Tom D'Andrea), a friend of Colby and former client, tells him that Caesar had been getting drunk and bragging that Colby was sentenced for a killing he committed (the murder of Peggy). Sam also wonders why Flaxy was not helping Colby since she must know the same information.
On his way to prison to serve 20 years, Colby escapes and when he gets to the highway he passes out in front of motorist Nora Carson (Malone). Nora helps Colby get to the city to find out how he was framed. Colby realizes that Flaxy was not the woman she pretended to be.
In the city Colby finds Caesar dead. He later ends up in Flaxy's apartment as mobster Hap Richie arrives. She pulls the gun on both men and as she shoots wildly in the dark, Flaxy kills Hap. Colby calls the police and they arrest Flaxy for his murder.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Zachary Scott, Virginia Mayo give their best in often overlooked film noir.
Zachary Scott isn't a name on the tips of too many tongues these days, but in the late 40s he was a very busy boy.
However, in his best remembered movies, like Mildred Pierce and Flamingo Road, he had the misfortune to play second fiddle to the domineering Joan Crawford; many of his roles, too, were as weaklings, leaving the false impression that he was a weak actor (his visage deeply waved hair, a Tomas E.
Dewey mustache was considered quite dashing in the post-war years but now looks seriously passé, which doesn't help his legacy either).Flaxy Martin preserves one of his stronger starring performances, as a mob mouthpiece who finds himself in over his head.
He's been balking at his shady job as a syndicate lawyer for a long time, but his girl (Virginia Mayo, who takes the title role) keeps urging him to stick with it until he assembles a nice nest egg.
Unfortunately, she's really the moll of syndicate kingpin Douglas Kennedy, stringing Scott along to keep him quiescent.
When a murder by one of Kennedy's goons threatens to implicate Mayo, Scott takes the rap, confident that he'll get himself off.
The movie mixes a lot of tight, hard scenes with some soft and sappy ones; the redemptive sub-plot with, as Scott's new love interest, Dorothy Malone (wasted yet again as a good girl) proves flat and superfluous.
Mayo, along with Scott, has one of her better parts; she might have been one of the noir cycle's more memorable femme fatales had her acting skills been on a par with her pouty blonde looks.
And Elisha Cook, Jr. contributes another turn as a bantam rooster barely bigger than his gun.Flaxy Martin, along the the previous year's Smart Girls Don't Talk (also starring Mayo), marks a rare break for director Richard Bare, who from the early 40s until the late 50s and his passage into series television directed little but dozens upon dozens of `humorous' shorts with titles beginning `So you think you're...' and `So you want to be...'.
The overlooked Flaxy Martin, on the other hand, ought to be a bit better known.
Glam Virginia Mayo Is One Bad Babe.
Odd little noir film with Virginia Mayo as the title character, a total conniving bitch!
This must surely be Mayo's most unsympathetic character and shows that she was a better actress than we remember.
She's with a local racketeer (Douglas Kennedy) but also plays his lawyer (Zachary Scott) for a chump.
Lots of murders here and there and plot twists aplenty.Dorothy Malone plays the nice country girl, Tom D'Andrea is Sam the mechanic, Helen Westcott is the hapless Peggy, Elisha Cook plays the gunsel again, Marjorie Bennett is the nosy neighbor, Douglas Fowley is the detective, and Bill McLean is the hotel desk clerk.Scott actually gets the most screen time because Mayo disappears while he has his country adventure and meets Malone.
But everyone is good and works well together.
While Malone is stuck in frilly frocks and aprons, Mayo does the glam bit and looks just great.Aside from solid work from the trio of stars--Mayo, Scott, and Malone--D'Andrea and Westcott are very very good as well.
For those of us who remember D'Andrea as the neighbor on The Life of Riley it's always pleasant to see what a good supporting actor he was.
Trouble in the beautiful shape of Virginia Mayo.
Virginia Mayo is a man trap in "Flaxy Martin," a 1949 noir starring Zachary Scott, Dorothy Malone, Helen Westcott, and Tom D'Andrea.
Scott plays a mob lawyer Walter Colby, who's sick of the cases handed him by mobster Hap Ritchie (Douglas Kennedy).
He's in love with Flaxy (Mayo), who is two-timing him with Hap, though Walter doesn't know that.
When Walter finds out a witness (Westcott) was paid off to give an alibi to one of Hap's henchmen in a murder case, he threatens to go to the D.A. about it.
Before he knows it, with Flaxy's help, he's been framed for the witness' murder.
He escapes from custody and, going on the run, meets Nora (Malone).Compelling film with excellent performances by Mayo, Westcott, Malone, and Elijah Cook, Jr., as one of Hap's ruthless thugs.
Mayo is as cold as they come, sexy and convincing as she manipulates her men.
He has a small role, but he's very good.
Zachary Scott is Zachary Scott - he has a strong film persona, a good speaking voice, and does tough well.
He's not that slimeball Monty from "Mildred Pierce," though, just someone who works for a low-life.Well worth seeing..
The real stars of this are Dorothy Malone as a good girl, Tom D'Andrea as a shady decent guy, Helen Wetcott as a very bad girl .
And in the title role, Virginia Mayo.
Here, though, she gives a chilling performance as a voracious, two-timing bitch.The little smile that comes over her face when others are arrested or convicted is truly chilling.
We dislike Flaxy intensely and can't wait for her to get what's coming to her, as we know she will (this being a major-studio production.) Malone is very convincing as the country girl who seems to to be a backwoods type living improbably close to Manhattan.
Everyone is good, even Zachary Scott, though he seems not to be trying very hard and to be phoning in his performance at times.This one will chill you and you'll want to watch it again..
Zachary Scott plays a rather naïve New York lawyer covering tracks for his girlfriend, a double-crosser in-cahoots with mobsters who's also involved in the killing of a paid witness in a criminal trial; he's framed for the murder and takes it on the lam, meeting a lovestruck librarian along the way.
Virginia Mayo's devious Flaxy Martin takes a backseat to all the low-life male characters in the picture (who amusingly refer to each other as "Baby" and "Sweetheart"), and even runs a distant second to Dorothy Malone as the nice girl who believes in happy endings.
Malone helps ground the heady proceedings in a form of movie-reality, even though the Warner Bros.
Lawyer Thinking With His Male Member.
A really good cast puts over a noir feature from Warner Brothers that's undone by an incredibly, unbelievable plot component.
As another Warner Brothers star used to say, "what a maroon".Zachary Scott plays a criminal attorney who gets off mob hit man Elisha Cook, Jr. on some perjured testimony by Helen Westcott.
When Scott finds out about the perjury he fears bar association sanctions and determines to break with mob boss Douglas Kennedy.
But Kennedy has other plans that involve Scott's girl friend Virginia Mayo who is in the title role of Flaxy Martin.Mayo's trading up and she goes to Scott with a tearful story about how she's suspected in the murder of Westcott.
So what does this brilliant lawyer do who is now thinking with his male member?
But not against some perjured eye witness testimony that Kennedy gets to help the prosecution along.Of course Scott escapes and starts looking for more than vindication.
In that he's aided by friend Tom D'Andrea and farm girl Dorothy Malone who feels sorry for him.
After that horrible premise, the film does pick up and ends rather well.
If you've seen Virginia Mayo in White Heat you know how it ended for her there.
In fact I'm sure Mayo was cast in Flaxy Martin on the strength of White Heat.As for Zachary Scott the part he has is one I think might have been written with Humphrey Bogart in mind, but Bogey left Warner Brothers the year before.Though it's rather unbelievable Flaxy Martin is good display of the talents of both Virginia Mayo and Zachary Scott..
Doesn't Gel. Catch that great scene where Flaxy (Mayo) beats up a blackmailing Peggy, (Westcott) with the timid hotel clerk hovering outside the door.
Looks to me like Warner Bros.
used the film as an A-team try-out for cast principals and director.
Now, Scott, for one, comes through perfectly as the lawyer with a wobbly compass— I'm just sorry this fine, exotic actor never got the recognition his talent deserved.
The material, however, with its nifty double- cross, really merited an A-team director, like Walsh or Curtiz.
Instead, the studio gave featurette director Richard Bare a shot, and the result shows he had little feel for the dark material.
Unfortunately, the movie is inferior grade noir, lacking in both style and edge.
Take the early scene where Walt (Scott) and Hap (Kennedy) iron out wrinkles in the plot to free Caesar (Overman) from a murder rap.
They're standing stock still in Hap's living room, talking, and that's the trouble: they stand stock still for about two minutes doing little more than delivering their lines.
But Bare seems most at sea in directing the lead actresses.
Mayo looks lost in her key scenes with Scott— the second side of Flaxy's devious personality, the calculating side, fails to appear, and thus we're left with a very pretty girl speaking the lines, but without the necessary depth.
Now, Malone later proved a fine actress of many dimensions, (e.g. Written on the Wind {1955}).
Here, however, she's stuck in a thankless good girl role, so likely director Bare is at fault for not giving her the necessary cues.
I suspect the movie would have improved had actresses Malone and Mayo switched roles.Then too, Walt's sudden turn-around with 40 grand in his pocket is awkwardly handled.
Even an A-grade filmmaker would have trouble making this bit of Production Code hokum believable, but in Bare's hands it comes across as little more than a clumsily developed happy ending.
Thus, it's not surprising that the studio returned the director to making the humorous shorts he was so good at following this failed experiment.
I also better understand why editors Silver and Ward omitted this entry from their highly successful tome Film Noir.
Unfortunately, the movie may have all the trappings of the genre, but like bread dough in the hands of a neophyte baker, the loaf simply fails to gel..
Zachary Scott has most of the best lines and Virginia Mayo gets the complete glamor treatment in the title role of FLAXY MARTIN.
Both of them score heavily in this tight little crime melodrama that suffers only when the plot's loopholes begin to show.
Dorothy Malone gets third billing as the wholesome librarian who sticks her neck out to help a man she almost runs over on a dark and stormy night.
Her motivations for taking him in and then discovering he's a man on the run from the law are never completely believable.Nor is the way Scott tries to shield Mayo from the police by pretending that he's the man who murdered a woman the mob wanted to get rid of.
He's a lawyer for the gangsters and sticks his own head into a noose by thinking that he can back himself into a corner and then get out.But aside from these plot contrivances that don't ring true, the story about a lawyer being double-crossed by the gangsters he was protecting is tight and suspenseful.
The supporting cast includes Douglas Kennedy, Elisha Cook, Jr., Tom D'Andrea and Douglas Fowley, all well-used and fitting into the noir-like atmosphere of the melodramatic turn of events.The amusing tough guy talk from Zachary Scott gets the kind of delivery that shows he was a very capable actor who deserved more recognition with better roles in A-films.
He's excellent here and Virginia Mayo is so convincing as a scheming tramp that it makes me think Bette Davis was right when she told Warner Brothers they should have offered the role of Rosa Moline in "Beyond the Forest" to Mayo.
Lawyer Zachary Scott (Walter Colby) is fed up of defending gangster boss Douglas Kennedy (Hap).
He agrees to one last case before he intends to collect payment and start a new life with girlfriend Virginia Mayo (Flaxy Martin).
Mayo is also Gangster boss Kennedy's girl.
It's not Scott.The story has a ridiculous premise in that lawyer Scott puts himself up as a murderer in a crime he did not commit so that he can get himself off with his lawyer self-cleverness and then be with Mayo forever.
The film follows Scott as he realizes what has been going on and we discover whether or not he can receive the justice he deserves.Or doesn't!
The film is made interesting by the female roles - Mayonaise, and Dorothy Malone (Nora) as the librarian love interest for Scott once he escapes from custody and sets out to prove his innocence.
These 2 women show strength of character to be applauded with Mayo getting the juicy nasty role to play - and she plays it well.
I'm afraid Zachary Scott is completely unlikeable as demonstrated by his reactions to both Mayo (I just don't believe his stupidity) or Dorothy Malone (he's just an obnoxious you-know-what to her).
The film also contains that ultimate pipsqueek hard-man Elisha Cook Jr (Roper).
I liked the way that enemies Douglas and Scott had to work together at the end to try and get the better of bad girl Mayo when all 3 were in the same room at the film's end.
The film is called Flaxy Martin - maybe we should have concentrated more on her and less on the very poor Zachary Scott..
Fascinating characters and performances undone by a really dumb plot device..
Zachary Scott is excellently cast as a mob lawyer who is sick of defending low-life scum.
Despite the people who pay his salary, Scott is a decent person--and is unwilling to lie or cheat to gain acquittals.
When Scott realizes this, he unwisely announces he is resigning from the employ of a mob boss AND turning states evidence--not a good idea!
Scott's lady friend is Flaxy (played by Virginia Mayo).
Eventually, she is pulled into a plot to destroy Scott since Flaxy's boss needs Scott out of the way.So far, the plot and characters are wonderful--very noir-like and very juicy--especially Mayo.
Flaxy is involved in a murder and when she goes crying to Scott, he tells her that HE will tell the police he did it and it was self-defense.
But, when the case comes to court, the mob provides a witness that buries Scott--getting his a 20 year sentence.
While this IS intriguing, it makes you stop and say "why did Scott's character plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit--especially when it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that Flaxy was involved up to her neck?!".
No lawyer, particularly a sharp one like Scott played, would ever confess to a crime he didn't do--especially when there's little apparent motivation for destroying his life and career.
A bit later, when a woman helps Scott after he breaks out on his way to prison, this, too, seems to make little sense--her motivation also made no sense.
Well, given Scott's and Mayo's acting, it is.
In particular, Mayo was so conniving and evil that I loved watching her in action--she was the perfect film noir 'dame'!
In addition to their good work, I also loved Elisha Cook in a supporting role as a young thug--he was excellent and fun to watch in action--mostly because he really had the noir-style dialog down pat!
In addition to the acting, the second half of the movie is better written--more taut and without the hole-riddled plot.
If only they'd worked out the plot leading up to this, it would have been a terrific film.By the way, although Virginia Mayo was very good in the film, I don't know why they named the movie after her character--she was NOT the main focus of the film and Scott's character occupied the vast majority of the screen time, though I guess she was a lot better looking than Scott!.
Atmospheric and prophetic role for Dorothy Malone..
Entertaining little film noir gem handled with skill and style.
The cast make the film quite bearable along with the direction, soundtrack and lighting.
What I thought so very striking was that Dorothy Malone's character had some pretty amazing ties to her role as Constance MacKenzie in the TV series, "Peyton Place" nearly two decades later.
In the film, she works in a library.
Finally, in the TV series she waits for her lover to get out of prison as she does here in the movie with her soon to be lover, Zachary Scott..
Slumdog Film Noir.
This Warner Brothers double feature under card has some good points.
A poor script totally undermines some good acting and decent directing.
Virginia Mayo and Dorothy Malone are fine in the lead female roles.
Zachery Scott is okay in the male lead.The plot is often lost and more than a little confusing at points.
The cops look stupid throughout the movie.
It is one of these where the lead (Scott) is innocent and too nice a guy to be guilty.
Mayo is given a moll role and Malone a romance role to balance the moll.I note the Director here, Richard L Bare, because he became a really good sit-com director later when he did Green Acres on CBS.
There are scenes here where he sets up a great film noir atmosphere, but they are too few and far between to save this one.
Mayo disappears for 45 minutes!.
Producer: Saul Elkins.Copyright 12 February 1949 by Warner Bros.
U.S. release: 12 February 1949.
86 minutes.SYNOPSIS: A crime melodrama, involving blackmail, theft and murder.COMMENT: Director Richard Bare certainly opens this film at a fast pace.
But the construction of this film is rather similar to that of "Impact", with Miss Malone looking very demure as the sub-heroine and Miss Mayo disappearing from the film altogether for a 45-minute stretch.
However, David Lang's script has a fair share of suspense and Elisha Cook gives yet another of his sterling characterizations.
|
tt0080009
|
Tess
|
The story takes place in Thomas Hardy's Wessex during the Victorian period.
The events of the story are set in motion when a clergyman, Parson Tringham, has a chance conversation with John Durbeyfield, a simple farmer. Tringham is a local historian, and in the course of his research he has discovered the "Durbeyfields" are descended from the d'Urbervilles, a noble family whose lineage extends to the time of William the Conqueror. The family lost its land and prestige when the male heirs died out. The parson thinks Durbeyfield might like to know his origins as a passing historical curiosity.
Durbeyfield soon becomes fixated upon the idea of using his noble lineage to better his family's fortunes. Finding a noble family named d'Urberville living nearby, he and his wife send their daughter Tess to call on his presumed relations, and seek employment at the manor house. At the manor house lives Alec d'Urberville and his mother. Tess is a beautiful girl, and Alec d'Urberville has an appetite for women. Alec and his mother know they are no relation to Tess, for their family name and coat of arms had been purchased. Finding her naive, penniless and attractive, he sets about taking advantage of the situation. He tries to get her alone, and attempts to seduce her with strawberries and roses, but these efforts are parried by Tess. In time he rapes her.
Tess returns home and soon discovers she is pregnant. She is angry with her mother for placing her at risk when she knew so little of the cruelness of the world. The baby is born sickly and dies. Some time later, Tess goes to a dairy farm to work as a milkmaid. She meets Angel Clare, an aspiring young farmer from a respectable family. He believes Tess to be an unspoiled country girl, and completely innocent. The two fall in love, but Tess does not reveal her previous relationship with Alec until their wedding night. Disillusioned and heartbroken by the news, Angel rejects her.
Deserted by her husband, Tess meets Alec d'Urberville again. She at first angrily rebuffs his advances, but the death of her father puts the family in desperately hard times. Facing starvation, eviction and homelessness, Tess is compelled to resume her relationship with Alec as his mistress to support her mother and siblings.
Shortly afterwards, Angel Clare returns from travelling abroad. A disastrous missionary tour in Brazil has ruined his health. Humbled, and having had plenty of time to think, he feels remorse for his treatment of Tess. He succeeds in tracking her down but leaves heartbroken when he finds her living with Alec. Tess realizes that going back to Alec has ruined her chances of happiness with Angel, and murders Alec.
Running away to find Angel, Tess is reconciled with him; he can finally accept and embrace her as his wife without passing moral judgment on her actions. They consummate their marriage, spending two nights of happiness together on the run from the law before Tess is captured sleeping at Stonehenge. An ending summary tells that she is convicted and hanged for murder.
|
tragedy, revenge, murder, romantic, melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0485288
|
Queer Duck: The Movie
|
The film focuses on Queer Duck who wakes up from a late night party and watches a commercial for an amusement park called Happyland. Declaring it a gay day for the park ("Gay Day at Happyland"), they were closed down by the officials and were told to leave because they were gay. Soaking in bed, he realized that there's no point of being homosexual if almost everyone is against it. During work, he meets the quirky, energetic and suave Broadway actor Lola Buzzard (Jackie Hoffman) which stroke his heart from her sweet and sassyness along with her upbeat attitude ("Smile, Damn You, Smile"). He encourages her to do Broadway acting once more which she does in a play called "Still Alive", which she won an award from Rosie O'Donnell's show. Because he starts developing a crush on her, he is deciding whenever to stay gay or turn straight. Oscar Wildcat insisted that marrying Lola would be his only chance of a relationship unlike his chance. During his youth, in the 60s, since homosexuality was a crime, gay bars were hidden and disguised and only revealed at times when authorities were gone. When he went to the bar, he meets a drag queen named Rex who calls herself Regina as she sings "Shamalama" with her band, The Blueballs. The two dance and before they kissed, the Stonewall riots occurred and he was separated from Regina and beaten up but he managed to keep his sixties earring as a remembrance becoming a nipple ring. This decision also has an effect on his lover, Openly Gator who wants Queer Duck to accept for who he is without change. Queer Duck asks Openly Gator about this and he states (in hidden emotion) that whatever makes Queer Duck happy will make him happy. Queer Duck decides to marry Lola but needs help turning straight so Lola recommends him to a homophobic bigoted priest named Reverend Vandergelding that can turn him straight. All of the reverend's procedures failed and so he creates an elixir that turns him straight. When Queer Duck drinks it, he is muscle bounded, becomes fat, straight and monotonish and marries Lola Buzzard until her unexpected death, leaving him to wish to turn gay again. Openly Gator, still sad from losing his lover, takes his frustrations out on Conan O'Brien who keeps eating at the restaurant. He also plans to stop Queer Duck's wedding before he realizes that Queer Duck didn't show up and when he did, he told him to beat it and called him a "homo".
After turning gay by Barbra Streisand, he loses the love of his life; Openly Gator, who states that he's in a relationship with Liza Minnelli thinking that the Liza he got was just an imitator but it turns out to be the real one, but gains respect and independence of homosexuals. The reverend was arrested for kidnapping and intoxicating clients after Queer Duck returned to him as a gay man again in which he threatened him in response. Lola gave all of her fortune to Queer Duck when she died and so, he used it by buying the gay bashing theme park Happyland, giving Bi-Polar Bear a baseball stadium since as a child, he always gets picked last ("Baseball is Gay"), and gave Oscar Wildcat his own antique variety show. Oscar reunites with Regina as she tries to pawn off her earring. Regina has become Rex again and gave up his drag life, being a customer of Reverend Vandergelding. Oscar, realizing that he can stay a homosexual and get the love of his life, shows him her earring he snatched. Since they now recognize each other from when they were young, they no longer have to worry since there both gay and they save sex on national TV. Vandergelding is so irritated with so much references of homosexuality from Oscar's live sex routine to the announcement of the world's first gay theme park, that he escapes prison, kidnaps Queer Duck and vows to pour his big pot of elixir all over Fairy Land (formerly Happyland) to turn all gay people into heterosexuals, but Openly Gator, after hearing that Queer Duck is in trouble when he was assigned as a captain of a ride in the park by his agent, comes to the rescue and stops the Reverend and kicks him out where he is splashed with his own elixir and pink hair is stuck on him, in which a gay bull charges him and kisses him, thinking he was another bull.
Openly Gator and Queer Duck kiss and make up, which Queer Duck states that he's gay to stay, which they end the movie with their last hit number "I'm Glad I'm Gay".
|
psychedelic, satire, adult comedy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Queer Duck Rules.
This film is the cartoon story of a gay duck, his life, his loves and his adventures.
He marries a diva, he tries sexual behavior modification therapy with a Christian fundamentalist, buys an amusement park, and generally lives it up.That's the general plot, but this film is an absolute riot.
Loaded with gags, parody, puns, double entendres, etc.
Musical and dance numbers galore.
Fabulous guest appearances by the stars we know and love.
I laughed until it hurt.
There are no words that can adequately describe this film, and all I can really say about it is if you like mad cap humor, this one's for you.
NOT a profound statement about the gay experience.
And buy the DVD -- you can order it on Amazon.Guest appearances by Michael, Barbra, Liz, and the usual suspects.P.S. To Wayne who wrote the pejorative comments about my review: I had absolutely nothing to do with the making of this film, I do not know anyone who made this film, and I have not received any incentives, financial or otherwise, to promote it.
I saw it in a packed auditorium with a seating capacity of 1,407.
No one walked out during the screening, and most of the audience was laughing as much as I was.
I'll admit it's goofy humor, but duh!
it's a cartoon..
"It is Gayday at HAPPYLAND.".
People need to understand, that sometimes everyone enjoys a light-hearted comedy, that sparks creative freedom.
Okay, sure the premise is about 15 years too late, its about a gay duck and his silly adventures.
But what makes this truly enjoyable comedy, absolute hilarious, is its ability not to take itself too seriously.
Growing up gay and Jewish makes me relate to the entire characterization of Seymour Duckstein.
But when this melodramatic comedy, has names of cartoon characters such as Oscar Wildcat, Bi-Polar bear,just too name a few.
I cant recommend this comedy enough, if you want a funny, laugh-out-loud comedy that is so tongue-and-cheek it makes family guy look like the first seasons of the Simpson's.
The only shortcomings, that the film has is it is 74-79 minutes , plus I would have loved to see a full soundtrack instead of musical members that last maybe a minute or two..
Not Great Cinema, But Funny if You Love Campy Humour.
I enjoyed Queer Duck when it first showed up online.
I went into the movie, however, with no expectations that I would even like it that much.
I thought it was a fun hour+.
The jokes and visual puns are nicely done, and Conan O'Brien played his "role" well.
Sadly, many of the celebrity-driven jokes are from a specific time and place, but if you know the context, you'll laugh out loud.
The DVD itself is worth watching, including the original internet videos and interviews with the creators and voice actors.
All this said, if you're looking for something that speaks to the struggle to be happily gay in a heterosexual world or imparts a greater wisdom, watch "The Life and Times of Harvey Milk" or some other film; this is not for you..
Loved It. I Bought the DVD because i heard all the rage about this Queer Duck so I went to wal mart and bought it for 14 bucks watched it when i got home and i absolutely loved it from beginning to end.
From celebrity jokes to gay jokes the movie was terrific.
The voice actors were amazing and Mike Reiss sure does know how to entertain people this is a great movie that has to be bought not rented.
It was nice to see Mark Hamill, Tim Curry and David Duchovny doing silly cartoon voices like Tiny Jesus.
I Laughed my ass off when i saw this it has to be the best independent film ever made right next to Klay World.
so i give this movie 10 stars for great voice acting, great animation, wonderful jokes and terrific music..
Junk.
I literally signed up at this site just to knock this lame duck out of the water.
I'm almost positive the person who wrote the review "Queer Duck Rules" had some hand in the production of this film, because this was just junk.
I checked it out because I saw that it was written by a former Simpsons writer, and had Conan as a guest voice...how could that not be funny?
But this film just completely lacked the flow of a proper comedy.
There were a couple of decent jokes in the mess though, but I didn't actually laugh at any of them.
I just kind of acknowledged that they were jokes in a "well, that's not bad" type of way.
Nothing worth spending money on.In addition, the film kept on using sound effects after each joke...like a drummer in a nightclub.
I guess to ensure that the audience understood which lines were jokes, and just about everyone came off looking bad.
On top of all of this, the musical numbers were drawn out and tedious, which made them feel like nothing more than filler.This cartoon runs at about seventy-two minutes.
I turned it off at about fifty minutes, and I actually felt ashamed that I wasted fifty minutes on it.
That should tell you all you need to know right there..
Does Sexual Orientation Affect Sense of Humor?.
You would think, with the voice talent in this movie, that it would be at least a little funny.
90% of this cast has made me laugh out loud at least once.
Maybe, MAYBE it's funnier if you're gay but I like to think that gay people have better sense of humor than this.
It's full of silly puns, old messages and tired stereotype jokes.
South Park has done more credit to people who are homosexual.I have considered that if someone has a different sexual orientation, maybe they also have a different comic orientation but I don't think this is a case of humor being different, as if written in a language other than my "straight" tongue.
I get the jokes, Michael Jackson looks like an old woman, Judy Garland is Queen of the Gays and Cher is just an endless source of fabulous humor.
How many Evil Christian Preacher characters have we seen before?
I've just heard it all before and it was funnier and better said the first time.
I mean, look at the movie "But I'm a Cheerleader" about a girl who goes off to a straight reprogramming camp.
Same theme but funny!.
I read the positive review(s) above and am absolutely astounded that a theater full of people could watch this and think it was funny.
Or clever.
Mass hysteria?
Stoned out of their gourds?
Straight?On a message board, a poster notes that on the DVD extras the Queer Duck creator says that all the participants except one were straight.
I don't know if that's true, but it might explain the quality of this film.
It feels like some doofus-hipster straight guy's idea of what he thinks is funny about gay life.
Very young children might find this film funny, but it would be inappropriate and they wouldn't understand that it's supposed to be satirical.
It would only reinforce whatever stereotypes they've already picked up from the media.
Anyone above age 12 or with an IQ over 70--gay or straight--should avoid Queer Duck like the plague.
If the man who made this is gay, I'd say it's an exercise in self-loathing.
If he's straight, he's got a bad-, bad-, bad-sitcom sense of humor and a very superficial idea of what it means to be gay.Gay life can be wickedly, screamingly funny, and it's ripe for laugh-exploitation.
How a satire on gay life could be this lame--that's the only word for it--is utterly baffling.
This is one of the worst films I've ever seen and undoubtedly the worst animated feature I've ever seen..
Great Comedy.
Queer Duck: The movie is a solid comedy about a homosexual duck fighting with his sexuality, good jokes all around and a real connection to the characters, a shout out to openly gator as my favourite of the bunch.
The comedy in the film didn't over shadow the character development and they connected wonderfully ending in a good mix of comedy and serious character development I would rate a solid 7/10 and would watch with my kids again..
Low rent cartoon better suited for comedy central.
This consistently clever, though rarely hilarious low budget cartoon is suitable only for hardcore cartoon (homoerotic?)animation fans, with it's sole purpose being 70 + minutes of shoddy animation dedicated to making fun with, though not of, gays.
Alienating a large portion in an already small demographic, Queer Duck does not shy away from the queer demographic in it's relentless cuts to musical numbers and continuous homophobic baiting, although the constant pop culture and celebrity gags should appease many of the students of Family Guy, South Park, and The Simpsons (from which Queer Duck's creator was first established).
If one were to distill the zany scatological humor found throughout those gems, cut the resources by about 85%, and add an entire unabashedly homosexual slant, one may appreciate what this little toon is offering..
And I thought Howard the Duck was the Height of Duck movie making!.
This was a funny film.
Lots of gay jokes, lots of camp funny, some wicked double entendres, easy on the eye, fast paced, enjoyable.
MOst of the time watching it I was thinking about other people i knew who would be laughing their asses off too, When you see a film called Queer Duck you can't go in to the experience expecting drama, plot, gritty realising or anything of the sort.
It's not CSI.
If the very concept of a queer duck doesn't make you smile then you probably won't like this film.
Also, and as the maker says, this is a stereotype of homosexuality based on a pretty select demographic - middle aged fags the maker knows.
No real plot but a lot of fun and some real laugh out loud moments..
Some good comedy with no good plot.
I would have given this movie a much lower rating; but, the fact is, I sat through the whole thing and was never terribly annoyed with it.
However, the film came very close to crossing that line.The movie faithfully follows the animation and comedy style of the shorts it is based on, which can be found free for the taking all over the Web. I think those shorts have a huge advantage over this movie: they are short.The problem is not that the quality of the humor in this movie ever dips lower than that of the shorts, it's that the jokes are endless, and you get tired of grunting out a half-hearted laugh after a while.The plot, and I use that word loosely, is about Queer Duck questioning being gay.
Is this all there is to life: endless parties, drugs, and sex?
We know that Queer Duck parties and likely uses drugs, but we also get the impression he is in a committed relationship with Openly Gator.
For the sake of a laugh, this impression is ostensibly proved incorrect in an early scene, but knowing the true nature of Queer Duck and Openly Gator, we know they are committed to each other.
If they were not, Openly Gator wouldn't be so upset when Queer Duck tries to live life as a straight duck and marries an old buzzard akin to our world's Liza Minelli.But, this is where the plot is lost.
The film shows Queer Duck having a wonderful relationship with Madame Buzzard, but when she dies, it never shows why Queer Duck wants Openly Gator back so badly, except that perhaps he is lonely.
We are supposed to believe that Queer Duck really accepts being gay because his wife dies.
But the beginning of the film doesn't show us Openly Gator and Queer Duck's really bonding; however, the film does convincingly show the bond between Queer Duck and the buzzard.
We understand that Openly Gator is heart broken, and we can assume why, but the movie never shows us why.
It never shows that spark between Openly Gator and Queer Duck, even though we know they had been in a committed relationship for some time.I would have liked to have seen Oscar Wildcat play a bigger part in this movie.
His dry banter provides a welcome respite from the other, louder jokes that play throughout.This movie is recommended if you can't find anything else at the video store and don't want to leave empty-handed.
It's a step above that C-level-romantic-comedy you know you don't want to see, in that I think you are less likely to turn this off..
i saw this on TV late one night and tuned in based on the name alone.
i figured with a name like Queer Duck: The Movie it would be a fun movie that didn't take itself to seriously.
For it's campy gay humour, it's enjoyable.
There are some serious flaws in it however.
It starts off fun.
The opening sequence is entertaining and the names might make you smirk (Openly Gator, Oscar Wildcat etc...) but after that, it slowly goes downhill.
The most irritating thing in the whole movie is the animation.
Web cartoon-grade movement where the eyebrows seem to just bounce around at every word while the mouth attempts to match the dialogue (spoiler alert...it never does) The jokes are more miss than hit and one joke is just stolen off an episode of Family Guy (it's like a friend telling the same joke only with added gay animals) All in all, don't bother buying it on DVD but if you see it on TV, you could do a lot worse 3/10
|
tt0035659
|
Background to Danger
|
In 1942, Nazi Germany attempts to bring neutral Turkey into the war on its side by staging an assassination attempt on Franz von Papen, its own ambassador to the country. Much to the annoyance of Colonel Robinson (Sydney Greenstreet), von Papen survives and the Russians that his agent provocateur was trying to frame have solid alibis, forcing him to turn to another scheme to inflame Turkey's traditional rivalry with Russia.
Meanwhile, American machinery salesman Joe Barton (George Raft) boards the Baghdad-Istanbul Express train at Aleppo and is attracted to another passenger, Ana Remzi (Osa Massen). She is worried about being searched by customs agents once they reach the Turkish border; she asks Joe to hold on to an envelope containing some securities, all that remains of her inheritance. Joe obliges, but when he later examines the envelope, he finds maps of Turkey with writing on them.
When they stop in Ankara, he goes to her hotel to return her property, only to find she has been fatally wounded. He hides when someone else approaches the room. He watches unobserved as Soviet spy Nikolai Zaleshoff (Peter Lorre) searches the dead woman's luggage. Then, Joe exits through the window. Leaving the scene, he is seen by Tamara Zaleshoff (Brenda Marshall), Nikolai's sister and partner in espionage.
The Turkish police take Joe in for questioning, only it turns out that they are German agents. They take him to their leader, Colonel Robinson. Robinson wants the maps. Joe refuses to cooperate, and is taken away to be interrogated by Mailler (Kurt Katch). Before the Germans get very far, Joe is rescued by Nikolai.
When the Zaleshoffs reveal that they are Soviet agents, Joe agrees to fetch them the documents. Unfortunately, he finds his hotel room has been ransacked and the documents stolen.
Joe, it turns out, is also a spy (for the United States). When he reports to his boss, McNamara (Willard Robertson), he is assigned an assistant, Hassan (Turhan Bey).
The pair head to Istanbul. There, Robinson has bribed a newspaper publisher to print an article claiming that the documents are secret Russian plans for the invasion of Turkey. When Joe barges in by himself, he is quickly taken prisoner. The Zaleshoffs have also been captured. Joe and Tamara get away, but Nikolai is killed during the escape.
Joe kidnaps a German embassy official and learns where Robinson has gone. Joe heads to the newspaper. There he forces the Nazi ringleader at gunpoint to burn the maps. Robinson is handed over to the Turkish police and then to his greatly displeased superior. He departs by airplane, knowing he is doomed for his failure. Joe and Tamara head to Cairo for their next assignments.
|
murder, melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0818692
|
Pinocchio
|
The story begins with an inventor named Geppetto making a robot, Pinocchio, as his son. Meanwhile, an evil mayor named Scamboli is building a technological city called "Scamboville" to get rid of nature. He also hates all children, except for his beloved daughter, Marlene. When Marlene expresses concerns to Scamboli about there being no space for children to have fun, he sets out to make a kids-only theme park called "Scamboland".
That night, Geppetto and Spencer the Penguin are preparing to make Pinocchio come to life. But Scamboli has seized control of the city mains to light up his theme park for the Grand Opening, so, Geppetto has no choice but to steal his electricity. Suddenly, Scamboland has a power outage and the children leave. After Pinocchio comes to life, much to his family's delight, Cyberina the fairy appears. She decides to grant Geppetto's wish to turn Pinocchio into a real boy if he learns about right and wrong.
The next morning, Pinocchio is walking his way to school with Spencer when he meets up with Zach, Cynthia and Marlene. Marlene challenges Pinocchio to an Imagination game, hosted by Cyberina. Marlene wins the game, but Pinocchio snatches the medal from her. As he runs away, he comes across Scamboli's robotic henchmen, Cabby and Rodo, who take Pinocchio to see Scamboli. While they talk to each other, Pinocchio says, "Life would be great if kids were more like us", sparking an idea in Scamboli's diabolical brain.
With the true opening of Scamboland, he makes Pinocchio into an attraction, but when Geppetto gets word of this, he tries to convince him to come home. While Pinocchio performs at a concert, Scamboli kidnaps Geppetto. Afterward, all the children board a roller coaster ride called "A Whale of a Change", which transforms all of them into "Scambobots". Meanwhile, Pinocchio gives Marlene her medal back and befriends her, and they spend the night together at Marlene's private garden.
As they awaken the next morning, Marlene is crestfallen to find that Scambobots have destroyed her garden. Hearing Pinocchio laughing at her dismay, she gives the medal to him and revokes her vow of friendship. But Pinocchio, realizing that he had accidentally helped Scamboli, leaves to find his Dad. He returns home, but finds that his father isn't there, but Spencer is. He tells Pinocchio that he went off to get him, so they head off to find him, only to find Scamboli turned Geppetto into a robot to kill Pinocchio. After Spencer blinds Scamboli with his camera and steals the remote that controls Geppetto and the other Scanbobots, Pinocchio and Spencer hide out in the "Tunnel of Danger" ride, where Scamboli manages to trap them. Marlene arrives and helps Pinocchio to avoid the tunnel's many dangers. However, Scamboli incapacitates Marlene, so he can kill Pinocchio with a laser gun. Pinocchio uses the medal to shield himself from the laser, causing the beam to reflect back at Scamboli and destroy his weapon. Meanwhile, Cabby accidentally gave Geppetto the remote that controls all Scambobots, getting them fired. Geppetto then commands the robots to get Scamboli.
Scamboli attempts to escape in Cabby's shuttle, but is caught by a Scambocop. It tosses Scamboli inside a shuttle and flies down to the Whale ride. Pinocchio, Geppetto, Marlene and Spencer go to turn the robots back into children. Soon it's Geppetto's turn, but Scamboli presses a button to stop the machines. Pinocchio goes inside the whale and tries to fix it. Pinocchio finds the out-of-reach button, so he begins to tell a lie about his personality . Once he reached it, Scamboli was caught on the cart. Pinocchio then realizes that everything was his fault. Cyberina appears, Pinocchio tells her that he has learned about Right and Wrong and turns Pinocchio into a real boy and Geppetto back into a human. Suddenly, Scamboli, turned into a robot, appears and Marlene was shocked. Cyberina borrows Cynthia's "Funbrella" to make sunshine and bring all the plants Scamboli has destroyed. It ends with Spencer taking a picture of Pinocchio, Geppetto and Marlene.
|
fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0045125
|
Scaramouche
|
In France just prior to the French Revolution, Queen Marie Antoinette (Nina Foch) asks her cousin Noel, the Marquis de Maynes (Mel Ferrer), to uncover the identity of "Marcus Brutus", a dangerous pamphleteer rousing hatred of the aristocracy.
Meanwhile, André Moreau (Stewart Granger), a nobleman's bastard, kidnaps his beloved Lenore (Eleanor Parker) to keep her from marrying another man. Afterwards, Moreau learns that his father is the Count de Gavrillac. While traveling to meet his parent, Moreau runs into Aline de Gavrillac (Janet Leigh), the Queen's ward, when her carriage breaks down the road. They are strongly attracted to each other, but Moreau's ardor suddenly cools when he learns that she is his half-sister. He hides that information from her.
By chance, de Maynes encounters Marcus Brutus, who turns out to be Moreau's best friend, Philippe de Valmorin (Richard Anderson). A master swordsman, de Maynes provokes de Valmorin into a duel, then toys with his inexperienced opponent before finally dispatching him. Enraged, Moreau attacks, but does no better than his dead friend. After de Maynes easily disarms him several times, Moreau chooses discretion over valor and flees for his life, vowing to kill de Maynes the same way he slew de Valmorin:
"You're going to die as he died, by the sword. You'll be driven back step by step, until you stand helpless as he did. Then I, Andre Moreau, will kill you as you killed him. I swear it, Philippe. By all that I hold sacred, I swear you this man's death!"
Chased by de Maynes's henchmen led by the Chevalier de Chabrillaine (Henry Wilcoxon), Moreau hides out in the commedia dell'arte troupe in which Lenore performs. Forced to disguise himself as the character Scaramouche, he discovers a hidden talent for acting. Burning for revenge, Moreau seeks out de Maynes' personal fencing instructor, Doutreval (John Dehner), and trains diligently in secret for weeks, while also performing with the troupe. However, de Maynes interrupts one such training session and they fight for a second time. Moreau is still overmatched. He is saved only when Aline and Doutreval unexpectedly intervene, allowing Moreau to escape.
Moreau decides that, to surpass de Maynes, he needs to learn from Doutreval's teacher, Perigore (Richard Hale), so he takes the troupe to Paris. There, Dr. Dubuque (John Litel), a deputy of the new National Assembly, seeks his help. The aristocrats in the assembly are systematically killing off the deputies representing the common people by provoking them into duels. Moreau is not interested, until Dubuque mentions that de Maynes is one of the duelists. Then he eagerly accepts the seat of a deceased deputy. Each day, he shows up at the assembly to challenge de Maynes, only to find his enemy absent on trivial but official duties, arranged by Aline and Lenore working together to protect the man they both love. However, other nobles in the National Assembly are eager to fight the newcomer, challenging him on a daily basis. Moreau wins each duel, gaining valuable experience with the sword in the process.
In the meantime, de Maynes becomes engaged to Aline. Overhearing de Maynes' intention to confront Moreau that night, Aline persuades him to take her out instead. At the suggestion of de Chabrillaine (who had been lucky to survive his duel with Moreau), they attend a performance of the De Binet Troupe. At last, Andre has his opportunity for revenge. The two men engage in a spectacular, prolonged duel (reputedly the longest in screen history at about seven minutes) that ranges throughout the theater, from the balcony boxes, to the lobby, through the main seats, onto the stage, into the backstage area, and finally back on the stage itself. At the end, Moreau has de Maynes at his mercy, backed against the proscenium arch, defeated, helpless as Philippe de Valmorin had been; but something he cannot explain stays his hand. Moreau stabs his sword into the stage and stalks off, leaving de Maynes bloodied but alive.
Later, Moreau learns from Philippe's father (Lewis Stone) that his father was not the Count de Gavrillac, but rather the old Marquis de Maynes, the Count de Gavrillac's friend; Noel de Maynes, the man he could not kill, is his half-brother. He then realizes that he is not related to Aline after all, so they can be married. Lenore, after giving him her blessing, consoles herself with a certain Corsican officer.
|
revenge, action, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
An 18th century nobleman (Stewart Granger) avenging the death of a friend sets in motion the action-filled plot of this Rafael Sabatini tale filmed in gorgeous technicolor and done in rollicking tongue-in-cheek style by an able cast.
Eleanor Parker and Janet Leigh both look beautiful as the women in love with Granger's character, who, to hide his true identity must wear the mask of an actor called Scaramouche.
It's all done in high style with some beautifully filmed sets and costumes that are breathtaking in color.Not for a moment can the improbable plot bear close scrutiny--nor is it intended to judging from the over-the-top performance of Stewart Granger in the kind of role that brought stardom to actors like Errol Flynn and Tyrone Power.
Stewart Granger and Mel Ferrer are dueling opponents throughout, including the final seven minute duel that takes place in a crowded theater where the astonished audience is treated to one of the most skillful duels ever filmed.The finale would have been even more impressive if the film hadn't already offered a number of extensive dueling scenes.
A breathtaking display of sword-fighting at its best, excellent acting from all the main characters, brilliant direction, superb over-the-top script and dialogue, first-class photography.The final duel between Stewart Granger and Mel Ferrer is the longest in screen history.
This is not just a sword fight, though: it's a display both of acrobatics and of the characters' personalities, with Granger's character exhibiting courage and magnanimity; Ferrer's is less generous but equally brave.The drama is punctuated by scenes of low humour (at the clowns' theatre) and high irony (in the National Assembly).Both of the female leads - Janet Leigh and Eleanor Parker - are stunningly beautiful.
The story goes that the day my twin brother and I were taken home from hospital after our birth, Scaramouche was the evening film on the BBC and we were given our baths completely oblivious to the movie gem we were being treated to on our first night in our new home.I personally do not remember this but I have been reliably informed that this is so.Over the years however, I have acquired a great passion for the films of the golden age and Scaramouche, although not the best of films, is definitely a classic.Stewart Granger plays Andre Moroe a free spirit, who's life has amounted to nothing more than his constant pursuit of fun and wealthy ladies in 17th Century France.
It also contains one of the best uses of the English Language I have ever seen on film....or maybe I'm just easily pleased.'if i can no longer be taught by the man who taught my enemy, then what is more fitting in a mad world,than to be taught by the man who taught the man who taught my enemy' Catchy eh?However all this time Moroe is evading the villain's men by hiding out in a circus of sorts where he has adopted the role of the masked Scaramouche.....the clown.It is at one of his performances where Moroe comes face to face with his friends killer and in true Hollywood fashion, they duel in and out of the shocked spectators hanging over perilous ledges and high theatre balconies and of course up and down grand staircases.Mel Ferrer is wonderful as the evil Demain and gives his role an almost Bond villain presence with his charm ans sophistication, and for love interest we have both Eleanor Parker and Janet Leigh (before she started taking showers) Yet for once Hollywood decided to put romance on the back burner and these two beauties, although great in the roles, have nothing more to do than parade around in cleavage inducing bodices, although that's fine with me.
If this film is your cup of tea or not, it's worth watching for that alone.There are other aspects of the plot which I need not go into here except that they amount to the "he was my father which makes you my sister" scenario and when the unknown brother is revealed, you will be forgiven in thinking you had tuned into a period edition of EastEnders but despite all this is definitely worth the watch.Incidentally the final sword fight was the longest sword fight in movie history until Antonio Banderas and Catherine Zeta Jones fenced their way into the record books in The Mask of Zorro.
A third way is to build the main plot around a few well-choreographed action scenes -- and in this respect the movie is superb."Scaramouche" reminds one of Errol Flynn at his best, in "The Adventures of Robin Hood." Instead of Saxons and Normans, we have aristocrats and poor people.
For the second time is adapted in the greatest Hollywood splendor , the complete romance , the historical characters, the full novel just as Rafael Sabatini write it ; it stars Stewart Granger as the rake young who turns revenger when his best friend is killed and he , subsequently , becomes the role Scaramouche and finally faces off his deadly enemy , featuring a top-notch seven-and-a-half minute sword battle .
The film is well set in the days of the French revolution and it starts with the youngster Andre Moreau (Stewart Granger , this is one of Granger's best movies at MGM) , a bastard nobleman searching for his family .
Nice acting by Stewart Granger as Andre-Louis Moreau , a nobleman bastard become an actor in a Commedia troupe and vowing to avenge his friend ; being his nemesis , Mel Ferrer , as Noel De Maynes , a marquis in love with two women : the queen , Marie Antoinette , well played by Nina Foch , and the gorgeous aristocrat Janet Leigh .
I actually recommend that if you really like the films, you should also try to track down the novels as well (if you can find them--they have been out of print for MANY years).Granger's character, Andre Moreau, sees his friend murdered in a sword fight with the incredibly detestable Marquis, played to the hilt by Mel Ferrer.
Although Granger would LOVE to kill Ferrer, he is in no way his equal with the sword, so he hides in a traveling acting company and dons the mask of the character "Scaramouche" to hide his real identity (and save his tush).Time passes, during with Granger has a lot of time for romance and to hone his skills with the sword.
I had never heard of this film before but the line up of stars, Stewart Granger, Eleanor Parker, Mel Ferrer and Janet Leigh, and the description intrigued me.
Directed by George Sidney (Anchors Aweigh/Kiss Me Kate), it stars Stewart Granger, Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh, Mel Ferrer and John Dehner.
the middle section of the piece involves escape, disguise, and practice, leading to the time when he can avenge his brother.Andre takes up with an old girl friend in a commedia dell'arte troupe, wearing the mask of the buffoon "Scaramouche", and training with first one swordmaster--de Maynes' teacher-- then old Perigore of Paris, the swordmaster's master.
In the very good cast, Eleanor Parker stands out as the actress who lets Andre join the troupe,; Janet Leigh is too young for a good part as the fiancée, and Mel Ferrer good at an understated de Maynes.
One of the finest swashbucklers of its time, Scaramouche pits the dashing rogue Stewart Granger against smarmy nobleman duelist Mel Ferrer.
The robust Stewart Granger is "Scaramouche" in this 1952 adaptation of the Sabatini novel, and it's a good example of the kind of film MGM excelled at - it's a fast-moving adventure in beautiful color, with great production values.Granger plays Andre Moreau, who watches a friend killed in a sword fight with the Marquis (Mel Ferrer).
Finally, he and the Marquis meet again, in a long, exciting, swordfight that takes place in a theater, the highlight of the film.Very exciting movie in spots, gorgeous to look at, with strong performances by the well-cast Granger, Mel Ferrer, and the beautiful Eleanor Parker.
This adaptation of Rafael de Sabattini's novel "Sacaramouche" set in the pre-French revolution days is certainly a great film.George Sidney handles the story of Andrè Moraeu -a bastard born who doesn't take life too seriously and has "...
Everything is alright here: great color and photo, good adequate music score, accurate settings and gowns, consistent dialogues and one of the best achieved sword duels in film's history.The cast is perfect too.
Nina Foch has the required class to play the Queen of France and Henry Wilcoxon is right too as de Maines's sidekick.I insist: this is perhaps the best cape and sword film ever.Trivia: I read in a review here that Scaramouche's final sword fight was the longest one in movies until the one between Banderas and Zeta Jones in "The Mask of Zorro".
Janet Leigh, (Aline De Gavrilae Due De Bourbon) is very young and beautiful in this picture and her charm captures Scaramouche immediately until he finds out some things about her that will effect how he really feels about her and who she will become in his lifeMel Ferrer, (Noel Marquis De Maynes) is a young man who loves to duel with men and kill everyone who encounters his great skills as a swordsman and does meet up with Andre Moreau/Scaramouche, and they both have a ten minute duel with each other in balcony's, a stage and over seats in a big theater.
The hero of this movie is Stewart Granger and it has a great cast that includes Janet Leigh, Eleanor Parker and Mel Ferrer.
And well, the story and the plot that makes it work, is hackneyed and predictable.The theatrical scenes are, however, good and there the color and costumes work as does the ever reliable Eleanor Parker whose character has a touch of humor but the irrepressible and optimistic Scaramouche is like Candide, just over stays his time..
I have no doubt that they had fun filming those.Stewart Granger gets top billing, but I feel compelled to talk about Eleanor Parker's and Janet Leigh's characters.
I won't go into details of the plot, largely because others have done so before me.I will say that I am a huge fan of movies made in Technicolor - they seem so much more vibrant than today's pictures - and this doesn't disappoint.It's a well shot film, with a star studded cast; 'eye candy' for both guys AND gals - in the forms of Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh and Stewart Granger.There's action a-plenty, a love story (of sorts) and humour.
Stewart Granger, Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh, Mel Ferrer are all perfectly cast.A great movie is loved for its memorable "moments"—and Scaramouche is full of them: the "revelation scene," the Marquis pinned to the wall, André and Leonore's poignant farewell, etc.The film owes much of its success to the superb score by Victor Young.
Good action scenes but quite dull at times too.Set in 18th century France, the story of a man (played by Stewart Granger) who sets out to avenge the death of his friend at the hands of a master swordsman (played by Mel Ferrer).Set up is long and tedious.
The movie only really gets interesting towards the end, once Andre Morou ends up in government.From then it is quite interesting, with some good intrigue, humour and action scenes.Overall though, so-so.Good performance by Stewart Granger in the lead role.
André Moreau (Stewart Granger) Sets out to revenge his friends death at the hands of Noel, Marquis De Maynes (Mel Ferrer) Aline (Janet Leigh) falls for André even though she Noel has his eye on her for himself.
Stewart Granger is at his very best in this film and Mel Ferrer exceptional as the villain and it is one of Cinemas most memorable performances.
He finds a major foe in swordsman Mel Ferrer (as the Marquis de Maynes) and romances two beautifully figured women...Red-haired Eleanor Parker (as Lenore) and white-tressed Janet Leigh (as Aline) are well-costumed, as is this swashbuckler from MGM.
This production's greatest strengths are the colorful art/set direction and a nicely choreographed sword duel between Granger and Mr. Ferrer.****** Scaramouche (5/8/52) George Sidney ~ Stewart Granger, Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh, Mel Ferrer.
Although there is a silent film version of the novel, it is the 1952 version with Stewart Granger, Mel Ferrer, Eleanor Parker, Janet Leigh, and Nina Foch that people remember.
But the change of the relationship is actually more acceptable for the film plot - it makes the dueling somehow more acceptable if the antagonists are contemporaries.SCARAMOUCHE is probably the best fencing movie ever made.
While he waves to her, we see Parker (the loser in this triangle with Granger and Leigh) being shown in her room with her latest boyfriend - and a glimpse into the Revolution's future path.Frequently (on this board) SCARAMOUCHE is compared to Erroll Flynn's movies.Flynn's first film in Hollywood was another great swashbuckler, CAPTAIN BLOOD.
The quality of content seems to suffer, inventive slapstick replaced by elaborate choreography, but when Scaramouche on stage challenges Noel in his box, the theatre world spills into real life, the working class into the aristocracy, foreshadowing the Revolution itself.This script brilliance should not take away from the sheer fun of 'Scaramouche', the energetic action scenes, where the hero is not required to be superhumanly invincible; the game acting, where modest talents - Granger and Ferrer - surpass themselves - and great talents - Eleanor Parker - have a ball; the splendid art direction, creating a period look that strikes the right balance between artifice and evocative detail; and a general tongue-in-cheek tone that sees the deadly serious sword-fights mockingly (and very suggestively) parodied in the pot-fight in the caravan between Moreau and Lenore..
Stewart Granger's cheerful cynicism and dashing good looks carry this film through the warmth and cinematic colour of pre-revolutionary France, Hollywood style (it took me years to work out that Marquis 'Domain', the character played by a brilliantly menacing Mel Ferrer, was the American pronunciation for 'de Mayne').
'Scaramouche' is rightly famous for the breathtaking sword fight at the end, but there is much else by way of humour and atmosphere throughout, not to mention a fine supporting cast: in addition to Ferrer, Eleanor Parker is beautiful and funny as Granger's feisty girlfriend, and a very young Janet Leigh is also good as the aristocrat who loves him.
Scaramouche is a reasonably average swashbuckling Technicolor extravaganza with great sword fights, but the story, the characters and the performances just didn't impress me as much as I had hoped.Set in France in the period leading up to the French Revolution we follow the story of André Moreau the bastard son of a nobleman.
If you love seeing dashing leading men running around in tight trousers,with sword fighting left right and centre then Scaramouche is right up your street.There are many scenes that wouldn't seem out of place in a silent comedy act and you actually don't need dialogue in many parts as everything is conveyed in the actors faces and actions.Credited with what is the longest on screen duel between Stewart Granger and Mel Ferrer this is a film filled with boundless energy,action and a mischievous spirit.This 1952 offering is a remake of the 1923 film of the same name.Set during the days of The French Revolution,Scaramouche follows the dashing playboy Andre Moreau(Stewart Granger)who is the illegitimate son of a wealthy nobleman.He is in love with the feisty and beautiful travelling player Lenore(Eleanor Parker)who tired of waiting for him to return to her agrees to marry a wealthy man who showers her with diamonds.On the day of her wedding Andre wins her back and she agrees to marry him instead.He ends up having to leave her when his best friend Phillipe De Valmorin(Richard Anderson)is suspected of writing material supporting the Revolution and writing under the name Marcus Brutus.The two go on the run and come up against the best fencer in all of France(who is also the cousin of Queen Marie Antoinette).The Marquis DeMaynes(Mel Ferrer)who after killing Phillipe makes an enemy in Andre who trains in the art of fencing to avenge the death of his friends.To escape the clutches of the Maquis Andre meets up with Lenore's travelling troupe and assumes the identity of masked comedian Scaramouche.It all leads to a breathtaking showdown in a Paris theatre that's a must for fans of sword fights.Try and see past the illogical and frankly daft plot holes that pop up along the way and just get lost in it's humour and fun.Featuring an enchanting performance from Janet Leigh as Aline De Gavrillac De Bourbon who may be Andre's half sister,who is also engaged to the Maquis.If your a fan of the dashing Stewart Granger and love adventure films filled with romance then this is one you should enjoy..
I enjoyed the fighting scenes immensely, especially the offense and defense that moved André Moreau (Stewart Granger)and Marquis De Maynes (Mel Ferrer) from every inch of the theater balcony, down the stairs, into the fully seated auditorium, to the rear props storage rooms, then onto the stage, to finish with a surprising end.I also discovered Jean Heremans, a European fencing champion, was hired by MGM in 1948 to supervise the swordfighting on The Three Musketeers.
However, if a strong voice arises from among the peoples' representatives, they are quickly eliminated through a gentleman's duel, most often initiated by the superior swordsmen that support the King and Queen (Nina Foch appears briefly as Marie Antoinette): Mel Ferrer plays the Marquis de Maynes, the best swordsman in France, and Henry Wilcoxon plays his right-hand man Chevalier de Chabrillaine."He was born with a gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad" - Stewart Granger is perfect as Andre Moreau, a quick witted ladies' man with a mysterious parentage and no interest in politics.
Stewart Granger spends most of this 1952 film hiding in the character of Scaramouche, a fool playing on the comedy stage of pre- revolutionary France.
|
tt0120598
|
Barney's Great Adventure
|
Cody (Trevor Morgan), his sister Abby (Diana Rice), their best friend Marcella (Kyla Pratt), and their baby brother Fig are dropped off by their parents for a visit at their grandparents' farm. As Cody is believing that there may be nothing to do at the farm, Abby and Marcella rub a Barney doll in his face. Cody loses his patience and starts a game of "keep-away" by taking the Barney doll and running off with it. The two girls go after Cody, who hides the Barney doll in the shower in the bathroom. The girls catch up with Cody, who tells them to use their imagination and laughs when he thinks that nothing happened. However, the doll comes to life as Barney the Dinosaur takes the girls to play in the barn. Cody refuses to believe in Barney at first, claiming that imagination is just for kids and that real dinosaurs neither talk, nor laugh.
That night, Cody takes advice from Barney and wishes for a real adventure for that summer, and to do something no one has ever done before. A shooting star deposits a large colorful egg in the barn which Cody discovers in the morning. Barney and the kids go to tell the grandparents about this, but Barney is distracted by Fig's crying. Grandma suggests to Abby and Marcella that they go see Mrs. Goldfinch. Cody finds Barney who has just changed Fig's wet diaper and takes him to see his grandparents. However, Abby and Marcella take Cody and Barney to see Mrs. Goldfinch, who tells them that the egg is a dream maker. Cody accidentally knocks the egg off the table which lands on a birdseed truck. Barney and the others try to recover it through a parade as the egg narrowly avoids being stomped or cracked by the parade's participants as the egg's five colors begin to reveal itself, one color at a time. Barney's friend B.J. catches it when it almost lands on the ground, but accidentally tosses it away. Barney and the gang chase the egg throughout a French restaurant, a circus, and fly through the sky on an airplane to continue their pursuit of the egg which is in a hot air balloon. All the while, Baby Bop is looking for her small, yellow blanket, and B.J. and Baby Bop arrive just in time to see the egg hatch.
After they return the egg to the barn, it finally hatches into a koala-like being named Twinken who shows everyone Abby's dream and then Barney's. Cody apologizes to Barney for being mean and admits that he thinks he's cool. Barney accepts his apology and tells Cody that he thinks he's cool too and the two share a hug. Twinken shows everyone a magical fireworks display which lands in Barney's arms. Barney begins to sing "I Love You", and everyone else sings with him. Baby Bop gets sleepy, which prompts B.J. to decide that they are ready to go home. The film ends with Twinken sitting right next to Barney, who has reverted to his doll form.
|
cute, entertaining
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I know it's cool to hate Barney, but this really is a bad movie.
I'm just sort of guessing that human beings have an instinctive fear of fire so the credit of a child waking her family should be down to her basic instinct - Not something she saw on a television show As you imagine this feature length film starts with a sugary sweet sequence of young children and a baby being driven to their grandparents house and the story continues in the same vein .
Isn't life wonderful etc " is the expected response from the parents watching this but any person child or adult with critical faculties will be telling asking themselves " Are we being manipulated here ?
We're being emotionally blackmailed and if you don't like this patronising crap then you must be an evil person , you're not allowed to criticise the pathetic and badly choreographed song and dance numbers or the fact that that for a film with the word adventure in the title there's nothing resembling adventure I have to be honest and say that I feel very , very sorry for children whose parents make them watch this .
My own childhood adventure revolved around Saturday nights when I watched DOCTOR WHO and I think I can speak for everyone in the western world when I say sadistic monsters made out of condoms by the BBC are far more interesting than a man dressed up as a purple dinosaur.
Seeing how I can't receive the Barney show here, thus only knowing it's reputation trough the various spoofs (Simpsons, etc.), I guess it wouldn't hurt to watch along as my 8 year old sister was looking at it when it aired on TV.
What made this movie worse (despite the appearance of the big purple thing itself) are the songs, the plot holes and Trevor Morgan.
I was told that the movie Barney's Great Adventure was worse, so I gave it the benefit of the doubt and went ahead and watched it.
It is pretty much the same with Baby Bop, who I admittedly found cute once upon a time, but other than one or two cute parts where she is trying to find "her yellow blankee" she is annoying and she is sickly sweet in alternative to naturally sweet.The acting is really not great, and the voice acting of Barney and BJ especially is really uninspired.
Overall, a bad movie, it isn't the worst movie I have ever seen, and while kids will love it, adults won't most likely.
I know this is a kid's film and all, based on a somewhat treasured children's show and I am actually cutting it slack by rating it a 2, honestly, because once you have seen the film, you will understand why so many realize how terrible it really is and why they feel the need to criticize it so hardly.First of all, I wasn't expecting it to be anywhere near good anyway, but I wasn't thinking this would be the worst movie ever either, and it wasn't, because surprisingly I have seen worse, but it is pretty freaking bad.
The story plot is stupid, characters are stupid, entertainment level is anything but low, just because you're so interested in how horrible it is, but bad, crappy, terrible, horrible and horrendous still all perfectly describe this movie.
Stick to the Walt Disney's for your sake, because children are bound to enjoy one of them at least a little, and it will relieve you of the horror that is Barney, because I feel so sorry for you if your kid asks you to watch this with them..
Apparently recess isn't good enough for kids from the States so they have to be entertained by a purple rubber suit.Nevertheless it spawned hundreds of millions in revenue and for a few years (mainly the early-to- mid-nineties) Barney the Dinosaur (TM) (C) (R) was THE children's representative.
The show was a runaway success and the merchandise sold stupendously well.Unfortunately (or rather fortunately) by the time this film rolled around in 1998 Barney had already hit the slippery slide downwards and the movie generally flopped in theaters.
This is one of the most terrible films ever made and even as kids' entertainment it is intellectually insulting.The acting is atrocious (it's got the kid from Jurassic Park 3 in it when he had even less acting skills) and the whole idea of some big, fat, annoying guy in a dinosaur costume playing with kids for two hours strikes me as a bit Michael Jackson-ish.
I actually heard that even people who are Barney fans (yes, they exist) don't like this movie!
So here is my review of the dumb dinosaur's great adventure: Plot: The plot is simple- Barney comes to life, He and some kids find an egg, They go all around the world using their Imaginations and unfortunately.
They brought along Barney's friends- BJ and his little sister, Baby Bop. The plot is (other than that) Non existent and has over 70 minutes of general stupidity.
My overall score for this piece of crap movie-1/10 Another review from Phil MacRae- Kicking Barney's butt up and down the street since I was five..
Now that I'm older, I'm sure I wouldn't enjoy the movie as much as I did at 5 years old, but back then it was heaven on earth to watch Barney and his friends race against time.
If you like terrible plots, horrible acting, and gay purple dinosaurs that hang out with CHILDREN, then this movie is for you!
But the people who hate terrible plots, horrible acting, and gay purple dinosaurs that hang out with CHILDREN, should skip this steaming pile of trash and go watch a good movie like Back to the Future, Star Wars, or Scarface.
It should be called bullcrap.If you're a parent who has a baby that likes Barney, you should let them watch it.
Kids between the ages 2-5 will probably love this movie.If you're over the age of 5, don't watch this crap.
It's only recommended to kids who are 2-5.BARNEY'S GREAT ADVENTURE 1/10.
Reviewing a film like Barney's Great Adventure is especially difficult because while you're trying to consider the target audience, you don't want to undermine your own opinions as well.
However, nostalgia doesn't always equate to on-screen success, and Barney's Great Adventure struggles with some tonal problems that are apparent from the very beginning, along with a general frugality to the production despite a medium-sized budget for this kind of project.More on that later.
The film concerns three young kids, the stubborn Cody (Trevor Morgan), his instigating sister Abby (Diana Rice), and their friend Marcella (Kyla Pratt), all of whom are headed to Cody and Abby's grandparents' farm.
Cody, on the other hand, is cynical to this idea, even after Barney does indeed come to life, bring his cheeriness and infectious personality to the natural world.Frustrated and bored out of his mind, Cody wishes for a spectacular summer adventure one night, and the next morning, he's greeted with a large colorful egg.
Most of the time, we get petty moralizing amongst the characters, which is fine if that wants to be the climax or the concluding scene, but Barney's constant interference that involves some kind of wraparound, larger-than-life idea wears on the audience to the point where one feels they're being sermonized to and not entertained.Barney's Great Adventure has a chance to amuse the young, but not as much as your average episode of Barney & Friends, in my opinion.
Barneys Great Adventure stinks like steaming cow dung.
The characters the kids meet are all generally supportive role models (good typical Barney stuff).
This is great for Kids who like Barney, I watched it with my young cousins ( and the rest of the family!), we all enjoyed the sing along parts!It's got alot of cheese, but that just makes it more funny!You have to enter into the fun, and NOT be cynical!Some of the ideas in it are great, like the milkshake maker in the truck!And the whole of the 'Bird' Lady's house is good to look at.
I found Barney a little annoying, but Twiken is very cute- we all went ' aahhhh' !And we liked the dancing too!It's just a great fun film for kids.And it's good to see some rain in a movie!.
Barney's Great Adventure has got to be one of the best films I've ever had the pleasure of seeing.
The Special Effects were marvelous, and all through the film, it looked like real dinosaurs were actually there on the set with the children.
This was an entertaining flick, that if you think Barney is good for kids, then you'll like it.
This is a totally enjoyable adventure for kids and adults alike.There are exciting parts like trying to find the egg at the town carnival.There are funny parts like the interactions of the boy, Cody, and his sister and her friend.Users who panned this movie are trying to Roger Ebert reviewing a regular release movie.
This is Barney and a movie about kids' imagination and dreams.Just sit back and enjoy with your kids or grand-kids.Good Job whoever is responsible for this fun film.10 out of 10..
The majority of other reviews here have been from people who did not see this movie as a kid, and can therefore not make any objective comments, due to not being a member of the target audience.The bottom line is: if you are looking for an entertaining movie for a CHILD (that is, someone below the age of say, eight) then this is for you.
Just like she has done with every other Barney video we have ever rented or owned.Is Barney's Great Adventure a good movie?
Barney's great movie.
It's tongue in cheek approach to enmeshing barney in the real world is pretty funny for parents of kids who have been forced to watch the TV show.
The kids are not as insipid as child stars in most movies, and the face on "Grandpa" when he finally meets Barney is worth watching.
We rented it on pay-perview about a year ago in a hotel.It made me sick.The only good thing about it was the puppets.If I had to go through all that trouble over one egg.I`d eat it for breakfast.The part were Barney said lets use our imagination to turn this pile of wood to a plane.I`m like sure.It`s too silly.Barney is the worst show on tv.And probably the one that gets most made fun of..
When my sister ordered "Barney's great adventure", I thought it would be the stupidest movie ever made.
This movie is like a really long episode of barney.
What I liked most about it compared to regular barney shows, was that there was much less loud and kid-sung songs.
this movie just touched my heart so much i need to tell the world.This beautiful dinosaur has shown kids around the world how to live and act anyone who acts the in a way this dinosaur doesn't like i will hunt them down and murder their families.The plot is amazing and innovative.Oh the songs OOOHHH THE SONNGS.they are the greatest piece of art to exist ever.
There's just something about Mom & Dad sitting down to enjoy a good, morally-clean, fun family movie with kids!
So if parents watch trash...the kids will think that's good for them too.
The songs are very enjoyable (if you can get past Barney's annoying voice) The acting is good - both by the children and the adults.
But even at my age, I feel that every once in a while I need to relive the cutest and most charming moments of my life.To clarify, I never saw Barney's Great Adventure as a kid, but I only saw it just today on YouTube.
I was checking it out to see if it was as bad as most people claim it to be and expected it to be a big waste of my time and really annoying, though admittedly I skipped an irrelevant musical number, but it turned out to be a movie that was, in my opinion, fine for little children.On the other hand, the real negative points are...
Barney's Great Adventure (1998): Dir: Steve Gomer / Cast: George Hearn, Shirley Douglas, Trevor Morgan, Kyla Pratt, Diana Rice: Unbearable family film about adventure and imagination that is best viewed under the influence of alcohol.
I had previously seen clips and a Christmas episode of the TV show starring the prehistoric pre-school character, then when I was about ten years old I asked for the VHS of this movie, as a joke (I'd seen the trailer), I didn't expect I would actually get it, but I sat down and watched it all the way through (I'm ashamed to see a few times).
Abby has brought along her stuffed purple and green Tyrannosaurus Rex doll Barney the dinosaur, Cody does not believe in magic, but with their imagination Abby and Marcella bring Barney (voiced by Bob West, performed by David Joyner) to life, and he is keen to entertain and join the children having fun, playing games and singing songs.
At night Cody makes a wish on a shooting star to have a real adventure, and after walking away this star crashes to Earth into the barn, the next morning Barney and the kids discover a large colourful egg.
Barney and the children do finally get the egg back, Grandma and Grandpa join them, seeing that the living dinosaur is real after all, they are joined by Baby Bop and BJ as the egg hatches, inside is a koala-like being named Twinken.
The episode I saw of Barney & Friends was frustrating, as the children had almost forced smiles while performing with him, I would not expose my child to this "entertainment", in the TV show and in this film Barney the purple dinosaur may be popular with the children, but having grown up I find him rather annoying and overly childish, it is very likely he is gay as well, the children performers are okay.
OK i know barney is crappy but this just plan out sucks,i mean PBS show our never meant to be made into movies especially barney,i mean isn't it enough that we have to watch him on TV.but PBS chouldnt give a crap what as teens,kids and adults think, they just appeal to 2 year olds or 3.and you think the movies would be safe from movies like this.but i guess i was proved wrong,don't you just hate it when you get some hard earned cash and then spend it on a movie like this.you see PBS just wants your money and they'll go high and low to get it.nobody wants to see this movie, heck the only reason you'll go is because of the preschoolers.what makes this movie so annoying is its plot.barney and friends find some magic egg on a farm and rolls away and they have to find it.not only that but they also have to put those crappy crappy songs in there.and remember you paid 10 bucks to see this.my advise to you is if you have a kid at home who wants to see this deny it as long as you freaking can it will pay off in the long run.
I was literally shocked when I saw Barney's Great Adventure (1998) among those films.
Does Barney da Dinosaur have a MOVIE!?".
Now, I'll explain why I think Barney's Great Adventure shouldn't only be prohibited but exterminated.
It's exactly the same with Barney & Friends, for it didn't reach that popularity in its audience (children), whether you liked the series or not.
I'll set an example: when Barney shows up for the first time in the movie, he says he's been taking a bath.
Another negative aspect of this film is a serious mistake that it makes from the beginning to the end: Barney's Great Adventure confuses IMPOSSIBLE with ILLOGICAL.
God, what are our little siblings and/or sons used to watch?) I'm glad to know that this film is no longer that popular because now children will no longer be stupidized by this monstrosity.
Apparently, Barney's Great Adventure aims to make you believe that everything is possible by using our imagination; but that's when the terrible mistake is made, for not everything is possible, and you do know it!
Imagination is a great support, for it helps us to think outside the box and stop thinking about boundaries, but the fact of using the imagination to believe in an idiocy as absurd as a "dream-maker" fallen from the sky in an egg is simply bad, and certainly makes children dumber.Another aspect that I would like to emphasize, is the simple idea of having wanted to launch this film in theaters.
Barney's Great Adventure could've been enjoyed by some kids; several, perhaps.
Now this is a bit deceptive, as very few kids in Barney's demographics vote on films on IMDb or review them, and the show and movie were never meant to appeal to anyone older than 7 (at the most).
It sure would be nice if this film were scored on what kids think of it as well.
Your kids might like it.So why, then, did I watch this film?
The film begins with three kids and an obligatory ethnic friend (this is required for Barney episodes) going to stay with the grandparents.
So, when his little sister and her friend are playing with Barney, he is miserable and hates this "kid's stuff".
The grouchy boy (Cody) was actually like having an adult follow along during much of the movie so he could comment about how stupid the whole thing was.
As most adults hate Barney and his friends, getting one to sit through the film in the theater with their kids is problematic.
|
tt1319708
|
Deus Ex: Human Revolution
|
=== Setting ===
Human Revolution takes place in the year 2027, 25 years prior to the original Deus Ex. The Deus Ex series is set in a cyberpunk future rife with secret organizations and conspiracies: among these forces is the Illuminati. Leading up to Human Revolution, there have been marked improvements in human society, with people actively combating global warming, finding cures for a large variety of diseases, and improving green energy. Alongside this, global megacorporations have come to eclipse government authority in power and influence, while private military forces dwarf the sanctioned armies of First World countries. Advances in biotechnology and cybernetics have led to the development of "augmentations", advanced artificial organs capable of greatly improving and enhancing the human body's performance. The development of augmentation technology has triggered the creation of a new social divide: those with augmentations become the world's new upper class citizenry and are touted as the future of humanity, while normal humans form the majority of the lower-class population. Augmentations also come with the necessity of taking Neuropozyne, a limited and expensive immunosuppressive drug that stops the body rejecting the technology. By the events of Human Revolution, society is being divided between "augs", humans who have accepted augmentation technology; and normal humans who are either morally opposed to it, too poor to afford it, or whose bodies actively reject it. The tensions between the two factions begin generating open conflict.
=== Characters ===
The main protagonist is Adam Jensen: coming from a humble background in Detroit, he worked as a leader with the local SWAT squad until he refuses to follow a questionable order and is turfed out. After this, he is taken on as security manager at Sarif Industries, a local company at the leading edge of augmentation technology. A fellow at the company is Megan Reed, a researcher for Sarif and Adam's ex-girlfriend. His employer is company CEO David Sarif, who is instrumental in saving Adam after he was left near-dead at the beginning of the game. Adam meets many key characters during his missions between Detroit, Montreal and the new Shanghai metropolis of Hengsha. These include Sarif's chief pilot Faridah Malik; Sarif systems engineer Frank Pritchard; Eliza Cassan, a media personality and public face of Picus Communications; William Taggart, founder of the anti-augmentation group Humanity Front; Hugh Darrow, who founded augmentation technology but is one of those genetically incapable of using them; Zhao Yun Ru, CEO of the Tai Yong Medical megacorporation; and the "Tyrants" mercenary squad, composed of leader Jaron Namir and his associates Lawrence Barrett and Yelena Fedorova.
=== Plot ===
Note: While the general plot of Human Revolution follows a distinct path, many elements are subject to the player's decisions. The game also offers several subplots which the player may or may not encounter, depending on their actions within the game. This synopsis concentrates on the main, unavoidable plot thread of the game.
On the eve of unveiling a new type of augmentation that will negate the use of Neuropozyne, Sarif Industries is attacked by the Tyrants. Adam Jensen attempts to save Megan Reed and her fellow scientists, but Tyrant leader Namir critically wounds him and apparently kills Megan and the scientists. David Sarif uses his most advanced technology to save Adam, giving him superhuman abilities: he also learns that the augmentations are bonding to him naturally without the need for Neuropozyne. Called back to deal with an attack on a Sarif Industries warehouse by anti-augmentation extremists, Adam discovers an augmented hacker attempting to gain access to the secret Typhoon weapon augmentation. Upon discovery, the hacker is forced by their controller to shoot himself. After Adam retrieves the deceased hacker's neural hub from his old Detroit police precinct, Frank Pritchard tracks the hacking signal to an abandoned factory in Highland Park. Adam discovers the Tyrants guarding a FEMA detention camp, but they are moving out after the failure of the Sarif raid. Adam confronts and defeats one of the mercenaries, Barrett, who tells him to go to Hengsha before killing himself with a grenade.
Together with pilot Faridah Malik, Adam travels to Hengsha and tracks down the hacker, Arie van Bruggen, who is being both hunted by private security company Belltower Associates and hidden by local triad leader Tong Si Hung. Van Bruggen directs Adam to find evidence inside Tai Yong Medical, the world's largest augmentation technology manufacturer and Sarif's main rival. Infiltrating Tai Yong, Adam finds footage of a call between Namir and Zhao Yun Ru, which confirms that Megan and the other missing scientists are alive and that Eliza Cassan is somehow involved. Confronting Zhao in her penthouse apartment, he learns that she is allied to a powerful organization that controls global interests before she triggers security and forces him to leave. Traveling to the Picus corporate building in Montreal, Jensen tracks down Eliza, revealed to be an artificial intelligence construct designed to influence the media: despite her programming, she has begun to question her role, and offers to help Adam. After he defeats Tyrant member Fedorova, Eliza gives him footage directing him to Doctor Isaias Sandoval, aide to William Taggart.
Back in Detroit, Sarif admits to Adam that the Illuminati are behind the attacks. Adam infiltrates a Humanity Front rally and discovers Sandoval's location. Sandoval admits his involvement in the kidnapping and gives Adam the lead to find the researchers. Back in Sarif HQ, Adam meets Hugh Darrow, who is currently working to stave off global warming with the newly constructed Panchaea Facility in the Arctic. Adam, along with other augmented people, also start experiencing painful glitches, with authorities urging them to have a biochip replacement. Pritchard locates the tracking beacon of one of the scientists, taking Adam back to Hengsha, where he and Malik are ambushed by Belltower. The beacon leads Adam to Tong Si Hung, who has just been implanted with the now-deceased scientist's arm. Under Tong's direction, Adam manages to stow away in a stasis pod in the wake of a staged explosion, waking up a few days later in a secret Singapore base. He finds the kidnapped scientists, and learns that the biochip malfunctions were staged to distribute the result of their research: a new biochip to control augmented humans. Adam and the scientists stage a distraction, allowing him to infiltrate the facility's secret bunker. Here he faces Namir one last time, then finds Megan. Confronted, Megan tells him that she was kidnapped for her research; the genetic key to make all humans compatible with augmentations, which she found in Adam's DNA — and to help Darrow foil the Illuminati's plans.
Moments later, Darrow appears live on television and broadcasts a modified signal that throws any augmented person with the new biochip into a fear-driven, murderous frenzy. Jensen evacuates the scientists, and commandeers an orbital flight module to reach Panchaea. He confronts Darrow, who reveals that he wants humanity to abandon the augmentation technology he invented, because he believes it will destroy human identity. Adam sets out to disable Panchaea's supercomputer and end the broadcast; on the way, he encounters Taggart and Sarif, who each urge him to side with them and further their own agendas. At the heart of Panchaea, Jensen first confronts Zhao Yun Ru when she tries to hijack the signal for her own use; then Eliza, who offers Jensen four choices. Jensen can either broadcast the full truth and distance humanity from augmentations; rig the broadcast so it throws suspicion on the Humanity Front and allows further development of augmentation technology; send out a report blaming the incident on contaminated Neuropozyne so Taggart's group and by extension the Illuminati find new support; or destroy Panchea, leaving no-one to "spin the story". Depending on the choice and whether Jensen has taken a pacifist or violent approach through the game, his final narration varies.
In a post-credits scene, Megan meets with Bob Page, the main antagonist of Deus Ex, and discusses her employment in "the nanite virus chimera" and "D project": prior to this, Page instructs his cohort Morgan Everett to search the Hyron Project wreckage for salvageable technology for the 'Morpheus Initiative': these are the precursors to the manufactured nanotechnological "Gray Death" virus and the "Helios" artificial intelligence, key parts of the plot of Deus Ex.
|
neo noir, sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0382806
|
Look Both Ways
|
The film charts the stories of several people over a hot summer weekend in Adelaide. Photojournalist Nick (William McInnes) discovers he has testicular cancer that has spread to his lungs. On his way home he goes to the site of a train accident to report on it, and meets Meryl (Justine Clarke) an emotionally vulnerable artist, who has witnessed a man get run over by a train. Over the course of the weekend, their relationship develops sexually as another chance encounter allows them to discover more about each other; the two gradually allow themselves to let go of their fears and form a meaningful relationship.
Meanwhile, Nick's colleague, Andy Walker, has to deal with the news that his estranged girlfriend, Anna, is pregnant, made more difficult because neither of them really wanted or planned for a baby. Andy also has to cope with his ex-wife, who doesn't trust his ability to take good care of his two children. The lives of Julia (the partner of the man run over by the train) and the driver of the train are explored: Both characters are shown going through the seven stages of grief. The train driver bridges the gap with his estranged teenage son during the course of the movie. The rain at the end of the film symbolizes relief.
The films credits are complemented by a series of photographs showing Nick and Meryl staying together, eventually traveling together and Nick surviving cancer.
|
boring, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It's not just the use of animation to convey a character's thought and feelings; every scene has something in it that's part of the story, but this picture show is never intrusive.
Sarah Watt, the animator whose first feature this is would have been a natural in the silent movie era.The action in the film covers a hot February weekend in Adelaide and starts with a death a man out walking his dog somehow winds up under a slow-moving passing freight train (there are no fences).
The train-driver is brooding over the accident, watched over by his silent though strangely composed son and the dead man's girlfriend is trying to come to terms with her loss.The interwoven stories are of course reminiscent of "Lantana", many a Robert Altman movie starting with "Nashville", and Paul Thomas Anderson's "Magnolia".
Although William McGuiness and Justine Clarke are the lead actors, the rest of the cast shine as well; even the minor roles are well executed for example Maggie Dence as Nick's mother, Edwin Hodgeman as his now-dead father, Sacha Horler as Meryl's flatmate and Andreas Sobik as the train driver (who has only one line of dialogue).You can't help wondering what Sarah Watt would do if she had a budget the size Peter Jackson now has.
With life inevitably comes death and the characters here bring the fear, longing and love of life to us in the most normal, everyday way.
Running like a railway track throughout the movie is the reality of death which may be around the corner, or a century away, no one knows their final hour, yet everyone finally becomes more aware of its inevitability at some point.
I loved this clever LOCAL film, full of mature characters and visual treats.In the cinema with me - full house by word of mouth I'd say- there were people laughing out loud yet the subject matter deals with death and pain.
Justine Clark was so dishily funny and down to earth, such an expressive face as she delivers her so clumsily real lines.The drawings and animation add so much to the story and fabulous fast,montages carry an extra charge.This is what the big blockbusters cant do- deliver stories that talk to the locals.
It's uncomfortable to even think about yet touches us all on many levels, and that is why LOOK BOTH WAYS succeeds.Building on death in thought-provoking, sad, and often hilarious terms, Look Both Ways binds a small Australian community together after the death of a man upon the local railroad tracks.
Also on the scene is Nick's newspaper partner Andy (Anthony Hayes, NED KELLY) and eventually the deceased's wife Julia (Daniella Farinacci, BROTHERS).Meryl sees the event as just another death, something that fill her thoughts and her paintings on a daily basis.
Newspaper writer Andy battles to understand life and death while struggling to be a good father to his divorced children, and the discovery that his new girlfriend is pregnant with an unwanted child.
Widow Julia tries to understand the seemingly meaninglessness of her husband's death as flowers flow into her home and she's forced to come to grips with such a sudden loss.Where Look Both Ways succeeds is in its delivery.
Widow Julia and the engineer who was driving the train are two of the more interesting cases within the story, as they have no speaking parts until the very end, but are given ample screen time which speaks volumes on its own.The message of the flick is simple but not forced: look at death both ways.
There is hope and fear within it, operating not at opposite ends of the spectrum, but as a gauge on how to live life without death looming ever present on one's mind.Meryl, the one who the film is mostly about, learns this lesson the hard way, coming to terms with her own fate, and that of Nick who's cancerous life is destined to plow into hers with the force of a padded sledgehammer..
It is good to be truly moved by a film without feeling like you have been manipulated, to see good acting without any 'star performances' overwhelming the whole thing, and to find yourself talking and thinking about it for days afterward with delight.
She has that great ability to tell a universal human story with an artists eye, through all those perfect little details of scenery, set, facial expression, props - all memorably enhanced by her unusual touch in using animation to convey thoughts and emotions.
But here's what my companion and I loved about "Look Both Ways" - the characters were real, the scenery real, the main topic (death) made us squirm, but we recognized the reality that we would rather avoid.
The main characters have to deal with things that creep up on us without warning, whether it be the death of a loved one, or a freight train accident, or the first unsure steps in a developing relationship.
Some of the actors who appear in several scenes have no lines, or only a handful, but this just underscores the quiet intensity of the script.It reminded me of some of Altman's best stuff, separate story threads that wind in and out of each other, sometimes intimately intertwined and sometimes very briefly touching.
Can't think of any other movie it compares to very closely, State and Main would be the nearest I can think of, although this is less of a comedy and more a thinking and feeling film.I've no idea if or when it's going to get released elsewhere, but catch it if you can..
There is no reason for a small budget to reduce the aims of a film production, but director Sarah Watt tries to pack too much into her filmic bag in Look Both Ways.
The result is that none of their stories are fully developed, and in the absence of commanding central figures, the theme of death threatens to take over as the main character.The main story, a budding romance between Meryl Lee (Justine Clarke) and Nick (William McInnes) needed more detail: we needed to get to know the characters better, but Watt does not seem to know them well enough to go further.
The Waifs, and other Aussie pop singers were another intrusion.Watt is a gifted film-maker, but she should study the art of story-telling, in particular the skill of peeling layers off characters to reveal their inner selves.
The performances of William McInnis, Justine Clarke and Anthony Hayes are real convincing portrayal of characters trapped in a moment in time.
The delicate performance of McInnis as the cancer suffering Nick, brings home the real feelings of disbelief, fear and anger that a person has when they are told for the first time that they have the "C" word.
The tragedy for writer / director Sarah Watt has come with her own diagnosis after the film wrapped - the Australian Film going audiences such as myself wishes her a speedy recovery so she can continue to provide us with powerful pieces of cinema such as "Look Both Ways"..
Death is a daily topic in all media, part of which is shown in the film by the short animated sequences.
I've just seen this movie for the first time and thought I would pen a short comment, but feel that Look Both Ways is a movie that could improve with multiple viewings...Over the space of a weekend we follow a group of ordinary Australians who are mostly connected through the tragedy of a train crash.
We watch as couples and families work through their feelings, cope with their relationships, and manage health problems.In so doing Look Both Ways explores the ups and downs we all face as we lead our lives and has a relevance for each and every viewer.
Something I really love about this woman's short films was the elusiveness of theme -- especially in "Living with Happiness." This film has some nice beginnings -- unusual location and the potential for a strange cinematic treatment, but fails to succeed with clunky expositional dialogue, patchy performances and very television coverage.It's once again charming television and very ordinary cinema.
I know many people will say the film has deep meaning and is life affirming while it just a small story that says nothing new or different about death and dying.
Justine Clark tries hard and William McInnes is likable in his Seachange rehash as a snag with a big issue.The Big Train Smash story is off screen and that's part of the problem - there's no defining screen event to propel you into the film.
After years of supporting an increasingly tired and predictable Australian film industry, Look Both Ways is a minor miracle.
Sarah Watt (the writer/director) is definitely a person to watch, her mastery of the art of story-telling is well matched by her skill with direction.
His real life wife, Sarah Watt, has created magic with the script and direction and the dream/thought sequences that employ her unique style of animation.
Look Both Ways is a very, very good Aussie film.
Most of the characters are surrounded by death, one with cancer, one who's partner got hit by a train and another who's father has died.
Following these characters through a weekend of awful events, unfriendly attitudes and bad news just isn't my idea of a watchable, interesting movie and I got very tired of its "one note" theme and couldn't wait for it to end--in fact I almost stopped about halfway through.
I found the film a great little gem about life and death, often sharply poignant, occasionally quite funny, and certainly moving.
I thought that perhaps there was a little less time devoted to each story as I would have liked, Andy and the train driver in particular, however the film is still erstwhile in its dramatic drive, and malignant in driving home the message it sets out to tell.Whilst I can claim to being slight biased, its nice to come home from a night at the movies after seeing your home up on the big screen, in a good film.
Another IMDb reviewer described it as "life-affirming", and I will endorse that opinion.This film about otherwise ordinary people was so moving, its message so deep and fundamental to our humanity, and so thought provoking.
And the writer-director, Sarah Watt, has succeeded brilliantly in one of the toughest tasks in film-making: representing the inner experience of people their thoughts and fantasies visually, cinematically, without resort to soliloquies, dialogue or voiceovers to convey such interior events.Ms. Watt has been making short animated films for over 15 years, and she uses her animation skills to great advantage in this, her first feature length, narrative movie.
Then she witnesses a man struck dead by a passing freight train.In the wake of these events and another unconnected to her, a horrific train accident elsewhere in the country, Meryl begins to imagine brief catastrophic scenes at every turn, in which she herself dies a violent death.
We are shown these flashes of vivid visual imagery, which always take the form of animated watercolor paintings, in a style like those she makes in her spare time (this is where Ms. Watts's animation skills come into play).Nick (William McInnes) is a photographer with the local paper who covers the accidental death caused by the freight train that Meryl witnessed.
But they are absorbing, especially the angry, grieving partner of the man killed by the train, the devastated train engineer, and a hotheaded reporter colleague of Nick's and the two women in his life.The film is not without problems.
That said, I think Ms. Watt has real promise as a narrative film director; she appears to work well with actors, and her own imagination shines.
I understand that Sarah Watt is usually a director of animated films.
The use of animation here was excellent: the pictures spoke the emotions with no need for scripting.If you liked "Tom White" or "Three Dollars" you will probably enjoy this, although I ranked these both higher as they struck more of a chord with me than this film..
Writer, director Sarah Watt's film "Look Both Ways" is a noble, uplifting movie about the human spirit.
The story was engaging, the direction was spot-on, the characters were almost brilliant, there is nothing I would criticize of this film.
The film often breaks into animation without severing the flow of the movie, quite a feat, and the rapid montages that appear from time to time are stunning, to say the least.
Look Both Ways is a fairly engaging movie that focuses on a set of people after a tumultuous train crash kills a person.
The movie just sort of floats on by, The only saving grace is the hilarious animation that possesses a character's inner thoughts about death, but other then that, it's pretty unremarkable..
Maybe directors will once again trust actors to bring intelligent contributions to the film and allow them to navigate their own way through the development of a character.
It seemed the actors found their own ways of playing these characters and hence they were given dimensions that are never evident in many other films..
With more than just a nod to Paul Anderson's Magnolia (1999) and Tom Tykwer's Run, Lola, Run (1998), long-time animation writer/director, Sarah Watt, has produced an engaging montage of mini-stories all interwoven over a hot, lazy weekend in and around Adelaide, South Australia, and all loosely connected as a result of an accident or was it?
Not so here: Meryl Lee (Justine Clarke) and Nick (William McInness) are in the frame most of the time, she being a commercial artist creating birthday/anniversary/wedding cards and such like (and is grieving about the recent loss of her father), he being a photo-journalist for the daily rag.
She sees the death (or does she?); later, he photographs the accident scene with his mate, Andy (Anthony Hayes), the journalist who drags him along to get the photos necessary for the story.
However, while at the scene, Meryl's and Nick's eyes meet briefly, and, with the job done, both find that they're wandering off in the same direction, and thus strike up a conversation.Andy, in turn, is dealing with death and an on-again/off-again romance in a different way: he's on a crusade to prove that many male 'accidents' are actually suicides (for whatever reason) by writing a series of pieces for the paper and raising public awareness.
Incensed, for multiple reasons, Meryl runs off, agonizing and agonized.At this point, let me leave you to find out how Nick/Meryl and Andy/Anna come to terms with the need to look both ways, and while they all ponder the meaning of the young fellow's death.There are other characters who contribute enormously to this little gem, beginning with the train driver and his family.
Without one word of dialog between the driver, his wife, and their son, Watt really shows her skill as a director and with the camera to 'tell' a complete story, culminating with the driver delivering an apology and one of Meryl's bereavement cards which, as the viewer, you've already seen in an earlier scene to the girl-friend/partner/wife (it's uncertain which it is) of the accident victim.Add to that, the talents of the children who appear, all of whom perform flawlessly (but kids like to play-act naturally, do they not?).The four main actors are simply excellent.
William McInnes (real-life husband to director Sarah Watt) is outstanding in his role, by far the best I've seen from him (winning the Australian Best Actor Award for this role).
Not only is her directing and writing skill evident, her technique in this film of using animation to show the thoughts of the characters is often excruciatingly funny.
The film is more about the choices we make during our life than about death.Even the less sympathetic characters, such as Andy, were portrayed in such a way that you could understand their emotions,even if you couldn't full sympathize with them.
The cartooning and artwork added another element to the movie that kept my interest.I would recommend it to fans of independent films who like realistic characters in realistic settings presented in an unusual way..
In a summer stuffed with over long blockbusters, how nice to watch a film that ends when it should, and has a decent script and a story you can follow without taking notes and drawing up a flow chart.The movie starts with a train wreck and then ventures into the unsteady territory of the potential train wrecks of the protagonists' lives.
He's got an awkward ex-wife, two ill-mannered kids and a pregnant girlfriend, and is feeling pretty sorry for himself.In the meantime Meryl, (Justine Clarke who is this wonderful woman?) an artist on her way home from her father's funeral, witnesses the rail track death.
Adelaide manages to look like Dagenham with sunshine I'm still trying to decide if that's a good thing or a bad thing.I read that Watt is an animator, and I certainly loved the animations of Meryl and Nick's varied death fears.
A movie about cancer has to offer something more profound than entertainment, but this film fell short of making any kind of statement a 14-year-old couldn't.
no offense to Adelaide people - love your "city", very pretty place, but i think such a great film ought to have been made the way it was intended and this was intended to be a Melbourne movie.
In their first meeting, the two main characters prove that there are things in life worse than death.
Or is life serendipitous, do things just happen for no reason.Sarah Watt is an award winning animator, this being her debut film.
Justine Clarke, William McInnes and Anthony Hayes bring so much pain and misery to their characters, yet making them so sympathetic and flawed, they make they feel so real.This is a beautiful story about the wonders of life, set within a dark world of death..
|
tt0120481
|
Washington Square
|
A prologue introduces us to Dr. Austin Sloper (Albert Finney), a New York City doctor and resident of a large house on Washington Square whose wife dies in childbirth, leaving a daughter, Catherine (Jennifer Jason Leigh), to be raised by her father. As a child, Catherine is overweight, clumsy, and untalented; however, she is also a sweet, affectionate child. She adores her father and tries hard to please him, but he considers her a disappointment and treats her with ironic condescension. His thoughts are still much occupied with his beloved wife and with a promising son who died before Catherine was born, and he privately – but bitterly – resents his only surviving child for causing his wife's death.
Sloper invites Catherine's widowed aunt, the incurably foolish Lavinia Penniman (Maggie Smith), to live at Washington Square as a chaperone for Catherine. Catherine becomes a plain young woman who is painfully shy and inept in the social graces expected of someone of her class, despite her aunt's best efforts to instill them. Apart from her sweet nature, Catherine possesses only one obvious attraction: money. She earns $10,000 annually from her mother's estate, and will inherit considerably more when her father dies.
At a party celebrating her cousin Marian Almond's (Jennifer Garner) engagement, Catherine is introduced to a handsome, charming young man named Morris Townsend (Ben Chaplin). He is attentive, respectful, and – to Catherine's obvious astonishment – clearly interested in her. He begins paying regular calls at Washington Square. Before long, the susceptible Catherine falls headlong in love with him. Sloper, however, suspects Townsend of being a fortune hunter, with no intention of pursuing a career. Aunt Lavinia loves melodrama and gets a vicarious thrill from Townsend's attentions; and so, contrary to Sloper's wishes, she does all she can to encourage the relationship, even meeting Townsend secretly to collude with him.
The central conflict emerges when Townsend proposes marriage and Sloper refuses to give his consent, telling Catherine he will disinherit her if she marries without it. Catherine doesn't care about the money, but disobeying her father is another matter. She dutifully accompanies him on a Grand Tour of Europe, during which he exhorts her to give Townsend up; she refuses, and a frustrated Sloper speaks to her with such contempt that she finally admits to herself that he despises her. The realization pains her deeply, but also strengthens her resolve to separate herself from him and bestow all her love and loyalty on Townsend.
Catherine comes home, determined to marry. When she and Morris are reunited, she convinces him that her father will never relent. Shortly afterward, he backs out of the relationship. When Catherine tearfully confronts him, he admits his mercenary motives outright and leaves her.
Years pass. Catherine has refused at least one respectable offer of marriage. When her father's health fails, she nurses him through his last illness. During his final days, he asks her to promise never to marry Morris Townsend. With quiet dignity, she replies that while she seldom thinks of Townsend, she can't make such a promise. Sloper misunderstands her and alters his will, adding a codicil deploring his daughter's ongoing interest in unscrupulous young men and leaving most of his $300,000 fortune to charity. Catherine is left with only the house and the income from her mother. She isn't offended by the codicil; in fact, at the reading of the will, she laughs.
Some time later, Townsend reappears at her doorstep. Catherine, who is now running a daycare center in her house, talks to him briefly. She isn't angry, but she has no interest in renewing their relationship, and tells him so, quietly and firmly. He departs, leaving Catherine to reflect on the passion she once experienced.
|
cruelty
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It is unfair to compare the 1997 film "Washington Square" to the 1949 film "The Heiress." "Washington Square" is a faithful adaptation of Henry James' eponymous classic novel; "The Heiress" is based on the stage adaptation of the James novel by Augustus and Ruth Goetz.Hence, the two most dramatic scenes in "The Heiress" do not appear in "Washington Square" -- Morris Townsend's cruel jilting of Catherine right before their planned elopement, and Catherine's revenge in the final scene, where Morris is left pounding on the bolted door.There were many fine performances in "Washington Square," most notably Jennifer Jason Leigh.
This is a masterpiece of film-making, both because of the talented Polish director Agnieszka Holland, and the performance by Jennifer Jason Leigh.
The performance by Leigh is really as delicate as gossamer, and she spins a transparent silky web of tormented love with such intensity she outdoes even Olivia de Havilland, who played the role before her in 'The Heiress' long ago, and to do that is a miracle!
I believe this is the finest of all the many excellent films based on Henry James stories, and most of them are so good, that is high praise indeed..
It takes a lot of nerve to take on a De Havilland's part ,and Jennifer Jason Leigh has succeeded though:she has never taken the easy road ,as "last exit to Brooklyn"(1989)testifies.She is one of these rare contemporary actors (like Sean Penn,Daniel Day-Lewis,Emma Thompson)who shuns narcissistic parts,who does not think twice about making herself look ugly(like De Havilland).Her portrayal of a gauche,clumsy but endearing heiress(!)despised by her father is brilliant.Matching her every step of the way are Finney's and Smith's sensational renderings of the rich fat bourgeois and the ambiguous spinster.
Albert Finney plays a selfish cruel man ,whose wife died when his daughter was born,and he never forgave the girl this death.So he 's always putting her down,humiliating her fiercely.Maggie Smith -who has already played old maid parts:see "the prime of miss Jean Brodie"(1969),"the honey pot" (1967)"A room with a view"(1986)-is equally successful as the heroine's aunt:we never know whether she helps or thwarts her niece's plans.She probably tries to recreate what she misses during her whole life,but isn't she trying to make her niece what she is as well?Whatever you think of remakes,when you deal with such a efficient threesome,you forget all your bias.Henry James talks about woman's condition during the last century.Money is the center of the heroine's drama;she will never be sure to be loved for herself,that's why her love is doomed from the very beginning.At the time,marriage was the woman's only future,ugly women became either spinsters or nuns.Catherine's dilemma is that,unlike the other socialites for whom marriage is the way to become part of the posh elite,love is second to none for her.Ben Chaplin is rather acceptable,but his character remains one-dimensional.It was probably hard to equal Montgomery Clift.In a nutshell,a movie who shuns fad;hence a very commendable work.Agnieska Holland -who had already directed a remarkable "Europa Europa"- is a director who promises great things..
To truly understand the plight of the young lovers and especially to get a sense of the tension behind the relationship between daughter and father, one must view "The Heiress" and "Washington Square" for the two films are lovely by themselves, but they certainly complement each other.
The film version of Henry James' novel twists the story James tried to convey.
I think that a more strict adherence to James would have made the film just as romantic, but would have left the audience with the message that the lovers had just as many faults as the good Doctor..
"Washington Square" is a flat, shabby adaptation of the short novel by Henry James.
Moreover its simple, eventless story seems unsuited to make it into a film (although William Wyler, with his "The Heiress", gave in 1949 a beautiful version of the novel).
Along three quarters of the movie, Catherine (Jennifer Jason Leigh) just seems to be mentally retarded, poor thing.
But if a director utterly ignores or misunderstands the art of an author (here Henry James), I don't see the point of using his work to make a bad movie.
The acting is adequate to the movie: poor and flat, in spite of the talent of Albert Finney and Maggie Smith.
I do not know who is to blame, Miss Leigh or her director, but her performance as Catherine is almost impossible to watch.
It was a rambling story told by a busybody with none of the dramatic high points of The Heiress; it is Henry James" first novel and has none of the intriguing nuances of his later novels.This film stays closer to the novel than "The Heiress".
This film is an insult to two of the greatest actors ever to hit the silver screen, Olivia de Havilland and Montgomery Clift, who starred in the original version, The Heiress.
I dont know if it it touches all those who have felt betrayed or if katherine is so believable that the leaking eyes are for her!!I have recommended it to all my friends who enjoy a good weepy.The ending is not sad but gives me a sense of strength and survival,a kind of "good on ya Katherine" having read other reviews it amazes me how differently people experience the same movie.
While The Heiress was a good, if not entirely accurate, adaptation, Washington Square is a heavy-handed and poorly acted, except for the part of Dr Sloper, film that could have been so much better.The director's attempts at making 'beautiful' scenes were so obvious that I actually cringed.
I agree with other comments about Leigh's portrayal of Catherine as an idiot, instead of naive and shy; she made me despise her not feel for her.Catherine's transition from childlike trusting to adult cynicism, the whole point of the story, was internalised, just as it was in the novel.
I think someone skipped adaptation class at filmschool.I appreciate the director's attempts to make a moving and beautiful film out of a difficult text but it just didn't work..
This movie has some beautiful sets and Albert Finney does a great job as the ruthless father.
The movie fails because Jennifer Jason Leigh is too jumpy as the daughter and is no match whatever for Olivia De Havilland's far more nuanced, mature rendering in The Heiress (1949).
The film's feminist-leaning conclusion also goes against the austere conclusion of the novel, Washington Square, whose author, Henry James, savagely parodied feminism in some of his other novels.
I understand there was some conflict between Leigh and the great Maggie Smith during the filming.
The film is much more faithful to the original Novel by Henry James than its predecessor, The Heiress (Dir. by William Wyler), which was heavily based on a stage play of Washington Square.
This film was beautifully acted, directed, written, costumed, staged -- everything about this movie was well crafted.
While it's nice that we get to understand why Catherine is mostly ignored by her father (because her mother died while giving birth to her), director Agnieszka Holland, writer Carol Doyle, and Jennifer Jason Leigh make her overly pathetic at first.
It's as if they were smugly suggesting, "Of course no one would look at her, because her father beat her down so much." Jennifer Jason Leigh is a better actress, IMHO, then Olivia de Havilland (who played Catherine in William Wyler's adaptation of this novel, THE HEIRESS), but de Havilland(or Wyler, or both) understood we needed to see Catherine appealing and shy, otherwise we'd never believe Catherine when she believes Morris is truly in love with her.
Henry James' WASHINGTON SQUARE is well served in this solid film whose screenplay was adapted by Carol Doyle and has been directed with secure wisdom of James' style by Polish director Agnieszka Holland )'Europa, Europa', 'Red', 'Blue', 'Copying Beethoven', etc).
The musical score is in the capable hands of Jan AP Kaczmarek and the Director of Photography is Jerzy Zielinski, and with all these elements in place, the last ingredient in making this a successful adaptation of a Henry James novel is the cast.
Albert Finney is superb as the wealthy Dr. Austin Sloper who hoards his money in his mansion on Washington Square and whose overprotective rule of his less than attractive daughter Catherine (Jennifer Jason Leigh) - who is also under the influence of her overbearing Aunt Lavinia (Maggie Smith, still chewing the scenery as usual but convincing) - has put an impasse to Catherine's infatuation with the handsome but poor Morris Townsend (Ben Chaplin): if Catherine should choose to marry Morris she would be cut off as his heiress.
Distance, imposed by the disapproving Dr. Sloper in escorting Catherine to Europe for a year, doesn't appear to squelch the passion between Catherine and Morris, but Morris finds work which takes him away from the returned Catherine, only to learn upon return that Catherine will not inherit her father's fortune - a glitch that sadly changes the relationship of what had appeared to be a true love romance.
In the end the film follows Henry James' view of the world of his time - a palette for social criticism.
Albert Finney and Ben Chaplin are good too and Maggie Smith is gold.
Especially the one between Catherine and her father and the one in the final sequence with her and Morris.'Washington Square' makes for a decent one-time watch, mostly because of the performances..
End of comments on grooming.This charming Morris Townsend -- good family but no job and no money -- devotes a great deal of attention to Catherine.
And I'm not normally one to recommend the taste of teenagers, but I want to tell you that my high school English classes, so film-weary that they are quite hard to please, liked this film and, with a bit of help with the dialogue, especially between the older adults, tuned in very quickly to the idea of the father's protectionism, not truly for his daughter's benefit, but for his own pride.
But these are minor problems.) I also wasn't happy with the scene in which Catherine reacts so melodramatically to Townsend's departure, as there was surely never a Jamesian heroine who behaved so, but as a story about familial and romantic love and all its difficulties, it is definitely worth watching, especially if you are looking for a film for different age levels..
One of the problems encountered when preparing to see such movies as "Washington Square" is how to avoid early comments from those who "have seen the original" or "have read the book" or are professional film critics.
To be sure a couple of performances are a little "over the top' ie Leigh and the ageless Maggie Smith but the story allows them to indulge in their own acting foibles.
And the night before that I saw a film of a novel by George Eliot and I recalled what James said of Elliot that she had a horrible face, but he fell in love with her this from a man who never married and whose ability to love is questioned.
Leigh for instance is one of the most visibly confident actors alive, while Finney who plays the overbearing father, has a style based on obvious fear of being.It isn't quite James.
Jennifer-Jason Leigh gives an incredibly, nuanced performance as Kathryn Slofer, the heiress who is wooed by a young fortune hunter.
Jennifer Jason Leigh is achingly good and Finney is remarkably restrained and well-suited in the role as her single-minded father.
Ben Chaplin (who does a great American accent) is very credible as Morris and quite different than Montgomery Clift's performance in the earlier adaptation of this film, "The Heiress." Chaplin is so appealing that despite reservations viewers (and Finney's character) may have of his Morris' intentions, it is completely conceivable that Leigh's Catherine would fall so hard for him.Maggie Smith, is, as always, brilliantly funny and so perfect in her role as the meddling aunt (shades of Cousin Charlotte from "Room With a View" with an American accent).This very much gives you a feel for James' story.
This is not a disappointing film with a great cast including Dame Maggie Smith, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Sir Albert Finney (although he refused knighthood).
At her cousin Marian Almond (Jennifer Garner)'s engagement party, the socially awkward Catherine is introduced to Morris Townsend (Ben Chaplin) who seems to be actually interested in her.
Her father assumes that Morris is more interested in her inheritance.The younger Jennifer Jason Leigh always brought an innocence to her characters.
I watched it just because Agnieszka Holland directed it, and Jennifer Jason Leigh, one of my favorite actresses of all time, was in it, and not because I was interested in the story.It's another story set around the beginning of this or in the last century, I don't really know.
It's a love story, but also a character study of a young woman, played by Jennifer Jason Leigh.
It all turns into a long and entangled tale of bitterness, persistence, betrayal, overprotection, cruelty and, yes, also emancipation, and Leigh's efforts are without doubt worth approval, but the initial sweetness and dullness of her character is a bit disturbing (and I don't mean the good kind of disturbing) and the storyline is too epic.A plus of the film is the (almost) incomparable Maggie Smith (a strong reminder of `The Secret Garden') who is an aunt, a housekeeper and a schemer.
Those who only know Dame Maggie Smith from "Downton Abbey" and the "Harry Potter" movies will enjoy her here in a change of pace role as a really kind matron who anxiously longs to see her niece (Jennifer Jason Leigh) get together with the poor but charming Morris Townsend (Ben Chapin) even though her doctor brother (Finney) is dead set against their even seeing each other socially.The real conflict here is the relationship between father and daughter, a complicated and resentful one.
Leigh also makes her character much more clinging, so ultimately, she is not as likable, closer to the unattractive heroine of the musical "Passion" than to what the original play and movie had her to be.As Dr. Austin Sloper, Albert Finney is excellent, a combination of social mores, hidden hatred of his daughter, and in conflict with himself between his coldness and his Hippocratic oath.
It makes no sense that Leigh's Catherine would blame her aunt for Morris walking out on her.
In the original versions both on stage and on screen, you can tell that Catherine will go on with her life whether being a spinster or not, but something tells me here that Leigh's Catherine will end up like "Great Expectation's" Miss Haversham and be one of the most feared and disliked characters around.
This adaptation, like 1949's *The Heiress*, is based on the Henry James novel.
It is the story of a awkward, yet loving daughter (Leigh), devoted to her father (Finney) after her mother dies during childbirth.
I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception.
Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles.
Catherine loves her father, her Aunt, Morris, even herself.
Nothing against Maggie Smith but she's not young looking or attractive in the film.
The part in the film where he states with passion he doesn't care about Catherine's father's money is a lie.
As much as I do not care for James, he did not write that as Catherine in the novel.
Morris mentions the cruelty of who he really is, and as a young woman in love, she doesn't care but as an "old maid" of 40 at the end of the novel, while you know she still loves Morris, her strength of knowing that while she does love him he'll never love her, only her money, and her father's money.The novel has passion, the film does not..
Catherine Sloper (Jennifer Jason Leigh) is the plain and simple daughter of a well-to-do doctor (Albert Finney), whose is raised by her aunt (Maggie Smith) when her mother passes away in childbirth.
When a handsome young man (Ben Chaplin) becomes interested in Catherine she is transformed, but her father suspects the young man is only after her money.The performance by Jennifer Jason Leigh is quite impressive as she shows her characters development throughout the film, the rest of the cast is also by and large quite strong particularly Albert Finney.Thanks to both the original novel and the adaptation by director Agniezka Holland and her screenwriter the film manages to present a story with a definite edge and characters with layers rather than just a simple costume drama.Based on the Henry James novel, previously adapted as "The Heiress" by William Wyler in 1949 with Olivia de havilland (Oscar as Best Actress), Montgomery Clift and Ralph Richardson.
(** no serious story spoilers **) This is a very sexed-up dramatisation of the great Henry James' original novel.
And Jennifer Jason Leigh gives an excellent, quietly confident performance as the plain, unloved Catherine Sloper, which will always make me admire her skill and bravery; plus the tension and even heat she helps generate in her scenes with Chaplin feel very real and powerful.In "Washington Square", Catherine Sloper, only surviving child of the formidable, rich and widowed Doctor Sloper, attracts the attentions of a young, handsome and clever man, one Morris Townsend.
This exchange, late in the original novel, between the Doctor and Catherine's kind aunt, Mrs Almond, shows something of the metal of both their characters: "At first I had a good deal of a certain genial curiosity about it; I wanted to see if she really would stick.
If you enjoyed this intense and well-cast film, I'd highly recommend your reading Henry James' extraordinary and deep novel to fully flesh out the nuances of the story..
With big-name actors like Maggie Smith, Albert Finney, and many others, there was no reason for the movie to fail.
|
tt0891527
|
Lions for Lambs
|
Two determined students at a West Coast university, Arian (Derek Luke) and Ernest (Michael Peña), at the urging of their idealistic professor, Dr. Malley (Redford), attempt to do something important with their lives. They make the bold decision to enlist in the army to fight in Afghanistan after graduating from college.
Dr. Malley also attempts to reach talented and privileged, but disaffected, student Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield), who is not at all like Arian and Ernest. He is naturally bright, comes from a privileged background, but has apparently slipped into apathy upon being disillusioned at the present state of affairs. Now, he devotes most of his time to extra-curricular activities like his role as president of his fraternity. Malley tests him by offering a choice between a respectable grade of 'B' in the class with no additional work required or a final opportunity to re-engage with the material of the class and "do something." Before Todd makes his choice, he must listen to Dr. Malley's story of his former students Arian and Ernest and why they are in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, in Washington, D.C., a charismatic Republican presidential hopeful, Senator Jasper Irving (Cruise), has invited liberal TV journalist Janine Roth (Streep) to his office to announce a new war strategy in Afghanistan: the use of small units to seize strategic positions in the mountains ("forward operating points") before the Taliban can occupy them. The senator hopes that Roth's positive coverage will help convince the public that the plan is sound.
Roth has her doubts and fears she is being asked to become an instrument of government propaganda. Near the end of the film, she informs her commercially-minded boss of her plans to call out the senator's new strategy for what she feels is a ploy, but is shot down. Ultimately, Irving's version of the story is run without the critical interaction. Whether Roth gave in and toed the company line or quit her job is not clear.
In Afghanistan, a helicopter carrying Arian and Ernest is hit by Taliban insurgents. Ernest falls out, and Arian jumps after him. Ernest's leg is badly wounded, and he suffers a compound fracture, rendering him immobile as the Taliban arrive. After a drawn-out gunfight, the U.S. soldiers run out of ammunition. Rather than getting captured, Arian helps Ernest stand up, facing the enemies and turning their empty weapons against them, an action which prompts the Taliban to kill them. The unit commanders attempt a rescue of the downed soldiers, sending A-10 Warthogs, but the weather, time, and distance interfere.
Hayes is then seen watching television with a friend. A reporter is discussing a singer's private life, while below runs a strip announcing Senator Irving's new military plan for Afghanistan. He suddenly falls quiet, contemplating the choices with which his professor had left him.
|
murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It could be a Sunday-morning panel discussion, but the cast consists of a bevy of stars, performing magnificently, with a script that seems to be formed by headlines from today's newspapers.At the center of the film is a lengthy, unlikely, but brilliant duet of a an interview between a veteran, nobody's-fool political reporter (Meryl Streep) and a young hotshot NeoCon senator (Tom Cruise), both utterly believable, notwithstanding the challenge of some lame lines by screenwriter Matthew Michael Carnahan for Cruise.
(These are not editorial comments, but rather a report on what the film says.) While dissecting the Iraqi disaster, and hearing some surprising and obviously manipulating admissions of errors from Cruise's hawkish senator, the issue at hand is the senator - a key military adviser to the President - trying to steer Streep's skeptical journalist into "selling" a new plan of attack in Afghanistan, something she instantly recognizes as a throwback to failed strategy in Vietnam.Alternating with the interview segments are battle scenes in Afghanistan where two Army rangers (Derek Luke and Michael Peña) are risking their lives in implementing that new plan.
Then, by a stretch and rather awkwardly, there sits Redford's professor in his West Coast college office, pulling the story together between the two lion-like Rangers, who were his students, and a bright, troubled student (Andrew Garfield) who lost his way, baa, baa, baa.Significant and entertaining, thought-provoking and reality-based sad, mostly well-written, and exceptionally well-acted, "Lions for Lambs" is likely to leave the audience with the feeling of having participated in an important happening, but perhaps not quite knowing what it was.Gushing about Streep is almost embarrassing, but...
Robert Redford, a symbol of consistency and independence, Meryl Streep, an actress who defined the last two decades of film acting with characters that went straight to the center of something and Tom Cruise, the box office champion who's become a controversial figure despite of his undeniable humanity.
The Seventh movie direction of Bob Redford, Lions for Lambs is a movie about conscience and the effects of politics and the government in society, it also touches several aspects of the American society, such as student issues, the manipulation of media for political propaganda ends.It also invites the viewer to reflect on very important ethical and moral issues of modern society.Great Cast and good direction but I think the most important part of this movie it's the message but as I said before, you'll either loath it or think about it..
LIONS FOR LAMBS is a very intelligent and timely film that addresses what we are doing in Afghanistan and our American policy in handling the issues of the Middle East played out via tremendous performances from Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise and Robert Redford, with a strong cast of supporting actors.
Watching Meryl Streep as a Journalist interact with Tom Cruise on the screen and the strong dialog that plays between them is a wonderful piece of writing from Matthew Michael Carnahan as they discuss the issues of winning the war in Afghanistan.
And, as I am reading THE RACE from Richard North Patterson, seeing the Tom Cruise character play to a Journalist to get his story out is another act of political positioning.Robert Redford as the Professor and his student, Mr. SC frat boy, discuss what he should do with his life, and hearing about the story of his two students who came before him, plays out perfectly with what is important to accomplish in America today as a young man and woman.
LIONS FOR LAMBS deserves a large audience, but it may play out as just another political story dealing with Afghanistan and Iraq, and it really deserves the attention and the lessons which the film delivers.
Lions for lambs reminds me of a time when Directors had greater ambitions than to make a huge opening weekend before people realize their film is garbage (Transformers, Pirates, etc...but being saturated with these types of films for so long I doubt many remember what film can be, and accomplish.) Robert Redford strikes me as someone who wants to make a difference and the problem is that the audience has become more deaf to reason than ever.Lions for Lambs is more of a filmed essay than a narrative feature, and being a Kubrick fan, I am all for changing the classic form of Hollywood narrative structure.
These perspectives include a slippery GOP Senator engaging in Orwellian double speak, half-truths and propaganda; a journalist with honest intentions that recognizes her organization's complicity in selling the war leading to the death of 1000's of Americans founded on lies; two brave ideological students who become Army rangers in the hope of making a difference; a wise college professor that recognizes that in America today, lion warriors fight for lamb leadership which have no skin in the game; and a cynical "every man" college student struggling between apathy and activism.If you are not open to honest dialog and introspection, do not seek the truth, are a political or religious ideologue, are one of the 58 percent of Americans that can not identify the three branches of government but can name the three stooges, are part of the apathy crowd, are one that actively engages in cognitive dissonance, are an authoritarian follower, or if your idea of entertainment is just watching things blow up, then this film is not for you.
There all supposed to form this profound statement, "People act in their own interest." The problem for me is that I am in college right now and all the statements made in this movie play like a freshman debate in Political Science 101.
Redford, as Professor Stephen Malley, tries to motivate the intelligent, liberal minded, but apathetic student, Todd Hayes, played by Andrew Garfield, and in doing so teaches us all why, 'failing to try,' is much worse than, 'to have tried and failed.' This message is supported by two parallel stories that show just how difficult trying to make the right decision in real life can be.In one story, reporter Janine Roth, played by Meryl Streep, is burdened with the decision and repercussions of whether to publish propaganda fed to her by a hawkish architect of a new Afghan offensive, Senator Jasper Irving, played by Tom Cruise.In the other story, we watch as two students from an impoverished neighborhood make the risky choice between going to an elite graduate school, taking on more debt and pursuing a high paying career to pay it down, or enlisting in the military to fight in the middle east so that upon their return, their experience will allow their voices to be heard, the government will pay for their graduate education, and they can pursue a career that will allow them to make a difference.In this timely and topical film, Redford expertly shows us just how difficult, but important, doing the right thing is, and reminds us that by deciding to do nothing, we are actually making the decision to let the other side call all the shots..
This part of the film asks why the young generation of today, youngsters born in the 1980s and 1990s just don't seem to care; and tries to realize what happened to us as a society that led us up to this point.The third story is a more Republican take on the turmoil events surrounding us, this time focusing on two American soldiers who find themselves stranded in a hostile territory in Afghanistan, surrounded by Taliban forces who wish to wipe them off the face of the planet.
Robert Redford directs this film, and like so many of Redford's directing efforts, "Lions for Lambs" ponders the tumultuous intricacies to the prevailing circumstances which pertain to a complicated situation (In this movie's case, the Iraq War).
It was refreshing to see the audience laugh in clusters at points in the dialog, but rarely all on the same line.Here are some of the numerous themes and morals in 'Lions for Lambs':a) The media's role in selling the war in Afghanistan, and Iraq and in particular the governments spoon-feeding of the message to the media b) To not squander the great privileges one has, and to seize the day c) To realize that the choices we have lessen as we age, so we ought to start making the right choices as early as possible d) Even if one has sold out, it is never too late to take a stand for humanity e) Those that are aware "Rome is burning" have an obligation to do somethingStreep is my favorite actress and her performance as a seasoned journalist was phenomenal.
And all of this offered to us by an excellent script, superb direction and outstanding acting (I can't imagining despising the Cruise character and what he stands for more or feeling more empathy for Streep's weariness.) We are all caught up in a scenario that presents one of the major moral dilemmas of our time, whether we choose to acknowledge it or bury our collective heads in the economic and cultural cushions to which we have not only grown accustomed, but have come to believe are our entitlement.
To tackle a moral dilemma one must be willing to wrestle with his/her values and beliefs, and examine what it will take to act upon them.If you leave this movie unable to shake your uneasiness, if you find yourself not really looking forward to light conversation over a glass of your favorite wine afterward, but would prefer to go home to a quiet house and try to make sense of what is going on in the world--even as you recognize it isn't making sense--then, experiencing "Lions for Lambs" was a successful experience..
Does boring mean that the film makes you think, that it tells stories on different levels, that it merges the reality we live in today, that it forces the audience to acknowledge that every day US soldiers and Irak civilians die in a war created by private enterprise?The film addresses young people, the indifferent and those who are convinced by the war propaganda, the mishandling of news by multinational media people who seem not to question official information, politicians who continue to uphold official decisions so as not to tarnish their careers, and the impotence felt when one can do so little to stop the war mongers..
Here we have what will likely be a divisive movie that, despite intentions to admirably show American ambiguities and hypocrisies lying on many sides of the terrorism debate, rears an unmistakable liberal sentiment underneath a dumbed-down script (realizing who wrote this further's the disturbance) and overly dramatic performances.Three inter-cut narratives (two excessively talky/preachy, one repetitiously bland) do little at forming a cohesive whole until everything shoddily comes together near the end, but despite all that the film goes by generally quick with enough "provocotive-popcorn" moments to engage a large crowd of people who like their reality-based dramas spoon fed.I suppose it is a good thing Lions for Lambs manages to fit in an empty mind's worth of quotable, bite-sized flavored, crispity controversies when addressing all us knuckleheads who let others do much of the dirty laundry our country currently washes.
Both Pena and Garfield as the soldiers steal the film and are in the best moment of the movie when they stand up in Redford's college class and talk about poor kids entering the war and why a draft is needed.
And instead of putting himself in yet another one man show, he combines forces and shares the spotlight with a stellar cast comprising Robert Redford, who also takes on directing duties, and Meryl Streep, in a story that touches on quite realistically on current affairs, based on scribe's Matthew Michael Carnahan's take on the entire political situation in the USofA currently, with special focus put into its war on terror.While Tom Cruise's recent antics might have irked some and taken off some of the shine off his star power, I can't help but be mesmerized by his take as the toothy grinning like a Cheshire cat, cock-sure character of a Republican senator, who's on the party's good books, and billed as the next big personality that will probably take the White House one day.
I have to admit that I had actually looked forward to him delivering that all famous "Yes or No" line from the trailers, though "Whatever it takes" may well be immortalized amongst his other more legendary one liners like "You could be mine" (Top Gun), "Show me the money!" and "You complete me" (Jerry Maguire) and "I want the truth!" (A Few Good Men).War on Terror movies are proving to be popular subjects in the tail end of 2007, especially when USA is sabre-rattling Iran.
And Lions for Lambs couldn't be any more current when Cruise's Senator Jasper Irving shows off his new tactical strategy against the guerrilla enemies, with words so carefully crafted and chosen by a brain nurtured and educated from Ivy League education, relating them to Streep's Janine Roth, a journalist who has been granted a one hour one-on-one session interview, with so much conviction, appeal and charisma, you're more than likely to fall for his charms, if not for Roth to bring him down to earth with reflections from the past.Told in separate segments, each taking a look microscopically at the issue, but each when put together forms a bigger picture putting you in a Deus Ex Machina position, I thought the best segment belonged to Cruise-Streep, where they debate on politics, and media responsibility, with keen dialogue between the two parties filled with thrusting and parrying of various push and pull factors.
Lions for Lambs 2007 Directed by Robert Redford Starring Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise, Michael Pena, Peter Berg, Derek Luke and Andrew Garfied.No other movie made in recent times and which had a political subject has ever been misrepresented and misunderstood as Lions for Lambs.
And this is what the movie is actually about, the fact that the people of today have chosen to accept being told what to do and what to believe, instead of QUESTIONING.The reporter in Lions for Lambs is the complete contrast of the reporters from "All The President's Men" and the student is the complete contrast of the main character from "Three Days of The Condor".
A mish-mash narrative as three stories collide; two soldiers who get wounded in Afghanistan, Senator Irving (Cruise) being interviewed by Political journalist Roth (Streep) and Redford engaging a student in a debate regarding life, principles, morals, the universe and everything else.Tom Cruise should get an Oscar nod, he plays the slimy US Senator who wants to create good for his own personal gain (typical 'I am for the people' politician) regarding the situation in Afghanistan, while Meryl Streep plays an strong and opinionated political journalist, and frankly is just over-shadowed by his presence throughout.Then the film goes downhill with the other two 'stories' or 'events' taking place.
No wonder so many right-wing hacks post bad reviews.Lions For Lambs has one major fault however, a failure actually, and it is clearly evident in many of the negative comments about it: the film has apparently not reached the ones who need it most.It is an intelligent and moving work that, far from being the "anti-war propaganda" some simpleton labeled it, actually attempts to intelligently engage the major source of its criticism: people who are either incapable of honest debate or so immersed in the waters of their own idiotology, they simply can't hear the truth.Perhaps grunting and primitive hand gestures might work better.
i just saw it today and i have to say this movie has Oscar buzz all over it , the acting was amazing especially Meryl if she docent get a nod for Rendition she will defiantly get one for this , tom and Robert were also good but this wasn't there best performance, the directing was great which i think will get Robert a directing nod also , i agree with some reviewers that the story isn't that strong and at times becomes a little too preachy , also the action in this film isn't done in a good way for instant the scene were the soldiers are in the military plane looks fake and unrelated to the outside shot of the plane, this movie has it's down moments and they weren't many but i think the witty script makes up for an interesting and intelligent movie in the end..
Robert Redford brings up a very important discussion in his new film, supported by great acting and an agile, instigating narrative.Because the story surrounds many vital areas of our system, like the Military, Politics, Journalism and Education, many people can be stimulated in a lot of different perspectives.
'Lions for Lambs' discusses the same situation with much greater responsibility and a brilliantly written and structured screenplay.The plot of the film revolves around three events that are happening simultaneously an ambitious Senator's (Cruise) interview with a leading journalist (Streep), a formerly zealous and now reckless student's meeting with a professor (Redford) of political science and a military attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Americans should not be fighting wars just to flex their military muscle.And the fact that dimwit Robert Redford got it wrong - it was lions led by donkeys, not lambs, shows how stupid a film it is.Can't even get the title right.I won't even keep or pass on the DVD.
If you were to ask the bulk of people who have seen this movie, they'd probably tell you that "Lions for Lambs" is a politically-charged film with an ensemble cast.
Hopefully for the better.The reason, i think, Lions for Lambs is getting a low rating is because people expected to see more war action scenes which the movie is absolutely not about.Oscar recommendation..
Robert Redford, Meryl Streep, and Tom Cruise deliver the performances of the century.Lions for Lambs is the truth, people..
The third tract involves a very cynical TV news reporter (Meryl Streep) being given a hard sales job on the War On Terror by an up-and-coming neoconservative U.S. senator (Tom Cruise).If this doesn't seem much for a movie, it's not because LIONS FOR LAMBS itself is to blame.
|
tt0117891
|
A Thin Line Between Love and Hate
|
Nightclub manager Darnell Wright is a perpetual playboy and hopeless male chauvinist. He works for a nightclub called Chocolate City and aspires to be its owner. He trades VIP privileges at the club for favors from women. Though he is an expert at conning women, he sometimes worries about what his childhood sweetheart Mia (Regina King) thinks of his adventures.
When the classy and elegant Brandi (Lynn Whitfield) steps out of a limousine to enter the club, Darnell feels that he's met his ultimate prize. She rejects his come-ons, which only fuels his appetite. He pursues her, showing up with flowers at her real estate office. He finally wins over Brandi, only to find out that he's really in love with Mia. But Brandi doesn't take kindly to rejection. It appears that she has borderline personality disorder and becomes an obsessed femme fatale stalking him, even taking all four wheels off his SUV to ground him from his rounds and demolishing his nightclub.
Ending his relationship with Mia is not enough to satisfy Brandi who finally administers Darnell's punishment for his misogyny. Darnell quickly learns the hard way that when you "play", you have to "pay." The film ends much like the last verse of the song "A Thin Line Between Love and Hate", with an injured Darnell in the hospital pondering over what happened to him and deciding to change, and a mugshot of Brandi and Darnell's voice saying "Damn I'm truly sorry about what happened to Brandi. I hope baby lands on her feet, but they better make damn sure they fix that dent in her heart before they let her out".
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0112655
|
Chain of Command
|
New Secret Service agent Mike Connelly, assigned to protect President-elect Jack Cahill, becomes uneasy having to protect a person who is having an affair with a friend's wife. Connelly feels even worse about it after preventing an assassination attempt aboard Cahill's plane where a flight attendant is accidentally killed in the process. Sensing Connelly's discomfort around Cahill, his boss reassigns him to the team that protects the "nuclear football" as soon as Cahill becomes president.
In the film, the "nuclear football" briefcase contains a high-tech laptop computer, which can only be operated through a two key system (one key operated by the president and the other by the agent on "football duty") along with thumbprint and eye retina scans from the president.
After the newly inaugurated president has been planning a meeting with Fung, the President of Taiwan to discuss the strained relationship between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China, one of the Secret Service agents returns home to find that his family is being held hostage by some men who are later revealed to be Fung's henchmen. They force him to participate in a plot to steal "the football". When President Cahill and President Fung are at Taiwan aboard Fung's ship, Fung insists that he feels that peaceful co-existence with mainland China may no longer be possible and that drastic action must be taken to ensure China does not invade Taiwan. Soon afterwards, Fung's henchmen begin killing all the other agents, leaving Mike Connelly as the only loyal Secret Service agent left.
Fung's men, along with Fung's girlfriend Iris, are successful in stealing the football, and Fung forces Cahill to activate it (by knocking him unconscious to get his thumbprint and eye retina scans), explaining that he will use the US's ICBMs to launch a nuclear strike on China, hoping that this will lead a revolution among his people towards "a new beginning" of Taiwanese freedom and pointing out that since he alone controls all of the US's missiles, he would not have to worry about mutually assured destruction of both China and the United States, just the United States when China retaliates.
Meanwhile, Vice President Valdez is informed of the situation and Fung makes a phone call to her explaining that he has seized control of the United States' nuclear missiles and will launch one against Beijing unless both China and the United States within 24 hours recognize Taiwan's independence and that the United States promises to use its full military might against China if it tries to invade Taiwan. Valdez insists that this would never be possible and later Fung follows through with his threat, launching a first strike against Beijing using an ICBM from Nebraska.
Valdez first contacts the President of Russia to assure that the missile is not targeted towards Russia. Then Valdez contacts Chairman Tzu of China to explain the situation and that the United States did not launch the missile and is therefore not responsible. She also offers to give Tzu the chance to shoot the missile out of the sky but Tzu angrily points out that this would be impossible. It is then that he gives the order to launch a retaliatory strike against the United States using one of China's ICBMs, which he calls "an eye for an eye". True to his word, the missile is targeted for Washington, D.C.
After Beijing and later Washington are destroyed, Tzu launches a second strike using several of China's missiles as further retaliation for the destruction of China's capital. Meanwhile, Iris is revealed to Agent Connelly to be an undercover Chinese agent whose assignment was to recover the football and return it to Beijing. But even she had no idea Fung would actually launch missiles against her country, and points out that China would no doubt retaliate against the US in response to the attack, thus she points out now they both have a common interest. Together they are able to escape Fung's ship and follow Fung and the still kidnapped President to Hong Kong. They are both ultimately successful in taking out all but one of Fung's henchmen. The last remaining one strangles Iris to death however and continues his search for Agent Connelly.
Meanwhile, Connelly finds President Cahill held at gunpoint by Fung who still has the football. Fung along with Agent Thornton orders Connelly to surrender or else either Fung or Thornton will kill the President. It is then Cahill says for Connelly to "remember your duty". Fung at first thinks he means the duty of protecting the President, but then Connelly points out that he is on football duty and that it's "some other guy's job" to protect the President. Connelly shoots the President in the leg which shocks Fung and distracts him just long enough to allow Connelly to take him and Agent Thornton out. Connelly and President Cahill now are in control of the football and begin the process of deactivating it. The last of Fung's henchmen however, is able to fatally wound the President before Connelly can take him out. But not before President Cahill is successfully able to deactivate the football. By doing so, Vice President Valdez and NORAD have regained control of the United States' nuclear arsenal.
Valdez gives this news to Chairman Tzu and says that he may now order the destruction of his missiles. Tzu refuses, thinking Valdez is bluffing. Valdez then gives the order to NORAD that "Stage One is a go", which Tzu is horrified to find out is in fact a launch of several of the US' ICBMs. Valdez warns Tzu has one minute to destroy his missiles, and if he does, Valdez will destroy her missiles and points out to Tzu that he does not want to know what "Stage Two" is. Just when it seems all hope is lost however, Tzu complies with Valdez's instructions and destroys all his missiles which soon afterwards Valdez does the same with hers. Thus a major nuclear war was narrowly averted.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0016230
|
The Pleasure Garden
|
Jill, a young dancer, arrives in London with a letter of introduction to Mr. Hamilton, proprietor of the Pleasure Garden Theatre. The letter and all her money are stolen from her handbag as she waits to see him. Patsy, a chorus girl at the Pleasure Garden, sees her difficulty and offers to take her to her own lodgings and to try to get her a job. Next morning Jill is successful in getting a part in the show. Her fiance, Hugh, arrives with a colleague called Levet. Hugh and Patsy become very close while Jill is being pursued by a number of rich men, eventually breaking up with Hugh in order to begin a relationship with the wealthy Prince Ivan. Not long after this, Hugh is sent to Africa by his company.
Jill moves out of the lodgings she shares with Patsy and becomes more involved with the Prince. As she becomes more successful and used to the rich and famous lifestyle she also becomes more dismissive of Patsy, shunning her and eventually seeing her as a commoner. As Patsy laments the loss of her friend, she is comforted by Levet who convinces her to enter into marriage with him. The couple honeymoon in Italy before he leaves to join Hugh in Africa. After some time Patsy finally receives a letter from her husband in which he says he has been sick for weeks. Patsy is determined to go to take care of him and asks Jill to lend her the fare. Jill refuses as she is preparing for her marriage to the Prince and has no money to spare. Patsy is able to borrow the fare from her landlords Mr and Mrs Sidey. When she arrives at her husband's bungalow, she finds that he is having an affair with a local woman and leaves. Levet tries to drive the woman away but when she refuses to leave him, follows her into the sea and drowns her.
Meanwhile, Patsy has found that Hugh really is very ill with a fever and stays to take care of him. Hugh has since discovered from a newspaper that Jill is to marry the Prince and he and Patsy soon realize that they love each other. Levet finds them together and accuses Hugh of making advances to his wife. Patsy agrees to follow Levet back to his bungalow in order to save Hugh. During the night, Levet is stricken with guilt and paranoia over the murder of his mistress and begins seeing ghostly visions of her. Hugh becomes convinced that the ghost of his mistress will not stop haunting him until he murders Patsy too. Levet corners Patsy with a sword but he is shot dead before he can kill her. He and Patsy find consolation with each other and return to London.
Parts of the movie scenes were filmed in Lierna, Lake Como.
|
murder, melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The Pleasure Garden is the first film that Alfred Hitchcock directed to completion.
I enjoyed some of the point of view shots early in the film with the blurred view of the man looking through his monocle as well as the gentleman looking through the binoculars at the show girls legs.
Not that it was used like the staircase in Vertigo, but it made me smile thinking of how important that would be in his later film.
Jill (Carmelita Geraghty) is an aspiring dancer who gets engaged to Hugh (John Stuart) who has to leave for work overseas.
Patsy marries Levett (Miles Mander), Hugh's friend who also goes overseas to work with Hugh.
I liked seeing Cuddles, the dog, thrown in for a little comic relief to contrast the seriousness of the film, which of course is another of Hitchcock's trademarks.
This was Hitchcock's first ever film as director to be completed and it is indicative of his huge talent.
Hitchcock imbues it with directorial flourishes of brilliance with clever, interesting camera shots, intelligent storytelling and little bits of his psychological themes which strengthen all his films.In conclusion this is a superb film considering its age and the fact it is Hitchcock's debut..
Looking at Hitchcock's early pictures, one struggles to see signs of his future greatness, like looking through every manger for the baby with the halo.
But this, the first complete Hitchcock movie, shows no signs of his future greatness.
He is clearly a journeyman director, some one who shows promise, but sent to Berlin for his final exam.On the plus side, this movie starts off surprisingly well, with a snappy, American-paced chorines-on-the-town plot.
The start moves fast, plot points pop up, and suddenly we take a turn and the story descends into melodrama.Fairly typical of Hitchcock, you might say and you would be right, but he hasn't got any sense of what his chosen symbols are -- both leads are brunettes, which will come as a surprise to anyone who knows Hitchcock's taste for icy blondes.
The symbolic items are standard and not particularly shocking -- Virginia Valli's wedding-bed deflowering is indicated by an apple with a large chunk bitten out of it -- and the actors are not really up to their jobs.Hitchcock was never a great director of actors but a great director of scenes.
at best, adequate, with Miles Mander very stagy and whoever plays his native lover -- still miscredited in the IMDb as Nita Naldi -- seemingly brain-damaged.There are a couple of interestingly composed visual glosses: the door that Mander must go through looks like a Turkish harem door and the decoration on either side differs dramatically; on one side is life, on another death.
and there's none of that here.I find it hard to give this an exact rating: the great start is sunk by the foolishness of the ending, and Hitchcock at the the start of his career is not the great film maker he would be in another thirty years -- or even four.
But it is Hitchcock, and therefore demands our attention, so I'll give it a good mark for that.But if it weren't Hitchcock's first film, no one would care.
It's true that little of the Hitchcock we've come to love comes through but there are quite a few touches at that and all of them work.
The travel scenes at Lake Como and somewhere in the South Sea work very well indeed and there's precious little in this film that doesn't contribute meaningfully to the movie.
Hitchcock's first complete film, and a quite decent one.
The Pleasure Garden is notable for being the first complete film of Alfred Hitchcock, one of the greatest and most influential directors in film, so it is one of great historical interest.
Hitchcock has definitely done worse though, and The Pleasure Garden is a decent film.
Even for such an early effort, Hitchcock's direction does shine through with great use of camera angles and directorial flourishes.
The story is intelligently explored, the script serves the actors and Hitchcock competently(though of course there have been much better scripts since) and while the pacing is uneven the beginning and ending are solid enough.
All in all, a quite decent first complete film, though Hitchcock definitely went on to much better since.
The Pleasure Garden would probably have been consigned to the dusty bin of obscurity, were it not for its being the debut of one Alfred Hitchcock.Hitchcock was of course destined for greatness, so this picture inevitably gets scrutinised for hints of said greatness, or at least traces of Hitchcockiness.
A point-of-view shot of the legs of a chorus line in the opening scene is often referenced as an example of such, a bit of pure voyeurism that is at odds with the moralist plot line.
Hitchcock was clearly interested from the beginning by the idea of putting the audience in the place of a character, and the latter example helps to tell the story visually, but it is of little long-term value.
Neither the thief nor the leg-viewer become established characters, so there is really no need for us to "become" them.The way these early scenes are shot may be aimed to cut down on the intertitles by conveying the story visually.
You see, during his apprenticeship Hitchcock had done some art direction work on Der Letzte Mann, a picture best known for containing no intertitles whatsoever except one at the beginning and one near the end.
Then again, it could just be because the 26-year-old director really liked to look at women's legs.But after those showy opening sequences, The Pleasure Garden gets bogged down in a series of "talking" scenes.
In the melodramatic climax there are some vague attempts at psychological manipulation, with a few close-ups of a menaced Valli, but it's too little too late.The Pleasure Garden is full of tricks, many of which can be seen as corresponding to the technique of the later Hitchcock – "God" shots, point-of-view shots, close-ups to focus us on a particular object.
But these are all things any monkey could pick up after hanging around a few film sets, and the director does not yet know how to put them to best use.
The Pleasure Garden may pique the interest of Hitchcock completists, but other than that it is simply dull..
People coming home to find their dog has chewed up their clothes These bits show the director already having a sense of humour, and playing with his audience, but not yet really knowing what to do with the fairly uninvolving story present, a sort of behind-the-scenes melodrama at a revue; infidelity, and the murder at the beach house.
A lot of the sets are well done, as is the director's humorous flair in filming some of them, but quite frankly, the plot is just boring and uneven.
Were it not for the fact that this is one of Alfred Hitchcock's first films as director (it is his first solely-directed feature film, but third film to be released) , no one would remember, or care about, this one..
Hitchcock's first film, a very good melodrama.
At the age of 25, Alfred Hitchcock, who had been an assistant director to Michael Balcon, was given the chance to direct his first film, which was of course silent.
Assistant director on the film was a girl named Alma Reville, who was to become Hitchcock's wife and lifelong partner in all of his film projects.
The American actress Virginia Valli plays Patsy, the good girl of the two.
And Jill, the girl who goes to the bad, is played by another American actress, Carmelita Geraghty.
Possibly the best performance in the film is by British actor Miles Mander, who outdid Falkenberg by appearing in 107 films, between 1920 and 1947, including WUTHERING HEIGHTS (1939).
In this film he plays a cad who married Patsy and then betrays her with a mistress and goes to pieces with drink and decadence.
Hitchcock's first film shows him to be merely a competent director.
There's nothing Hitchcockian about this film, although a clever early shot shows a producer puffing away on a cigar next to a "No Smoking" sign, a visual contrast to show character.The film does move along nicely and the acting is competent.
I imagine the original film has a good deal more about how she ended up, contrasting with Jill's fortunes.
The Pleasure Garden takes a long time to get where it's going.
It seems Alfred Hitchcock was still getting his feet under himself when in regard to filmmaking, but it was still interesting to see his directorial debut..
'Pleasure Garden' is Alfred Hitchcock's real firs movie as a director.
It doesn't feel like Hitchcock's movie and there are very little his trademarks visible (how could there be, he was just beginner director).
Besides being Hitchcock's first movie as a director, there is nothing special, but it is a sweet film that definitely deserves to be seen.
Especially by the fans of the legendary director.P.S. Alma Reville and Alfred Hitchcock got engaged during the shoot and what a couple they became..
Hitchcock's first film is fascinating in that him shows him leaping, almost fully formed, onto the screen with his lifelong themes and his jaundiced views present and shockingly incorrect.
The Pleasure Garden tells the story of a chorus girl, Patsy, who gives the gift of friendship to a newcomer, a rube of a girl called Jill who gets herself robbed on her first visit to the theatre and who lacks a friend, contacts and a place to stay.
Patsy gives her all of these.At first the film seems that it is going to be Jill's story, as we follow her hiring by the masher of an impresario and her quick elevation to the star of the lowbrow dance show the theatre is presenting.
But it gradually becomes apparent that Patsy is the focus of the tale, as she is romanced by a friend of Jill's earnest fiancée Hugh, a rodent of a man called Levett.
Levett and Hugh sail away to their overseas job in the colonies, leaving Patsy to pine for her husband and Jill to romance a roué Prince.Patsy and Levett's marriage is a curious thing.
There follows a denouement of rather rancid melodrama, as Levett kills his mistress, is haunted by her ghost, almost kills Patsy, is killed himself by a deus ex machina colonial superior, leaving Patsy and Hugh free to realise that they love each other.Levett's cynical view of women (he quickly recognises Jill for what she is), his view of marriage as a mutual sharing of loneliness, his sexual obsession with his Other of a mistress, his murder of her when she puts his respectable life at risk and his haunting by the dusky temptress is a pretty lurid and provocative portrait of white middle-class masculinity soured by experience and conflicting desires.
That he has to die for Hugh and Patsy to get together suggest that Hitchcock and his sources were up to the idea that respectable petit bourgeois marriage is built on the grave of all that it excludes long before the cultural and queer theorists were writing their stuff.
Levett is a fascinating character, far richer and far more unknowable than the rather bland leads - the first in a long line of portraits of human oddity from The Maestro.The film's opening sequence, as Charles Barr points out in his introduction to the recent Region 2 Network release in their The British Years box-set, has a dirty old man sitting in the front row of a theatre looking through a lens at the bodies of the dancing girls - voyeurism, the male gaze, women subjected to it all ready to go in old Hitch's very first sequence in his début film..
Yet, the 1925's silent film, 'Pleasure Garden' is not one of his films, well-known.
'Pleasure Garden' is the director full feature debut after filming short films for years.
You see it, in the opening scene, where he use the camera to mimic a person's gaze, forcing viewers to engage in a form of voyeurism like 1954's 'Rear Window' or 1960's 'Psycho'.
There is also a spiral staircase in the opening of this movie like 1958's 'Vertigo', use as a motif for impending danger or suspense.
Don't get me wrong, the cheesy comedy parts were fine and I did like the dog, "Cuddles", but there were a few things that could had made this film, a lot better.
First off, I think the film could had juxtaposing the humor against some of the heavy subject matter, a lot better.
The first half of the film looks nothing like the second half, at all.
It seems like two different movies, sloppy edited together with lots of pacing issues.
Based on a novel of the same name by Oliver Sandys AKA Marguerite Florence Barclay, the plot is supposed to tell the story of two chorus girls, Jill Cheyne (Carmelita Geraghty) & Patsy Brand (Virginia Valli) at the Pleasure Garden Theatre in London and their troubled relationships.
While, at first, it seems, like Jill Cheyne will be the protagonist of this story, due to her strong desires to be a dancer; it became apparent, that Patsy is indeed the main focus of this film with her melodramatic with her husband, Levett (Miles Mander).
While, in truth, these movie sequence is indeed, shot in Italy; in story it's supposed to be, Africa.
For a Hitchcock movie, I really surprised by the lack of any exotic & adventurous with this location.
Overall: I have to say, this dinky period melodrama lacks the depth and engagement of the director's better films to come.
The tendency to see greatness in the earliest extant work of a true master is understandable yet not entirely merited in this, the first feature-length film directed by Alfred Hitchcock.We arrive upon a stage production of "Passion Flowers," a dance-hall revue where pretty girls kicking up a storm seems the main attraction.
She opens her arms only to a new girl, Jill Cheyne (Carmelita Geraghty), who seems an innocent but quickly shows she's a woman with an agenda, and little time for friends after they serve their purpose.
This includes a "dewy-eyed" fellow named Hugh Fielding (John Stuart) who is engaged to Jill but finds a truer friend in Patsy.A dinky period melodrama with overplayed sentiment and silent-cinema quirks galore, "The Pleasure Garden" benefits from a smooth opening sequence that shows our young director in splendid form.
We begin with a shot of dancing girls rushing down a spiral staircase to perform, followed by a shot of a row of male spectators, each individually expressing voyeuristic delight, capped off by the one woman in the row, who has nodded off.I felt a bit like her well before the business of "The Pleasure Garden" had concluded.
It offers decent central performances and some delightful bits of business courtesy of Patsy's middle-class landlord couple and a cute dog, named "Cuddles" in the film.
But the story lacks the depth and engagement of Hitchcock's better films to come.Hitchcock does a nice job early on playing with audience expectations.
"Then I give it to you and hope you have a nice time," she says, cutting him off.But it's Jill who turns out to be the film's heel, something anticipated in the way she pushes Cuddles off Patsy's bed in a moment no one else sees but us.
Hitch loved these sort of designing women, and made much of them in other movies, but here he just trots Jill through her paces until she upstages Patsy 11 minutes in and then proceeds to shake her off once she gets herself established with the same sleazy patrons Patsy wisely avoids.The story is much the same with the other duplicitous character in the film, a friend of Hugh's named Levet (Miles Mander, the only actor here who worked in another Hitchcock film, "Murder!").
No surprise we find him a few minutes after marrying Patsy in the arms of a tropical-island girl he treats like a maid.The story does nothing with Jill after establishing her true nature; we watch her coldly cut off Patsy a couple of times and wonder what made Patsy into such a victim when she had smarts and looks to spare.
Valli, like Geraghty an American actress in this very British film, plays her part with too much fluttering vibrato, even if it is what the story requires.
The resolution of Patsy's unhappy marriage is done in a particularly utilitarian style, Hitch showing his screen economy but not the shadings or textures of his later work.I liked "The Pleasure Garden" more for the hints of later greatness, though the symbolism here is too often on-the-nail for its own good.
When Levet is done with Patsy, he casually throws a rose he gave her into the river and tells her "Had to - it wilted." Meanwhile, her relationship with Hugh just sort of happens out of left field, with us being told by the end Cuddles knew all along.It's a pat end for a pat film, not terrible, just stunted by the time it was made, the silent medium it was made in, and the inexperience of its maker, who managed to get much better very soon..
"The Pleasure Garden" is a British/German co-production from 90 years ago and the only reason why this film is still somewhat known today I guess is because the man behind the camera was Mr. Alfred Hitchcock, in his mid-20s, with one of his earliest filmmaking efforts.
The best thing about the film was maybe the cute dog.
It is a silent (don't be fooled by the music), black-and-white film that, like so many other suffer from simply not enough intertitles to understand exactly what's going on, even if the dramatic finale was decent.
Also like many other films from almost 100 years ago, this one got restored and there are several information in terms of the runtime.
|
tt0202908
|
Hokusai manga
|
Tetsuzō (Ken Ogata) is an unsuccessful ukiyo-e painter who lives with his young daughter Ōei (Yūko Tanaka) in poverty over a geta shop owned by Ōyaku (Nobuko Otowa), the older wife of the aspirant writer Sashichi (Toshiyuki Nishida) who is a childhood friend of Tetsuzō.
Tetsuzō lives by borrowing money from his adoptive father, the Shogunate mirror-maker Nakajima Ise (Frankie Sakai) and, one day, he meets a young and beautiful prostitute named Ōnao (Kanako Higuchi) and leaves her to Nakajima as a concubine. Meanwhile, Tetsuzō has grown a destructive obsession for Ōnao. Ōnao is a sadist with a traumatic past. She psychologically torments Nakajima until he hangs himself and leaves.
After Ōyaku dies, Sashichi, adopting the pen name Bakin, devotes his life to writing and ignores Ōei's advances who has intimate feelings for him. Nevertheless, Ōei continues to love him, which results in her celibacy.
Years later and after hard-earned fame, Tetsuzō, now Hokusai is 89. He lives by painting Ichimatsu dolls with Ōei. One day, Ōei finds a peasant girl who looks like Ōnao (played by the same actress). After he sees young ama playing with a dead octopus, Hokusai persuades the girl to pose for the shunga of an ama engaged in a threesome with two octopuses.
|
pornographic, psychedelic, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Eccentric Portrait of an Eccentric Artist. I first noticed this film amongst the more popular Japanese films on Hulu, but I didn't pay much mind to it, cause I figured I could guess how it got there (being titled "Edo Porn" and all). But when I realized that this was a film by Kaneto Shindô (Onibaba, Kuroneko, The Naked Island), I couldn't pass up a chance to watch another one of his films.This film is a portrait of the Japanese artist Hokusai, who I knew nothing about going in, but whom this film has piqued my interest in. He created the famous "Great Wave off Kanagawa". Apparently, he also created what could probably be considered the earliest example of tentacle porn. The sequence in the film where he draws that is... amazing.This film starts off a generally well-made, albeit somewhat odd biopic of an eccentric man. In the last act however... I can understand the criticisms. There's a lot of Hokusai and his friend stumbling around - the actors in unconvincing 90-year-old man makeup doing their best half-crazy half-senile old man impressions. There's a lot of Hokusai talking to himself about death. Things get really strange, but I have to admit, that's kind of what I love about this film.In a strange way, I think this is a good companion film to Kenji Mizoguchi's "Utamaro and His Five Women". That film is also about a famous Japanese woodblock printmaker of the same era, Utamaro, who is mentioned and briefly appears in "Edo Porn" as something of a rival of Hokusai. Made 35 years earlier, it's a completely different style of film, but, y'know, they're completely different styles of artists.. a bio pic on the life and work of Hokusai, he of the amorous octopus woodcut.. This starts very well indeed with interesting characters and situations and I wasn't at first aware that this was a bio pic on the life and work of Hokusai, he of the amorous octopus woodcut. Certainly the first half is very beautiful and engaging with it has also to be said lots of nudity as the artist sketches out his erotic pictures. The last half, unfortunately, at least to western eyes seems overly drawn out with the characters now made to look old in rather poor effects make up. It may be that we have different ideas about which features to accentuate to get an aged look but in any event it does not seem very realistic. Again it is perhaps an eastern preoccupation that so much time should now be devoted to regretting what has not been, looking forward to death etc. What I have not yet mentioned of course is the central scene where in fantasy and fact we see the beautiful nude and the octopus. Again, for me, not the greatest special effects but the scene certainly carries power with Hokusai's claim that he is painting not a woman being ravished but the hidden desires of women and is undeniably erotic. Well worth a watch and some gorgeous views of Mt Fuji to accompany the sequence dealing with his many interpretations of the elegant mountain.. Hokusai deserves better. This is a biography of the famous Japanese woodblock print-maker Katsushika Hokusai (1760-1849), one of the most well-renowned Ukiyo-e artists. The Japanese title of the movie, Hokusai Manga, is actually the name of the 13-volume sketchbook he published cca. 1814. The sketchbook contains a number of shunga drawings (erotic pictures), which the film decides to focus on as far as Hokusai's work is concerned. The people from Hokusai's life are all here; his daughter who spent her entire life with him, his friend and Japan's first professional writer, Kyokutei Bakin, an alluring model called Onae (who was, as it seems, invented for the film because there's no mention of her online at least), and even his contemporary Utamaro Kitagawa, another famous woodblock artist. But really, the film fails to do anything memorable with this ensemble, instead turning into a generic biopic without any eccentricity or artistic vision. The movie feels very drawn out and boring at certain times. There are also some attempts at humor which completely miss their mark in the movie's first half. The second half, where everyone is much older, is a tiny bit more entertaining and the scene where Hokusai paints his famous tentacle porn drawing "The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife" is pretty hilarious and reminds me of Ed Wood. By the way, the old person make-up is pretty bad.This is pretty disappointing, especially coming from a great director such as Kaneto Shindo and with a notable cast (Ken Ogata, Jo Shishido, Nobuko Otowa). A bland biography with a very cheap budget. Usually that's not a bad thing in and of itself, but this truly comes off as a cheap TV-production. Campy acting, bad effects and an unappealing visual style where everything is set in like two or three rooms which all look the same in their watery brown-ish hues. There is some nudity in the movie which makes it less boring, but it doesn't save it much. The music isn't bad but sounds like it belongs to an adventure/action movie a la Indiana Jones (take a listen during the end credits).
|
tt1580426
|
Repeaters
|
Kyle Halsted, Sonia Logan, and Michael Weeks are inmates at a rehabilitation facility. Bob Simpson, the administrator, tasks them with apologizing to those they have hurt with their addiction. When Kyle attempts to apologize to his younger sister Charlotte, she angrily blows him off, and the principal kicks him off school grounds. Sonia goes to the hospital where her dying father is a patient, but she is unable to bring herself to face him. Michael visits his father in jail, but the conversation is cut short by his father's abusive threats. When Bob tries to get them to discuss their day in group therapy, they refuse, and Michael storms off. Later, while discussing the pointlessness of Bob's therapy, Sonia is told that her father has died. As the trio try to deal with their emotional pain, a storm rolls in, and each of them is shocked and knocked unconscious.
When they wake up the next morning, the events of the previous day repeat. Kyle, Sonia, and Michael stumble through the day and repeat their actions in a daze. When they discuss the situation, Michael is intrigued by the consequence-free possibilities open to them, but Kyle convinces them to act on a news report that he recalls. They go to the dam but are too late to stop a jumper. Michael suggests that they take advantage of the situation, and they commit petty crimes that result in a stay at jail. Eventually, as the day repeats endlessly, they embark on a drug bender and crime spree that culminates in the violent kidnapping of a drug dealer who has been selling to Charlotte. At the dam, Michael carelessly risks his life walking on top of the railing and dares Sonia to do the same. When she slips, Michael merely laughs and refuses to try to help Kyle save her. Sonia falls to her death, though she wakes up with a gasp the next morning. Sonia claims to remember nothing of her death, and the trio become emboldened by their apparent immortality.
The next day, as Kyle and Sonia save the jumper at the dam, they discover that Michael has raped one of Charlotte's friends. When Kyle and Sonia confront Michael, Michael accuses them of hypocrisy and says that his actions are excusable because everything will become reset the next day. Michael's behavior becomes more violent and antisocial as the days repeat. Shaken by Michael's behavior, Kyle ambushes him and ties him to a chair. Kyle and Sonia fall in love and work toward redemption, but Michael laughs at Kyle; he claims that Sonia's story of childhood sexual abuse is just an act. However, when Kyle and Sonia successfully make peace with their pasts, the time loop abruptly ends, but Michael does not realize it until the middle of a violent rampage that ends with the senseless murders of two people. Freaked out, Michael takes Charlotte hostage, but he commits suicide after Kyle attempts to reason with him. In the last scene, Michael wakes up again, stuck in his own time loop.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Yes, it is impossible to talk about Repeaters without mentioning Groundhog Day - a charming family film where a sardonic Bill Murray has to relive the same dull day again and again until he can find a way of somehow - literally - moving his life forwards.Groundhog Day was a happy-go-lucky sort of affair, filled with light-hearted 'what if' scenarios.
However, the results are far from Groundhog-like.This time there are three central characters who keep reliving the same day and they're all in a recovery centre, trying to get over various addictions.
It covers pretty much all the nastiest adult themes you can think of, so, if you're looking for a 'feel-good' kind of movie, you better steer clear.Bottom line: Groundhog Day + comedy = Groundhog Day. Groundhog Day + action = Source Code, whereas Groundhog Day and nastiness = Repeaters.
The cast and crew of this film know what it takes to make an interesting movie.
I did not realize this until after I watched the movie and then checked out the movie's details on IMDb. Repeaters' repeating theme is sort of another take on Groundhog Day starring Bill Murray and though this duplication takes away from any claim Repeaters could have to originality the two movies are totally different in plot and genre.
In other words Repeaters has the ability to entrance an audience and so thereby can be appreciated as a good, reasonable piece of movie entertainment.
Repeaters contains numerous film school conventions and setups -- pretty shots with shallow depth of field while characters say things that sound profound but are meaningless.
While admittedly most movies drawn up these days use a bit of the same sleazy concepts, this one I believe nestles down into its own unique little fortified holding and fires upon the viewer with a quality helping of raw..
But he's young so maybe he'll come around one day.Amanda Crew tries, but doesn't have that interesting of a character either.
I really don't want to say much about this one.It was boring, and it never went anywhere with some preposterous twists and really not any character to root for.This was irritating at best, no explanation as to the supernatural occurrence, i guess is sort of a metaphor for people who are repeaters, and the way they live, which is so shallow that it's really just laughable.Seriously, the ratings for this movie are way to high.
The acting is of a reasonable standard, but just short of the bar such that we don't believe the characters enough to really feel any of their emotions.The story distinguishes itself from groundhog day in its pursuit of a thrilling, rather than funny series of events, for the most-part at least.
Suddenly the antagonist would make an appearance like the villain in a pantomime play and more silliness would ensue.Watchable with a new aspect on the groundhog day concept, don't expect more..
Luckily this movie gets to the darker groundhogs day that some people may have been thinking about the whole time.
This is one of those films where I'm sure it sounded good while the producers and directors were discussing the general concept, but once it came time to actually shoot scenes and compile a film, it just didn't quite come together.That's what Repeaters is, in my humble opinion.Maybe as a sci-fi thriller novel, this could have worked, but trying to convey this story into a film experience just comes off as being absurdly confusing, and for the most part, not even a slim chance of visualizing this story as somehow being plausible.Sorry .
(That's a message to the writers.)It's not blowing anything to say this is basically an attempt at a dark version of the same concept from Ground Hog Day. That's all contained in the synopsis and the pre-release blerb.Or, if you want some serious physics: its a portrayal of the effects of Closed Timelike Curves - an Einsteinian concept.But let's face it, it's a simple, childhood daydream, and therefore an archetypal idea: what if the same day repeated ad-infinitum?I used to dismiss Ground Hog Day as a slightly better than average Hollywood comedy, though my love for Bill Murray has grown and grown over the years (The Life Aquatic is now a film I proudly own).But the more I have gone back and looked at Ground Hog Day, the more it has improved.
And it manages to be inspiring, and cunningly the writers have left the ending open: you can interpret it in some kind of religious/spiritual ooga-booga way, or you can take it that it's just the result of the protagonist's careful planning - he had time to think the whole thing right through, after all.And this brings us to the issue with Repeaters.
Instead, we find ourselves passing endlessly through Mediocrity, Writing Needs Work, and Lost Our Whiteboard, again and again.Several things irritated me - characters being pussies when they should have charged into the fray (and would have, if they'd had all the time in the world to map out the consequences; there are a LOT of things I would have added, or treated differently) - lack of intellectual support (plot could have been quite ingenious, but ended up not: this is a puzzle-trap after all) - and a really stupid plot-hole, introduced by the writers finally trying to be CLEVER (and instead delivering messed up, gluggy short-hand that garbles the message), that has been the subject of great debate on the IMDb forums.But, having said all that, what about enjoyment?
This film isn't another Groundhog Day.It isn't another comedy take on getting things right before you can move on.
Oh and it doesn't do character study very well but perhaps it didn't try very hard.The premise is three drug addicts in rehab who, during an electric storm are shocked into the repetition of a day which didn't work out very well for any of them: Kyle cannot talk to his sister, Sonia cannot talk to her father in hospital and Michael does, kind of, talk to his Dad in prison, a bad move.
And so three people with three reasons underlying their actions get to act out a repetition of this nemesis in affairs, and from here personalities and camaraderie battle out what to do with this "gift" or "curse".As in Groundhog Day obvious benefits are exploited from the off, but in this case there is no easily identifiable target goal for this trinity to focus on.
But darkness returns and original ideas are conspicuous by their absence which is a shame.Fortunately this film is still entertaining and watchable up to the last but I do feel those involved missed a chance to make it even better.Seven out of ten (mainly for acting by the leads - Milligan, Crewe and de Klerk)..
Movies like Repeaters, are why I watch independent films.
I had not seen Groundhod Day at the time).OK, moving along!Repeaters is pretty much the same premise as Groundhog Day, like I said, but much darker.
Three "twenty-somethings" find out just how life changing a repeated second chance is in this brilliant little film from Canada.Written by Arne Olsen (Relic Hunter, Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie) and directed by Carl Bessai (Severed, Normal) Repeaters is the story of three inmates of a drug rehabilitation centre in Mission City.
Kyle Halstead (Dustin Milligan), Sonia Logan (Amanda Crew) and Michael Weeks (Richard De Clerk) all hang out together and one event filled day they become caught in a time warp that results in them re-living that day repeatedly.The combination of great story-line and great performances by the lead actors made this spontaneous purchase of an 8 pound DVD turn into a real gem of a film.The publicity/marketing for the film states that the film is like Taken meets Groundhog Day. Now that sounds good, but in my humble opinion the film is more like Groundhog Day meets Flatliners.My only real problem with the film was the lead actors resemblance's to other actors and (in one case) to one of my first cousins.
Unfortunately, the two male characters had more of a story arch than the female lead, but despite the slight annoyance of this fact the film still delivered a pretty impressive punch.There is not a whole lot of information available on this 2010 Canadian independent film, but they do still have a website: Repeaters.If you get a chance, check this film out.
This movie explores one of the most intriguing premises: what if today was to repeat itself indefinitely, and you had the freedom to do what you want and remember everything you did and what happened, every time the day repeated itself?
And this is particularly important when the story includes many very interesting ideas such as the duration of the time loop, what if it's infinite, what happens if it ends, how will you know, death and time, does what you do have any effect on the "real" time line, and, come to think of it, which one is the "real" time line.
It's not easy to understand what happens in recovery from addictions and this is a psychological portrait of how people deal when faced with confronting their own demons and taking responsibility for their actions.If you like to think about psychology- you'll enjoy this movie.
I thought they could have gone deeper with the purgatory idea - especially the day after Sonia comes back the first time.
This movie tries to take the 'Groundhog Day' idea into darker territory, with three recovering drug-addicts in rehab getting to live a bad day over and over again, until, presumably, they get something right.Besides the dark edge, this movie also promises interesting developments by having three friends go through it together in different ways.
The third, however, seeing the endless hate his father has for him, decides to give up and give in to the dark side of his insecurities, and turns to a nihilistic life of brutal crime, since there are no consequences to his actions anyways.So it starts becoming interesting, and in a sense, they become god-like beings that can get away with anything, except that the more conscience-laden duo now also have a 'super-villain' on their hands to deal with, while the regular world suffers the consequences.But then it stops being interesting, fizzles out, and just ends.Their attempts at stopping him never become creative (for example, they don't even bother finding out who starts their day first by a few seconds, thus giving that person a slight edge).
The development of the bad guy is way too fast and extreme - it could have worked if they had to repeat a hundred times or so, but to turn into a suicidal-rapist-murderer within 3-4 days is a bit much.
People who do drugs, obviously (so sayeth the movie) make bad decisions and are bad people.I bet they show this film in rehab a lot just like they make people watch "doing time on maple drive" cause I've been staff in rehab and trust me, they make you watch some pretty lousy don't do drugs movies...This film is not a mind bending thriller...its a movie about people who made crap decisions with their lives , ended up at a rehab center, somehow without explanation got the power to reliver the same day over and over again, and still made BAD DECISIONS throughout the film , so, moral of the story...bad people, do bad things, because they are bad.
Each one of them has issues: Kyle sees his younger sister sliding down the same road he went, Sonia was abused by her father who will die that day, but whom she still needs to say goodbye too, and Michael, whose dad is in jail because of him, and doesn't want to talk to him.
While in the beginning they enjoy the freedom this repeating day gives, they all follow their own path in the end.The comparison with Groundhog Day, a movie with a similar idea, is quickly made.
It's not about the idea of repeating days, but about the way people interact in such a condition.
If you are just interested by the idea of repeating days and what you would do with it, better watch Groundhog Day..
Repeaters is really well made and introduces us to some great new actors who do a fine job, but nevertheless it ends up being a rather long 90 minutes as this twisted version of Groundhog Day doesn't really take advantage of the opportunities but instead resorts to typical psycho horror with a lot of spaghetti sauce flying out of people's backs and splashing on the walls.
Instead of a TV news reporter, it's a group of three troubled youth who get caught in a time loop, at first going on rampages in order to take advantage of the lack of consequences their situation affords, but then two of them struggle with the moral issues and want to find a way out of the repeating day, as their friend goes nuts and decides to be as evil as he can because it will all be erased when he wakes up to the same morning again.
Repeaters is an okay movie, it just goes on a little too long and doesn't offer any great twist at the end..
You continue to show just how bad a human being you are until the day stops repeating and normality returns.There, I've saved you 90 minutes of your life.This deliberately drab, depressing film, takes the Groundhog Day premise and crams as much sadness into one day as possible - nothing good ever comes from the protagonists actions.
...director/cinematographer Carl "Emile" Bessai's "Repeaters" is likely Arne "Red Scorpion" Olsen's best screenplay, which may or may not be saying much, given that the story is basically a riff on the Harold Ramis classic, "Groundhog Day." This incarnation (unsubtle allusion intended) follows three young addicts in rehab as they find themselves reliving one day over and over again no matter what they do.
She sort of looks like Jennifer Love-Hewitt if Jen had a makeover.I am not sure whether the makers of this film hoped that enough time had passed since the said Bill Murray comedy, hoping that audiences had long forgotten about that film, or whether they merely wanted to give an already done-before premise a thriller slant while not feeling ashamed that they were using an old premise.
The other two indulge him at first, but then to Mike's dismay want to seek a path of forgiveness and redemption.Unfortunately I have seen Groundhog Day so the repeat aspect got old real fast.
A time loop where people live the same day, over and over again.12.01 was excellent.
Ground Hog Day was with Bill Murray contained his dry humour, was very good.But this poor excuse??????????.I cannot understand why this film got any positive reviews at all.?????Foul language and moronic scenes of younger people doing moronic things because they know they will get away with it due to re- living everyday the same.And that was this film.I was hoping for an intelligent script, no chance.Anybody with half a brain stay away from this movie..
I know time travel/loop movies are impossible to make real, but when they KNOW it's the THIRD day they say and do the same stuff.
A Canadian flick that repeats Groundhog Day, but just not as well.
Threatening them, forcing them to do things they don't want to do, and insults them, and their 'little relationship'.In the end, these three young twenty-something adults know they have to redeem themselves, but the same day just keeps on repeating itself, but leading to another thrill-ride of suspense and adventure.
It's like the one mistake you don't want to repeat, keeps on getting interrupted by the repetitive days.
The movie was marvelously well structured, and the next same day just kept on getting better and better.Overall, an awesome dramatic thriller, where you do not want to repeat something, and face consequences afterwards.
The movie starts with a 3 drug addicts in rehabilitation center, who struck by lightning after spending their first day out.
In my opinion the movie was pretty decent there was curiosity what will happen next plus the change of dynamics between three characters going through "Repeaters" was interesting.
I have seen other time repeating movies, and they were more comedies.
It is your decision if you want to live in the moral squalor you made, or make your environment better.I know this review was personal, but it is always good to have personal message from a movie.For sum it up: I might watch it once more.
That's Groundhog Day!" Well as someone who watched the movie - While I can see a lot of backing for that, it's less of a rip-off and more of a reworking of the premise to instead of being some quirky comedy with heart to instead be darker and some kind of symbolization of the life of a junkie.Okay so the premise, Three junkies in rehab are shocked electrically one night and repeat the same day over and over.
They really pull through good performances in the movie and I will certainly be looking for more stuff that these people have been in.
I just felt a kind of "That's it?" vibe from it because I know it symbolizes the life of a junkie and how it's a new day and they are improving their lives but I wouldn't have minded seeing them still do some good for other people like trying to stop that girl from jumping off the dam again.
I would recommend this movie to anyone who can accept this as it's own unique thing without drawing any references to Groundhog Day..
The film opens with the quote 'Dont wait for the last judgement, it happens everyday' - IE its not about the end result but the journey in getting there.Other Opinion: After the accident, their days repeated for the reasons above - until wrongs acknowledged and put right.
|
tt1139319
|
A Film with Me in It
|
Mark (Doherty) is an actor living in a basement flat below his writer friend Pierce (Moran). Residing with his girlfriend, Sally (Huberman), Mark struggles to find work whilst caring for his paralysed brother, David (O'Doherty). Desperate to avoid paying overdue rent, Mark continually eludes landlord Jack (Allen), meaning he is also unable to inform Jack of the flat's dilapidated state.
Discovering that Mark wasted money meant for the overdue rent, Sally finally decides to end her strained relationship with Mark, informs Jack of the repairs needed, and arranges to move out. The damaged state of the flat reaching its peak, Mark witnesses two consecutive freak accidents; a bookshelf falls and kills his dog, and the living room chandelier collapses and crushes David. Reeling in horror from the events, Mark looks on as Jack appears to repair a high lightbulb atop a wobbly stool, only to fall and pierce his throat with his screwdriver. Pierce then arrives and discovers the corpses, causing him to panic.
Hiding in the bathroom, Mark and Pierce plot to control the situation, only for Sally to return. Discovering David's body, Sally faints and impales herself on Mark's clarinet stand, killing her too. Realizing the absurdity of four consecutive, fatal accidents occurring in one place, Pierce concocts a plan to move Jack's body to an alternative location, as they both had a strong motive to murder him. Shooing Sally's father when he arrives, a police officer (O'Sullivan) then arrives due to an unrelated noise complaint, causing Pierce to panic and take her hostage.
Unable to kill the officer, the duo ties her up and attempts to reason with her. Left unattended, she attempts to escape through a faulty window, only for it to close and crush her head. Now surrounded by several corpses, Pierce finally formulates a plan; placing David, Sally, Jack, and the dog in his car, they drive it to a secluded area and cause it to explode, leaving minimal forensic evidence. Additionally, since three immediate deaths of Mark's acquaintances can place suspicion on him, Mark places his jewellery and clarinet on David's corpse, faking his own death.
Finally moving the officer to the neighbour's garden, Pierce fakes her death as caused by a falling plant pot. Cutting Mark's hair and dressing him as David, the two attempt to pass Mark as his disabled brother, and give Pierce an alibi as his carer in Mark's absence. A closing epilogue then shows Pierce has written a script based on the film's events, and is currently directing it whilst Mark continues to pass as David.
|
dark
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This black comedy is a story of Pierce (Dylan Moran) and Mark (Mark Doherty), two jobless Irish friends sharing a run down apartment with Mark's girlfriend Sally (Amy Huberman), and Mark's disabled brother David (David O'Doherty).
The movie suddenly takes a turn for the worse one day in their uneventful and eroding lives.The movie really takes the very definitive yet subtle elements of black comedy and ties it together with very interesting plot twists.
Although no comparison can be made, for the sake of a relative scale- A Film with Me in It is abreast with some of the blackest comedy works of the Coen Brothers (such as Burn After Reading, Barton Fink and The Man Who Wasn't There).The movie tends to drag a little here and there, but makes up for it in the fine character development and cinematography.
As the plot progresses, the viewer is often subtly taunted to question their understanding of the story so far.I'm a fan of Dylan Moran's stand-up work, and he has lived up to my expectations of him on the screen as well.
All in all, it's definitely a good watch..
This film is very funny, the cast are all excellent.
I would single out Amy Huberman as being excellent in this, I also saw her in another Irish film that played in Montreal in August, Satellites and Meteorites, where she was flawless.
Dylan Moran, while perhaps reprising many of the other characters he has played previously, was very enjoyable to watch, as was Keith Allen though his part was predictably small.
A few cameos at the end really were well placed, especially Johnny Rhys, though the context of his cameo was a little close to reality so I'm not sure what way he will come across to auds in Ireland.
Throughly enjoyable film, the industry in Toronto reacted extremely positively to it and it along with Kisses really showed us all that Ireland can, when it wants, produce good product.
The question if you will like were this is going or not, will depend on how much you like "dark humor".
If you have seen quite a few of those movies, than you might anticipate quite a few things that will happen.Still it is done very good, many jokes are really exciting and the movie ends very well.
One of the things that stuck out though, was the fact that this movie is Irish.
Which means the guys playing this have a very unusual accent (for me and I'm sure for quite a few other guys), which also means, that I had some trouble getting every little thing that was said.The (inevitable) American Remake will come surely, but before that, make sure to watch this original!.
Both Moran and Doherty know how to spin the story, lend credibility to the scenario.
Watching them is a delight as they portray their downbeat characters with warmth and affection.
Otherwise, enjoy the wittiness of this small scale gem and celebrate the fact that such pictures get into circulation at all in such cash-straightened times..
Mark Doherty not only stars in this film, he wrote it.
It is so bizarre that it is hilarious.We are talking two losers, Mark (Doherty) and his friend Pierce (Dylan Moran).
Mark is faced with a series of accidents that leave him utterly incapable of action.
He turns to Pierce, who just makes things worse.This film is not laugh-out-loud funny, but it is hilarious.
Of course, you have to see the humor , not in the tragedies that occur, but in the response to it by Mark and Pierce.Amy Huberman was excellent in her role as Mark's girlfriend, leaving us wanting more in her short role..
Dark and damp like Ireland.
The point is though when it comes to casting he's limited to the roles he can play but for this one he's ideally suited.This film is very dark and slightly funny film.
Two down and out wannabe script writer/film makers bundle their way through a series of explainable but hard to believe accidents which are made all the more worse by their bungled attempts to cover them up.
No where does the film make sense but it's not supposed to, if you approach this film with logic you're wasting your time.
This film is in fact Murphy's Law.There are no perfect teeth American heroes to save the day, no beautiful people to carry the film on their looks, no slush no montage scenes of pretty woman hat changes, this film is as dark, damp, dreary and miserable as the dank basement flat it's set in and that's how it's supposed to be, a good British film.Is it hilarious?
Movie with them in it or day with them in it is filmed?.
Mark is rejected by one more movie project.
Permanent looser Mark is living in a wrecked house which he can't pay for the rent for three months together with his brother in wheel chair.
Leading role in his friend's movie sounds for him like the solution to everything.
The script of Pierce who is an impenitent alcoholic coincides whit what we are watching.
We can't be sure if the movie they want to make at this specific day is what we are watching or they are inspired by this day for their movie.
After such shrewd start, movie presents 90 minutes laughters to us.Tragedies one after another don't change Mark's indifferent attitude to life even when he has lost almost everything.
Mark's astonishment and Pierce's reactions are main objects of the movie represents British comedy manner.
What is happening to them is too much absurd even for a movie according to a movie writer Pierce he says but they again find the solution in a scenario idea.Everything is fabulously funny in this good sample of British comedy which resembles "Shaun of Dead" and "Hot Fuzz".
A Film With Me In It, second movie of Ian Fitzgibbon has various critics like his first job but still it attracts attention in some Festivals include Irish Film and Television Academy (IFTA)..
Ratings: 5 - Amazing 4 - Great 3 - Very good 2 - Good 1 - Fair 0 - Poor For more information about the ratings, please visit: http://critical-eruditass.blogspot.com/p/about-blog.htmlCharacters: 2 Screenplay: 2 Cinematography: 2 Emotional: 1Overall: 2.0The film does a good job of walking the line between tasteful and tasteless of dark comedy.
Nothing in this film makes sense or is logical, but it isn't supposed to; each ridiculous twist and turn can be amusing.
To me, it was amusing and I had a few laughs, but they can be a little sparse.
And in the end, it leaves you feeling a bit empty.
While that may be the point of the film, it also feels a bit like a television episode that was dragged on.
Overall, I found it a good experience.The characters are stupid and illogical.
The actors also did a pretty good job of appearing similarly dumbstruck.
Moran is his usual self.Not only is it hard to develop any kind of connection with the characters, but they can induce hate.
Sometimes inducing this kind of emotion is good, but they overdid it and it can definitely begin to shift to annoyance, ruining the suspension of disbelief.
The screenplay was absurd, in a good way, but could have flown better.
The clear foreshadowing does create an interesting little "whose gonna get it" atmosphere, but they needed to anchor more of the script around it.
If it was worked and teased a bit more, it would've been great.
It got better as the bodies began piling up and the absurdities amounted.The tone of the film started off teetering between funny and serious, so some parts left the viewer uncertain as to how to feel.
The ending expunged on the humor created and is a hate it or love it thing.The cinematography, on the other hand, was surprisingly aesthetic.
With no flair, the angles and composition is well done for a low budget film.
While I was never really drawn into the film, I enjoyed the brief nonsensical departure from sane people..
While I was never really drawn into the film, I enjoyed the brief nonsensical departure from sane people..
Sometimes dark comedies just don't work.
"A Film with Me in It" is dark, it's Irish, it's indie.
Mark (Mark Doherty) and Pierce (Dylan Moran) are broke and jobless, and they're too incompetent to even know that they're broke and jobless, let alone how to not be.One is a screenwriter and the other's an actor, and they've decided to make a movie.
When Mark's girlfriend Sally asks, "with what money?" Mark does not understand what she means.
Like, real money, what is required to live in the real world!" Mark still has no clue what she's talking about.
Yes, that joke is funny, but it also begs the question how did Mark even get a girlfriend in the first place?
Questions like that are never answered.
We're just supposed to laugh at these imbeciles rather than get to know them or understand them.Their movie is going to be like an Irish "Fargo" and they kidnap somebody with money.
As you can guess with most dark comedies, life starts imitating art.
But when most-likely-innocent, under-developed characters and animals are killed (not murdered just killed accidentally), I couldn't follow their humourless foibles.If they gave me actual characters, like real people whom I could connect to, "A Film With Me in It" could probably at least be watchable.
But as is, every plot twist is meaningless because there is no development or understanding to anything anybody says or does..
If you take a cast of good comedians you might hope for some good jokes but there aren't many here.Moran is funny is his normal crazed way but the rest of the cast aren't.
The script is poor with the dialogue being stilted and, more importantly, just dull.The acting is OK, it just isn't funny.The plot seems quite good if not especially original but the slapstick falls flat and there is nothing else to keep you interested.This was quite hard to watch to the end and the ending isn't really interesting enough to have bothered..
A Film with Nothing in It. The idea is fantastic.
A bunch of people keep having deadly accidents in the apartment of a broke wannabe-actor.
Now he has to avoid looking like a deranged serial killer while the bodies start piling up and his best friend tries to write a movie around the whole thing.
One would think that a black-humoured British amalgam of both ideas, starring Dylan Moran of Black Books and Shaun of the Dead would be even better.
The first wasted opportunity is casting Dylan Moran not as the lead, but as the grumpy alcoholic screenwriter friend who plays second fiddle to Mark Doherty.
Doherty is unable to make his character likable, or what happens to him intriguing.
Instead, he sleepwalks through the movie like a robot telling a joke.
Instead, it's a string of the same thing happening over and over again until the film ends with an unlikely and unsatisfying denouement, while the subplots go nowhere.
an unexpected delight and a film not to be missed.
Black comedies don't come much darker than this little gem from Ireland.
Audiences who loved last year's Death At A Funeral will get lots of laughs from this very funny comedy about a couple of hapless wannabe film makers and their attempts to cope with a couple of accidental deaths in a small flat.
Mark (Mark Doherty) is a struggling out of work actor desperately looking for a decent role in a film.
He shares a poky basement flat with his girlfriend Sally (Amy Huberman), and his paralysed wheelchair bound brother David (David O'Doherty).
And Mark's slacker best friend Pierce (Irish comic Dylan Moran, from the TV series Black Books, etc) is trying to write a film script drawing upon their experiences.
As the unusual situation begins to get out of control, Pierce's helpful suggestions actually exacerbate things.
There is a fine art to black comedy, as filmmakers have to walk a fine line between tasteful and tasteless, but this is the type of comedy where the British excel.
Director Ian FitzGibbon and writer Mark Doherty get the delicate balance right here, and they push the material about as far as it can go without overstepping the boundaries of good taste.
There are plenty of laugh-out loud moments throughout, some nice sight gags, and a running joke that eventually pays off.
The film is a little slow to get going as it spends a lot of time in the early scenes establishing the characters and setting the scene.
The film combines elements of top British films like the wonderful Withnail And I, and Shallow Grave.
FitzGibbon and Doherty follow one outrageous implausibility with another, but the whole thing ultimately works.
To reveal too much about the film's plot would spoil its surprises.
The small but effective cast are attuned to the tone of the film, and their performances match the material.
Moran brings charisma and charm to his unsympathetic and self-centred character.
A Film With Me In It is an unexpected delight and a film not to be missed!.
Well if a good romp in some dark territory sounds like fun then this is your movie, def low budget, but the cast more than makes up for it as any good dark comedy classics will prove.After a series of set-up albeit, believable accidents happen.
Together they must use their skills to avoid the jail time that will surely ensue, after they make the situation progressively worse.I'll give it doesn't take too much to figure out most of it but the trip was worth the ticket cost and seeing some of the cast from Shaun of the Dead working was a great surprise and a joy.If you enjoy dark humor and the witty humor of the the Irish/English then you'll enjoy this one no matter the side of the world you hail from..
Good, but not great.
I'm personally a big fan of Dylan Moran.
His stand-up makes me laugh, I enjoy the movies he's been in, and I like his couldn't-be-arsed exterior.
Overall, I think he's a pretty cool guy.But, for me, this movie was a bit of a disappointment.
It was fairly good, but it could have been excellent if it had been worked on a bit more, teased out a little.The opening and the introduction to the characters was sloppy, which took the edge off for me (call me old-fashioned, but I like to know who everyone is before launching into all the plot twists and whodunits).
Also, the tone at the beginning is constantly changing from funny to serious, which leaves the audience unsure of how to react when the various characters start getting offed.
So, I thought A Film With Me In It was a good film.
Dark Comedy at It's finest..
I found myself watching this movie, alone in bed, eating popcorn, hungover like a beach towel on a Tuesday night.Incredible..
all in a matter of minuets, it's not funny but why am I laughing?
Lots of twists, great film, well good enough.
Love Dylan Moran, I hope to one day marry a man just like himself.
Eight out of Ten stars for 'a film with me in it' please enjoy as much as I indeed did.Make sure to check out my list of movies to watch - recommended by myself.
if you like this you are bound to enjoy the other titles in the list on my profile..
Once again, we have an inept film built on that idea, inept because the writer wanted to be in it.The overall shape is an ordinary, explicit fold: one buddy is a blocked film writer, the other and unemployed actor.
Noir-inspired events transpire, messing with them while "giving them material" for a film we discover at the end is the film we are seeing.
What is clever is the dialog that jumps from one side of the line to another, in and out of the movie, realizing that "out" is really "in." There are roles that are designated viewers: loyal dog, crippled brother, lecherous landlord, allsuffering girlfriend, kind policewoman.
Each is developed as noir center then dispatched in the same tone that the dialog uses in dismissing genre ideas.
It is really quite a brilliant script idea.
But alas, the film does not have enough energy to let us know when it is changing direction.
So bad and unfunny I stopped caring even though Dylan Moran fights valiantly to save it.
This film stars Dylan Moran and someone who's name and face I will try to block from memory (this non person also wrote the screenplay).
It has something to do with an actor who has to deal with dead bodies and attempts to get work.
Or something.I saw this as part of the IFC in Theaters cable service and all I can say is I'm so glad this was essentially a freebie since the movie was part of the service I already pay for.
Actually the other thing I can say is this is only the second film I've seen from IFC Films that I can't understand how it got picked up for release.This is an unfunny film that made me stare at the screen wondering what I was supposed to be laughing at.
Moran is a funny comedian, I'm a huge fan of his, but he's not the star some other guy is so I had to really suffer.
The best way to describe this is as the sort of odd ultra dry humor that is so dry as to not be funny.
Who did Neil Jordan owe that he got hooked up with the writer and star?(Jordan's attitude at the beginning is how I felt about the film) A waste of time
|
tt3064298
|
Man Up
|
Nancy is 34 years old and single. Her sister hopes that Nancy can find love and encourages her to "put herself out there." Nancy has a failed blind date at her friend's engagement party.
Later, Nancy's parents are celebrating their 40th anniversary, so Nancy takes the train to London. On the train, Nancy sits across from Jessica, a 24-year-old woman who is going on a blind date based on a self-help book called 6 Billion People and You. Nancy is rude to Jessica, so Jessica leaves her copy of the book with Nancy, bookmarking Chapter 7, "Your Negative Thoughts are Ruining Your Life (And Everyone Else's...)". When disembarking the train, Nancy pursues Jessica to return the book, but is stopped by Jack, Jessica's blind date. Nancy decides to take a chance and pretend that she is Jessica, and the pair have a very good time drinking and bowling, but Nancy's ruse is destroyed when they run into Nancy's creepy middle school acquaintance, Sean.
Nancy and Jack argue and return to the bar, where they run into Jack's soon-to-be-ex-wife with the man she is having an affair with. Nancy has to console Jack in the bathroom and helps him achieve closure.
Nancy wants to invite Jack to her parents' anniversary party -- but Jessica has left telephone messages for Jack and still wants to meet up, so he parts ways with Nancy. Nancy arrives at her parent's party, but is very sad and Jack also quickly realizes that letting her go was a mistake. He enlists the help of Sean and some teenagers to find Nancy's house and they decide to take a chance on each other.
|
comedy, humor
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The greatest asset of this movie is its success of making you feel happy, energized and with a positive look at life.Has many awkwardly cringy/funny moments, time passes by in a heartbeat, though the screen time is fairly short too.
Unbelievable situations could often (at least in the movies) lead to great romances...like...it was meant to be...A man and a woman, desperate to meet their other halves (although with different approaches, one closed to herself, the other one just trying his luck "out there") end up having a (blind) date in current London, in a situation with mixed identities (sort of).Simon Pegg and Lake Bell have chemistry in the leading roles and give more than adequate performances.Overall: A romantic fairytale with quirky humor and an obvious, although impossible, ending!.
To me Richard Curtis is the king of British Rom-Coms, Love Actually is a great film and in fact more recently we had About Time which was an incredibly feel good film which i enjoyed a hell of a lot more than i expected.
Following that trend is directed by Ben Palmer who proves to be quite the competition to Curtis with a film the trailer makes us feel we've seen before, in fact i saw this simply because i happen to love Simon Pegg, but proves to be a surprisingly original film.Man Up follows Nancy played by Lake Bell who is a bit down on her luck when it comes to men to say the least.
When a chance encounter with a woman on a train results in her leaving her book for Nancy, which she was going to use for the certain man to find her results in Nancy accidentally going on a blind date with Jack (Simon Pegg) she immediately hits it off with him and we have the rest of our movie to unfold.
Sure the premise doesn't sound like the most interesting premise but it is handed to us so well that it proves to be a highly entertaining and hilarious journey into these people's lives and we learn a lot on the way with them.First off, Simon Pegg and Lake Bell both pull off very good performances.
nd don't watch the trailer, there is no needI wasn't expecting a typical American comedy, since I usually appreciate Simon Pegg's work.
Man Up. I'm not a fan of romantic comedies, but I can't deny the fact that I have enjoyed various films which (in my humble opinion) transcended that label in order to become good movies on their own merit.
And even though I wouldn't place Man Up at the same level of those films, it kept me very entertained due to its solid combination of humor and romance, besides of the perfect chemistry between Lake Bell and Simon Pegg, who really make us wish their characters to remain together, not because the formula says so, but because the incipient relationship between them feels organic and authentic.
Pegg is mostly known for his work in the "geek" genre, with the films Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz and the TV series Spaced; however, he had already worked in some romantic comedies, which had been mediocre (Run Fatboy Run, How to Lose Friends & Alienate People).
Nevertheless, it might not be a great movie, but I enjoyed Man Up pretty much, and I can recommend it to fans of romantic comedies, and also to the detractors of the genre (such as me), because it proves the possibility of creating a story inside the established parameters, but with enough narrative ability to overcome the expectations generally inspired by the films of this kind..
Simon Pegg might not be your conventional romantic comedy actor with the devilishly handsome looks but his humor and charisma shine through in this funny British film that takes place over the course of one day.
Simon Pegg shows leading romantic man chops we haven't seem previously but his comic timing and vulnerability works for a fundamentally flawed and struggling character.
The plot makes no sense especially the moment where Pegg's and Bell's characters breakup before the inescapable finale for seemingly no reason other than it was just that time in the movie where that was supposed to happen.
Simon Pegg is undoubtedly a funny guy and has made some good films along the way, but sadly this won't go down as being one of them.The premise is good and in Lake Bell he has a naturally gifted comedienne to support him, but somewhere in the films short running time it all falls flat.Improbable characters, annoying characters and people doing quite clearly irresponsible things.
Rom-coms are way down on my list of genres of films to watch usually .They are usually reserved for the wife to watch but strangely enough on the odd occasion i watch one i more often than not end up liking them and Man Up is no exception.
Jack is totally unaware of the switch and immediately takes Nancy, the wrong girl, out on the streets of London.Man Up is definitely among the best romantic comedies I've seen in a long time.
Personally, I thought that the script was weak and unfunny but I enjoyed the dancing scene to the Reflex (Duran Duran).I recommend this movie to people who are into their romantic/comedy about man who meets the wrong girl on a blind date, that turns out to be the right girl.
The film may not quite manage to completely steer clear of some of the genre's pitfalls, but that's easy enough to forgive when Tess Morris' script is so smart and refreshing in digging into its characters and central relationships.We open on Nancy (Lake Bell), a jaded 34-year-old woman who's close to giving up on romance and spontaneity.
When she forms an instant connection with Jack (Simon Pegg), a 40-year-old divorcé who shares her love of cult movies and seems to really get her terrible jokes, Nancy makes the impulsive decision to skip out on her parents' fortieth anniversary party in favour of maintaining the farce and pretending to be Jessica.Anyone who's schooled in the conventions of the genre would be able to guess where it's all headed.
Anyone more familiar with Pegg's comedy antics may not think that he's up to the task of delivering big, romantic gestures and speeches, but he plays it all with such disarming sincerity here that he helps the slightly pat ending go down very smoothly indeed.Even the most mediocre of rom-coms can become something special when the chemistry between the leads is right.
When Bell and Pegg share a screen, you want to keep watching them hang out – the fizzy, sparkling chemistry between them is undeniable and all the more impressive for the many permutations their mercurial on-screen relationship undergoes during the course of the film.It's true that Man Up sags a little in its final stretch.
As the film dutifully ties up its loose ends, it loses a little steam, especially in giving too much weight to Sean (Rory Kinnear), an oddball supporting character who's nursed a creepy crush on Nancy since their school days.However, a touching if slightly shaky ending does not detract from Man Up's many virtues.
Some very strange things happen in Man Up, Ben Palmer's surprisingly likable romantic comedy, starring Simon Pegg and Lake Bell.
With its action condensed into a single afternoon and evening, Man Up expertly conveys the feel of one of those great first dates that just kept going, it's got an endearing and awkward Britishness that makes its characters relatable and in the shape of its gifted leads an on screen couple you'll genuinely root for.
I am not sure the movie is intended to make you laugh, to make you think, or to make you depressed if you are approaching your forties.So what we get is the story of an about-to-get-divorced man who is going on a blind date around London.
Man Up delivers laughs and just the right amount of nicely timed emotion to make for one of the best films of recent memory.The always witty Simon Pegg and breakthrough actress Lake Bell lead this charming romantic delight of a film.
Simon Pegg's undeniable charisma along with Bell's guarded sensitivity and fresh screen presence makes Man Up more than just a run of the mill rom-com.As much as this film is a romantic comedy, you could make the argument it's quite the adventure as well.
Not only is it a refreshing take on the genre, but it will likely be a film I pick up and view more than once.+Pegg and Bell's chemistry+Score/soundtrack+British sense of humor+Romantic adventure10/10.
'Man Up' is a British Romantic Comedy that stars Simon Pegg as Jack, a man going on a blind date with a mystery woman, and Lake Bell as Nancy who ends up unexpectedly going on that date, but unknown to Jack she is not the mystery woman he expected (Wow, just thinking about it, that could also be an interesting synopsis for some sort of mystery thriller...).
Very well acted, great romance, hilarious quirky humour, good writing, and just a charming enjoyable film, so if you enjoy rom-coms, this one i think you would also enjoy.
Man Up (2015) is a nice little comedy/romantic based film, great ideas in the movie, the typical relationship comedy; with a nice story line.
Now I certainly like the darker based films better than most but I do find myself enjoying "Man Up. The cast for what the movie is about fit quite nicely, and the actors done a great job on their parts.
It's a simple story - the old blind-date mix-up, where Jake (Pegg) meets Nancy (Bell), both disillusioned with relationships, but they happen to find each other and have a great night out, before it's revealed that she's not his intended blind date.Very fast-paced (only 85min long), with no time for dull moments, and plenty of laughs throughout to keep everyone happy.
The soundtrack is great and there's some fun/memorable scenes, including the teens running through the streets, the race to the bar and the fire extinguisher.What really makes the film work is Pegg's unflappable charm and his chemistry with Bell, who's the real star - endearing and unassuming, she's cute, but also witty and just enjoyable to watch.
Still this is not only funny and uplifting, it has two very charismatic and talented people at the front.This may not be enough for some comedies, but with a solid script like this one has, the movie did Man Up and deliver on its premise.
However, what I've seen with Man Up is that you can have a film with such a formulaic story (and believe me, this follows the rom-com instruction book so closely), but when it's injected with fun-loving performances, entertaining and light-hearted comedy and quick-paced, snappy dialogue, you can have a whale of a time.What I liked most about this film was the performances.
He's so much fun to watch, and it's a performance that feels a lot more like the classic, funny Simon Pegg that we know from the likes of Shaun Of The Dead, Hot Fuzz and The World's End – this might be his best comedic performance outside of those films.However, Lake Bell really is the star of the show.
etc., but what Man Up did so brilliantly was make me not care at all about how predictable the plot was by making me have so much fun in the moment.Of course I could see what was coming, but every single scene in this film is both so well-acted and so well-written, with amazing fast- paced and witty dialogue that you don't really see in the genre too much, that I couldn't care less whether it had a generic ending or not – I was happy and having fun at every moment throughout.So, what I'm trying to say about this film is that, despite my hatred for the rom-com formula, it can work if you try.
So many rom- coms are just lazily-written and that's why they feel so predictable and unfunny, but if you get a film with such a brilliantly funny screenplay, and put two amazing performances that work so well together, you can make one of the most fun films ever, to the point where I genuinely didn't want this to end!.
The thing that worked in this movie was the interaction between Simon Pegg and Lake Bell.
Romantic comedy about Nancy (Lake Bell), who on the spur of the moment usurps a blind date with Jack (Simon Pegg), that strikes a good balance between sweetness and cynicism.
For example, Nancy and Jack bond over, among other things, love of the movie version of "The Silence of the Lambs," which would seem to be an unusual choice, but it sets-up a great plot callback late in the film that had me in stitches.Several of the characters, especially Nancy and her lecherous school stalker Sean (Rory Kinnear), are just this side of being too obnoxious to want to spend much time with.
Let's have some fun and look at the differences between American and British Rom- coms, consider the cinematic future of Simon Pegg and analyse the film, Man Up. Overall Rating: 3.25 stars Cinematic rating: 3.5 stars Bigger questions rating: 3 starsSummary: Nancy (Lake Bell) is travelling to celebrate the 40th anniversary of her parents.
Through a series of coincidences, Nancy ends up being mistaken for the other woman and ends up on the blind date with Jack (Simon Pegg).
While it's a romantic-comedy, it's also has some content that isn't necessarily that funny nor romantic.When the film begins, Nancy (Lake Bell) is dead set against yet another set-up by her friends.
"What kind of person stands underneath a clock waiting to steal someone's blind date?!" Nancy (Bell) is trying to find a good man but is starting to lose hope.
On the other hand though Simon Pegg and Lake Bell really help with the comedy and overall feel enough to make it seem fresh and interesting.
Nancy (Lake Bell) who feels unlucky in love and feeling life is passing her by ends up mistakenly going on a blind date with Jack (Simon Pegg) who is still affected from a recent divorce.Both strike up a good rapport sharing similar interests in music and movies despite Nancy being stalked all evening by a former school friend who she had a chance encounter with at a bar.
Man Up is a real feel-good film, with great performances from Simon Pegg and Lake Bell which really help you to connect with the characters and feel invested in the story.Plot-wise it's really nothing new, a simple girl meets boy situation with some hiccoughs on the way to an inevitable happy ending.
In the British comedy Man Up, Lake Bell (In a World) stars as Nancy, a woman who is sitting in hotel room and reluctant to join a party and socialise.
Throughout the chaotic evening of their date, they accidentally meet people from their past, including Nancy's stalker from school Sean (Rory Kinnear) and on Jack's side, his ex-wife (Olivia Williams) from whom and her new partner.Man Up is rather surprisingly a hilarious and economical comedy about a chance encounter and the hidden agendas people forge when in relationships.
And, given that the number of people (aside from myself) who can claim to like all four of these groups/performers must be close to zero, and given that all are nevertheless worked seamlessly and ingeniously into the content of the film, we can see the makers' triumphantly successful interest in reconciling different tastes and overcoming apparent divisions and difficulties that actually represents a hallmark of their film (just as they were hallmarks of "About a Boy", "Love Actually" and many others).Repeatedly, and with increasing intensity as the 86 minutes pass, we are shown how young and old might work together, and how people who ought to be resentful of each other can find some synergistic magic to allow all to come out ahead.This is then the pleasant and surprisingly powerful watching that accompanies a simple enough story of deliberately concealed blind-date identity featuring Simon Pegg as Jack and the intriguing-looking Lake Bell as not-Jessica-but-Nancy.
In fact she is so wanting to help Alice she gives her the book she is carrying.The problem is the younger woman was traveling to meet a blind date, played by 40-something Simon Pegg as Jack.
And in the end Jack and Nancy find that this fraudulent chance meeting might just be the best things that could have happened to each of them.My wife didn't want to watch this with me, she doesn't particularly care for typical British comedies..
Spoiler alert - I have watched this movie a couple of time and found it pleasant to watch, namely as I have had a crush on Lake Bell for ages , but she did a English accent so convincing, which few Americans can really pull off.Its a nice comedy with hints of romance, however it is a little off real life, no one can drink as much as they do on this film and not be lying in a cutter somewhere with last nights kebab plastered to their face, they drink loads with out the effects I get, plus at the end he gets to sleep with Nancey, after one date, thats never happened to me anyway.Plus points: Lake Bell, lake Bell, Lake bell Rory Kinners loathsome character, who was funny, oh and Lake Bell.
She passes herself off as Jessica (Ophelia Lovibond) as she has a great time with Jack (Simon Pegg) who has his own emotional issues.The film is a romantic comedy.
Not knowing any better Nancy just happens to be holding this book at a certain place in the train station which a stranger named "Jack" (Simon Pegg) mistakes for a sign that she is Jessica--his blind date.
|
tt0071913
|
The Nine Lives of Fritz the Cat
|
It is the 1970s; Fritz the Cat is now married, on welfare, and has a child named Ralphie, who casually masturbates. As his wife screams at him for being an irresponsible father and husband, Fritz sits on the couch, staring off into space, smoking a joint. Tired of listening to his wife nag at him, he fades off into his own little world, imagining what life would be like for him if things were different.
The first character he meets on his stoned journey is Juan, a Puerto Rican. The two talk about Juan's sister Chita. The scene fades to Juan's house where Fritz is seen sitting on the couch smoking a joint next to Chita, while Juan is at the store. Chita complains to Fritz when he blows smoke in her eyes. His reaction is to tell her to loosen up and "embrace her fellow man", then he suddenly shoves a joint into her mouth, taking her off into her own hallucinogenic fantasy. The pot makes her horny. Meanwhile, outside, a pair of crows are about to rob the place, but decide to stay outside and watch what happens inside instead. A car pulls up and out comes Chita's father, who sees Fritz and Chita having sex, and blows Fritz apart with a shotgun. This violent display turns off the two crows, who decide to come back at another time.
In his second life, Fritz meets a drunken bum claiming to be God. In his third life, Fritz imagines that he is a soldier in World War II-era Nazi Germany. After being caught having a ménage à trois with two German girls by a commanding officer (the two girls being the officer's wife and daughter), Fritz escapes, and winds up being an orderly to Adolf Hitler. Fritz takes the form of a therapist, and analyzes Hitler, telling him that his world domination plans were just a way of trying to get attention. In the showers, Hitler "accidentally" drops his soap, and urges Fritz to pick it up, in an attempt to rape him, and ends up getting his single testicle (a reference to the song "Hitler Has Only Got One Ball") blown off. In this segment, Fritz meets his death by way of the US Army.
The film cuts back to 1970s-era New York in Fritz's fourth life, as Fritz attempts to sell a used condom to a liquor store owner, Niki, who bets he knows who Fritz used it on. The two break out laughing as they take turns describing the woman. Fritz at one point blurts out that the woman has got the clap. When Niki asks who her name is, Fritz responds by telling him "Gina". Niki says that that's his wife's name and that she doesn't have the clap. Fritz tells him "she does now," causing Niki to curse and shout at Fritz. As he walks out of the store, Fritz bumps into a pig named Lenny. Fritz tells him that he was an irresistible stud in the 1930s. Fritz's fifth life is a psychedelic montage of old stock film and animation, vaguely illustrating Fritz's downfall in the 1930s (losing everything to excessive partying and drinking).
In his sixth life, Fritz shows up at a pawn shop run by a Jewish crow named Morris, and tries to get a welfare check cashed. Fritz tries to make a deal with Morris: If Morris will cash Fritz's welfare check, then Fritz will give Morris a toilet seat. Morris doesn't like the deal, but suddenly getting diarrhea from the pickles he has been eating, he reluctantly accepts the deal, but instead of cashing Fritz's welfare check, he gives Fritz a space helmet. We then see Fritz in his seventh life, as NASA hires Fritz to go into space on the first mission to Mars. While waiting for the shuttle to take off, Fritz decides to have sex with one of the reporters, a black girl. However, the space shuttle takes off a little early, and, once in space, it explodes.
In Fritz's next life, the film portrays Fritz talking to the ghost of his black crow friend Duke, who was shot to death in the previous film. The film then flash-forwards to a future where New Jersey is a separate country from the rest of the United States, and has been renamed "New Africa", home to all black crows. Fritz is just starting his job as a courier, and he is asked by President Henry Kissinger to deliver a letter to the president of New Africa. In New Africa, Fritz finds a high crime rate, corruption, and violence. Once Fritz is led to "The Black House", he hears the president of New Africa and his vice-president talking about how low his popularity is, and how an assassination attempt would boost his popularity. The president refuses to get shot, but is shot anyway, because the vice president needs his president's popularity to increase so he will not lose the upcoming election. The vice-president blames the assassination on Fritz, because he is the only "white" cat in New Africa. Because of this, America and "New Africa" are at war, and Kissinger eventually admits an unconditional surrender. In the end, Fritz is shot for the crime he did not commit.
In his final life, Fritz finds himself living in the sewers of New York, where he meets an Indian guru, and the devil. However, Fritz is given a rude awakening from his drug-induced reality by his wife, who finally throws him out of the apartment. After a quick look at all of his lives, Fritz sighs and says "This is about the worst life I've ever had."
|
pornographic, adult comedy, cult, violence, flashback, psychedelic, humor, satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
If you know me at all, you'll know that I was not a fan of Ralph Bakshi's FRITZ THE CAT.
Well, I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to see THE NINE LIVES OF FRITZ THE CAT.
By some stroke of good luck or divine intervention, it happens to be better than the original.The film, made without Bakshi's involvement, (who was knee deep in the controversy stemming from COONSKIN) begins by finding our hero in a slum, living on welfare with a wife and child.
The wife is pretty abusive (although she does have a point-you'll understand when you see the film.
Fritz smokes pot to escape and imagines himself in nine other lives (hence the title)It's actually a pretty good film.
The film is less raunchy and vulgar than the first, but I know some people out there will still be offended.
But I applaud THE NINE LIVES OF FRITZ THE CAT for taking chances; it could have been more of the same, but instead strives to be better.
I was fascinated by the idea of an R rated cartoon, and Fritz the cat seemed the obvious choice.
The film begins with Fritz' wife harassing him about the state of his life.
The film ultimately shows that Fritz has no chance to improve his life, as every opportunity he gets he sees as another chance to have sex, smoke, cheat the system, and make an idiot of himself.
I felt like the loser at a game of chicken, daring each scene to be more twisted and vile then the last, and being ultimately pulled down and run over by a movie that actually dared to go farther then me.
This movie has all the things to needed to be great after a bong session including an unfollowable plot, and deja vy.
The Nine Lives of Fritz the Cat is a movie, or something like it, that I got to see on night late on a Showtime channel, and when I started watching, it had the material that made me want to change the channel, and maybe not.
There are many weird and surreal scenes, most involving sex and marijuana, some with racism (Hitler cat), some with unique and bizarre characters, and it connected as that while Fritz the cat tries to cash a welfare check he goes over the different deaths in his life, getting blown up, getting blown up in space, getting shot in the batoot, etc.
At times it's too patched together, and makes no sense in the scene where funky 70's music plays while images from the days of black and white flash by and then images pass by like an amateur Kubrick ala 2001, but it oddly works for a mature audience (kids will be freaked out if they should for some chance watch this) on the levels on comedy and of being a all out stoner/druggie flick (most of you out there who watch this will eithe rgo wow or uggh).
The saying "sequels ain't equals" is definitely demonstrated in this completely lackluster follow-up to the earlier brilliantly witty "Fritz the Cat".While both films portray an anthropomorphic view of 70s counterculture using animals, and both use the shock value of drugs, sex and cursing to stir up a reaction; this movie by a totally different production team completely lacks any of the charm, personality, or essential feeling that made the earlier film so appealing.While I am not a member of this counterculture and don't relate to it personally very well, I did try to keep an open mind while watching both movies, and neither one really shocked me that much - maybe because they're getting older and I've witnessed more shock value in recent movies.
With the original FRITZ THE CAT I got the impression that the "naughty" stuff was true to life, and helped make the characters real and interesting.
With NINE LIVES the whole thing just felt like some very bad schoolboy joke that merely shows off the "smutty" bits for their own sake, and doesn't go anywhere with them.
The take on Nazi Germany had a teeny bit of satirical value, but it hardly seemed to be worth the trouble, and the idea has been done a lot more effectively elsewhere.Summing up: don't waste your time with this one, unless you're a fanatical completest.
But go and enjoy the original FRITZ THE CAT, if you feel you can handle it..
Just a couple of thoughts after watching nine lives of fritz the cat.
Second the animators are not the same, the director is not the same, actually quite a lot isn't the same as the first one, which is a bad thing, since this second fritz movie doesn't have a proper story line, or a good script, actually it doesn't have anything of the things that made the first movie so wonderful.
Still it's Fritz the Cat and all is not lost, but all through the film i get the feeling that the director just took all the ingredients of the first fritz movie and mashed them together to a lifeless pile, sticking them in here and there, maybe because that's what he thought the fans wanted (and that would make more money).
Then he managed to portray Fritz as somewhat of a loser, which he may be, in some people's eyes', but i don't think that's the feeling you get from the first one.
So my suggestion is; if you haven't seen any of the fritz movies, watch the first one only, this one isn't quite worth while.
To start this off, I love the original, I think it is brilliant social satire, plus I'm a huge Ralph Bakshi fan.
Well it was pretty bad, instead of making a social comment most of Fritz's Nine Lives just degenerate into dumb slapstick, and gross out gags.
Oh and just a note if you're going to use live action footage as your background, make it less interesting than the animated foreground(something this film does horribly).
While I appreciated the animation, I was left pretty flat by most of the social commentary/satire.
There were images and messages that I of course understood (Hitler, Kissinger, etc.) but the majority of the subject matter was fairly relevant to the present time.Unfortunately, especially during the bizarre psychedelic freak out moments I found myself looking at the clock which is actually kind of sad considering the film was only just over an hour to begin with.
Having said that however, I am glad that I finally saw this film so that I know what it was actually about, and I give the filmmakers a lot more credit for having created something that transcended novelty smut.--Shelly.
It's super to have a change from animals to humans and it is very satirical about how folk in the southern areas of the states react to those of the northern states, and how persecuted one feels if they are just a little bit different from anyone.
I found NINE LIVES OF FRITZ THE CAT on the Showtime FAMILY channel.
I'm no prude, but to imagine a 5 year old tuning into this is horrible.Anyway, I only watched 5 or 10 minutes of this film.
The animation is good for it's era, but the comedy & satire is worn and dated.
A "big mama" cat with huge boobs is yelling at a stoned Fritz cat, telling him he's good for nothing, goes out all night looking for love, and she doesn't know why, 'cause he's bad in bed.
A few seconds later we see some black "thug" cats outside Fritz's house, talking about robbing this house in 'this' (white?) neighborhood.
He's trying to get her high so he can "get with her." She smokes some, and we get a psychedelic menagerie of images that tries to be creative, but really, someone needs to take some lessons from "The Wall"'s animators.
Flashback to the big mama cat yelling at Fritz again.
Now that I read a few other reviews, I suppose the the whole time Fritz is supposed to be listening to big mama yelling at him, but zoning out to these different places while she's yelling.Anyway, my description of this is probably as funny as the cartoon itself.
However, that would be an effort and after seeing this drug induced nonsense I decided that this movie was not worth any further effort on my part.
A lot of people say that this movie is not at all as good as the original first movie.
Well, I would certainly hope not since this movie is BAD and clearly geared towards hippies that survived into the 70's dreaming of a comeback and wannabe drug addicts.
The best thing that can be said about this movie is that it is fairly short, only some 70+ minutes, thank god.I cannot say that I am sorry for watching it since it was a bit of life experience (I have not seen the original and I only knew that Fritz the Cat was a bit of a cult thing when I sat down to watch this one) and, as we all know, a lot of life experiences are not that pleasant.
However I am still in a bit of shock knowing that some people actually liked this depraved trash.Even though the general concensus seems to be that the original movie was better I do not think I will make much of an effort trying to watch it.
An R-rated animated film has Fritz (a cat) being told off endlessly by his wife about his drug habit, being on welfare, being bad in bed etc etc.
The film never stops moving, the animation is very good but there's no real story.
And the racial issues are handled quite offensively (for black and white) and are VERY 70s.Not really worth your time.
"Fritz the Cat" was better..
It is always a good idea to watch something all the way through before writing about it.This film has some excellent sideways kicks at society and anybody who does not have the education to understand or concentration span should switch off after ten minutes.BTW.
To apply that word boob to a woman`s body is sexist and what one would probably expect from a redneck.This film does not have the cutting edge of the original and although some very good moments does tend to lose its way.
However, these two films were landmarks and the satire has not been equaled via cartoon until South Park arrived..
You'd have to be pretty stoned to enjoy the Nine Lives of Fritz the Cat. Besides the dreadful animation, the non-stories and the incredibly dated dialogue, the (arguably?) racist depictions of African Americans are incredibly offensive.
I enjoyed Fritz the Cat and was all for a sequel, and I got a pretty good film.
While I loved the unique look of Fritz the Cat, the animation here is really good here as well, even more colourful and vibrant than before.
The script is witty and funny, the soundtrack is hip and cool, the voice acting is good and Fritz still has both his hypocrisy and likability.
Still, it is a pretty good film.
I really liked the first installment of Fritz, but this one was just mediocre in comparison.
The few pluses I got out of this film is I really like the animation style of all the characters, and the settings.
Obviously effort and time was put into it on that side of the equation, so that is why I give The Nine Lives of Fritz the Cat a 4 out of 10..
The Nine Lives of Fritz the Cat succeeds in being offensive, but that's about all it does.
Unlike the South Park movie, which came out in 99 and had a lot of comparisons to the Fritz the cat serious, Nine lives is neither smart nor funny.
Rated R for Language,Drug Use,Sexuality,Nudity and Some Strong Violence.I had heard about the Fritz The Cat movies and wanted to see them.I haven't read the original comics or seen the first Fritz The Cat film.So I saw this one today and I was a bit disappointed.It was not very funny though there were some funny parts,and it was a bit boring.The animation was pretty good for its time and the storyline is decent.There are some very trippy scenes in this movie and I imagine that this movie would be fun to watch while high.Anyway I heard the first film took place in the 1960's.This one takes place in the 1970's.Fritz now has a wife and kid.His wife yells at him because he does nothing and Fritz just reminisces about his eight lives(eight because Crumb the creator of the comics killed Fritz off in the final comic).In his eight lives he is an astronaut,a nazi,a messenger and just normal "Fritz".The film has some funny scenes and was probably good for its time but I think its dated as of today and I find this film just mediocre..
This movie has some really cool art, cool music and can be very funny at times, but it has the problem of an overuse of sex and sexist jokes (most of them not funny at all).I find this movie like watching a Kevin Smith comedy, with cartoon characters and lots more of raunchy jokes.I'll give it ** out of *****.
I had previously seen the first movie, "Fritz the Cat", but was not impressed.
Growing up in the seventies (I turned eighteen and graduated High School the same year as this release), I was extremely aware of most of the social problems this film attempted to address: bigotry, racism, war, sexuality, drugs, and the "What am I going to do with my life?" syndrome that affected quite a few of us at this time.
It's not all good, and there are those that will find it too basic on the whole, and I'm not going to claim that they're wrong; I don't go for a lot of drawn(by hand or computer) films.
The original Fritz the Cat was a decent adaptation of the infamous art of Robert Crumb; this, however, is like fan fiction-made worse by the fact that neither Crumb or Bakshi, the director of the first, were involved.
The only thing that this film offers that even comes close to good is the music of Tom Scott and the L.A. Express, and to be fair, there's not much of it..
Fritz, you old alley cat you!.
This is the sequel to the 1972 cult classic FRITZ the CAT.
Fritz lights up a joint and thinks back about his wild and swinging life in the 1960's.
He's a literal Schrodinger's Cat. Robert Crumb hated the movie version of "Fritz The Cat" so much he ended the comic by killing Fritz, but they made a sequel anyway.
This movie features Fritz imagining eight other lives while being yelled at by his wife.
In a movie that's only 77 minutes long, that's a big problem.
This is the last ever appearance of Fritz the Cat in any media.
I was always intrigued by the orange cat and tall mouse like woman that appeared on the poster and it turns out neither of them are even in the movie.
The animation wasn't bad, although incredibly cheap as they used greenscreen shots of Fritz dancing as filler.
However, the 1972 Fritz the Cat film was crude and racist because it was making a statement on society at the time, as well as the hippie lifestyle.
It certainly doesn't seem to be reflecting any time period of society, although, if Fritz' new obese wife had a cell phone and lived in a trailer, it could easily pass off as reflecting the jogging pants wearing, Wal-Mart, texting trailer trash people of today.There were some scenes that made absolutely no sense at all, and the only scene I thought was remotely funny was the one where Fritz and the businessman in the space helmet are in the truck.
Duke doesn't even have the same sounding voice as he did in the first one.I wouldn't recommend this film, just stick with the first one, you're probably better off not seeing this..
Crumb and his creation, Fritz, should be beyond getting offended by them.
The film pulls no punches in showing the lives of an oversexed stoner whose only real ambition is to keep the welfare checks coming in and lay as much tail as possible.Layered with social commentary and satire, it still manages to avoid being preach or heavy-handed, since the film makes it clear that everybody's got their own hangups, and nobody's really the best or the worst.I think the best satire in the movie comes from Fritz's flashforward to his life as a messenger boy in a future America where New Jersey has been ceded to the 'crows'.
I'm pretty sure the American president in that episode is supposed to be Kissinger; the accent and face fit, but I never knew him to be a golf fetishist.I loved the scene between Fritz and God (you know: the guy who lives in the trash can).Not a cartoon for the kiddies or the small minds, so you've been warned..
Nine Live of Fritz the Cat is about a Cat named Fritz who is trying to get away from life of being married and having kids.
This movie was definitely ahead of it's time in 1974.
I don't think there were many animated films in the 1970's that were even Rated R.
This movie is pretty trippy.This movie deals with a lot of heavy topics such as racism and drug use.
There is scene where the black people are suppose to be crows and they do use the N word at least 2-3 times.
If you don't like crude humor you probably won't like this movie.I thought this was a pretty good movie.
I liked many of the scenes in the movie.
There are a few parts that I didn't like in the movie.
|
tt1712561
|
Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands
|
=== Setting ===
The Forgotten Sands returns to the storyline established by Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, and concluded by Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones. On December 14, 2009, Ubisoft UK released the first details of the story on their official video portal.
The game takes place in the seven-year gap between Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time and Prince of Persia: Warrior Within. The Prince character is supposed to be a cross between the character models in these two games. He is again voiced by Yuri Lowenthal.
=== Plot ===
Note: This plot is the one found in the PS3, Xbox 360 and PC versions of the game.
The Prince is riding through a desert on his horse, on a quest to see his brother, Malik, and learn about leadership from him. When the Prince arrives at Malik's kingdom, he finds it under attack by an army which is attempting to breach the treasure vaults for a great power known as "Solomon's Army". The Prince charges in to the city, and tracks Malik to the treasure vaults. Here, Malik says that he is fighting a losing battle and proposes to rely on a last resort or be forced to retreat. The Prince strongly objects, but Malik releases Solomon's Army using a magical seal. Solomon's Army is an assortment of different creatures, all made of sand. The Prince and Malik both manage to obtain halves of the seal used to keep the army contained, protecting them from being turned into sand statues, which is the fate of the rest of the kingdom.
Malik is separated from the Prince, who finds a portal to the domain of Razia, a Djinn of the Marid race. Razia tells the Prince that the only way to re-imprison Solomon's Army is to reunite both halves of the seal. Razia gives the Prince special powers and sends him to find Malik, and the other half of the seal. When the Prince finds Malik, he is not interested in stopping Solomon's Army, but instead wants to destroy it and use its power to become a more powerful leader. This is explained by Razia: whereas the Prince is using the power gifted to him by Razia, Malik is using power taken directly from those he defeats. The Army's sand is gradually affecting his mind, making him susceptible to Ratash's influence. The Prince again sets out to find Malik, but this time to forcibly take his half of the seal. When he finds him, Malik is stronger and manages to escape. Pursuing Malik again, the Prince finds Ratash, Ifrit leader of the Army, searching for the seal. After the Prince outruns him, he concludes Ratash must now be chasing Malik, and so sets out to aid him. The Prince arrives in the throne room to find Malik and Ratash fighting, and he aids Malik. The Prince and Malik seem to kill Ratash, and Malik absorbs his power, shattering his half of the seal. Malik then runs off, seemingly in a hysterical fit, using some of Ratash's powers to escape.
The Prince pursues him, and again finds Razia. Razia explains that Ratash cannot be killed by any ordinary sword, and that what actually happened was quite different from what the Prince saw: Ratash has actually killed Malik, and possessed his body. The Prince doesn't believe this, and sets out to find the Djinn Sword, hidden in the ancient city of Rekem, which Razia says can kill Ratash. Along the way, the Prince chases Malik, now being used by Ratash to retake the Ifrit's original form. The Prince loses a battle to Ratash and, convinced his brother is truly dead, finds the Djinn Sword. Razia soon bonds with the sword, giving it the power needed to destroy Ratash. The Prince again searches for Ratash. When he finds him, Ratash is now gigantic, literally fed by the sandstorm which has come over the palace. The Prince uses the sword to kill Ratash, and, when the sandstorm subsides, he finds Malik dying. Malik says to tell their father that Prince will be as mighty a leader as Solomon, then dies. In an epilogue, the Prince tells of how he took the sword back to Rekem, where he thought Razia would want to rest, and how he must now set out to inform his father of Malik's death.
=== Characters ===
The Prince: Fresh from his adventures in Azad, the prince is now stuck in a new epic adventure
Malik: The Prince's older brother, who unwisely releases the Sand army to save his kingdom
Razia: A mysterious woman and queen of the Marid, who endows the prince with control over water and time
King Solomon: The ruler of the whole empire, and ally to Razia
Ratash: The main antagonist, an Ifrit who attacks Malik's Kingdom
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Wait, what is this grainy stuff I'm walking on, again?. At some point(I have no idea where this fits into the Sands of Time trilogy, since it has none of the titular time powers, but it must be after the first and before the second, and that makes no sense as there's no mention of the Dahaka... anyway, it's the same dude), the Prince(who's back to incessantly whining) goes out in search of a kingdom to call home. He's led to the cursed ruins(complete with a trapped princess) of one(that he has to clean up before he could possibly claim it... I guess because otherwise, there'd be no game) by the genie(or djann... a female djinn; and no, I hadn't heard that word, either; no three wishes thing though, she's just his sidekick throughout, granting him magic powers that I'll describe later) Zahra(who a friend of yours can join in for co-op to play as... then again, it's really "meh" what they'll get to do, so you may not be doing it much), who enjoys long walks along lethal areas, being called by her name and going into stone statues and asking Prince to kiss her(I guess making up for the fact that her lips never move... she also badly needs to start paying her hairdresses to get those scissors out, she's liable to slip in it... or would be, if she weren't flying all the time). The theme this time around is plants, and it's just as lame as it sounds. This has by far the least memorable enemies(and little versatility), though the scenery sometimes makes up for it with breathtaking scope(and outer space! Sort of). You'll go through some areas more than once, similar to Warrior Within. Thankfully the level design is reasonable(so it isn't too bad), if there are few challenging spots, especially early on, and the puzzles don't get tough until late. This has an appropriate length, around the same as the other recent ones. The visual FX are pretty simple(a *lot* of glowy crap, it seems like they went through the entire color pallet on that one), and this even cannibalizes the "eerie life-up" area of SoT, and it's far less effective here. This has about the same game-play as worked in the others(one great thing is that we get a white trailing line showing if you can make a manoeuvre and the like... they should have implemented this way sooner; they do streamline the crap out of this, and it takes away a lot of danger), if the fighting(with only one sword at a time now... and he holds it backhandedly, I guess to show off) is slower(...why? It's also less like a speedy chess match now... and awkward, for no reason; you do still "enter" combat, and the amount is appropriate; they also seem to eliminate a lot of moves; and the Gauntlet punching(from the '08 one that I have not tried yet), for breaking the opponent's block, is largely useless), they try to epic the heck out of the usual jumps(that you can do all the time(and it now doubles as special action)... the roll got its own key, a hard to reach one) and such(slow-motion? In fantasy?). What adds to it, and makes the acrobatic aspect that is key to these seem fresh anew(quite an accomplishment) is the Creation Powers. Pointing the Wii-Mote(note that this console version appears to be completely different from the one for the others) at a wall and you can create a hook to grab and climb by or at the floor and you can create a tornado to hurl you upwards, and if you press the button mid-air, you can create a sphere to float in. They won't move from where you activate them, and you can only do one of each at a time, so you still have to use the path they want you to... if you can occasionally customize the exact approach. This does get to be fun, exciting and intense, and all in all, if you enjoy these(I can't get enough of them), you'll want to get this one, too. There's a hint system that can come in handy(some are really "duh"). The camera can really screw you over, you can partially turn and then it'll reset it automatically, and it'd be nice if it showed you if you'd die from going over a ledge or if there's something down there for you. Panoramic view is excessively distant. There's a retro 2D portion(also one map(there are a handful, they vary in quality) that is kind of cool, one of the surprisingly few and unremarkable unlockables... only four videos, and all about animation?), it's nowhere near as good as the experience in the old and feels thrown in. This comes with either the original '89 one or the '92 re-release(the cover and the disc disagree on the matter, and I haven't gotten access to it yet). There are a couple of bosses and you tend to go up against them at least twice, and you dodge a bunch then slash, rinse and repeat. The final one is the easiest since the one from the '03 one, and I honestly wonder if there was some last minute change or decision(there's only one difficulty setting, further lowering the replayability). This only has one "push this, gesture this way at this time" bit, reminding us how awesome those are(well, this one is no big deal to complete... at least they learned their lesson from Rival Swords) and making us wish it wasn't the only one in this. You can "cheat" your way past some traps. There are bugs in this, if they tend to be minor. AI is poor(I've seen them kill themselves on "death zones"). The ending is... strange, if OK enough of a conclusion(the twist is obvious right off the bat). There is disturbing content and mild violence(no blood, I think) in this. I recommend this to anyone who loves these(if you don't, you may be disappointed), if it could be a bit better. 7/10
|
tt0210075
|
Girlfight
|
Diana Guzman is a Brooklyn teenager whose hot temper gets her into trouble at school as she repeatedly starts fights with other students. Her frustration stems from her unhappy home life; she lives in a public housing estate with her brother Tiny and their single father, Sandro. Sandro pays for Tiny's boxing training in hopes of his becoming a professional boxer, although Tiny would prefer to be an artist.
After visiting Tiny's gym and intervening in a spar to defend him, Diana asks the trainers to let her box, too. She is told she can train there, but not compete in actual fights. When she learns that she cannot afford coaching from Tiny's trainer, Hector Soto, she asks her father for an allowance but he tells her to get a job. She resorts to stealing his money instead and returns to the gym, where Hector begins to teach her the basics of boxing.
Diana's first spar is with Adrian Sturges, whom she later meets again when Hector takes her to a professional fight. Adrian invites Diana to dinner after the fight and kisses her after walking her home. One night after a spar which gave Diana a black eye, Sandro sees Diana and Adrian together and confronts her, assuming that she is in an abusive relationship. She storms out of the apartment and spends the night with Adrian. When he asks about her parents, she reveals that her mother committed suicide several years ago. When Diana returns to her apartment, Tiny offers to give up boxing so that she can use the coaching money he gets from their father.
Diana later goes to Hector's birthday party, but leaves when she sees Adrian getting friendly with his ex-girlfriend. When Diana and Adrian spar at their next session in the gym, he is reluctant to hit her, and she leaves before he can talk to her. Diana's first amateur match is scheduled against another girl, but when her opponent pulls out she ends up fighting a man, Ray Cortez. Sandro arrives in the middle of the fight to see the match end in Ray's disqualification for illegal shoving. When Diana arrives home, Sandro berates her for looking like a loser. She retaliates by beating him to the floor and accuses him of abusing her mother to the point of suicide.
After weeks of rigorous training, Diana wins another amateur fight, this time against a girl, Ricki Stiles. Although Diana has accepted Adrian's apology, tensions rise between them again when they learn that they both have advanced to the finals in their division to fight each other. Adrian refuses to fight a girl and Diana struggles to convince him to view her as a legitimate opponent. He turns up for the fight on the day, however, and after an even match, Diana wins with a unanimous decision by the judges. After the fight, Adrian fears that he has lost Diana's respect, but she tells him she respects him even more for fighting her, and they reconcile.
|
dramatic, violence, inspiring
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0143068
|
Toonsylvania
|
A typical episode of Toonsylvania starts with a cartoon series called "Frankenstein" (a parody of Mary Shelley's novel of the same name), about the adventures of Dr. Frankenstein (voiced by David Warner), his assistant Igor (voiced by Wayne Knight) who always sets out to prove that he's an genius like his master, and their dim-witted Frankenstein Monster known as Phil (voiced by Brad Garrett). Before the second cartoon, there is an animated vignette where Igor is on the couch with Phil and tries to fix the TV remote, but in every episode there's a new problem with it (a running gag akin to the couch gags seen on The Simpsons).
After that, there is a cartoon series called "Night of the Living Fred", about a family of zombies. This segment was created by cartoonist Mike Peters. Sometimes, a parody of a B-list horror movie would air instead of a "Night of the Living Fred" cartoon.
After that is a short segment called "Igor's Science Minute", where Igor gives a science lesson (be it a musical piece or a spoken piece) that always ends in disaster.
The final segment is "Melissa Screetch's Morbid Morals", where Phil the Frankenstein monster does something bad and Igor punishes him by reading a horror tale involving a bratty girl named Melissa Screetch (voiced by Nancy Cartwright) who doesn't heed the warnings of adults (usually given by her mother) and suffers the consequences one way or the other for it.
=== Second season changes ===
In season 2, Bill Kopp and Jeff DeGrandis left the show and were replaced by Paul Rugg. The series' format changed into more of a sitcom style, with Igor, Dr. Frankenstein and Phil interacting with a variety of new characters, including a snooping next-door neighbor Seth Tuber (voiced by Jonathan Harris), who was based on Norman Bates from Psycho. He interacted with his "immobile" mother by putting his hand over his mouth and talking into it. There was also a typical Transylvanian angry mob that was in fact a cheerful group of Beatles-esque hipsters. Most of these new characters were voiced by Paul Rugg, who also improvised many of their lines.
The only other backup segments to re-materialize in season two were the B-movie parodies (though some episodes of "Night of the Living Fred" aired) and Melissa Screetch in a new segment called "The Melissa Screetch Show". Whenever Melissa was disappointed with a friend or a family member, she'd go home and cover herself under her bedsheets where she pretended to host a show. She then had her transgressor on as a guest star and often did away with them in an ironic manner.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt4935334
|
Southbound
|
Five interlocking tales of terror follow the fates of a group of weary travellers who confront their worst nightmares and darkest secrets on a desolate stretch of desert highway.
The film unfolds in an endless loop through purgatory that plays out chronologically over the course of one never-ending day.
=== The Way Out ===
Directed by Radio Silence
Written by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin
Mitch (Chad Villella) and Jack (Matt Bettinelli-Olpin) are on the run from mysterious floating creatures. Filled with remorse, Mitch looks at a photograph of his daughter Katherine as they drive down a nameless highway. Out in the desert, Mitch sees the creatures stalking them but does not tell Jack. In desperation, the pair pulls up to a run-down gas station. Inside, the men witness strange events as the creatures stalk them from afar. As Mitch and Jack attempt to escape, they pull up to the same gas station further down the road. Jack tries to leave as the creatures close in on the pair, and is killed. Mitch, believing that this is the fate he deserves, refuses to leave and instead follows the creatures to a nearby motel. He enters room 6255 and finds himself in a home that he finds familiar. Hearing the sound of disembodied laughter, Mitch follows the sounds and finds an apparition of his daughter Katherine, who begs for his help. As he moves closer to his daughter, however, she continues to run away. Mitch is trapped in the hallway of the house, tormented until death by the regret he was not able to help his daughter, while the creatures oversee his punishment.
=== Siren ===
Directed by Roxanne Benjamin
Written by Roxanne Benjamin & Susan Burke
At the same motel are Sadie (Fabianne Therese), Ava (Hannah Marks), and Kim (Nathalie Love), traveling musicians in a band called The White Tights. Leaving the motel, their van's tire goes flat and they are forced to pull over. Stranded in the middle of the desert, they are picked up by a friendly, eccentric couple (Susan Burke and Davey Johnson). In the backseat of their car, Sadie sees a bear trap. The band is taken to the couple's house further down the road. Inside, the band is shown to their room; Sadie hears the woman mention their late friend Alex, but neither Ava nor Kim seem to notice. At dinner with the Kensingtons (Anessa Ramsey and Dana Gould), who live nearby with twin sons, they are served a meal of burnt meatloaf; Sadie, a vegetarian, politely declines. After dinner, Kim begins to blame Sadie for Alex's death, whereupon both Ava and Kim suddenly begin vomiting a black substance. Sadie gets help and the people in the house give Ava and Kim a white liquid medicine to drink. Sadie confronts her friends for their strange behavior and tries to persuade them to leave; they refuse, in a trance, and decide to stay the night at the house. That night, Sadie has a nightmare of Alex being killed in a car accident. Waking up in the middle of the night, Ava and Kim are gone. She finds them outside around a bonfire, participating in a strange cult ritual with the others in the house. Investigating from the brush nearby, Sadie's foot becomes caught in the bear trap seen in the couple's car the day before. Hearing the commotion, Ava and Kim give chase as Sadie escapes the trap and moves into a nearby shed; here, she is accosted by an apparition of Alex. Terrified, Sadie runs out into the road and hails an approaching car for help.
In the road behind her, one of the floating enigmatic creatures can be seen watching Sadie.
=== The Accident ===
Directed by David Bruckner
Written by David Bruckner
The driver of the car, Lucas (Mather Zickel), talks to his wife Claire on the phone. Distracted, he does not see Sadie and she is hit by his car. Lucas exits the car and sees Sadie lying on the ground, critically injured, and calls 911; however, he is unable to tell the dispatcher where he is. A certified EMT gets on the line to help. The voices of the dispatcher and the EMT tell Lucas to drive Sadie to a nearby town, where he finds a medical facility. Entering the facility, he finds it completely abandoned; after searching for help, the dispatcher opts to guide Lucas through performing lifesaving surgery; a third voice, that of a doctor, gets on the line. The surgery eventually fails, and Sadie dies; the voices begin to laugh at Lucas, and he hangs up. He tries to escape the hospital but finds that all doors are locked. Shortly after, his phone rings again; the dispatchers persuade Lucas to talk about the incident. They agree that Lucas did not deserve this, and promptly tell him that he can leave. They mysteriously provide him with access to clean clothes and a new car, so it will be as though nothing happened. Lucas, hesitant to leave, is reassured that he will not need to worry about Sadie's death. He leaves the facility, enters the car, and drives away.
As he does, one of the floating creatures can be seen on the edge of the road overseeing the events.
=== Jailbreak ===
Directed by Patrick Horvath
Written by Dallas Hallam & Patrick Horvath
Sandy (Maria Olsen), the dispatcher on the phone with Lucas, watches him drive away from a nearby payphone. She hangs up, and walks into a bar named The Trap; across the parking lot, Danny (David Yow) gets out of his car. Inside, the bartender Al (Matt Peters) reprimands Sandy for leaving the door open. An argument ensues between the two and Warren (Tyler Tuione), another patron in the bar. Danny barges in with a shotgun, and demands to know the location of his sister. Warren, revealed to be a demon, cuts a gash into Danny's back; Danny blows off Warren's clawed hand with the shotgun. Danny takes Al hostage and forces him to drive to his sister's location: the back room of an ice cream parlor. There are demons Danny cannot see closing in on him as Al leads him through a secret entrance into a hidden room. Inside the room, he finds his sister Jesse (Tipper Newton) applying a tattoo to a patron's back. Danny tells Jesse that he has come to rescue her; she tells him that she is there by choice, and refuses to leave. Danny kills Al and kidnaps his sister, carrying her to his car. The locals, all demons, chase Danny as he drives away. Coming to a pause before a rough dead end, Jesse begs Danny not to go off the road; Danny, with the locals in pursuit, decides he has no other option. The car shakes violently as the pair drive out into the desert, and eventually breaks down. Jesse reveals that she killed their parents, and that she deserves to live in the town. The demons pull Danny out of the car; Jesse leaves him behind and drives away. She smiles and turns on the radio.
As she drives, one of the floating creatures can be seen in the moonlight overseeing Jesse's plight.
=== The Way In ===
Directed by Radio Silence
Written by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin
Jem (Hassie Harrison) exits the bathroom at Freez'n Over and sees Jessie walk back to the secret door. Jem notices her and then meets her parents, Cait and Daryl (Kate Beahan and Gerald Downey), to finish their food. Jem is going to college and this is their last weekend together before she leaves. As they leave Freez'n Over someone in the parking lot watches them get into their car and drive to their vacation house. They are about to have dinner when three masked men break into their vacation house. Daryl and Cait are caught while Jem hides. Daryl realizes that he knows who the men are and what they want, and begs them to spare his family. One of the men whispers to Cait what Daryl did and she is astonished at her husband's secret. The same man then says "eye for an eye" and kills her in front of her husband. Jem then attacks one of the men with a knife. Surprisingly, the other two tell her to leave. She runs away and they kill Daryl. As he is dying, the man in the mask holds up the photograph of Katherine that Mitch was looking at in The Way Out to be the last thing he ever sees. After Daryl is dead, they remove their masks and they are recognizable as Mitch and Jack. As they are leaving, Jem returns and fights back. She injures them badly but when she’s about to escape, Mitch accidentally kills her. The men feel guilty because they went too far, but it's too late. Outside, the ground to hell opens up as the enigmatic floating creatures from below come through the dead bodies to drag the intruders down to hell. The men try to escape but Shane is dragged down by the tentacles from hell. As the ground behind them continues to crumble, Mitch and Jack drive away.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0037206
|
Raiders of Ghost City
|
At the height of the Civil War, a gang of supposed Confederates, headed by Alex Morel, raid all gold shipments from Oro Grande, California, bound for Washington. Captain Steve Clark is recognized as a Union Secret Service agent by Morel's accomplice Trina Dessard, along with his friend Idaho Jones, is ambushed in the baggage car and sent to almost certain death when the car is un-coupled and plunges down the mountainside.
Leaping to safety, Idaho and Steve report to Colonel Sewell in Oro Grande, and Idaho introduces himself as a Wells Fargo detective to Cathy Haines the Oro Grande company agent. Steve and Idaho learn that the Morel raiders are only posing as Confederates, and their headquarters are at Morel's "Golden Eagle" saloon. He also discovers that members of the gang use old European coins with the date "1752" as identification.
In a raid on the hideout, Steve's brother Jim is killed by the gang. The next victim is Confederate Army Captain Clay Randolph who has discovered that Morel is connected with a group of Prussian spies who have been using the stolen gold to initially finance Prussia's wars but later to buy Alaska from the Russian Empire as a "club over Canada"; hed gives Steve a clue before he dies. The date 1752 of the recognition coins is explained as the date of Frederick the Great's Testament that supposedly gave instructions how Prussia would take over the world.
The clue leads Steve to a San Francisco dive owned by Abel Rackerby, who thinking he has Steve in his power, exposes the ring's activities and operation methods. Aided by the San Francisco Secret Service, Steve escapes and returns to Oro Grande where he and Idaho round up the spies.
|
violence, mystery
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0057952
|
Circus World
|
Matt Masters (John Wayne), a Wild West circus star in the mold of Buffalo Bill Cody, bought a bankrupt circus in 1885 and successfully rebuilt it into a combination three ring and Wild West extravaganza, mixing Wild West Show acts with conventional circus acts in a winning combination. He has successfully toured the United States for more than a decade. Now that the century is about to turn, he wants to take his show to Europe.
His Circus Boss, Cap Carson (Lloyd Nolan), is against taking the show across the Atlantic. He maintains that Europe is bad luck for American circuses. He also calls Matt on his reason for making a European tour: Masters wants to find the lost great love of his life, Lili Alfredo (Rita Hayworth), and figures that this tour will smoke her out if for no other reason than to see her child, Toni Alfredo (Claudia Cardinale), Masters' adopted daughter. One of his Western stars and wannabe-partner, Steve McCabe (John Smith), also attempts to dissuade Masters, but to no avail. Masters buys a freighter, renames her the Circus Maximus, and the show sails for Europe.
At Barcelona, the first port of call, the Circus Maximus capsizes at the pier and puts the show in the toilet. Masters has to release most of his performers, board out his animals, and go back to performing an act for the Ed Purdy Wild West Show, a staple on the European circus circuit. Down but not out, Masters doesn't waste the disaster. "While touring Europe at Ed Purdy's expense," as Masters puts it, he, Cap, Steve and Toni scout acts that will enable Masters to relaunch the Matt Masters Circus bigger and better than ever.
His first new hire is Tojo the Clown and the Wire-Dancing Ballerina (Richard Conte and Katharyna respectively). They have a unique act; Tojo is dressed as a clown but walks the high wire over a cage full of lions while coaching the Ballerina (his niece Giovanna) as she dances on a wire on the ground. Backstage, Masters discovers that Tojo is an old acquaintance — Aldo Alfredo, brother-in-law of his lost love Lili Alfredo. Despite his reservations at hiring a possible enemy Masters takes the act on and neither he nor Aldo admit to Toni, who is Aldo's niece, that they have met before; or that Tojo the Clown is her uncle. Aldo assures Matt that the vendetta is over, and Giovanna begins training for the ballerina act she will perform on the high wire.
His second new act is Emile, a French animal trainer who has a spectacular act involving lions who lie down on him in the ring. Masters offers to take him on if he will switch from lions to tigers (Masters has many tigers but few lions). The trainer is adamant that he does not want to change to working with tigers; his wife persuades him to do so. By the time the circus is ready to re-launch, Emile has so adapted to working with a different variety of big cat that when a couple become ill, he demands that Masters hire a doctor for "HIS tigers."
The third addition to the performers' roster is Margo Angeli, an artist of the high trapeze, coincidentally where Toni wants to work instead of in the Wild West show or as part of Clown Alley, where Matt has her working. In reality, Margo is the vanished Lili Alfredo, haunted by the guilt of having been caught up in a love triangle, blaming herself for the death of her flyer husband who had fallen — or did he miss Aldo's catch on purpose after learning he was part of a love triangle? She had run away from the world of the circus and kept on running, finding solace first in the Church and then in the bottle.
As Masters had hoped, the lure of her daughter brought Lili out of hiding. She speaks to her daughter during a performance of Ed Purdy's Wild West Show without identifying herself, and Masters spots her. The two have an intense confrontation in a bar, ending with Masters slamming a full bottle of brandy down in front of Lili and telling her that she needs to decide whether the booze or her child is more important to her; but that if she doesn't pull herself together, as far as he's concerned she is dead to him. Lili quits drinking and goes into training to seek a position in the new Matt Masters Circus, then in winter quarters near Madrid.
Meanwhile, Toni has fallen for Steve and he for her, despite a difference in their ages of at least a decade. Matt has to come to terms with the fact that his adopted little girl is a woman grown, with a mind of her own. "Margo's" reappearance helps, and she is secretly amused by Toni's attempts to pair her off with Matt. Matt's doing pretty well on his own, as Toni observes with pleasure. She loves her adopted father and wants him to be happy.
Inevitably, the truth comes out. The afternoon of the rehearsal for the first show of the circus season in Vienna, with Masters demanding of his performers the same show they will put on that evening, Toni finds a poster of The Flying Alfredos in her wagon living quarters with "Suicide" daubed on it in red. She also finds a newspaper clipping of the Flying Alfredos that allows her to identify "Margo" as her mother. There is a stormy confrontation with many passionate, hateful words on Toni's part between her, Lili and Matt; and Matt has to tell her that he was the second man in the love triangle. Toni curses both of them and runs out, just before a bugle call summons the show to Dress Rehearsal.
The rehearsal opens to empty seats with Grand Parade, with the performers marching in behind the flags of the nations whose citizens are in the show: the United States, Great Britain, France, Imperial Germany, Switzerland, Iceland, Sweden, Italy, and many more. Partway through Grand Parade, a fire breaks out in Wardrobe and spreads to the Big Top. Fast action by Lili, Matt, Steve, Toni, Cap and Aldo prevents injury to the circus performers and manages to save about half of the tent from the flames. The one positive thing to come out of the fire is a rapprochement between Toni and Lili.
Matt somehow obtains permission from the Emperor to set up the circus in the grounds of the Imperial Palace. The show is a smash success, with a new act headlining: Lili and Toni Alfredo performing a swing-over routine fifty feet in the air. Ultimately Matt, Lili, Toni, and Matt's new partner and Toni's new fiancé, Steve, are shown taking bows to the applause of the people and the Crown.
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Too bad the old champ wasn't there that day or it would have been a perfect Sunday.Seeing it now on a formatted VHS the awesomeness of the spectacle during the scenes of the circus fires and the capsized ship in the harbor is really lost.
It's quite an eyeful and should only be scene in theaters.And the film would be revived, but we have a subdued John Wayne here and it's not for the better.
Read the Capra autobiography to find out exactly what they were, but they weren't fully fixed in the final product by director Henry Hathaway who later piloted the Duke to his Oscar in True Grit.John Wayne was a guy who was usually very careful to give the public the Duke they expected.
The people went to see John Wayne, but they didn't get their money's worth.Pity because it would have been great to see John Wayne with Rita Hayworth in a great film.
That couldn't have happened when they were younger because of Rita's contract with Columbia pictures and Wayne's personal boycotting of that studio because of his dislike for Harry Cohn.
That story I won't go into.Rita Hayworth who doesn't enter into the film until almost halfway through is fine as Wayne's lost love.
Lloyd Nolan as Wayne's sidekick is always good.Richard Conte is Hayworth's brother-in-law and Cardinale's uncle.
This fine actor is wasted here in a part that either was badly written or left on the cutting room floor.John Smith was a Wayne protégé of sorts, Wayne gave him an early break in The High and the Mighty which he produced.
Smith went on to star in the Laramie TV series and on completion of that he was cast opposite Cardinale, probably at Wayne's insistence.
Slow moving and overlong film upon circus world with the great John Wayne.
The movie talks about a circus employer (a proprietor beset by problems called Matt Masters well played by John Wayne who was suffering from the early stages of lung cancer) who decides to take his show on a European tour along with his fostered daughter (a gorgeous Claudia Cardinale) and her lover (John Smith) .
Meanwhile , the Circus owner searches for the mother of his adopted daughter , who disappeared years before , she is a trapeze artiste (a veteran Rita Hayworth) who bears a dark secret that originates the drama .In the picture there is a love story , circus show , melodrama in which protagonists are caught in emotional conflicts , but it isn't fast movement and that's why it is a little boring and dreary .
Mille with Charlton Heston resulted to be much better and obtained several Oscars , while ¨Circus world¨ , a typical John Wayne film , was a real flop and failed in the box office and didn't achieve success at nowhere .
In spite of the numerous and famous screenwriters : Ben Hetch's last film , Philip Jordan Nicholas Ray and James Edward Grant (who John Wayne insisted to be brought to rewrite it) , the plot is confusing and embarrassing .
The picture finished to sink the Samuel Bronston's empire along with ¨The fall of the Roman Empire¨ because of both movies didn't make money .
Support cast is frankly good , such as : Rita Hayworth , John Smith , Richard Conte , Jose Maria Caffarel , Milles Malleson and Lloyd Nolan replaced David Niven who was originally cast as Cap Carson .
The movie was regularly directed by Henry Hathaway , though Frank Capra began this project but he turned it down due to he wanted to use his own script .
Big John Wayne played for Hathaway various films as ¨The sons of Katie Elder (65), ¨Circus World (64) ¨ certainly not one of his memorable movies , ¨How the west was won (62) ¨, ¨ North to Alaska (60)¨ , but his greatest hit smash was ¨True grit (69)¨ in which Wayne won his only Academy Award .
Although Hathaway was a highly successful and reliable director film-making within the Hollywood studio system , his work has received little consideration from reviewers .
The motion picture will appeal to John Wayne and circus fans .
Some sources claim Samuel Bronston's "Circus World" was filmed in Cinerama.
That is, unless you consider the fact it contributed to the collapse of producer Samuel Bronston's short-lived film empire to be a good thing.It, along with its' sister 1964 Bronston mega-production, "The Fall of The Roman Empire", served to sink the producer's four year Spanish production company and end his fairly short career as a film mogul.
As far as John Wayne go, The Magnificent Showman is not among the best like The Searchers, Fort Apache and The Quiet Man. But he has also done worse in his career as seen(in my opinion that is) with The Conqueror, Brannigan and The Green Berets.
There are also some scenes that hold up well and entertain, particularly worth of note are the climatic fire and the capsizing of the circus ship, both scenes are full of excitement and tension.The Magnificent Showman was begun as Circus World, directed by Frank Capra.
And while I wasn't that impressed really with the acting, two performances do stand out- Rita Hayworth and Claudia Cardinale.
Just for the record, I think Cardinale just about wins the contest.These aside, I was divided personally on the performance of John Wayne.
However, for my liking his delivery of the lines seemed rather stiff and there were times where I couldn't help thinking he was too old for the role.The film is too long, at 133 minutes it is very lengthy.
"Circus World" (1964), a grandiose Cinerama film directed by a Hollywood veteran Henry Hathaway, is a paradoxical case.
The story is very simple (an untold past tragedy casts its shadow on the present as a circus director, played by John Wayne, tries to create a successful show in Europe where he is reunited by his former lover, played by Rita Hayworth), but there's more than that to the film.By this I do not mean that Hathaway had elaborated a subtle subtext to the film in question or anything like that.
First of all, "Circus World" is a film directed, written, and starred by old Hollywood legends.
"Circus World", on the other hand, is as though a posthumous legacy, in a somewhat similar sense as "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" (1961).
Moreover, the film takes place in the early 20th century and dives into the nostalgic world of the circus which often represents a carefree existence of play and work (closely studied in the film of Federico Fellini, for one).
While the historical setting seems to echo the film's own production time in this sense (reminiscing about the good old days before the world wars, semi-analogous to the good old days of Hollywood), the film's melancholic tone is further enhanced by the fates of its leading stars.
It is well-known that "Circus World" was not only the last film John Wayne made before his lung cancer operation but also the first film where Hayworth's alleged Alzheimer's disease started acting up, causing numerous problems with production.
It is as if everyone involved had been through their best days, inevitably casting an impact on the quality of the film in question as well, but still came together to perform in the wild circus world.
Worth seeing for the odd pairing of John Wayne and Rita Hayworth.
They actually interact well but Rita's part is minor considering her star status, by this point she was beginning to really suffer with memory loss and her scenes were a trial to complete, and the story is weak.
Claudia is lovely but totally unbelievable as Duke's daughter speaking with her natural Italian accent while supposedly being raised by him, he of course talks like John Wayne.
Not a terrible film but diffuse and without a strong point of view, that may be because the production was fraught with issues, begun by Frank Capra and finished by Henry Hathaway there was no clear vision to the shape what the film was supposed to offer..
Besides Wayne, there's Claudia Cardinale, John Smith whom I remembered from "Laramie" and one of my favorites, Lloyd Nolan.
I enjoyed Jack Hildyard's beautiful photography and wish more films had been photographed in Technirama - it was such a versatile format, very high quality like VistaVision.
I didn't let the picture's script shortcomings bother me - for my money (none!), they just didn't matter - or the probable fact that, if all it took to capsize a ship at the dock was a bunch of people rushing over to the side rail, it never would've survived an ocean crossing.
If you like John Wayne playing "The Duke" here he is.
I have seen many movies by John Wayne and some movies many, many times.
Just enjoy the film for what it is, a movie, not reality.
I´m a big John Wayne Fan but this movie is very boring.
John Wayne is acting like he thought the same in 1964.
Endless scenes with animals, clowns and artists (one of them Rita Hayworth who looks like she will fall asleep every moment, too).
One of the movies of John Wayne you don´t need to see..
Apart from JET PILOT and THE CONQUERER, this is my choice for worst John Wayne film once he became a bona fide star.
Sure, some of his very early B-movies were rough and silly, but considering he was young and had little star power, I wouldn't count these films.
CIRCUS WORLD, on the other hand just isn't any fun.
While Claudia Cardinale is a lovely woman, she was 102% wrong for the film.
She is supposed the to be the daughter of an American and an Italian who was raised since a very early age by John Wayne in the United States.
She sounds NOTHING like Wayne (who raised her) or her mother (Rita Hayworth--who abandoned her) or her long-dead Italian father.
For example, late in the film, Cardinale goes nuts and tells Wayne and Hayworth that she hates them.
For example, the identity of who painted over the posters and how the fire began all seem to be forgotten by the time the movie ends...as well as exactly who hates Wayne and Hayworth so much...as well as why there was the affair many years ago (Wayne keeps saying that he'll have to explain it all to her...and never does).
And,...well,...that's it.A bad film, even if John Wayne lovers would disagree.
I love most of his films, but I'm calling it like I see it--a big, bloated, overblown mess.
And, by the way, Wayne is completely miscast as well--what is this great western star doing running a circus that goes on tour to Europe?!?
By the way, my wife adds that SOMEONE must have had some incriminating pictures of Wayne to get him to make this film.
I'm a big John Wayne fan and I had never heard of the film.
Basically all it is is Wayne dealing with a lot of problems trying to put up a circus.
John Wayne and Rita Hayworth are not very good in this movie.
"Circus World", generally known in Britain as "The Magnificent Showman" was one of a number of films on a circus theme made during the fifties and sixties as filmmakers sought to cash in on the spectacle and drama of the Big Top. DeMille's "The Greatest Show on Earth" is possibly the best-known, but "The Big Circus" is another well-known example.
All three films are large-scale spectaculars and all three have for their central character the figure of the circus owner or manager, played in "The Greatest Show..." by Charlton Heston, in "The Big Circus" by Victor Mature and here by John Wayne.
Most circus dramas involve the company touring America by train, but here Wayne's character, Matt Masters, decides to take his circus on a tour of Europe.
At one time it would have been unthinkable for the clean-cut John Wayne to have been cast as a man involved in an adulterous affair, let alone an adulterous affair which led to the death of the cuckolded husband.
Wayne is not bad as Masters, but this is not really one of his great films.
Rita Hayworth as Lili was still strikingly attractive for a woman in her mid-forties, but again this is not one of her better films.
Overall, "The Magnificent Showman" (I will use the British title with which I am more familiar) has some entertaining and exciting passages, but does not really say anything new about its circus theme which had not already been said in similar films.
This lack of originality may have been one reason why the circus genre fell from favour in the seventies and eighties, although there have been occasional revivals since in films like "Water for Elephants".
But CIRCUS WORLD star John Wayne chose his projects carefully (no, he's NOT the killer clown, as you might guess), and he was sharp enough to realize that if half the geezers with one foot in an old folks home Ponied up to see this flick, he'd be able to corner the market on Panamanian shrimp (which he did, in Real Life).
If you told a bunch of screenwriters the plot of CIRCUS WORLD, they'd tell you that it would be a real stretch to pad out such thin material to as long as a 90-minute film.
CIRCUS WORLD is a lavish bit of spectacle that acts as a nice showcase for John Wayne's naturalistic talents.
He plays a circus owner who decides to bring his Wild West act to Europe with disastrous consequences, forcing him to go on a journey of self-realisation that sees him hooking up and making amends for his old life.I'm not a huge fan of circuses in cinema unless they're used for horror and suspense flicks, in which case they become a great setting (watch CIRCUS OF HORRORS and CIRCUS OF FEAR to see what I mean).
However, Henry Hathaway shoots the Big Top very well here, and his circus scenes are filled with excitement.
I can leave the cruel animal bits but the high wire acts are fantastic, the bits with the clowns are funny, and the Wild West show at the film's opening recalls BEN HUR-style spectacle.Wayne is the figure who holds this all together with a dauntless man-of-action performance.
He's joined by a slightly tragic past-her-prime Rita Hayworth, who still impresses as his lost love, and Claudia Cardinale who is a vision of beauty as his adopted daughter.
The film looks expensive and despite the slow pace it keeps you watching from beginning to end, never failing to entertain despite the odd shortcoming..
I finally saw this film on you tube recently.It was very sharp excellent print.Unless my memory is fuzzy,I think I had saw it on television too,I had not seen it since I first saw it at the state theater in 65, in El Paso Texas.This was not a road show print .It was mono and regular scope.The Irony is we had the Capri theater that showed Cinerama ,but it did not premiered there.This later version ,I saw, a road show print ,restored from the Technirama original negative.It had intermission music , for some reason in mono sound.Enter Acte music and exit music.It was very entertaining,but not John Wayne's best.Some time the voices got out of sync .The Polka music in the Celebrating for getting the tent party,by Dimitri Tomkin,Sounded exactly like the same music used in the fair sequence in ,"Friendly Persuasion.This better print sounded a lot better than the theatrical mono print.The story is just fair ,not great.You never understood why the ship tipped over all of sudden.This was created to take advantage 8 Perf 35 mm Technirama wide film and for the effects of the artificial Cinerama presentation.Bronson believed in spectacle in his films ,but at the cost of common economical sense,which led to his downfall as a producer,when he began to loose money on his films.One thing is you never saw Purdey character at the Colonel Purdy's wild West show.You never know who sent that article about The Death of Toni Alfredo's father to Toni and who started the fire,Was it Conti's character?that was another problem in the film.In spite of it all it was still worth watching.Too bad a Blu- ray version wasn't available on the u.s. 09/11/16.
I acquired this via a boxed set of six Rita Hayworth films offered at a ridiculous price.
Circuses have never appealed to me, I can take or leave Duke Wayne and Claudia Cardinale; Lloyd Nolan is invariably good but he seldom if ever carried a film, and Rita was down to third billing so I didn't figure I was missing much.
Rita arguably comes off best, not least in her early scenes where she plays a character who has lost her self-respect and more or less has to act as opposed to just looking glamorous.
U.K. release title: The MAGNIFICENT SHOWMAN.SYNOPSIS: In the early 1900's, an American impresario takes his circus to Europe.
Acting is more creditable than usual under Hathaway's direction, despite the weak and familiar plot, the tedious dialogue and unresolved drama (presumably Conte started the fire and planted the stuff in Claudia Cardinale's dressing room, but after his dramatic impingement into Hayworth's opening shot at trapeze practice, he virtually disappears.Claudia herself is perhaps a little too enthusiastically vivacious and Mr. Smith is far too much of an eager-beaver, but Hayworth's restrained performance holds her scenes together.
Circus World premiered in Chicago at the McVicker Theater on Madison just west of State.
(That theater had previously screened How the West was Won, a TRUE Cinerama film.
One big fluke, near the beginning, John Wayne is being wheeled around the circus ring on top of a stagecoach at full speed.
|
tt2404499
|
Kingdom
|
During a softball game at an American oil company housing compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, al-Qaeda terrorists set off a bomb, killing Americans and Saudis. While one team hijacks a car and shoots residents, a suicide bomber wearing a fake police uniform blows himself up, killing everyone near him. Sergeant Haytham of the Saudi State Police kills the carjackers. The FBI Legal Attaché in Saudi Arabia, Special Agent Fran Manner, calls his US colleague, Special Agent Ronald Fleury, to advise him about the attack. Manner is discussing the situation with DSS Special Agent Rex Bura when an ambulance full of explosives is detonated, killing Manner, Bura, and many others.
At FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C., Fleury briefs his rapid deployment team on the attack. Although the U.S. Justice Department and the U.S. State Department hinder FBI efforts to investigate the attack, Fleury blackmails the Saudi ambassador into allowing an FBI investigative team into Saudi Arabia. Fleury gathers Special Agent Janet Mayes, a forensic examiner, FBI analyst Adam Leavitt, an intelligence analyst, and Special Agent Grant Sykes, a bomb technician, to go to Saudi Arabia. On arrival they are met by Colonel Faris al-Ghazi, the commander of the Saudi State Police Force providing security at the compound. The investigation is being run by General Al Abdulmalik of the SANG, who does not give Fleury and his team permission to investigate.
The FBI team is invited to the palace of Saudi Prince Ahmed bin Khaled for a dinner. While at the palace, Fleury persuades the Prince that Colonel al-Ghazi is a natural detective and should be allowed to lead the investigation. With this change in leadership, the Americans are allowed hands-on access to the crime scene. While searching for evidence, Sergeant Haytham and Sykes discover the second bomb was detonated in an ambulance. Fleury learns the brother of one of the dead terrorists had access to ambulances and police uniforms. Colonel al-Ghazi orders a SWAT team to raid a house, managing to kill a few heavily armed terrorists. Following the raid, the team discovers clues, including photos of the U.S. and other Western embassies in Riyadh. Soon afterward, the U.S. Embassy Deputy Chief of Mission Damon Schmidt notifies Fleury and his team that they have been ordered to return to the United States.
On their way to King Khalid International Airport, their convoy is attacked and incapacitated. Leavitt is dragged out of the wrecked car and kidnapped while Fleury manages to wound one attacker. Al-Ghazi commandeers a civilian vehicle to chase the fourth SUV and the other car holding Leavitt into the dangerous Al-Suwaidi neighborhood of Riyadh. As they pull up, a gunman launches rocket-propelled grenades at them and a fierce firefight starts. Leavitt is tied up inside a complex.
While Sykes and Haytham watch the entrance to the complex, al-Ghazi, Fleury, and Mayes follow a blood trail and kill many gunmen inside. Mayes, separated from the others, finds Leavitt and his attackers, preparing an execution video of Leavitt. She kills the remaining insurgents, and al-Ghazi and the team start to leave. Fleury then realizes there is a trail of blood leading to the back of the apartment, and al-Ghazi sees the grandfather and inspects his hand. When the old man gives him his hand, al-Ghazi sees that the man is missing the same fingers as Abu Hamza al-Masri in the terrorist group's many videos and confirms his suspicion that the grandfather is the terrorist leader. Abu Hamza's teenage grandson walks out of the bedroom and shoots al-Ghazi in the neck, then he starts to point his gun at Mayes, prompting Fleury to kill him. Abu Hamza then pulls out an assault rifle and Haytham kills him. As Abu Hamza dies, another grandchild hugs him and Abu Hamza whispers something into his ear to calm the child down. Al-Ghazi dies in Fleury's arms.
At al-Ghazi's house, Fleury and Haytham meet his family. Fleury tells his son that al-Ghazi was his good friend, mirroring a similar scene earlier in the movie wherein he comforted Special Agent Manner's son. Fleury and his team return to the United States, where they are commended by FBI Director James Grace for their outstanding work. Leavitt asked Fleury and Mayes what he had whispered to her to calm her down. The scene cuts to Abu Hamza's daughter asking her own daughter what her grandfather whispered to her as he was dying. The granddaughter tells her mother, "Don't fear them, my child. We are going to kill them all," a similar line to what Fleury had whispered to Mayes.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0080724
|
Fatso
|
Luca Lucchesi is a single man who lives in his late grandmother's house. He keeps himself busy by translating instruction manuals from German into his native Norwegian. He occasionally phones his German clients to tell them "Ya gotta Eat", but apart from that his social contacts are reduced to a friendship with a show-off named Fillip who patronises him. Rino is very attracted to a till girl but each time he sees her in the supermarket he is dumbstruck and breaks into sweat. He expresses his fears by secretly drawing kafkaesque comix which are accessible for the film audience. One day after a night of watching porn and consuming plenty of convenience food he learns that his father has rented out a room to female foreigner. When the woman arrives,she explains to him she was from Sweden and intended to start over again in Norway. He doesn't ask why but he gets that information anyway when he eventually finds her helplessly drunk on the stairs to their flat. She tells him she had fallen in love with a family man who had returned to the mother of his children and she had hereby just repeated her big mistake. Next morning she sees him masturbating and later she even finds his comix. But when she leaves he has learnt enough from her to talk to his true love, the till girl, and ask her out successfully.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I still tell stories from the movie - the support group intervention is one of the funniest things I have ever seen.
I have to admit that I didn't even remember that the lead was played by Dom Deloise, as it is a very different role than the Burt Reynolds films I know him for.
Anne Bancroft, a multi-talented lady sorely missed, wrote and directed a picture here on a topic not ever before focused on, overeating.
Maybe it's just too close to home.The funny thing is that DeLuise himself, unlike some of the bit players in the picture, is not all that fat, seriously chubby, to be sure, not bathing suit material, but not really obese.
Directed by the late Anne Bancroft, Fatso is as funny and humane as anything her very funny husband, Mel Brooks, directed.
Bancroft evidently tapped into her Bronx background for this story of an Italian American, played sympathetically by Dom DeLuise, who runs a greeting card shop and is struggling with weight and shyness in courting a young women who opens an antique shop in the neighborhood.
Bancroft plays his sister who is always nagging him about his weight (but does an hilarious dance with him in his shop) and there are many wonderful family scenes, especially the funeral near the beginning of the film of the hero's morbidly obese cousin who "always had something good to eat on him".
A scene where DeLuise and his diet-support group ("Chubby Checkers") break out and go on an orgy of eating is alone worth the price of the movie.
I say this because I myself was in a relationship with a lovely gentleman who happened to be of ample body contour, and the courtship scenes with Dom and Lydia reminded me of my courtship with my own hefty, handsome boyfriend.
Also, gotta love Anne Bancroft as Our Hero's shrewish sister FAVORITE SCENES: Our Hero sneaking a wedge of his nephew's birthday cake, and his sister blowing a gasket!
This is one of the all-time great comedies in movie history.
Anne Bancroft does a splendid job of direction, and her character in the film is vivid, and colorful.
The funeral scene at the beginning was so raw and real, it was hard to watch - the grief of the Aunt and of Anne Bancroft is so intense!Though the family members are quirky, and very dramatic, you can tell that they really care for each other.
But the reason to watch is the film's honesty - Dom's pain, confusion,guilt and self-loathing regarding his overeating, his failed though sincere attempts to change, and his fear that this will lead to an early death.
The actress who played Lydia was good, too.This movie touched my heart and strengthened my program of recovery.
In "Fatso", he plays Dominick, a obese man who has a love/hate relationship with food.
My Italian side of the family adores this movie and it's been one of our favorites for over 20 years.
Dom DeLuise is great from beginning to end.
Amazingly Anne Bancroft wrote and directed this hilarious film, which makes me wish she had done more Italian-American comedies.
If you've got a sense of humor and you love to eat, don't miss this movie!.
The performances are all right on target, especially DeLouise and Bancroft.I'm here to say you DON'T have to be Italian or from NY to appreciate the movie.
This is THE BEST movie about Americans and their unique--dare I say perverse?--relationship with food.
This is a wonderful satire not only on the weight-consciousness of society, but on what it is like to be part of a close-knit Italian family.
I remember seeing Fatso for the first time in Madison, WI in 1980 and I thought it was a sad but funny movie.
It was sad throughout several portions of the movie, including the opening scene when the DiNapoli family gathered at the funeral of cousin Sal, who died of obesity, motivating Dom's sister Antoinette (hysterically portrayed by Anne Bancroft in her movie debut as writer and director) to persuade him to make an appointment with the diet doctor.Things go well until he threatens his brother (Ron Carey) with a knife and goes nuts and starts crying in self-pity and binges with his Chubby Checkers Sonny and Oscar.
Meanwhile, things get back on track when he falls in love with Lydia, played by the lovely Candy Azzara but one day she's not home and Dom is so distraught so he eats a humongous order of Chinese food.
The scene where Dom bought a birthday cake for his nephew Anthony and he ate part of it, causing Antoinette to get hysterical and throw the cake around.It's a shame that Dom DeLuise, who played Dom so well in his first starring role in a movie, Bancroft and Carey are gone.
Maybe being overweight isn't the best thing for a persons health, but being one's self and being happy is all that really matters in life - "I'm not so bad the way I am," says Dom DiNapoli, the portly subject of the movie, who loves food and a girl he thinks he can't have.
With a delightful blend of New York Italian culture and the human problem of overeating, Fatso makes for an entertaining movie experience.
Loaded with some of the funniest comedy gags I have ever seen, Fatso is a very humorous and yet serious movie about a very touchy subject, obesity!
I really lost it when his "Chubby Checkers" (diet comrades) came over to help him get through a hunger crisis, only to succumb to their own cravings for rich food and end up having a chocolate binge party.
Anyone who has ever struggled with being overweight and dieting will appreciate this movie, and judging by the worldwide obesity news lately, this probably includes most people..
This movie is very heartfelt and is able to capture how painful it is to have a passion for eating.It is easy to relate Dom and his struggle.
I love this movie and i don't feel it should be viewed as a comedy but more of a drama.There are some very funny moments but they are also subtle It is not a laugh a minute but I think it shows how dramatic Dom DeLuise can be.
So If You are Italian-American and or overweight or just love any movie withRudy Deluca or Ron Carey (Mel brooks Movies).in my opinion it is a very nice love story and It makes me cry..
It never got the respect it deserved when it was new.Someone has already noted the scene where Dom and his putative saviors discuss food as many men would discuss women.
This film manages to be very funny, while remaining warm and insightful.It's so good, one is tempted to wonder if Ms. Bancroft's husband Mel Brooks had an uncredited hand in its creation...though I hasten to add that I have no evidence to that effect whatsoever.
The "Chubby Checker" scene is classic, the checklist of what not to eat, Dom in line at the bakery, sneaking a slice of ice cream cake from his cousin's birthday are hilarious...then there is the tragedy of the untimely death of his obese cousin and the family grief.
This film captures the dynamics of the Italian-American family like no other.
Poignant, sweet, touching, yet hysterically funny this is one film worth owning so that you can watch it year after year.Brilliantly written,(and directed and starring), Anne Bancroft has given the world a timeless classic that stays with one forever..
It is, however, presented as sympathetic and is good for alot of laughs along the way.Particularly funny is the scene where Dom's "chubby checker" is talking him down from starting an over-eating binge.
You need to be Italian and from NY to appreciate this ,movie, I am sorry if I offend you but it is the truth.
the portrayal of a Italian NY family in this movie was superb-I feel you can only enjoy it to the fullest if you are just that-the lines in the beginning of the movie with the funeral scene and the clock as a flower piece can only be known from Italian Ann Bancroft to us on the screen.I would like to end this with "Rest in peace Antionette" REST IN PEACE ANN BANCROFT YOU WILL BE MISSED..
I remember seeing this movie when I was a kid, and the scenes that killed me then still did when I saw it again recently: Dom crying his way through birthday cards after his cousin's death, meekly proclaiming his fatness in chorus with his fellow "Chubby Checkers', waking up his brother Franky with a toy gun to his head, later threatening to slice him from his throat to his balls, the appetite breakdown of Sonny Awfullotta.
Obesity is funny again and Dom DeLuise exploits his own physical and mental weakness to make us love him for it.
Anne Bancroft writes, directs and acts in this Italian tale of love.
Dom DeLuise makes us laugh at his antics all while telling a cautionary tale of the pit falls of over eating.
While Dom DeLuise is far from that weight, his pudgy weepy face can be fascinating to watch as his tears roll down his face while he is told by a doctor that his eating habits much change drastically or his fate might follow his cousin's untimely death.
Very Funny most people on diets would relate to this movie..
Very Good acting by Dom Delouise and extremely funny to anyone on a diet.
A funny movie about a man and his love for food.
This is one of the funniest movies i ever saw, the funniest seen is when the chubby checkers sonny apalato and oscar lapedius) come over to help Dom DiNapoli but end up loosing it and go crazy in the kitchen, one funny line is said by the chubby checker sonny to dom (did u ever suck the jelly ouit of a jelly donut then fill it with the chocolat swirled ice cream, and then when doms brother asks the chubbey checker if he wants some lemon in his water, and the checker asks for orange juice, when he finds out they don't have any he becomes dissapointed he says the line ( ooook,,,, then lemon)in a very sad matter.....SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!.
Delicious the scene in which Dom DeLuise, invites the woman with curly white hair like an angel, to have coffee, milk and various cakes.
And the scene when Dom, his younger brother and the other two fat guys talk about what they like to eat is very funny.
Anne Bancroft, Mel Brooks's wife and Mrs. Robinson in "The Graduate"(1967), is directing with talent the movie and she's starring in it.
In addition to her writing and directing, Anne also co-starred in front of the camera.THE STORY IS a very personal one; being an account of what the main character, ably portrayed by comedian Dom Deluise, has to contend with from the rest of the world if one is "horizontally challenged." The private hurt of the cold and heartless barbs tossed out by unthinking persons is portrayed in a highly serious and near Chaplinesque manner by the heretofore unsuspected high tragedian side of Mr. Deluise.THE STORY IS obviously highly infused with a strong dose of Italian American ethnicity and some drawing on personal observations of the creator's own life.
Writer/Director Anne Bancroft, you see, was born Anna Maria Italiano.ON A PERSONAL note, we could relate to this story, even though not being of Italo-American extraction.
Anne Bancroft wrote, directed, and acted in this uneven comedy that doesn't know quite what it wants to be.
It's somewhat about a likable fat man (Dom DeLuise) who loves his food, but it's also about him yearning for a young woman (Candice Azzara).
When Dom's younger brother Salvatore drops dead at only age 39 from being morbidly obese, Dom is pestered by his overbearing sister (Bancroft) to get his butt to a doctor and lose some weight.
The best funny scene occurs one evening when Dom cannot control his appetite and maniacally awakens his sleeping brother (Ron Carey) while brandishing a gun and a knife if he won't unlock the fridge.
But the comedy here simply isn't funny, and it often seems that no one is trying that hard to deliver laughs.
Add feeble direction and inept editing, and you get a movie that lumbers slowly like a real fat person.
And as Roger Ebert said, Dom DeLuise isn't THAT fat.Maybe I'm the wrong person for this movie.
Judging from the other user comments on this movie, it seems it really hits home for overweight and/or Italian families.
If you're overweight or Italian, you might like this movie.
It is impossible for me to watch this movie (I have now seen it at least 10 times)without completely breaking down particularly at the hospital where he asks her to marry him and she says "YES!!!" The montage of pictures during the final credits showing their growing family is a real heart toucher as well.I had the extreme good fortune of meeting and visiting with Anne Bancroft a number of times.
For Our Italian-American Family, Funny Fond FATSO is a Documentary!
Occasionally, the Fox Movie Channel (FMC) airs a letterboxed version of the 1980 comedy FATSO, Anne Bancroft's only big-screen foray into writing and directing.
Having grown up watching the films of leads Bancroft, Dom DeLuise, and Ron Carey, I can hardly believe they're no longer with us.
Heck, I still remember the movie poster from FATSO's original theatrical release: a mournful DeLuise standing against a long list of foods under the bold heading "Do Not Eat." DeLuise stars as Dominick DiNapoli, an overweight 40-year-old bachelor living in New York City's Little Italy.
His happy life revolves around his family: sister Antoinette (Bancroft) and her husband and kids; "baby" brother Junior (Ron Carey, best known and loved in our household from his roles in HIGH ANXIETY and JOHNNY DANGEROUSLY); countless cousins -- and food, glorious food!
Dom's misadventures on the road to weight loss include the support group Chubby Checkers (featuring Estelle Reiner, the "I'll have what she's having" scene-stealer in director son Rob's ...WHEN HARRY MET SALLY), as well as good-intentioned but overzealous family haranguing that only makes Dom feel worse about himself.
I love watching appealing character actors get to have lots of hot kissing scenes!
But I digress...) Our family's favorite scene is the attempted intervention of two Chubby Checkers when Dom tries to head off a binge, only to erupt into the most spectacular binge of all time for all concerned.
By turns bittersweet, zany, romantic, and warm-hearted, FATSO may be too shrill and sentimental for some tastes, but my family and I absolutely loved it from beginning to end!
While many of the film's ideas about the best approaches to weight loss are dated now, it was surprisingly ahead of its time in portraying emotional eating and its tragicomic aspects -- making it all the more devious that Bancroft and director of photography Brianne Murphy film the tempting, luscious-looking foodstuffs in an inviting, sensual way that brings to mind WHO IS KILLING THE GREAT CHEFS OF EUROPE?
and JULIE & JULIA.Having grown up in NYC as part of a boisterous, food-loving Italian-American family (on Dad's side; Mom's side was Irish-American.
It's like a lively Sunday dinner with my Grandma Josie and/or our other food-loving drama queen relatives and Italian-American friends in our old Bronx neighborhood -- and I mean that as a compliment!
The title is misleading because this is not only about Dom's struggle with his weight but a love story and a tale of family.
I am overwhelmed at the talent of Anne Bancroft and Dom Deluise.
Weight-watchers who have a hard time staying on their dietespecially when they are exposed to the sight of delicious foodwill probably sympathize with the plight of Dom DeLuise in director Anne Bancroft's "Fatso," an entertaining comedy about the rigors of weight loss, co-starring Anne Bancroft, Ron Carey, and Candice Azzara.
The multi-talented Broadway actress and film star Bancroft makes her cinematic debut on the other side of the camera as the director for husband's Mel Brooks' company Brooksfilms.The plot of "Fatso" is pretty straightforward stuff.
The opening moments of "Fatso" brilliantly and realistically sets up the story as well as the trouble Dom encounters later when he tries to reduce.Every time Dominick cries or is hut, his mama offers him food.
At his relative's funeral, everyone is overcome with grief, but Dominick's in the kitchen eating out his grief.Dominick's cousin's wife Antoinette (Anne Bancroft of "G.I. Jane") forces Dominick to visit a diet doctor.
In one of the film's funniest scenes, two rotund Chubby Checkers visit Dominick to keep his mind off his appetite.
Afterward, the Chubby Checkers and Dominick have to break the chains and indulge in a food orgy.If "Fatso" seems depressing, it isn't.
Although the movie starts out urging fatso like Dominick to lose pounds, it changes midway through to a love story.
The happy ending that they have is a neat twist of irony."Fatso" is a funny, fast-paced, ripsnorter of a movie for the lean and the large.
Credit Anne Bancroft for making one of the year's best comedies.
Rated PG, "Fatso" is a family film, but watch out weight-watchers.
This is a touching and yet very funny and smart comedy, written and directed by Anne Bancroft.
It revolves around the character that Deluise plays, Fatso, who's trying to lose weight.
It's funny from start (the funeral of Cousin Salvatore)through to the end - a great little film that I heartily recommend..
Anne Bancroft acts and directed this 1980 farce.
We see the closeness of the typical Italian-American family brought together by the death of Cousin Sal, age 39, due to obesity.Bancroft's screaming during the service is almost unbearable if it weren't for the fact that she was so funny.
|
tt0120094
|
Selena
|
The film begins on February 26, 1995, with American Tejano music singer Selena (Jennifer Lopez) performing to a sold out concert at the Astrodome in Houston, Texas. Flashing back to Corpus Christi, Texas in 1961, a young Abraham Quintanilla Jr. (Edward James Olmos) and his band, Los Dinos, are rejected for an audition by the restaurant owner due to their Mexican-American ancestry. Crushed, Abraham gives up his music career.
In the 1980s, Abraham is now married to Marcella (Constance Marie) and has three children, A.B. Quintanilla (Jacob Vargas), Suzette Quintanilla (Jackie Guerra), and Selena. One day Selena finds her father playing music and sings along. Enchanted by her voice, Abraham decides to start a band with Selena as lead vocalist, A.B. on bass, and Suzette on drums, despite Suzette's protests that "girls don't play drums". He names the band Selena y Los Dinos. The band performs often at the Mexican restaurant the family opens, and receive a positive reception from the diners. Eventually, the business goes bankrupt, and the family moves to Corpus Christi.
The actions moves ahead to 1989, where Selena y Los Dinos are playing a concert at a fair. Abraham is shocked when Selena peels off her jacket and performs in a beaded bra. He confronts Selena on the band's bus, but she points out that her mother helped her make it, and that other fashionable female musicians such as Madonna and Janet Jackson are wearing bustiers too. Abraham relents, and Selena begins to design more and more of her band's attire.
When the band needs a new guitarist, A.B. recommends Chris Pérez (Jon Seda), and auditions him to his father. However, Abraham is hesitant to hire Chris because of his tough-guy, heavy metal image, but A.B. points out that "It's just musician stuff". Abraham agrees to hire Chris if he will cut his hair. Suzette and Deborah re-style his hair and Chris joins the band. The touring band stops off at a roadside diner, where Suzette hears a radio announcement that "Como la Flor" has reached number one on the music charts. The band and family celebrate. Selena and Chris begin to have romantic feelings for each other. Selena's mother is supportive, but Abraham angrily fires Chris when he finds them hugging on the tour bus. Selena tearfully objects, but a furious Abraham threatens to disband the group if she continues to see him.
Chris and Selena continue to see each other behind Abraham's back. Selena tires of having to hide their love, and goes to Chris' hotel room. She persuades him to elope, saying it's the only way her father will ever leave them alone. They marry secretly on April 2, 1992. The happy couple rides home in Selena's convertible, but a radio station announces their marriage and plays "Como La Flor" in celebration. Selena and Chris decide to hide out for a day so Abraham will have time to cool off. Selena goes home to explain to her father, and Abraham agrees to accept their relationship. The Quintanillas welcome Chris to their family and rehire him to the band.
Selena plays a concert in San Antonio, watched by executives from her Latin music label. The producers talk to Abraham about her soaring popularity and phenomenal record sales, and ask if she's ready to crossover into the English-speaking market.
In January 1994, Selena decides to fulfill another of her dreams and opens Selena Etc., a clothing boutique that will feature her designs, and hires Yolanda Saldívar (Lupe Ontiveros), the president of her fan club, to manage the boutique. Later, Selena is thrilled to win the Grammy Award for Best Mexican American Album.
Back home, Selena learns from her father that Yolanda has been stealing money from the fan club. On March 9, 1995, Selena and her father, along with Suzette, confront Yolanda about the missing funds at a meeting. Yolanda denies this and says she would never take anything from Selena. Selena, angry and hurt by Yolanda's betrayal, asks her how she could do this to her, and to her fans. Yolanda pleads for time to return the boutique's financial records and claims she can prove that she has done nothing wrong. Selena and Chris discuss the prospect of starting their family when the crossover tour is finished. The future seems bright with promise.
On March 31, after arguing over the missing financial documents, Selena is murdered by Yolanda at a Corpus Christi motel. Yolanda is arrested after a nine-and-a-half-hour standoff with the police. As Selena's family, friends, and fans mourn her tragic death, a montage of the real Selena photographs and videos play during a candlelight vigil, and the film ends with a freeze-frame of a smiling Selena with the caption "SELENA QUINTANILLA-PEREZ: 1971-1995."
|
tragedy, romantic, murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The supporting cast that includes Edward James Olmos, Jon Seda and Constance Marie are all very good too.I loved the way the soundtrack was used in the film and it brings a lot of energy to the story.
The cinematography is quite good but I did not like the 3 split screen.Even though we know the tragic fate of Selena, this film reminds us that it's more important to live a big life than a long life.
Selena had everything going for her, a good family, whom she was very close with, a great husband, loads of fans and of course her music career that kept getting stronger.
It tells you the whole story of Selena's life, from when she was just a young girl, to her meeting guitarist Chis Perez and secretly getting married to him, we see her singing at sold-out concerts, all the wonderful fans she had and not only that but we find out that Selena was planning to have kids and she was just about to release her first English language album, all until she was she was terribly murdered.
I thought the end of the movie, where there was real footage of the real Selena, was beautifully done and it was great to see clips of the real Selena singing at her concerts, meeting her fans and just having fun with her family, friends and husband.I thought the whole cast in the movie were great, Jennifer Lopez played Selena really well and deserved any award she received or got nominated for.
The rest of the cast including, Edward James Olmos, who played Selena's father and Jon Seda, who played Selena's husband Chris Perez did really well too.After watching the movie and hearing Selena, (Jennifer Lopez was lip-synching to Selena's voice.
Jennifer Lopez proved that she was a high-class actress with this true story of the Tejano Superstar whose life was cut short by a disgruntled employee.
But even if this movie wasn't based on a real singing superstar, it would have been great to watch anyway.Jennifer Lopez is stunning in every way as Selena.
Their relationship is so real because they were friends first...friends who fell in love.Ms. Lopez also does a great job lip-synching Selena's songs, and the ending will bring tears to your eyes.
It even goes so far as to make you wonder about the Beatles, even Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven.I admit I was a bit nervous when I rented the movie because I was worried that a sub-standard job may have been done to capture the short life of this young woman.
In fact, the characters were so real, I forgot several times that I was watching a movie and thought I was sitting with these people laughing with them and sharing in their joy and in their pain.
To play the villain in order to help raise awareness of the life of a fabulous soul would be very difficult indeed.The beautiful candle-light vigils shown at the end of the film made me regret very much having not lived in Texas and been part of them at the time.
It is innocent and honest and you kind of think to yourself that SELENA feels like a TV movie although the acting is solid.
Jennifer Lopez, Edward Olmos and the rest of the ensemble cast do a marvelous job in bringing the close-knit Quintanilla family to life.
Jennifer Lopez did perfect and so did the people that played her family and friends throughout the movie, if you havent watched this movie yet, u should!
after watching the film, i have now downloaded about 26 songs of selena's and bought the movie for myself.i absolutely loved this movie from beginning to end.
if jennifer portrayed her correctly, the real selena must have been..(besides and outstanding singer) a truly wonderful human being.the tribute at the end is amazing.
i love how the movie was focused of the celebration of her life and how much she accomplished in a short amount of time and not her tragic death.
It is scary to think of what Selena would have become had she simply not been killed.The movie focuses on Selena's rise to fame as a crossover Tejano music star, more popular south of the border than in the United States, but becoming famous in both lands nonetheless.
Other than Selena (Jennifer Lopez), the movie centers around her family, her husband Chris Perez (a very competent Jon Seda), and her strong-but-loving father, Abraham (Edward James Olmos in what is easily the best performance of his career).Lopez checked her attitude at the door for this film, and plays Selena with reverence.
The scenes between father and daughter transcended fame and showed the normalcy of Quintanilla family life as the backdrop for the spiraling fame that threw them into chaos, such as when Selena had planned to tell her father about her sudden marriage but the radio had beaten her to it.As we all know, Selena was tragically murdered by her fan club president, a woman I will not name so as not to give her any more fame (I urge others to do this as well).
SELENA (1997) ***1/2Starring: Jennifer Lopez, Edward James Olmos, Jon Seda, Constance Marie, and Jacob Vargas Written and directed by Gregory Nava 127 minutes Rated PG (for mild language and sensuality) By Blake French: I am not a fan of Selena Quintanilla, and I still loved Gregory Nava's "Selena." It was a respectable movie on its own level; the film would have worked even if there never was a professional celebrity singer of the same name.
This is one of the better biography movies to come down the road in some time.The film stars the talented Jennifer Lopez as the famous singer in the title roll.
Some days, the kids did not want to practice their instruments and music abilities, but discipline is what makes things work.The film begins an emotional journey into the life of the Quintanilla's.
Jennifer Lopez is so much better playing a character like Selena Quintanilla than some of the varied characters she has been in the past.
The movie Selena starts with her at a young age and ends with the day she dies.
In the movie they also incorporated the use of the real Selena's voice when they show her making her music and in her concerts--I thought that was a brilliant idea.
If you are a big fan of Jennifer Lopez," My Family", you will love her dancing, singing and her great performance as Selena Quintanilla-Perez.
Selena is encouraged to sing by her father and is a natural super star because everyone in her family was musically inclined and her our mother was able to teach her some great dancing steps.
...and for those who have not yet discovered the talent of Selena, the young Tejano singer whose life and career were cut drastically short.I was one of many people who remembered Selena in 1995, unfortunately I did not know of her until she was murdered.
The movie has funny scenes like when Selena and her band's bus, "Big Bertha" gets stuck in the middle of the desert and two cholos in a Low Rider stop by to help pull them out of the ditch, but unfortunately, they take the bumper right off the bus!
Selena was the last person I have seen with that kind of unique charisma and talent, a real star, someone who had paid her dues playing gigs on the road with her family when she was very young.
Other than minor details like that, it was an amazing movie and I think that if Selena was able to see it, she would be very proud of the job J.Lo and the other talented actors did to portray her life.
The relationship between Selena and Chris Perez (her eventual husband) doesn't come across particularly well since there's very little chemistry between Lopez and Jon Seda, who played Perez in the movie.
But other than that, I don't think someone who watches the film without knowing anything about Selena will come away with any real understanding of why so many people were so devastated when she was murdered..
It was like last year or maybe the year before I caught it on the television here.I don't really know much about her life, except from what I remembered from the radio that I learned that she was being killed by one of the members of her fan club.Jennifer Lopez as Selena...she almost fits so perfectly as what I imagined the real Selena to be.I guess I am thankful I caught this biopic back then because it gave me at least an idea towards Selena's life before her fame and her mark as a singer.
When I heard who she was and that she had a movie on her life starring Jennifer Lopez, it really got me interested.
I am so entertained by the magnificent performance of Jennifer Lopez and all the cast members, and I cry each time as I have to witness the death of Selena.
This movie is tastefully done and I recommend it to anyone who loves Selena, good music, and those who have tender hearts.
But, after seeing the movie, I became a great fan of her music, her voice, her talent in every respect, and her dignity and grace as a human being.
This movie is great and any Selena fan should buy it because it shows how her family struggled to become successful, how she met her future husband (Chris Perez) and sadly her murder by her fan club president (Yolanda Saldivar) and their is also a tribute 2 the "Real" Selena at the end of the movie and all audio used is from the "Real' Selena and this movie really breaks your heart,U will laugh, cry and enjoy this movie at the same time.
I recommend that you purchase this movie because it not only shows us what we lost when Selena was gunned down but it also shows how she opened doors for many latino artists of this generation and it also shows why the late great Selena Quintanilla-Perez was loved and liked by millions of her fans and everyone that enjoyed her music!
In conclusion, if you are a die-hard fan of Jennifer Lopez or like Selena's music, I highly recommend this excellent biopic of one of the greatest Tejano singers of all time.
I enjoyed the music in the movie (Which i understand was J.Lo lip-synching to the real Selena) and the end footage of the real Selana was nice.
Edward James Olmos, does a frightening, almost doppelganger like performance as Selena's father.The biopic does a good job telling the story of one of the most important Mexican American artist of all time..
When I saw the movie for the first time I don't think I listened to Selena's music.
The movie Selena is "A story of a girl who had the spirit to believe in a dream and the courage to make it come true." Selena Quintanilla was a singer, songwriter, actress, and fashion designer.
Jennifer Lopez, who plays Selena in this film, reminded the world of the loss of a loved hero, friend, and role model, who never forgot her roots.
There was a few controversies involving the movie, where Lopez was a Puerto Rican from New York, and the real Selena was a Mexican-American from Texas.
(No name spoiler here, but you already know.) In the good ol' days in Corpus Christi, young Selena (Rebecca Lee Meza) was raised well by her father, Abraham (Edward James Olmos) who was in a failed band called the Dinos with two other friends back in the 50's.
During the movie, we get to see everything in a condensed, but fast, pace of 127 minutes, the relationship involving her family including mama Marcela (George Lopez's Constance Marie), her romantic relationship between the rock-and-roll guitar player, Chris Perez (Jon Seda), her music (done by the real Selena, not Lopez) and yes, we do get to meet Yolanda herself, with a lot of character developing.
I think this is overall a good movie if your a Selena fan like me you will like it,I just wish it got more to the nitty gritty.
Jennifer Lopez does her best job in this movie I think this is her best film.
I am giving this movie 9/10 because it is truly amazing Go Jennifer Lopez Go Selena.
Jennifer Lopez did a great job as playing Selena.
I loved Jennifer Lopez playing Selena i thought she portrayed her extremely well.Selena is the true story of Selena the singer and her life until the moment where she dies.Not many people actually realize how good this movie is.
Also it will show kids in the future just who Selena was and all about her music.I loved the fact that her singing was in the movie and it wasn't Jennifer Lopez because then we can feel the atmosphere that Selena set.If you are to watch this movie all i am going to say is that a box of tissues is a must!.
I just love the acting, Jennifer Lopez shines like a true star in this film.
I think Jennifer Lopez portrayed Selena very well(besides it being the last movie she looked healthy in).
At times it feels almost epic, at other times like a very good movie-of-the-week (with a large scale budget).It's greatest asset is without a doubt the earnest performance of Edward James Olmos as Selena's father, Abraham Quintanilla, and Jennifer Lopez' who does an impressive re-creation of a much-loved (and sadly missed) legend.
The movie uses Selena's own music/voice, which provides for a 'real' experience.The concert scenes with the large crowds are so moving.
And Jennifer does a great job of lip synching in the movie(and we all know she's got a lot of practice at that!
To anyone who loved Selena or just would like to learn about her, go rent or buy this movie.
The movie was heartfelt, realistic (Selena did come to life!) and I loved all the characters, especially Abraham Quintanilla (Edward James Olmos), Marcela (Constance Marie) and Chris (Jon Seda), who all contributed to bringing Selena's spirit and music to life.
I don't care if people though that because Jennifer Lopez was Puerto Rican, she shouldn't have been playing a person of Mexican lineage, but she did a wonderful job to bring Selena's music and spirit back to life.
I was so impressed by Jennifer Lopezs Performance in this movie she was really outstanding, she played the role with real heart and it really moved me.
Jennifer Lopez (played Selena) wasn't as popular as she is now, and I believe this movie helped *in part* to launch her career.
Don't get me wrong!I like Jennifer Lopez and I think she is the only actress good enough to bring the essence of Selena Perez to the big screen.The soundtrack and photography are superb!Yet the filmakers have failed to tell the whole story and attempt to make any sense of Selena's untimely death!Perhaps the family of Selena agreed to be so open and candid about her life on the condition that her involvement with Yolanda Saldivar(who ultimately kills her) be downplayed and desensationalized!Of course this approach is understandable-but it dosen't provide any answers!I guess the best way to appreciate the movie is to watch it AFTER viewing an E or A&E biography of her life!These biographical accounts have pretty well examined how Yolanda worked her way into Selena's confidance and succeeds in blinding her to how dangerous she was!It still leaves the disturbing question of "what?" and "how?" it all really occured!
Jennifer Lopez and Edward James Olmos did superb jobs as Selena and Abraham Quintanilla, respectively!
Jennifer Lopez, does an excellent job in Playing the beautiful Selena Quantilla Perez.
I am one of those people who hadn't heard of Selena until after her death; and I didn't know too much about Jenifer Lopez until this movie was released.
I remember seeing interviews with Lopez promoting the movie, and thinking "this woman's going to be HUGE." She's certainly proven her star quality, but unfortunately her talent has not lived up to her work in this film, nor to the talent of Selena.
Also, the fact that Selena's family was so integral in the making of this movie should put to rest all the whining about Lopez's casting, accent, and looks (it isn't about who "looks" like Selena, but who could become Selena); as well as the film's portrayal of Mexican-Americans.
Jennifer Lopez plays the part of Selena so well.
Although I enjoy music a great deal, I must admit that prior to seeing the movie 'Selena', I knew almost nothing of her life or death.
It's a good movie that tells about Selena's life and about her tragic end.
I really didn't know anything about Selena's life, I just barely heard of it on the TV, it said that she was a great singer and that she was murdered by somebody who worked with her.
Right after I saw this movie I went right out and bought Selena's "Dreaming of You" CD (I bought Jennifer Lopez's "On the Six" CD as well).
If your a fan of Selena or Jennifer Lopez then you should love this movie!.
I thought Selena was a great movie, Jennifer Lopez gives her best performance ever in this movie.
I must admit, I was not a fan of Selena or Jennifer Lopez before seeing this movie.
As of this movie, Lopez is a singer in real life which kind of compares it that way.
Jennifer Lopez does a wonderful job portraying the character of Selena.
Jennifer Lopez who played Selena has only recently begun to get credit for her singing and acting talents, but it was already evident in this film.
|
tt0104073
|
Deep Cover
|
In Cleveland, 1972, Russell Stevens Jr. is the son of a drug addicted, alcoholic man, who tells his son never to be like him. Stevens then witnesses his father getting shot and killed while robbing a liquor store. He swears that he will never end up like him.
In 1991, Stevens is a police officer. He is recruited by DEA Special Agent Gerald Carver to go undercover on a major sting operation in Los Angeles, claiming that his criminal-like character traits will be more of a benefit undercover than they would serve him as a uniformed policeman. Stevens poses as drug dealer "John Hull" in order to infiltrate and work his way up the network of the west coast's largest drug importer, Anton Gallegos and his uncle Hector Gúzman, a South American politician. Stevens relocates to a cheap hotel in LA and begins dealing cocaine.
One day, Stevens is arrested by the devoutly religious L.A.P.D. Narcotics Detective Taft and his secretly corrupt partner Hernández, when he buys a kilogram in a set-up by Gallegos' low-level street supplier Eddie Dudley. At his arraignment, Stevens discovers that he bought "baby laxative" (mannitol) instead of cocaine and his case is dismissed. Stevens' self-appointed attorney David Jason, who is also a drug trafficker in Gallegos' network, rewards Stevens' silence with more cocaine and introduces Stevens to Felix Barbossa, the underboss to Gallegos. Felix kills Eddie when his finds out he's working with the LAPD and enlists Stevens as Eddie's replacement.
Stevens develops a romance with Betty McCutcheon, the manager of an art dealership which serves as a front to launder Jason's drug money profits. When one of Stevens' dealers is murdered by a rival dealer, Stevens kills him and is awarded a partnership in Jason's new business venture; distribution of a synthetic chemical variant of cocaine.
It turns out that Felix is a police informant working with Detective Hernández. Felix immediately gives up Stevens, Jason and Betty, and wants Jason killed during the arrest because of his business venture. Carver knows about this, but refuses to interfere forcing Stevens to violate orders and stop it himself by exposing Felix, which results in a vengeful Jason killing him, while Betty reneges the drug business because of it with Stevens´protection.
Gallegos comes to meet with Jason and Stevens and informs them that they have inherited Felix's debts to him. Later that day, Stevens meets with Carver to tell him about his meeting with Gallegos. Instead Carver pulls a gun on Stevens and orders him to surrender his weapon and get in his car. Angrily, Stevens disarms Carver and forces him to admit that the State Department has decided to leave Gallegos alone because Guzman may some day be useful as a political asset to them and Carver has decided to play along in exchange for career advancement. Stevens' disillusionment reaches its conclusion and he abandons his undercover status vowing to take down Gallegos and Guzman alone.
Stevens and Jason learn that Gallegos is going to kill them anyway, so they kill him first and steal a van storing over a $100 million of Gallegos' cash. Jason and Stevens invite Guzman to a shipyard and offer to return 80% of Gallegos' money if he agrees to invest the remaining 20% in their synthetic cocaine operation. Detective Taft, who has been tailing Stevens, interrupts the deal but is unable to arrest Guzman because of his diplomatic status. Guzman leaves the scene. Taft orders Stevens to surrender, but is shot and killed by Jason. Stevens reveals himself as a police officer and attempts to arrest Jason, but is forced to kill him in self-defence.
Afterwards, Carver coerces Stevens into testifying in favour of him and the DEA in return for not charging Betty for money laundering, but Stevens produces a videotape of the incriminating conversation with Guzman at the shipyard during his testimony to the House Judiciary Subcommittee, ruining the State Department´s intentions along with Guzman and Carver´s careers. Later he contemplates what to do with the $11 million of Gallegos' money he secretly kept.
|
neo noir, murder, blaxploitation, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Laurence Fishburne (Boyz in the Hood, What's Love Got To Do With It) stars as a cop who has avoided drugs and the crime life because of his father's involvement and death in it.
Jeff Goldblum (who I have never seen in such a deep role) is also strong delivering a surprisingly good performance.
The scenes between Larry Fishburne and Charles Martin Smith are superb, the writing is virtually flawless, the action is exciting and fresh, and the topic is so relevant it's hard to believe it came out fifteen years ago.
In what is probably his best role to date, with apologies to his turns as Ike Turner in the classic "What's Love Got to Do With It", and Morpheus in the "Matrix" series, Laurence Fishburne plays undercover cop Russell Stevens, who poses as drug dealer John Hull to apprehend a notorious drug kingpin.
And let's not forget Gregory Sierra as a sadistic crime lord and one of the best character actors of our time, Clarence Williams III as an honest cop.
However as he is forced to deal drugs and kill to keep his cover he finds the lines between cop and criminal being lost is he a cop pretending to be a dealer or a dealer pretending to be a cop?Larry (as he was then) Fishburne's first lead role was a typically dark vehicle.
For most of the film Fishburne's narration/voice over is a bit like a cross between Apocalypse Now and Blade Runner it comes across as a little too dark and heavy and also explains things like we can't figure it out ourselves.
My main problem lies with the characters.Fishburne is excellent, a real model of underlying anger and violence, Goldblum is good but perhaps a little OTT on the yuppie/violence thing, but there's good support from Smith and Spin City's beautiful (and often underused but not here) Victoria Dillard.
These things aren't a major problem, but with basically only two white characters in it, it's a little worrying that both are given that edge.However these are minor complaints that get lost with a good thriller.
Fishburne excels and Duke delivers a story that is a good thriller but also has a jaded, subversive edge..
Deep Cover stands out as a great example of how to make a good film and has something that is often missing from modern cinema.
The two main characters Russel/John (Fishburne) and David (Goldblum) parallel each other nicely, and reinforce the theme perfectly.On the one hand, there's Russel, the cop determined to make a difference in his community who is then taken advantage of by his superiors and used like a tool.
He too must make the same difficult choice, even stating in the film, "I want my cake and eat it too", which truthfully shows that it is a hard decision.While Deep Cover is labeled by most as a "hood movie", it is quite different in it's themes from most films in that genre.
The good guy(Fishburne)is really screwed up and you end up really liking the bad guy (Goldblum).
It has an almost "film noir" feel about - if that's possible for a color movie.Unlike many other films that have taken the undercover cop story and pursued it in a typical fashion, "Deep Cover" takes a tense, intimate approach.
Fishburne soon finds himself sucked into the dealer's life against his will, doing whatever he can to infiltrate the organization despite how far "deep" he's involved in it (as opposed to the cliché that the cop decides he likes being a drug dealer).
It stars Larry Fishburne, Jeff Goldblum, Charles Martin Smith, Victoria Dillard and Gregory Sierra.
The screenplay is always smart and cutting, mixing political hog-wash and social commentary with the harsh realities of lives dominated by drugs - the users - the sellers - the cartel, and the cop going deeper underground...Great performances from the leading players seal the deal here (Goldblum is not miscast he's the perfect opposite foil for Fishburne's broody fire), and while some clichés are within the play, the production as mounted, with the narrative devices of identification destruction (hello 2 masks) and that violence begets violence, marks this out as one the neo-noir crowd should note down as a must see.
However, the final chapter in this film gives us some satisfaction as we see those agency scumbags and two-bit congressmen getting their due.Laurence Fishburne was magnificent as a cop sent undercover to bust drug kingpins.
Clarence Williams III was the best I have seen him as a cop, who was Fishburne's conscience.Great film about undercover police work and the effect it can have on a cop..
The story moves very fast, which tells you something.As someone who loves narration, I enjoyed Laurence Fishburne's deep-voiced first-person narrating.
He was smooth in this gritty 1990s film noir filled with hard-boiled characters, rough language and some brutal scenes wrapped around a drug story.
He is shown as morally-bankrupt atheist.This movie is unusual in that the main character - Fishburne's "Russell Stevens" - goes from good guy to bad guy back to good guy!
One of the better drug movies has Fishburne who's really deceiving himself, going undercover.
His assignment (where a lot of other black cops failed the interview in quick cut scenes) for a shady superior-a fine Charles Martin Smith takes him on a journey through the underworld of drugs and it's penetrators.
Fishburne keeps working his way up, selling drugs, living bigger and better than he ever has, and feeling so much like s..t for it.
I liked Fishburne's character a lot and found little to fault about his approach to some tricky situations (the directors didn't make him do anything stupid or dumb just to work the plot.
Yes, it was somewhat violent at times, but 15 years later (post-Tarantino) it's nothing a woman who likes an intelligent, extremely well-acted, written and directed movie can't handle.
The writer did a good job of showing the conflict that Fishburne's character goes through after discovering the truth about the reality in which he finds himself (defending the right, while being used by the wrong, so to speak).
I also like the way the writer keeps one guessing until close to the end as to what choice the lead character makes - whether he will continue to fight the good fight or give into the power and lure of the darker side..
Russell Stevens, Jr., played here by the great Laurence Fishburne(Boyz N The Hood, The Matrix) is a Chicago police officer, who as a child witnessed his father die after a bungled robbery.
To do this, Steven's changes his name to John Hull, who moves to Los Angeles and lives in a small apartment and he succeeds as a small-time drug dealer.
Stevens and David become inseparable and immediately want out from their bosses clutches and start their own drug trade by dealing a safer, synthetic form of cocaine.This is actor Bill Duke's(who appeared in Commando, Predator) second directorial feature and is also his best.This is my favorite Laurence Fishburne film, sadly it's also his most under-appreciated.I give it a 9/10..
Anybody who likes action-filled dramas or films about the U.S. cocaine trade should see this movie..
I saw this thriller again last night, which stars Fishburne as a cop working under cover and, in a characterstic, slightly hysterical performance, Goldblum as his yuppie drugs partner.
Deep Cover is one of those better drug movies, an ode masterpiece to the legendary actor Bill Duke, who directs this impressive pic (surprise, where this hardly ever out of work character actor, has been gracing our screens for years.
When John Hull (a much slender Larry Fishburne) is approached by an DEA agent (a great Charles Martin Smith- fancy him popping up) he at first, is of course, adverse at the idea, of going undercover, when he realizes he's passed the audition (the earlier black interviewee cops had mixed reactions, you could say).
Here, he meets an assortment of characters, mostly unsavory, one slick scum selling drug dealer, Luther, never a worse victim, at the hands of a whacking pool Cue, which as Fishburne describes says in his somber and flat voice, "The guy has a life expectancy of half an hour".
This is a guy who really goes undercover, playing the part, living in squalor, and quickly rising to luxury, while working his way up the ladder, to nail the main players, one a real nasty, in a priest outfit, who rips Fishburne's earing, out of his ear.
The movie has a lot of interesting attachments, like a young teen crack whore and kid, Fishburne befriends, as well as a hectoring undercover cop (Clarence Williams 3r'd who fatally buys it).
Tolkin's surreal world is populated by a multitude of interesting supporting characters that allow the main players, Fishburne's Stevens and Goldblum's Jason, to take on a depth not seen in today's films.
I'll kill him myself." This clever dialogue and plot, as well as Duke's visual touches (which unfortunately dissolve as the film progresses) and the seamless performances of the stars and supporting crew have made Deep Cover one of my all-time favourite films and if you dig the wit and style of Unlawful Entry and Copland, I'm sure you'll agree.
What sets it apart from similar movies of its ilk is the performance from Jeff Goldblum as a greedy, crazed Yuppie drug dealer.
Laurence Fishburne deserves honorable mention here as well for his scene where he begins to spontaneously rap pseudo-Beat street poetry to another character in the film.Entertaining, but as previously mentioned, don't look too deeply into it..
The emotional dilemma he finds himself in becomes a bit more than he bargained for, as he finds himself drawn to the life he has tried so hard to reject.Jeff Goldblum perfectly plays the double-life, lawyer-partner character.Moody, tense film, with some harrowing, brutal scenes..
Deep Cover is Fish's third best performances of the early nineties behind Boyz N The Hood and What's Love Got To Do With It. The character he plays in Deep Cover is a smooth cop who gets in over his head when he goes undercover.
Jeff Goldblum makea great bad guy and the direction by Bill Duke was also very good..
(Laurence Fishburne) was an ambitious police officer that wanted to help clean up the streets from its drug problem.
At some point it becomes unclear if he still had sight of the goal: get drugs off the street by taking down the head honchos.The movie was good for the most part and I really liked Jeff Goldblum who played lawyer/dealer David Jason.
Deep Cover won't make my list of top drug movies but it is entertaining to watch..
Good film, but the same old government cover-up of important V.I.P. drug dealers; double cross of the field cop by his friends; danger from street punks; gunplay and overdoses; good guy cop doesn't know who to trust or where to turn so starts playing both ends to the middle.
"Deep Cover" is all about a cop (Fishburn) who goes undercover as a narc and pretty much manages to help a little kid and rescue a babe while single handedly solving all of the West Coast drug trafficking problems.
Nonetheless, the "Deep Cover" did have an interesting noir moodiness with some philosophical narration by Fishburn and should make an enjoyable couch potato watch for those who are into gritty crime dramas.
His bad-guy role is great written and he plays great.The movie tells an interesting story with interesting characters of whom Fishburne and Goldblum are the best..
Jeff Goldblum was at the top of his game and I don't think I've seen a movie where Laurence Fishburne was sub-par.
DEEP COVER is a pretty predictable film about a cop going undercover to take down some drug lords, but in execution it turns out to be a fun little film and more entertaining than it has any right to be from that premise.
The underrated Laurence Fishburne is a fine choice for lead, playing a guy who must come to terms with what makes him a man while exploring the moral quandaries in which he finds himself.This is a film packed with that inimitable early '90s style, with lots of hard-edged violence and even a little humour thrown into the mix.
Drug lawyer David Jason (Jeff Goldblum) takes his case and introduces him to Gallegos.Laurence Fishburne and Jeff Goldblum are good.
Not really my kind of movie, but Fishburne and Goldblum were good.
As the movie opens, Laurence Fishburne's character, as a child, witnesses his drug addict father being shot and killed (apparently at Christmas), just after a Santa Claus says something you would never want him to say.
As an adult, Fishburne is a cop who wants nothing to do with drugs but he gets assigned to an undercover operation where he actually sells the stuff.
The movie starts to get a lot better when Jeff Goldblum's character, a lawyer, is introduced.
Another character I liked was a cop Fishburne called 'Reverend.' The second half of the movie was not as good as the first, until about the last fifteen minutes, which ended up redeeming the movie for me.
But by that time the movie had gotten very confusing, because so many lies were being told you couldn't tell what was true any more.Fishburne and Goldblum gave good performances.
If the movie has any real significance, it is in the conflict Fishburne's character felt at knowing he was killing people, either directly or by selling drugs, in order to do good..
Laurence Fishburne plays a character somewhat like this.Here, we see Russell Stevens (Larry Fishburne, as he was called back then) as a much leaner and fast paced officer of the law who looked to make a difference in society.
But as much as it takes authoritarian corruption for granted, Deep Cover's attitude toward interracial sexual relations is at once fresh and unpretentious: As Jeff Goldblum's sleazy lawyer emerges from a black mistress's apartment quipping to Fishburne about the allure of exotic flesh, the film both confirms and renders ridiculous the sexual legend that, furtively, white men desire black women (and vice-versa).
Like so many other films about cops and bad guys, Deep Cover promised little else from what we were used to.
Deep Cover builds into the mythical from what seems like a simple cop story, while laying the psychology of its protagonist Russell Stevens, Jr.
Russell, renamed John by DEA agent Gerald Carver (Charles Martin Smith) to engage his undercover operation, braves misadventure and danger to work his way into the mid-level drug operation of David Jason (Jeff Goldblum).
But John must brave Hell to reach his goal, which is introduced to him by the superior agent Carver who says he's "God." A truly fascinating scene in the film comes due to masculine grudgery between Jason and drug dealer Felix Barbosa (Gregory Sierra).
David Jason's worldview could best be described as forcedly Edenic, whereas John Hull's plot at the film's end shows thought of Utopian character.
(a commanding and outstanding performance by Laurence Fishburne) takes a dangerous undercover assignment posing as a dope pusher in order to bust some major league drug dealers.
The story could sound as a cliché along the lines of "all i wanted was to do good as a cop but they turned me into a drug dealer." But it is not cliché at all.
There were probably plot holes, but I missed them - I was busy enjoying the movie.--- end spoilers --- This film is too dark for children and even early teens, but for the rest of the world it is a thought-inducing and worthy film, as a drama, a social/political critique and as a thriller/action/cop flick..
The supporting cast are equally impressive- and like all great noir films, each character is realistically flawed.....with the exception of Clarence Williams' honest detective (who winds up paying the ultimate price for being a good man in an evil, corrupt world in a devastating climax) there are no heroes here, just different shades of bad- I've rarely seen a film with such a cynical view of the police/law enforcement, and the villains- from Jeff Goldblum's greedy and amoral lawyer to Gregory Sierra's truly terrifying mid level dealer- are shown as even worse.
And, in perhaps the films most knowing line of dialogue, when Goldblum's character states to the Latin American Guzman "there's no black, Hispanic or white anymore.....just rich and poor, and we're all rich so we should be on the same side"- well doesn't that say it all- not just about drugs and the war against them, but about unfettered free market capitalism in general?
He gets in the organization from the bottom, and starts climbing up the crime ladder, and eventually manages to bust and/or kill all of them, save a little kid, and get the babe.What makes this film good is, of course, Laurence Fishburne in the lead, and his narrative capabilities.
**Possible Spoilers** Strong performances by Laurence Fishburne and Jeff Goldblum dominate this story of a cop who goes undercover as a drug dealer, in order to `Do some good,' in `Deep Cover,' directed by Bill Duke.
Twenty years later, Russell (Fishburne) is a cop, making good on the promise he made to himself the day he watched his father die; he wasn't going to end up like that.
This is a decent action film with a pretty good story, but there isn't much here that hasn't been done before; what sets this one apart from many others like it, however, are the two stars.
I like these kind of movies(DARK BLUE,TRAINING DAY,NARC) and this one is no exception.Very good paced,strong performances and an interesting story line make this a winner.
Fishburne is good,but I think Goldblum`s performance is terrific!
But its an entertaining movie with lots of shooting and also good music(and I like rock),together with good performances and convincing bad guys.
|
tt0066413
|
Strategia del ragno
|
Athos Magnani arrives by train, at the request of his father's mistress, Draifa, in the (fictional) town of Tara, where his father—also named Athos Magnani—was killed before his birth. The father, remembered as a resistance hero and looking exactly like his son, was killed by unknown fascists in 1936—or so says Draifa, the statue in the square, and everyone in the town.
His enquiries meet with evasion or hostility. Eventually three old acquaintances of his father tell him his father planned to blow up Benito Mussolini in the town theatre, during a performance of Rigoletto. The plot failed; the assassin died after being betrayed to the police. Young Athos does not believe this tale either.
Unsure whether to stay in this claustrophobic town where the truth is never told, he hears the sound of Rigoletto coming from the theatre. Entering, he is told that his father failed to go through with the bombing out of fear, and himself tipped off the police. For this his associates killed him, with his agreement, and ascribed the death to unknown fascists. A few days earlier a fortune teller had predicted his death, as in Macbeth, and on his corpse was an unread letter warning him not to go ahead, as in Julius Caesar.
At a ceremony in front of his father's statue, Athos starts to tell this story but stops. Though it was through cowardice and betrayal that his father had made himself into a hero, the town needs its myth. Resolving to leave, at the railway station he hears announcements that trains are increasingly late and, looking at the tracks, he sees they are rusted and overgrown. He too is caught in the web.
|
murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Quite a film, combining lush photography with brilliantly realized scenes, one after another in fact, from the beginning arrival of the train to the ending, set on the waiting platform of the train station, with a story that weaves in and out of the present (1970) and past (1936) about fascism and the difficult and ambiguous forms the opposition took to combat it.
Set in Italy's Po River valley in the town of Tara, it beautifully mixes the cinematic elements of plot, music, character, photography, etc...
with a story about the well kept secret of how a man's father became a local hero in the struggle against fascism.
Like any society caught in repression, the heroes we know today, who led the fight, maybe were forced by the circumstances of the times to take actions that could only be understood in the context in which they took place.
Bertolucci does a great in dramatizing that inherent ambiguity that lies under the statue of the popular hero that is in the center of the town.
There are some scenes that simply stand out, especially the outdoor dance (1936) where the hero and the fascists eye each other, and then he grabs the prettiest girl there and has all the dance floor while the camera goes from face to face.
But in a film that is so well composed, this is but one of the highlights, none of which would mean much if the whole operation didn't have such an astute level of direction guiding it.
For a film that relies so much on image, it says a lot, and doesn't squander any of its characters..
I found interesting to watch this movie since I noticed in it some characteristics that were to be strongly noticed in later films, such as the pleasure for the beauty of the composition (every image caught by the camera is very carefully thought before, considering all the elements in it, from a mirror to a chair, to a flower pot; and also studying its position, wheter the person speaking should be in the center or not, distances, etc.).
Bertolucci has also put, I think so at least, a lot of time in this details (which marks a difference from other filming methodes such as those of, let's say, Godard, even though both are worth watching), which grant the film a great artistic quality, since it is very beautiful.
I also see in this film the tendency for mixing stories in different times (remember the last emperor?).A part from this observations, this film has a story to be followed, not as intriguing or as fascinating as others...
Even though this is a political film, that's not even subtle or hidden, the main theme of this one is, in my point of view, the creation of myths, the creation of heros, idols...
Athos Magnani, the father, is an absolute nothing, despite his pseudo idealism, he made nothing in concrete except...
becoming the hero of those people, except becoming one more reason for the fight.
This is a myth, and myths, at least like this, only exist if people believe them.Beautiful landscapes, not spectacular acting (the actor who plays both athos Magnani is not exceptionaly convincing as the son but gives an interesting performance as the father).
I too enjoyed that the director resisted to the temptation of showing exactly the murdering; he did it in a better way.
After having searched high & low for this ridiculously hard to find film by Bernardo Bertolucci, I finally got a watchable VHS print recently (thanx, Scott).
Leonard Maltin may not know much, but he was right on the money when he said that this film contains some of the most staggeringly beautiful cinematography ever put on screen.
The story is, on the surface, a sort of 'search for the truth' mystery/quest that quickly turns into a complex examination of 'the nature of truth'.
The pace is slow, and there isn't much in the way of action, mostly just dialog scenes and gorgeous location shots.
Speaking of pace, this struck me as being quite Tarkovsky-esquire a film (barring a few odd cutaway shots), especially with that last scene that puts the whole film into a different spin.
This may be Bernardo Bertolucci's best film.
A young man returns to his "martyred" Father's village to discover the exact reasons for his father's death at the hands of Facists.
He also discovers more than he may want to know about his father's personal life - including intimate details from his father's mistress.
The supposedly heroic life and death of his father is greatly complicated by the actual evidence and suggestive clues he discovers.
The editing, cinematography, mise en scene, and acting in this film are breathtaking.
Yet the film's triumph lie in the philosophical and political suggestions provoked by the narrative.
This is a film worthy of myriad viewings..
Made the same year as Bertolucci's better known 'The Conformist', this look at the legacy of fascism in a small Italian town certainly has many strong points.
A son returns to a town where his father – an anti-fascist fighter in the years of Mussolini – was murdered by person(s) unknown, and has been made into a martyr and a hero by the locals.
The son meets those who knew his father, and as he tries to discover the truth about what happened in the past, the reality gets more and more complex.
A touch of the conventional thriller runs through this in a good way, keeping the story focused, even when the film-making techniques are a little more obscure or baroque.
Only the slightly flat acting, which feels a bit phony and distancing, keep this from seeming more like a full-on masterpiece.
It's as if Bertolucci wanted to engage only our heads, when nothing would have been lost by pulling in our hearts as well - something I think he succeeded with in "The Conformist" That said, given that many see this as Bertolucci's best film, I'll watch it again..
Somehow I always thought this was Bertolucci's first film.
We were young and Bertolucci was very left-wing so it was de rigueur to find this great, but in fact it was boring.
The plot meanders on, the acting is wooden, and in the end you don't know if there was a story there at all.
Bertolucci has become an icon, maybe more because of the scandals adhering to his films than of the intrinsic worth of his cinematographic output (in contrast to for instance Ettore Scola).
La Strategia del ragno is a beautifully shot, superbly acted movie with a lot of twists.
At fist glance the story depicts a man, Athos Jr, who has to solve the murder on his father, Athos Sr. This is asked of him by his father's mistress.
Later it becomes clear that that story is the strategy of the mistress to get him to replace his father (the two are identical).
The third story that runs through the movie is why Athos Sr was in fact killed.
It seems he's a traitor, but it's my guess that he staged his own death from the beginning (including his treason), without his friends knowing.
The only one who finds out the whole truth is Athos Jr. The way these stories are told and how they interact is magnificent.
Don't try to understand my very short summary, just watch the movie.
The Last Emperor is not Bertolucci's best, although I like that one, too.
His early films were often too 'artistic' to be taken seriously and his pretentiousness is quite evident here; he borrowed soundly from Godard and it shows with the excess wearisomeness.
The plot concerns a young man named Athos Magnani who visits a small village in Italy where his father was reputedly an "anti-fascist freedom fighter" in 1936, but from the flash backs, he was a pompous jerk who really didn't do much anti-fascist work.
In one scene of a dance in the village, Athos' father is smoking his cigarette in defiance of the fascist thugs who are giving him vicious looks.
His father was 'supposedly' murdered by the fascists and in the present is considered a hero, with the whole bit of martyrdom being evident in the erected statue that bears a striking resemblance to Athos.
So steps his son, in search of what his father was.
The town does not want to return to the past, they have heroes today for a reason and they hesitate to unravel anything about that long ago era.
Bertolucci manages to bore us while piecing useless confabulations from the people who knew his father including the mistress and three close chums, who are played by the old actors in the flashbacks, and thus Bertolucci plays with the contextual memory of the plot.
Is Athos his father or did his father ever exist?
Bertolucci could have made a wonderful film that rivals some of the great directors of the time but somewhere along the line everything didn't get aggregated like it should have, what we have instead is an egotistical exercise in excess that is only ideal to a half drowsy art student..
A young man named Athos Magnani (Giulio Brogi) arrives at the small Italian town of Tara.
Magnani's aim is to discover who killed his father, a local hero and anti-fascist, decades earlier.
The script makes many references to Mussolini, the Italian fascist leader of the 1930s.An essentially political film, "The Spider's Stratagem" contains deep themes related to personal identity, the definition of heroes, as well as perceptions of, and the truth about, others.
The thematic depth is enhanced by competent cinematography, with some clever compositional camera shots.And yet, I found this film hard to like.
There is an overall sense of gloom, with a drab landscape and bleak characters that seem more symbolic of ideas vis-à-vis real people with personal lives.
And some plot elements seem either unnecessary or deliberately opaque.Acting also seems stagy and contrived, which may have been the director's intent.
It has adequate thematic depth, for viewers wanting a thought-provoking film.
I found it not entertaining.Maybe a second viewing, when I have more time to digest the film's political themes, will render an impression that is not so alien and forbidding..
It's definitely true this movie is not just for everyone and you also really need to be in the mood for it to watch it.
Sometimes you have to fill in the blanks and interpret certain sequences for yourself in order to keep following it and understand things.However when you really take the time to sit down for this movie, it's definitely more than worth it.
It's a pretty fascinating watch, with a good concept and story in it.It's great to watch how the movie its 'mystery' slowly gets unraveled and the puzzle gets put together by the main character Athos Magnani, who returns to the town where his father got killed.
Not only does he try to find out who killed his father but perhaps more importantly, also the reason why.It's great to watch the dynamics between him and the townsfolk.
It gives the movie a great atmosphere of tension and mystery as well.
You never know who is telling the truth and what the motivations and reasons behind it all are.There are also some good twists in the movie, especially toward the end.
The movie its ending does not disappoint!Deinetely worth checking out if this looks and sounds like your kind of thing!8/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
One of the greatest films ever.
Contains "spoilers", but no endings/killers are revealed...Bertolucci's masterpiece is based on Borges' "Theme of the Traitor and Hero", as well as other Borgesian theme which were ingeniously woven into the script.
This addition is another Borges theme -which does not appear directly in "Theme of the Traitor and Hero"- the Spider's Stratagem, the idea of a spider luring its prey from the center of its labyrinth/web.
Also, Borges "recurring and predetermined history" theme is here enhanced by adding the father-son mixup (Giulio Brogi's double role).The blending of ideas from the great Borges with Italian history, Storaro's stupendous (and always narrative-effective) images, and great acting, produces, in my humble opinion, one of the greatest films ever.I strongly recommend going through (at least) the above mentioned stories ("Theme" is from Ficciones, "Ibn Hakkan" from The Aleph and Other Stories (Dutton), or in the original Spanish), and then watching this film on a good transfer (not pan-and-scanned color ruined video!).-too bad it is not released on DVD..
Excruciating "art" film with an interesting theme at its core.
For the most part, "The Spider's Stratagem" plays almost like a parody of the biases that some people have against "art films", by confirming most of their fears: it's infuriatingly slow, rambling (someone please tell that "culinary tester" to shut up!), diffuse, confusing (OK, everyone comments on how identical the protagonist looks to his father so it makes sense for one actor to play both roles, but many other actors play the same characters both in the present and over 30 years ago, with no attempt from the make-up department to de-age them), and weird for the sake of being weird (that lion head probably symbolizes something....but I don't know what it is).
And yet, if you stick with this film, which is not the easiest thing to do, an interesting and thought-provoking theme emerges near the end: the chasm that separates reality from legend.
The way the story turns out gets you wondering how many times things like that have happened in real life; we will probably never know, that's the whole point.
Athos Magnani visits Tara, the city in which his father, also named Athos, died murdered by the Fascists in 1936.
Called by his father's lover, Draifa, Athos begins a search to find the man who killed the local hero.
No one knows, but Draifa is sure he's a local person.So far the story seems pedestrian, but the script, loosely based on Jorge Luis Borge's short-story "Tema del traidor y del héroe", soon turns into an examination of truth, ethics and hero-worship.
The pacing is slow and hardly thrilling, like many of the thrillers of this age, but intellectually riveting.Giulio Brogi plays father and son, even though it doesn't look like at first.
As Athos junior, he's a confused man caught in a web of past events and lies, trying to make sense of his father's legacy.This is a great companion piece to Bernardo Bertolucci's other 1970 thriller, The Conformist.
Although apparently opposites - one is about a Fascist, the other about a anti-Fascist - they both follow weak men who can't uphold their lofty political and moral ideals.Aiding Bertolucci is the great cinematographer Vittorio Storaro.
And then if he weren't good enough, he draws inspiration from Giorgio de Chirico for the shots of the sombre Tara with its decrepit buildings and desolate squares.An interesting blend of plot and atmosphere, this is one of Bernardo Bertolucci's best movies, an obscure masterpiece of cinema..
Almost like Rashomon, the protagonist must seek the truth about his father, the hero of the town.
But everything is not what it appears and as he struggles to learn the truth he leans ambiguity, shades of gray and what history and later interpretations make of people.This is a brilliant film as it is executed superbly.
The personal aspects of that intelligence became more fully realized in his even better film The Conformist, surely one of the best adaptations ever done.The compositions and photography are of course famous but where this film stands out in terms of movies today is the editing and narration.
Cutting between times is not always simple and this film does makes demands on the audience.
This feature is marked in the scenes between the hero and his father's mistress, and as the same actor is playing both son and father at different times, instant confusion as to who is whom and why, is not quickly dispelled..
The book 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die is a fantastic way of finding films that I would otherwise never had known about that could be great viewing, this Italian film is another one I hoped would deserve its placement, directed by Bernardo Bertolucci (The Conformist, 1900, Last Tango in Paris, The Last Emperor).
Basically young researcher Athos Magnani (Giulio Brogi) returns to his ancestral home in Tara, at the request of his father's mistress Draifa (Alida Valli).
His father, also named Athos Magnani (also Brogi), was killed before his birth, he is remembered as a resistance hero.
Draifa, the statue in the square, and everyone in the town say he was killed by unknown fascists in 1936, Athos is met with evasion or hostility when he makes enquiries.
Then three old acquaintances of his father tell Athos that his father attempted a failed plot to blow up Benito Mussolini in the town theatre, the assassin died after being betrayed to the police, but young Athos does not believe this tale either.
Unsure whether to stay in this claustrophobic town where the truth is never told, Athos goes to the theatre, he is told that his father failed to go through with the bombing out of fear and tipped off the police himself.
At a ceremony in front of his father's statue, Athos starts to tell this story, but despite knowing that his father became a hero through cowardice and betrayal, he decides that the town needs its myth.
Athos goes to the railway station, where are announcements of increasingly trains, he looks ahead to see rusted and overgrown tracks, he finds himself tangled in the same web.
It is a simple, a young man who wants to gain more knowledge of his father's assassination, only for his legend to be shattered by the truth, it is a fascinating psychological journey, with great camerawork, locations and cultural references, a worthwhile drama.
|
tt0053198
|
Les quatre cents coups
|
Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Léaud) is a young boy growing up in Paris during the 1950s. Misunderstood by his parents for playing truant from school and stealing, and tormented in school for discipline problems by his teacher (Guy Decomble), (Antoine falsely explains his being away from school was due to his mother's death), Antoine frequently runs away from both places. The boy finally quits school after being caught plagiarizing Balzac by his teacher. He steals a typewriter from his stepfather's (Albert Remy) work place to finance his plans to leave home, but is apprehended while trying to return it.
The stepfather turns Antoine over to the police and Antoine spends the night in jail, sharing a cell with prostitutes and thieves. During an interview with the judge, Antoine’s mother confesses that her husband is not Antoine’s biological father. Antoine is placed in an observation center for troubled youths near the seashore (as per his mother's wishes). A psychologist at the center probes reasons for Antoine's unhappiness, which the youth reveals in a fragmented series of monologues.
One day, while playing football with the other boys, Antoine escapes under a fence and runs away to the ocean, a place he has wanted to visit his entire life. He reaches the shoreline of the sea and runs into it. The film concludes with a freeze-frame of Antoine, and the camera optically zooms in on his face, looking into the camera.
|
neo noir, cult, cute, sentimental
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Francois Truffaut's 'The 400 Blows' is one of the most well-known films of this movement, and has been embraced and hailed as one of the greatest films of all time.After viewing Truffaut's 'The 400 Blows', I have been ruminating over the deeper meaning behind his story of Antoine Doinel, a 14 year old boy in Paris who is having trouble in school and trouble at home.
The city views are those of a native Parisian the kind of tour one would get if they asked the average Parisian for non-tourist attractions.There is still a lot that I have to learn and think about 'The 400 Blows' and French New Wave in general, but with the minute amount of understanding I have of it, I found it to be an intense film, one that left me emotional and craving enlightenment.
THE FOUR HUNDRED BLOWS (François Truffaut - France 1959).Twelve-year-old Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Léaud) has troubles at home and at school.
Jean-Pierre Léaud would continue his role as Antoine in four more films by Truffaut, "Love at Twenty" (1962), "Stolen Kisses" (1968), "Bed and Board" (1970) and "Love on the Run" (1979).Camera Obscura --- 9/10.
I think many of the characteristics of the New Wave -as pointed out in class- can be inferred form the differences between the last film we saw in class, Carné's Les enfants du paradis, and this work by Truffaut: real life situations, no sets, everyday people.
Truffaut enjoys playing around with the camera: extremely long takes as we have never seen in any of the previous films: some of them in the classroom, other in Antoine's friend house, or a magnificent take at the end of the film in which we see Antoine, then a panoramic view and then Antoine again, running towards the sea.
Or shows us inner feelings through close-ups: the scene in which Antoine lies to his father telling him he did not take his map.However, I think that the most important difference between previous films and this one is the treatment of action.
He lies, steals, skips school and runs away from home, and soon ends up in a juvenile delinquency centre.Truffaut's inspiration for this film came from his own depressed childhood, so he bases Antoine on himself, including in terms of appearance.
Antoine, who is a character who believes in liberty and freedom, and the way he is always locked up is repressive for him, and this provokes a constant need for him to be out.Trying to make a realistic and moving film was Truffaut's aim, which, by watching this film, I realised that he had done amazingly well.
Inspired by the director's childhood, The 400 Blows (Truffaut's first film) is primarily about a young boy growing up with his mother and stepfather in Paris and apparently heading into a life of crime.
The two boys stay at René's house for quite some time, living up to the expectations of a life of crime, until they steal a typewriter leaving Antoine caught trying to return it.
The Four Hundred Blows is the semi-autobiographical story of Antoine Doinel, a boy trapped in a life of contemtptuous authority who turns to outward rebellion.
He is a pathetic character forced into his position by his teacher and his almost uncaring mother.Throughout the film, Truffaut hints at the possibility of a happy life for the protagonist, but just as soon as the ideal is given to us, it is taken away.
As the seminal work of the French New Wave, the 1959 directorial debut of 27-year old Francois Truffaut has such a vaunted reputation that the final film is bound to disappoint.
As a point of comparison, listen to the by-the-numbers commentary by film scholar Brian Stonehill (recorded back in 1992), which is thoughtful and well researched but devoid of the human factor.The film's title comes from a French colloquialism that translates into "raising hell", an appropriate reference since the story focuses on a thirteen-year old hellion named Antoine, living in a poor section of Paris and neglected by parents downright arrogant in their dysfunctional nature.
Truffaut tracks Antoine's life through a series of dispiriting episodes that ultimately lead him to be sent away to a reformatory after he gets caught returning a stolen typewriter and his mother and stepfather tire of their responsibility over him.
To Truffaut's immense credit, the film feels stark and naturalistic without resorting to dramatic manipulation, and he finds the ideal Antoine in Jean-Pierre Leaud, who brings out the confusion, angst and wandering attention of his character in realistic terms.
It is heartbreaking to see how bleak his life becomes, yet Leaud imbues the incorrigible, often intolerable side of Antoine with fervor.There are several interesting extras included with the 2006 DVD package starting with two separate interviews with Truffaut, the first a year after the film's release discussing he film's impact and the second five years later when we see the filmmaker in a more reflective mood about his cinematic influences.
The memorable story of young, troubled Antoine is worth seeing for a good number of reasons, probably most of all for the thoughtful direction by François Truffaut.
It stands out from most other movies about troubled youths, both in the way that it portrays the main character and in making such good use of seemingly minor events in showing how they shape Antoine's life.As Antoine, Jean-Pierre Léaud (in the role with which he would always be identified) strikes a nice balance in making his character come to life without making any of his actions seem forced or over-dramatic.
Truffaut sets things up for him perfectly, by presenting a great variety of situations in his life that allow Antoine's character to come out naturally.
At the time of its release it was hailed as an important film and subsequently proved to be immensely influential in the context of the French New Wave.The semi-autobiographical story concerns a Parisian adolescent (Jean-Pierre Léaud) who attempts to escape problems at home and at school by delving into a life of petty crime.
It depicts some events in the life of Antoine Doinel, a young French boy who gets into a lot of trouble no matter what he does.
Good movie, but hardly brilliant or a classic.A boy, Antoine Doinel, is often in trouble at school and doesn't get along with his parents, especially his mother.
6.The topic=stolen childhood had better days,before (Julien Duvivier's "Poil de carotte" ,Luis Bunuel's "los olvidados") and will have after (Maurice Pialat's "l'enfance nue",Kenneth Loach's "Kes") I do not want to demean Truffaut,his movie is not bad,but,frankly,French movie buffs,prefer "Jules and Jim" "l'enfant sauvage" (a film honest ,true and commercially uncompromizing to a fault)"l'argent de poche"(as academic as "400 coups" but much more funny)or his nice Hitchcock pastiche "vivement dimanche"..
Actually, I have been bored to varying degrees by all the Doinel films and find Jean-Pierre Leaud, who plays Doniel in "The 400 Blows" as well as the other films in the series, to be a nincompoop.The technique in this film is very like the Italian neo-realist films, especially a film like "Open City." It's shot in low-contrast black and white, it's shot in actual locations around Paris; it presents a slice of life.Despite all I've written above, I've seen many Truffaut films that I've liked very much (Shoot the Piano Player, Jules and Jim, The Soft Skin, The Bride Wore Black, Mississippi Mermaid (complete version), The Woman Next Door, among others) but not the Antoine Doniel films..
It's of course ridicules to call this movie a bad one but as far as so called new wave French movies go, this isn't the best example of it, in my opinion.Can't really see how people can call this one of the most powerful and emotional drama's ever made, unless you perhaps had a tough youth yourself and can identify yourself with its young main character.
It's an original but also risky approach to the genre, that in this case did work out, also really thanks to Jean-Pierre Léaud, who plays the young boy.So it all in all really remains a well put together movie, by François Truffaut, that just didn't really ever got to me at a more emotional level.
I only have seen three and I'm a little bit hesitated to watch "Fahrenheit 451".The 400 blows has some powerful meanings and many appreciate it for its historical importance as one of the first (if not the first already) new wave movies in French cinema history.The best thing in the movie ..
So when I saw it tonight, it was like seeing something brand new.I remembered only a few of the most memorable scenes: the carnival ride (followed by Antoine catching his mother with a strange man), the whole Balzac sequence, the psychologist's interview, and, of course, the famous final shot, the freeze-frame of Antoine Doinel looking into the camera.
Semi-autobiographical, the movie tells the story of Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud), a misunderstood schoolboy.
Upon first seeing the Francois Truffaut film 400 Blows, I was struck with the thought that this film was either designed to scar children away from a life of crime or just a social commentary on juvenile delinquency in Paris in the early fifties.
The characters were terrific: the philandering mother, Antoine's caustic old codger of a prof, and his little cigar smoking chum who lived in the cat-house, among others.What really did it for me though were the truly wonderful Parisian street scenes that leave you totally immersed in the story -- to the point where I felt slightly jolted when I returned to my 21st century existence upon the film's conclusion.
Having re-watched one of my favourite films recently, Shane Meadows 1999 effort 'A Room for Romeo Brass', another story of troubled boys in dysfunctional families, I find myself amazed how much more in common 'The Hundred Blows' has with that film than with its contemporaries.Truffaut also gets a fine performance from his young leading actor Jean-Pierre Leaud.
Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Léaud),is an attractive troubled adolescent who chooses the cinema and to read Balzac as escapism,imagine how far away this boy is from our time of predominant `video games'.Also was interesting the black and white cinematography and to see a different Paris from the 1950s.Every great film has its unforgetable moments (like Mouchette's night in the woods,).
I can choose three or four in this movie ,but I prefer two great ones: Antoine watching through the back window of the police van while this is moving away(also Antoine in jail pulling his turtleneck over his nose).The other emblematic scene is the last one:Antoine Doinel escapes, and the great moment when he rushes, arms open, toward the sea, savoring his freedom, is captured by Truffaut in a memorable freeze frame.Jean-Pierre Léaud brings a natural performance of tenderness and quiet desperation.
Truffaut's semi-autobiographical film about the struggles of youth is obviously infused with great emotion, telling a touching tale of a boy who can't seem to fit in wherever he goes, and turns to a life of petty crime.
Almost documentary like in its honest depiction of the boy's life, this was one of the most important films of the French new wave, and it's influence continues to this day..
The film follows Antonie through the troubles he has in his young life, always painting him as a realistic character never too simplistic so as to be totally likable (what child is!?) but not a brat like some kids are in American movies.
Of course, aside from him the other star is Truffaut himself and (as well as a cameo) his direction is great, natural, intimate and painting a convincing world for this story to occur within.Overall this is a small little film that succeeds in making the life of Antonie be very interesting and engaging.
Twelve-year-old Antoine Doinel, played very winningly by Jean-Pierre Leaud, doesn't suffer "400 blows," although he does get mistreated quite a bit, and he doesn't mean to raise hell or to be a problem to his parents or society.
But Truffaut wants to make sure we don't misunderstand so he has the boy get into trouble for (1) having a magazine passed to him in class, (2) unconsciously memorizing Balzac (he is accused of plagiarism by his fascist teacher) (3) returning a typewriter, which admittedly he had lifted, and (4) lighting a candle in honor of Balzac (which starts a fire).My favorite scene is the one with the psychiatrist in which we hear her questions, but the camera stays on Antoine.
One of the best-loved and most memorable of all French films, Les quatre cents coups established François Truffaut as a great film director and launched the acting career of Jean-Pierre Léaud.This is a poignant story about the life of a young teenage boy who seeks escape from his loveless, lonely existence by committing minor crimes and creating fantasies.
His futile attempts to please his parents, his empty fantasies, his loneliness when he takes to the streets of Paris - glimpses of a broken childhood that immortalises the young Antoine as possibly one of the most sympathetic figure in French cinema history.Henri Decae's black and white photography appears the perfect medium for Truffaut's wistful tale.
The final shots, with Antoine apparently finding his freedom on a vast expanse of beach, but leading no where but to the open sea, are similarly very moving.Decae's photography and Truffaut's script are very well complemented by Jean Constantin engaging musical score, having a child-like simplicity that seems to underline the futility of Antoine's aspirations for a better life.Les quatre cents coups was instantly successfully when it was released in 1959, winning Truffaut the Best Director award at the Cannes Film Festival.
It tells about a young Parisian school boy Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Léaud), who struggles in every area of his life.
"The 400 Blows" is a drama movie in which we watch a young boy whose parents do not pay the appropriate attention to him and leave him many times alone.
In this movie I believe the best interpretation was Jean-Pierre Léaud's who played as Antoine Doinel and he was simply outstanding.
Another great interpretation made by Antoine Doinel who played as the teacher of French.Finally I have to say that "The 400 Blows" is a must see movie and it really worth the time that you are going to spend on it.
This movie allows those of us who were never young hellraisers like Truffaut or his protagonist Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Léaud) to understand him and discover the universality of his story.
I have seen a few other Truffaut films, and one of the things I like best about his style is his skillful use of long wordless sequences, often set to music.
There is the physical education class run through the streets with the teacher losing students, the carnival wheel and finally the best ending scene to any movie ever put on film.
13-year-old Antoine turns to a life of small-time crime to escape the neglect he receives at home from his parents and the harsh criticism of his teacher.
As Antoine ventures out on his own, he discovers the freedom he wants is not so easy to attain.François Truffaut film is just perfect:Magnificent Screenplay and it´s masterfully shot,the acting by Jean-Pierre Léaud is excellent...RATING:5 out of 5 PERFECT!!.
This marvelous film from one of my favorite foreign directors, Francois Truffaut, remains one of the best foreign-language films ever made.To many, the word "foreign" as it applies to movies means difficult, but "The 400 Blows" is actually a very simple tale simply told about a young man who turns to a life of petty crime for a lack of anything better to do with his life.
The story is truly beautiful as we watch this young boy do whatever he can to enjoy life and free himself from the stranglehold of his parents and his school teacher.
Jean-Pierre Léaud gives a performance of a life time in the first installment of Truffaut's autobiographical youth, he stars as Antoine Doinel a troubled Parisian boy who struggles with authority and dealing with his common life.
This is the fist chapter of the saga of Antoine Doinel, performed in a masterly manner during a long period of his life (twenty years) by the surprising Jean-Pierre Léaud, followed step by step by the pygmalion Truffaut during the whole course of his full physical maturity, beginning from the actor's early years.The present movie deals with the topic of unquiet and misunderstood adolescence, clearly inspired by Edmund' character, the young boy who lives in the destructed Germany doing all kinds of work in Rossellini's "Germania anno zero".
This young boy is Antoine Doinel, (Jean-Pierre Leaud) who is a rather rebellious young man in school and causes all kinds of problems with his teachers.
The 400 Blow Is the first film Iv'e seen from François Truffaut, and Is a quintessential piece of cinema from the French new wave.
The 400 Blows against the classical Hollywood film clichés (in a good way), and it's episodic and somewhat documentary-like cinematic techniques help to create the authentic story of a 14-year-old boy.
In this movie Truffaut manages to describe a delinquent kid and his relationships with friends, parents and teachers through an amazing screenplay and great acting of the whole cast.The explanations of what, where and why in the boys life are so brilliantly incorporated in the storyline that you really get a sense of the times and the ways of life, but also the sense of dysfunctional families whenever or wherever.
'The 400 Blows', Truffaut's debut feature film, marks the beginning of his screen persona, Antoine Doinel; it's one of the most noted films of the French New Wave, and one of the most intriguing stories on adolescence.
The 400 Blows (1959) **** (out of 4) Francois Truffaut's tale of Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud), a young boy who is misunderstood by his parents and teachers.
|
tt0097481
|
Harlem Nights
|
In Harlem, New York, 1918, Sugar Ray has a dice game. Nearly killed by an angry customer, Ray is saved by seven-year-old errand boy Vernest Brown, who shoots the man. After being told that his parents are dead, Ray decides to raise the boy as his own. And because of the boy's savvy, he is nicknamed "Quick."
Twenty years later, Ray and Quick run a nightclub called "Club Sugar Ray", with a brothel in back run by madam Vera. Smalls, who works for the gangster Bugsy Calhoune, and Miss Dominique LaRue, Calhoun's mistress, arrive. Smalls and LaRue have come to see the club and report to Calhoune. Later, Calhoun sends corrupt detective Sgt. Phil Cantone to threaten Ray with shutting the club down unless Calhoun gets a cut.
Ray decides to shut down, but first wants to make sure he's provided for his friends and workers. An upcoming fight between challenger Kirkpatrick and defending champion (and loyal Club Sugar Ray patron) Jack Jenkins will draw a lot of money in bets. Ray plans to place a bet on Kirkpatrick to make Calhoune think Jenkins will throw the fight. Ray also plans to rob Calhoune's booking houses. A sexy call girl named Sunshine is used to distract Calhoune's bag man Richie Vinto.
Calhoune thinks Smalls is stealing and has him killed. Quick is noticed near the scene by Smalls' brother Reggie who tries to kill him. Quick kills him and his men. Calhoune sends LaRue to seduce and kill Quick. Quick realises he is being set up and kills LaRue.
Calhoune has Club Sugar Ray burned down. Sunshine seduces Richie Vinto and tells him she has a pickup to make. Richie agrees to pick her up on the way to collect money for Calhoune. Richie gets into an accident orchestrated by Ray's henchman Jimmy. Ray and Quick, disguised as policemen, attempt to arrest Richie, telling him that the woman he's riding around with is a drug dealer. Quick attempts to switch the bag that held Calhoun's money with the one Sunshine had placed in the car, but two white policemen "real boys" arrive. Richie explains that he's on a run for Bugsy Calhoune, so they let him go.
The championship fight begins. Two of Ray's men blow up Calhoune's "Pitty Pat Club", to retaliate against Calhoun for destroying Club Sugar Ray. At the fight, Calhoune realizes it was not fixed as he thought, and hears that his club has been destroyed. Quick and Ray arrive at a closed bank. Cantone arrives, having followed them. Ray's crew seal him inside the bank vault.
Richie arrives to deliver Calhoun's money, but tells Calhoune that the bags of money had been switched with bags of 'heroin', which turns out to be sugar. Calhoune then deduces that Ray was behind the plot. Vera visits Calhoune and tells them where to find Ray and Quick. Bugsy and his men arrive at Ray's house. One of his men trips a bomb, killing them all. Ray and Quick pay off the two white men who disguised themselves as the policemen earlier, revealing there are white people who are aware of the mis-treatment that has been happening. Ray and Quick take one last look at Harlem, knowing they can never return and that there will never be another city like it. Despite this, they happily depart for an unknown location as the credits roll.
|
violence, cult, humor, comedy, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0041776
|
The Queen of Spades
|
As described in a film magazine, Hermann, a Russian military officer with a small fortune, is fascinated when he hears a story of Countess Fedotovna, who won her fortune by playing three certain cards, the identity of which she refuses to reveal. Hermann gains entrance to the house through a flirtation with Lizaveta, ward of the countess. He confronts the countess with a revolver and demands to know the cards she played. The countess falls to the chair, apparently dead. Remorseful, Hermann goes home. The next morning he receives a message from the countess telling him that the three cards are the trey, seven, and ace. The first two nights he plays the trey and seven and is successful. The third night he bets all of his money, feeling sure that the card will be the ace. He finds it is the queen. With the loss of his money he loses his mind.
|
paranormal
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Anchor Bay's new DVD set includes a beautiful presentation of it, along with the 1945 anthology horror film "Dead of Night." I've read nothing but good things about "Dead of Night," but haven't gotten around to seeing it yet.
Once seen, it's hard to forget.Anton Walbrook may have played more multi-dimensional characters in other films, but never with the same frightening intensity as in this one.
As a result there arose many superstitions concerning the cards-one of these was the evil influence of THE QVEEN OF SPADES."The dead shall give up their secrets.Haunting, poetic, lyrical, romantic and visually arresting, Thorold Dickinson's take on the Pushkin story is a magnificent picture of many wonders.
However, now widely available on DVD (the Optimum Region 2 issue is a spankingly fine transfer), and with Martin Scorsese lending his weight to the film's greatness, it's hoped that more people will get to see and embrace this masterpiece.Dickinson (Gaslight) was only brought in at the last minute, literally days before the picture went into production.
The story is a more than solid source to work from, Walbrook's Tsarist Captain Suvorin aspires to gain wealth by learning Countess Ranevskaya's (Evans) secret to wining at the card game Faro.
Working from a book he located about people making deals with the Devil, Suvorin worms his way into the affections of the Countess' ward, Lizaveta Ivanova (Mitchell), so as to get close to the aged and fragile Countess and put the squeeze on the old dear.
He is obsessed and oblivious to the feelings of others and ignorant to the age old adage about being careful about what you wish for.....Filmed in subtle black and white by Otto Heller (They Made Me A Fugitive), film is big on shadows, odd camera angles, clinical sound work and haunting imagery.
Mirrors, too, play a prominent part in proceedings, hauntingly so, while many of the characters have an other worldly sheen to them.3, 7 & Ace.Mostly the film is highly thought of by those that have seen it, what negative reviews I have come across appear to be written by horror fans unhappy with not getting the horror film suggested by tag words such as ghost and the Devil.
Cast are terrific, Walbrook (Gaslight/The Red Shoes) is intense and maniacal, Evans (The Importance of Being Earnest) is oddly scary but pitiful, Mitchell is beautiful but perfectly staid and Howard (son of Leslie) is straight backed and gentleman like.From the opening credits that are off kilter written on scratchy looking paper, accompanied by Auric's blunderbuss music score, to the "devilment" of the denouement, this is a classic Ealing film for true classic film fans.
Adapted from a short story by Pushkin, this brilliant film is far too rarely seen or mentioned, which is tragic, because it is without question one of the best British films ever made.I was fortunate enough to see it on cable, where by coincidence it was shown right after 'The Third Man' and just before another Brtish b/w masterpiece, 'The Haunting' -- what a triple bill!
There are also close connections with The Archers (Powell & Pressberger) -- Anton Walbrook featured in three P&P films, and co-writer Rodney Ackland also scripted one of those films, P&P's '49th Parallel'.Watching 'Queen Of Spades' it's obvious that many of the team who made it learned their craft in the silent era -- lighting, costumes, set design and cinematography are all fantastic, and though on a slightly smaller and more restrained scale, QOS is almost on a par with Von Sternberg's baroque masterpiece 'The Scarlett Empress'.Brilliantly directed by Torold Dickinson (who also did 'Gaslight', in which Walbrook also features), the incredible, wildly expressionistic b/w cinematography is by legendary Czech-born DOP Otto Heller, who began his career in 1922(!) and who also shot Olivier's 'Richard III', 'The Ladykillers', Powell's 'Peeping Tom' and those three classic Michael Caine films of the 60s, The 'Ipcress File', 'Alfie' and 'Funeral In Berlin.'The casting is perfect, and it's easy to see why Anton Walbrook was one of Michael Powell's favourite actors.
The crucial scene in which Suvorin tries unsuccessfully to beg, cajole, and finally force the secret of the cards from the Countess is truly electrifying -- Walbrook is absolutely rivetting, and Evans -- who has no lines and plays the scene only with her eyes -- shows why she was considered one the greatest actors of her generation.
The climax of that scene, the look of stark horror on Walbrook's face, is one of the most powerful film moments I've ever seen, perhaps only surpassed by incredible card-game scene at the end of the film..
Why The Queen of Spades is so overlooked is a mystery to those who have seen it....it is a dazzling tour de force.Anton Walbrook pulls out all the stops as the army officer obsessed with learning how to win at faro.
The countess sold her soul to learn the magic of the cards, 3,7 and Ace and, in the end, that does not bode well for Walbrook.The baroque sets, assisted by wonderful lighting effects, builds an eerie, almost surreal atmosphere.
My Win. I've seen this now probably 10 times or more over the decades it's an out and out genuine British film classic, and still only Thorold Dickinson and Anton Walbrook's second best to Gaslight made 10 years before.
The production values in both were high lending a richly dark and brooding b&w atmosphere on nitrate film stock to compliment the inventive camera-work.Relatively poor Captain in the Royal Engineers jealous of the wealthy Cavalry officers around him dreams of making his fortune at faro, and eventually gets his way at the price of his precious soul.
What she does not reveal however is her mortal fear of death.There is a young soldier who would love to get the secrets of the cards from her and agrees to take the sins of her soul upon his in exchange for the knowledge - which does him no good.Photography and suspense is superb from filmmakers who knew their craft.
A gripping and atmospheric film with excellent performances from Anton Walbrook and Edith Evans, this film is up there with The Third Man as one of the best British films ever made.
It's the kind of highly stylized costume mystery/horror, that will undoubtedly appeal to lovers of old British cinema.The story is based on Alexander Puschkin's novella, "The Queen of Spades (1834), about a young captain in the Russian army (Anton Walbrook), an outsider (because he's German) who secretly covets the wealth and position of his fellow officers.
When he discovers that an aged countess has sold her soul to the devil in exchange for eternal fortune at the card table, he attempts to gain entry to the household by seducing the countess' naive ward, but his envy envy leads to the dowager's death, a loveless marriage, and Herman's descent into madness.The production initially ran into some trouble with director Thorold Dickinson entering the project when a great deal of the pre-production was already done.
The acting is somewhat stagy and highly stylized, but this was probably a common characteristic in British acting in those days, and I don't think of Anton Walbrook as a great actor, but the rest of the cast is fine, with Edith Evans in great form as the countess.
Any other version of Alexander Pushkin's short story classic The Queen of Spades, that isn't one of the brilliant Tchaikovsky opera, has to be really outstanding to beat this film, which is often considered the definitive version.
While Thorold Dickinson directs with a more than sure hand, there are some imaginative touches and he allows the atmosphere to really speak, a good thing considering that it is a ghost story, and the dialogue is intelligently written and easy to understand while respectful to Pushkin.
The story is hugely compelling, yes it is a slow-burner(which is not a hindrance at all, the film was unlikely to be as effective otherwise), but the spooky atmosphere and the high levels of suspense make the film's best scenes chill the blood even now.
The acting is spot on, especially from Anton Walbrook, who gives perhaps a career best performance, and a heavily made up(and effectively) Edith Evans- looking deliberately older than her years- who is terrifying and tormented.
The Queen of Spades is very much of the 'slow burn' variety; and like the classics produced by Val Lewton, relies mostly on it's atmosphere and story to keep things interesting - and that is really where the film falls down.
The story focuses around a very simple card game that was very popular around the time in which the film is set.
An army officer, fanatical about cards; but not wealthy enough to play himself, hears about an elderly countess who apparently sold her soul to the devil in return for the ability to always win at cards.
The officer then endeavours to track down the old countess in order to learn her secret so he too can win at cards.The film is based on a short story; and therein lies the problem with it.
A middle ranking soldier in the Russian imperial army is stung in to taking on his superiors at a card game, convincing himself that the secret of success lies in the spooky past of an aristocratic dame.
The photography is outstanding, with light/shadow/angles creating soulful atmosphere, and the director does some great combinations of music and close-ups on old actresses.At first the story is a bit slow and muddled, but it does wind up to an intense climax.
I watched it 3 times and I found much of the dialog to be hard to decipher and there were long passages of very boring scenes { like the dancing scenes while the card playing was going on } .
Poor, ambitious, bitter army captain Anton Walbrook plots to learn the secret to winning at faro so he can amass a fortune and take his revenge on those who look down on him.
This book holds the key to bargaining with the devil to win a fortune by playing a card game and it names a certain old Countess Edith Evans (Ranevskaya) as having gone through this particular process.
Walbrook is desperate to meet Evans and get the secret to everlasting wealth from her, ie, the secret of the cards.The character names can be confusing in this film, particularly at the beginning, but this doesn't really affect the proceedings as it is fairly easy to understand the relationships between the characters and that's what matters.
Edith Evans puts on a good show as a Miss Haversham type, while Yvonne Mitchell (Liza) is OK as her young companion but gets annoying in the scene when she realizes that she has been used by Anton Walbrook.
Walbrook holds our interest in the lead role as he pursues his goal for wealth and plays love rival to cavalry officer Ronald Howard (Andrei) for the attentions of Mitchell.The story is filmed with shadows and mirror images which add to its dark and creepy atmosphere, with great settings and costumes.
There is a particularly well done sequence when we hear the dead Mrs Evans coming for Walbrook.So, it's time to break out a deck of cards and get some wealth - after all, I now know the secret..
*Possible semi-spoilers, but as the story has been around for over 150 years, these may not surprise many...* 1806 Sankt-Peterburg: Herman Suvorin (Anton Walbrook) approaches middle-age as a bitterly disappointed man.
When he learns that old Countess Ranevskaya (Edith Evans) the grandmother of one of the officers he envies allegedly sold her soul to the Devil in exchange for learning an infallible way of winning at Faro, he sees a chance of advancement.
Edith Evans, as the Countess, acquits herself well playing a woman some decades her senior: spoilt, vain (still dressing in the high wigs and panniers of thirty years before), bullying - and beneath the show, pathetic and terrified.As a Pushkin adaptation, I would rate this film as highly as Martha Fiennes' 'Onegin'.
Along with Hammer studios,I've been trying to find and view more British Horror films.Thankfully,I recently discovered on the IMDb Film Noir board a huge amount of praise,for a dark,atmospheric UK movie,which seems to have almost been completely forgotten in British Horror history.The plot:Keeping up a tradition of standing in the corner and never partaking in a game of cards,Tsarist Captain Suvorin begins to contemplate on how he can grip all of the "falling" cash being spent by the gang of card players.Shortly after getting hold of some small change,Suvorin discovers a previously hidden book which details a number of deals that people have done with an alleged "devil",who along with helping the willing soul to achieve their desire's,also makes model figurines for the participant's souls to be stored in after their deaths.
Finding out of a party being held by reclusive Countess Ranevskya,Suvorin quickly learns that Ranevskya is infamous for having turned her luck around and winning a huge amount of cash from a card game decades ago,before retiring to become extremely reclusive.Feeling that Ranevskya's life weirdly mirrors a chapter in the book,about a woman selling her soul to the devil so that she can win a card game,and secretly put all of the money that she had stolen from her husband "back in its place".Suvorin starts to try getting the attention of Ranevskya's family,in the hope of getting close to the Countess and finding out how she scored such a devilish winning handView on the film:For their absolutely stunning adaptation of Alexander Pushkin's short story,screenwriters Rodney Ackland and Arthur Boys have Ranevskya's past dark dealings be something that slowly manifestation's into Suvorin,as he goes from just wanting to put his friends noses out of place,to being desperate to holding the key of the "dark arts".Placing the movie in a dark,almost Dickens Gothic setting, (with Countess Ranevskya sometimes looking like the sister of Miss Havisham!)director Thorold Dickinson brilliantly uses disjointed sound effects to show Suvorin's obsession breaking his reality apart,whilst also using complex,but perfectly executed camera moves to greatly increase the mysteriousness of the surrounding,and also turning the card games into truly tense,nail-biting scenes.Along with the strong directing,and Otto Heller's chillingly moody,low-lit cinematography,Anton Walbrook gives an excellent performance as Suvorin,who Walbrook shows to be a man that is never truly easy in his own skin,and always has an ulterior motive hidden under his sleeve..
The Queen of Spades, based on a story by Pushkin, is a marvelously atmospheric and menacing tale of obsession and greed.
Then he hears the story of Countess Ranevskaya (Edith Evans), who, a generation earlier, is supposed to have sold her soul for "the secret of the cards"...the three cards to choose which will win a fortune at faro.
Anton Walbrook was one of the great actors of his time.
A Captain of the Russian army, with little money, becomes mad for the secret of three cards which could yield a fortune.
That Captain, Suvorin(Anton Walbrook, who is mesmerizing)reads about Countess Ranevskaya(Edith Evans)who, facing public scrutiny after she commits adultery with a thief who desires money from a locked box, sells her soul instead of being found out of her sins.
Suvorin wants the secret of the cards more than anything and will manipulate her servant, Lizaveta Ivanova(Yvonne Mitchell)so that he can get in to meet the Countess.
The film might start out rather slow, but it gets better and better as time passes and the greedy dementia of Suvorin, a man who wants to know what wealth and privilege taste like, takes shape when it appears the secret he so longs for seems completely out of reach.
He's distant from the other officers, a bit unfriendly, and seems content to stay that way but, man, would he like to beat them all at a game of cards and carry off a king's ransom in kopeks.The problem is that, as it stands, he can't afford to "risk the necessary to obtain the superfluous." That kind of phraseology, plus certain other things like the retention of patronyms, makes me think the writers hewed fairly close to Pushkin's original story.
It's easier to steal dialog than to make it up.Dame Edith Evans is all lace and ancient fragility, is terribly wealthy, lives in a remote estate, and is rumored to have sold her soul to the devil in order to learn how to win at cards.
Anton Walbrook did a good job of portraying Suvorin, the gambler who doesn't want to actually gamble anything.
He's a man who is looking to sell his soul to gain wealth and power, yet by his actions he seems to be lacking one to bargain with.***SPOILER ALERT*** Here are some stupid plot points that helped kill this film for me: #1- Oh no, she has found the secret staircase behind the bookshelf!
This wouldn't be the first or the last time that a producer made an acclaimed film and followed it with a mediocre overrated picture.This pretty costume drama of a film meandered around boring me for a while, then gave me a bad romance between a stupidly smitten girl and conniving man and adds a third to the triangle with a boring character and after the death of an obnoxious old woman concludes with a tense, but ultimately ridiculous card game.Do you really want good 'slow burn Brit horror'?
And that the movie managed to be really creepy when it wanted to be.Not for every taste, but worth your time if you like Pushkin, Russians, British cinema or slow-burn tales of the supernatural..
The story itself reminded me a bit of Faust where a man would sell his soul to the devil in order to gather fortune.
So in the last 20 minutes this movie finally gets going with some exciting scenes between German and the countess and the card game between German and Andrei.
|
tt0117534
|
Sabrina the Teenage Witch
|
The movie centers around Sabrina Sawyer, who is sent to live with her eccentric aunts in Riverdale. On her 16th birthday, Sabrina discovers that she is a witch. Sabrina then develops a crush on Seth, the cutest boy in school who happens to be dating Katie La More, the school's "queen bee." Sabrina has to find a way to use her newly discovered magical power to get Seth to notice her, but at the same time not cast a love spell, which could backfire on her.
After Katie dumps Seth, he starts to notice Sabrina. Sabrina is able to use her magic to win a track competition and get Seth to ask her to the Spring Fling. Katie discovers Sabrina's secret and sets out to let everyone know what Sabrina is. Sabrina has to use her magic to turn Katie into a poodle to stop her but later changes her back. All the while, Harvey likes Sabrina and waits to see if she will have a change of heart and start to notice him. The story ends happily with Sabrina and Harvey together at the dance.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I don't know why everyone's being so hard on this movie.
No it's not like the TV series, but come on, this was made BEFORE the TV series as a movie all on its own, of course it's different.
Instead of endlessly comparing it to the TV show and complaining, why not try letting it stand on it's own?I actually really like this movie, so much so that I recently bought it on DVD.
Back when this movie was made Melissa Joan Hart was young enough to be able to pull off playing a TEENAGE witch and she did a really good job.
Melissa Joan Hart was so sweet in this film, she was cute but not too much, and her acting was just fine.
I really enjoyed Michelle Beaudoin as Marnie, Sabrina's best friend.
Beaudoin had great chemsitry with Hart and it was very easy to believe their friendship, which felt very natural.
I also thought Lalainia Lindbjerg was super as the malicious Queen Bee character Katie and Ryan Reynolds was great as hunky Seth, while Tobias Mehler was perfect as Harvey.
They weren't so bad but I'm not that keen on them either.The storyline was good enough...Sabrina Saywer is relatively new in River Dale.
She has a crush on Seth, a senior and the hottest guy in school.
But Seth is invovled with Queen Bee Katie, however when Katie breaks up with him Seth begins noticing Sabrina.
When Sabrina uses her newly discovered magical powers to win a track competition, Seth asks her to the Spring Fling dance at school but by this time Sabrina's unsure if Seth really is the guy for her.
All the while poor Harvey, who's liked Sabrina all along, has to wait to see if Sabrina will have a change of heart.Sabrina, The Teenage Witch plays very much like a chick flick aimed at young teens.
It clearly was made on a low budget but it still (in my opinion) looked good and it's just a cute movie that's fun if you have some time on your hands.
Try and watch it with an open mind, forget about the TV show while you do, and don#t judge this little bit of fluff too harshly.
Sabrina, The Teenage Witch, The Movie..
Sabrina, The Teenage Witch, well, of course the movie is about Sabrina, a teenage girl who is sent to live with her two strange aunts.
Whilst there, on her sixteenth birthday, Sabrina finds out she's a witch.
At first, she doesn't know what to think, but she soon gets used to it.
It's good that Melissa Joan Hart who also plays Sabrina in the TV Show, of the same name plays Sabrina here too as she really suits the role.
It's a shame we don't have the likes of Jenna Leigh Green here though who played Libby Chessler for a few years on Sabrina, the TV Show, as she was really great, but fans of the show will most likely like this movie, anyway.
I also think this is better then some of the other Sabrina TV movies..
I do think the the TV series based on this TV flick is better, but this movie did set the course for laugh-out-loud comedy series.
Most of the casting is messed up, except for Michelle Beaudoin as Marny, Sabrina's best friend.
Michelle went on to play Sabrina's best friend Jenny for a season, which was good.
The voice in the show is much better..
Show vs Movie.
I think the previous comments can be explained by some clarification.
Sabrina, the Teenage Witch the movie came first.
Given the popularity of the movie, a TV show spawned off of it (much the same as what happened with Buffy, the movie was first) and the cast changes and other changes were made.
I liked the series, but it's important to note that since Sabrina was already popular by that point because of the movie, the series had the opportunity to be much more polished and complete.
Taken with that in mind, it's much easier to enjoy the movie as the delightful first romp through the Sabrina world that it is, rather than comparing to the much-improved later works..
Rather than Caroline Rhea and Beth Broderick as the aunts, Nick Bakay as Salem, we have an entirely different cast.
The only ones that are the same as they appeared on the show were Melissa Joan Hart and Michelle Beudoin.
Sabrina Sawyer instead of Sabrina Spellman, a British Salem instead of the one we all know and love.
The movie was okay, but it just doesn't compare to the greatness of the TV show.
I recommend "Sabrina Goes to Rome" or "Sabrina Down Under." Those movies are more up-to-date..
If you love the series, you'll love the movie!.
I myself grew up watching the Sabrina the Teenage Witch episodes.
If you are a big fan of Melissa Joan Hart or love the series then you will definitely love this movie.
The movie takes place at the beginning when Sabrina just discovers that she is a witch.
But, it is a great started movie to the series.
I loved watching it.
If you like Sabrina, then watch this movie.
RE: Sabrina Movie's.
I would love to own the series of films that Melissa Joan Hart has been in.
IE: Sabrina Goes To Rome, Right Connections, Sabrina the Teenage Witch, Sabrina Goes to Austrailia (to save the mermaid colony), and of course I would like the family to go to the theatre to see Drive me Crazy which is coming out soon.
This is basically a cheap TV movie with a very thin plot.
Sabrina fights with the high school's ice queen over a boy and Sabrina uses some magic to win his heart.
Maybe that's enough for an episode in the series, but not for an entire movie..
I am a huge fan of the TV show, but this movie was not exactly like it.
I thought that the movie would be like the beginning of the TV series, and have the same cast and set as before.
They're funny in the real show, but in this movie how they shut their eyes and mumble is almost creepy.
I also think that this should have had something more to do with the Other Realm and being a witch than popularity and crushes.
Also, Salem's voice in this is British, and he doesn't even make one funny remark.Even though this was far from the quality of the TV series, I am very glad that it aired.
Overall, I'm glad that this movie exists, but I wish it had been like the TV show..
The funniest character was probably the cat, but everyone played a good part.
"A girl, sent by her parents to live with her two eccentric aunts and attend a new high school, finds out on her sixteenth birthday that she is a witch".
This premise sets up Sabrina the Teenage Witch (1996) to be a blend of "Bewitched" and "Mean Girls".This teen movie belongs to the "high-school-queen-bee-gets-her-comeuppance" sub-genre of which there are endless examples.
Apparently there is a huge viewing demographic who on some basic level repeatedly get off erotically or emotionally on this humiliation dynamic.
Sabrina competes with other girls in track and field events; winning several of them by using her powers to cheat.
The story hedges a bit on this issue, as her magic is mostly used in response to unwarranted attacks by her rival; but in several of the track & field events her cheating makes losers out of all the other participants and no attempt is made at rationalization or justification.The problem with casting someone like Melissa Joan Hart as your good girl love interest is the absence of even a hint of physical sizzle.
Which means that to stay remotely credible with viewers, the bad girl she plays off has to be several erotic levels below Megan Fox; hence Tori Spelling lookalike Lalainia Lindbjerg as Katy Lemore (apparently a play on L'Amore).
And Hart's rival Libby in the 1996-2003 series would be played by the even less sizzling Jenna Leigh Green.
And since Katy does not rank especially high on the queen bee badness scale Sabrina's extreme revenge is way out of proportion.
To appreciate the missed opportunity just check out Samantha's inspired abuse of rival Sheila Sommers (played by gorgeous Nancy Kovack) in several episodes of "Bewitched".But the producers should get some credit for a glammed up Katy in the "Zapped" (1982) inspired final comeuppance scene.
Although Sabina has tortured Katy throughout the movie she saves the most extreme for the end, reducing her rival to a disheveled and whimpering wreck.
With this "Sabrina the Teenage Witch" sets a new standard in teen movie queen bee degradation, if that is your idea of a turn on or a good time.
Going any further with this sort of thing would cross into "Carrie" territory and that is an entirely different genre.Sabina's bad boy hunk Seth is played by sleepy looking Ryan Reynolds, he is relatively harmless and almost cluelessly disengaged.
Reynolds would play an almost identical character three years later in "Dick".
"Dead Like Me's" Daisy - Laura Harris - plays one of Katy's friends and has a lot of what the main actresses are missing.Then again, what do I know?
for fans of the TV show and Ryan Reynolds is in it too.
Sixteen year old Sabrina Sawyer (Melissa Joan Hart) moves in with her aunts Hilda (Sherry Miller) and Zelda (Charlene Fernetz) in Riverdale.
Marnie Littlefield (Michelle Beaudoin) is her best friend at school.
They have a crush on hot jock Seth (Ryan Reynolds).
Harvey has a secret crash on Sabrina.
Katy Lemore spices up her love life by breaking up with Seth.
On her birthday, Sabrina is given her spell book and then their cat Salem starts talking.
She tries to win Seth with witchcraft but it requires love with a pure heart from Seth or else she'll be turned into a witch's familiar.It's fine as a teen romance.
Harvey could be played by an actor with a bit more charm.
This is for the TV show's fans and also anybody who wants to see Ryan Reynolds in his 80s fluffy golden blonde hair.
I didn't know about it until after watching the series.
I watched it on regular TV as a Disney movie, then rented it to see what was censored and what I missed.
Simply put, the movie is sexier.
The aunts were better looking than the TV show version, no hard feelings to them!
Sabrina got to do sexier activities too.
(At least in the movie she never farted!
I hate fart jokes!) Salem was a familiar rather than a male witch under a cat sentence.
I only came here to see what her movie version's last name was.
I also had to reply, because I hate people who watch a movie just to hate it and give it bad reviews.
I intend to buy the DVD of the movie now that "Columbia DVD" is offering it.
I'll get the series too.
This movie is very thin when it comes to the plot.
I'm not a fan of the series, nor of this movie.
I think adding a few more plot elements would have made it a halfway decent movie, but unfortunately, it doesn't work in the end.
The acting is decent, tho I'm far from a fan of Melissa Joan Hart, but nothing spectacular anywhere in the movie.
I'm not sure they have this movie on dvd or vhs or anything, but if they do, only spend the cash if you're a HUGE fan of the series.
Against my expectations, I actually enjoyed this movie.
I must provide one of the dissenting voices here as an individual who actually enjoyed this movie as relaxing and light entertainment even though the character development had a few flaws, the script could have been improved at times and the plot was essentially one that had been explored in many different contexts.
It is infinitely better than the subsequent `Sabrina' movie that was produced and I actually came away quite impressed with the quality of the actingIndeed I think it was the quality of the acting that turned this movie from what could have been an exceedingly weak teenage movie into one that was entertaining and enjoyable.
While usually not a fan of Melissa Joan Hart, she actually provided some high quality acting here and gave her character a real personality and a dimension that was very enjoyable to witness.
Michelle Beaudoin also was excellent in her role, as was Ryan Reynolds as Seth and Tobias Mehler as Harvey.
And Lalaina Lindbjergh provides an excellent portrayal of quintessential snob Katie Lemore.
The only major criticism I have is to do with Seth's character development later on in the movie but I won't give that away because it would be classified as a spoiler.
Yet I think it was Sherry Miller and Charlene Fernetz who really provided the most excellent, comprehensive and in depth portrayals of their respective characters.
The two gave the characters of Aunt Hilda and Aunt Zelda so much creativity, depth, imagination and appeal as well as an elegance and grace that went well beyond what the scriptwriters had in mind.
Aunt Hilda and Aunt Zelda completely stole the show and it was a shame we didn't see more of the excellent acting of Miller and Fernetz in this movie and indeed that we haven't heard more from Miller and Fernetz on the acting scene.
Sure, the plot was predictable, but the acting made up for it in my view.
If you are looking for some light and enjoyable entertainment for younger audiences, this movie quite definitely fits the bill..
Stays true to the comic!!!!!.
This movie was really good.
It stayed very true to the comic of which it was based on.
Most of the characters personalities stayed the same from the comic to the movie.
Only difference is Harvey is a bit more like his character in show.
The other difference (and something that is the same in the comic that is TV series) Sabrina's last name is Spellman not Sowyer.
Other than the last name thing the movie stayed true to the comics and the Archie world in general.
I have nothing against the TV show it was very good but still the comics are way better.
That's why I like the movie so much.
I dislike how people are majorly comparing the movie to the TV show.
It's just comparing Buffy the vampire slayer the movie to the TV series.
Both movies were the reason why we have these great TV shows (agian not the biggest fan of Sabrina the TV series but it was great as far as TV shows of the 90s go)..
I do like this movie, but I don't think that they did a very good job at making the movie to a TV series and what I mean is that Harvey isn't the same person he is a nerd in this movie has like no friends and not that cute.
In the TV series Harvey is basically the opposite.
Sabrina's last name isn't even Spellman in this movie.
The aunts aren't as comical in this movie and are obviously not the same actresses Hilda is smart and Zelda is more ditsy in this movie and the actresses chosen to play Hilda and Zelda look like they should of been switched around....this Hilda looks more like the TV Zelda and this Zelda looks more like the TV Hilda.
Sabrina cant just think about something she wants and point she has to make up an incantation for every little thing she wants, I'm thinking an incantation for ice cream is going to sound like a bad rap song.
Salem is not as amusing and was turned into a witch familiar for using magic to win a girls heart and kissing her when she wasn't his true love or something it sounds more like when Sabrina first kisses Harvey in the TV show and turns him into a frog and the only way for him to be human again is true love.
I think Salem is a bore compared to the evil,self-centered,world dominating Salem everyone knows and loves on TV.
Also in this movie Sabrina's parents are both witches and have to go on a sabbatical cause she has to go to someone to train her to use her magic on TV her mom is mortal and dad is a witch and the woman who plays his girlfriend Gayle is the same as this movie's aunt Zelda, but the reason she's with her aunts on TV is cause she can't see her mother or her mom turns into wax and her dad is busy working in the magic book so he's like stuck in the book yeah its different but its still a lot more interesting than what is happening with her dad in this movie.
I love Sabrina the teenage witch I just think its obvious that some people weren't thinking at all when they made this movie then switched it to a TV series..
the TV series is way better.
**SPOILERS** **SPOILERS** I have seen the tv series and loved it.
So, I was really looking forward to the movie.
There are many similar teenager movies.
A normal guy (Harvey) falls in love to a Girl (Sabrina).
But she loves the top athlete of the school (Seth).
She dates him, finds out that he is a dork, and finally falls in love with the other guy (Harvey).The fact that Sabrina is a witch, is only a minor part in the movie.
With some small changes, she wouldn't use her magic at all.For me, the only thing that makes this movie worth watching it is some of the female actors.The TV Series is way better.
|
tt0805184
|
Bhagam Bhag
|
Champak Chaturvedi (Paresh Rawal) the director of a theatre group, is offered a chance to perform a show in London. Babla (Govinda) and Bunty (Akshay Kumar) are two derps and flirts in his group, always fighting with each other to get the role of the hero. Their behaviour causes the actress (Tanushree Dutta) to run away. This really upsets the organizer, who offered the chance mainly because of the heroine. After reaching London, Champak tells the duo that whoever gets a new actress will get to become hero. Then Babla asks Gullu (Rajpal Yadav), a local driver where he can find a heroine. Gullu misinterprets this as prostitute and directs him to a park.
Bunty, who has heard everything, follows them. In a misunderstanding, they meet two men from underworld and exchange their goods, only to find that the men have sold drugs to them since the underworld misinterpreted their need for heroine as "heroin". Bunty convinces Babla into going to the police to turn in the drugs to get good credit or an award, but the police get the wrong impression and think they are drug dealers. Commissioner JD Mehra (Jackie Shroff) releases them after telling them not to leave the country until they are proven innocent. Then while search of a heroine, Bunty and Gullu take help of Guru (Shakti Kapoor), a local don who is a drunkard and they end up breaking his (Guru's) legs. Guru sends his goons to thrash Bunty and Gullu but they escape. They bump into Munni (Lara Dutta), who is trying to commit suicide. Bunty saves her and brings her to the theatre group to be the heroine.
Later, Bunty falls in love with Munni, but then she has an accident. The doctor notes that she may have suicidal tendencies. When Munni wakes up, she claims to be Nisha Chauhan, wife of Vikram Chauhan (Arbaaz Khan). They meet Vikram, who confirms her suicidal nature. A heartbroken Bunty accepts the fact and tries to forget her, only to learn some time later that Nisha has burnt herself to death.
Meanwhile, the underworld don (Sharat Saxena) who gave drugs and his boss M.G. Gandhi (Manoj Joshi) think that Bunty, Babla and Champak are undercover cops and they want to kill them. However, Bunty suddenly spots Nisha in the city one day. Later, Champak and Babla too see her. On the day of the drama, the trio see Vikram flailing a gun at someone and are shocked to see him die in front of them.
All three are frightened and throw his body down a vent. During the performance, Vikram's body falls from the ceiling. The commissioner questions everyone and arrests the trio for murder of Vikram. M.G. Gandhi wants the three dead because he thinks they're going to get him thrown in jail. Gandhi's men attack the police car transporting the trio, helping them to escape. The trio try to search priety based on the clues they have. Meanwhile, Gullu is given task by Guru to search for the trio. M G Gandhi captures Champak. Bunty and Babla run into Nisha, well and alive, upon which they trap her at the clock tower of Brighton railway station.
It is revealed her real name is Aditi and she was hired by Vikram to play his wife Nisha and convince people she is crazy in return for money and a passport out of the UK. Vikram wanted to kill his real wife Nisha (Gurleen Chopra) to get her wealth. When Aditi found out about his ways, she tried to stop him and failed. She later tried to reach Bunty at the show to tell him about it, but Vikram caught her. Then the Commissioner arrived at the play and killed Vikram. Just then, the Commissioner arrives there and confirms that he is indeed Vikram's killer.
The Commissioner reveals that Nisha was his sister and he killed Vikram to avenge her murder. He also intends to kill Aditi as she helped Vikram to pass off Nisha's murder as suicide. By then, Gandhi and his men, Champak, Gullu, Guru and his men, reach there and a skirmish starts. The Commissioner is about to kill Nisha along with Bunty, Babla and Champak. However, the disaster is averted, after which the Commissioner confesses his crime. Bunty marries Aditi. The film ends with the title song.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0032194
|
All This, and Heaven Too
|
Mademoiselle Henriette Deluzy-Desportes (Bette Davis), a French woman, starts teaching at an American girls school. She is confronted by the tales and gossip about her that circulate among her pupils and, thus provoked, she decides to tell them her life story.
Deluzy-Desportes is governess to the four children of the Duc de Praslin (Charles Boyer) and the Duchesse de Praslin (Barbara O'Neil) in Paris during the last years of the Orleans monarchy. As a result of the Duchesse's constantly erratic and temperamental behavior, all that remains is an unhappy marriage, but the Duc remains with his wife for sake of their children.
Her warmth and kindness wins her the love and affection of the children and their father, but also the jealousy and hatred of their mother. She is forced to leave and the Duchess refuses to give her a letter of recommendation to future employers. The Duc confronts his wife and she invents alternate letters taking opposite attitudes, which in fact she has not written and does not intend to write. Her account enrages him and, at the breaking point, he kills her.
The Duc de Praslin is in a privileged position; as a peer his case can only be heard by other nobles. He refuses to confess his guilt or openly to admit his love for Henriette Deluzy-Desportes, knowing that his fellow nobles wish to use such an admission to blame her for the murder by declaring that he was acting at her bidding. Ultimately the Duc takes poison to prevent himself from ever publicly proclaiming his love for Henriette, since he knows that would convict her; however, he lives long enough to reveal it to another of his servants, Pierre (Harry Davenport), a kindly old man who had warned the governess to leave the de Praslin household. With the Duc's death, the authorities accept that they have no evidence upon which to base a judgment that Henriette solicited the murder and she is released.
Deluzy-Desportes had been recommended for the teaching position "in the land of the free" by an American minister, Rev. Henry Field (Jeffrey Lynn), to whom she had expressed a loss of faith while in prison. He proposes marriage, and it is implied that Henriette will accept.
|
romantic, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt2064647
|
The Rundown
|
Beck (Dwayne Johnson) is a "retrieval expert", a bounty hunter who collects debts for a man named Billy Walker (William Lucking). He is dispatched to a nightclub to retrieve a championship ring from a football player, and after doing so is assaulted by one of Walker's other collectors. Angry, he confronts Walker and tells him that he wants out of the business. Walker talks him into one last bounty - retrieve Walker's son Travis (Seann William Scott) from a small mining town in Brazil and Walker will give him enough money to open his own restaurant. Beck accepts and leaves for Brazil. When Beck arrives in the town of El Dorado he meets with the man running the mining operation, Mr. Hatcher (Christopher Walken). Hatcher gives Beck his blessing to grab Travis, but reneges when he finds out that Travis has discovered a missing golden artifact called "El Gato do Diabo". Beck confronts Hatcher and his men in the local bar and leaves with Travis. On the way back to the airfield, Travis forces their Jeep off the road and into the jungle. There he tries to escape but is re-captured by Beck. After an unfortunate encounter with some local monkeys, the two find themselves in the camp of the local resistance movement.
At the resistance encampment, Travis convinces the rebels that Beck works for Hatcher and was sent to kill them all. After a prolonged fight, Beck gains the upper hand before the rebel leader Mariana (Rosario Dawson) intervenes. She wants Travis, as the Gato can be used to ensure the locals can free themselves from Hatcher. Hatcher suddenly attacks the camp, killing many rebels. Beck, Travis, and Mariana escape the camp and Beck makes Mariana a deal: she helps him get Travis to the airfield in exchange for the Gato. After some searching, Travis leads them to a cave behind a waterfall where the Gato is located. They retrieve it and begin the journey back.
On the way back, Mariana chastises Travis for wanting to sell the artifact, but Travis argues that he actually did want to give it to a museum. Mariana gives the two men Konlobos, a toxic fruit that paralyzes the eater. As she tells Beck which direction the airfield is, she leaves them with the fire to keep the animals away. After waking up able to move, Beck hauls Travis to the airfield. The local pilot, Declan (Ewen Bremner), tells Beck that Mariana was captured earlier by Hatcher and will probably be killed. Travis pleads with Beck to help, and the two head into town to rescue her. Using a cow stampede for cover, the two begin their assault on Hatcher's goons. Travis becomes trapped by gunfire in a bus, and Beck saves him before the bus explodes. Hatcher tells his brother to take Mariana and the Gato and flee, but they are stopped by Travis. Hatcher confronts Beck, who offers him the chance to leave town still. Hatcher refuses, and is confronted by the townspeople who shoot him before he can leave. Travis gives the Gato to Mariana before leaving with Beck, who tells him that despite all they've been through he must still return Travis to the U.S. Travis is delivered to his dad who begins to verbally and physically abuse him. Beck asks to celebrate with them and gives Walker and his men Konlobos. As they are paralyzed, Beck uncuffs Travis and the duo leave together, with Travis continuing to jokingly annoy Beck.
|
non fiction
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0245024
|
Brother
|
In the autumn of 1997, Danila Bagrov (Sergei Bodrov Jr.) returns to his small hometown of Priozersk following his demobilization from the Russian Army after the First Chechen War. Before he reaches home, he ends up in a fight with security guards, after he accidentally walks onto the set of a music video for the band Nautilus Pompilius. After Danila rejects a job offer from the chief of the local militsiya, who was a classmate of Danila's deceased father, he is released, on the condition that he will find work within the week. His mother insists that he travels to St. Petersburg to seek out his successful older brother Viktor, whom his mother is confident will help him make a living.
Danila travels to the city, but his attempts to make contact with Viktor are unsuccessful. Instead, he travels around the city and befriends several people from a very wide urban spectrum: Kat (Mariya Zhukova), an energetic drug addict and party-girl, and "German" Hoffman (Yury Kuznetsov), a homeless street vendor whom Danila helps after a thug attempts to extort him. Danila knocks the thug unconscious and takes a revolver from his pocket.
Unbeknown to their mother, Viktor (Viktor Sukhorukov) is an accomplished hitman who goes by the street name "Tatar" but is growing too independent and is starting to irritate his mob boss "Roundhead" (Sergei Murzin). His latest target is "Chechen", a Chechen mafia boss who was recently released from prison and runs an open-air market. Roundhead, who is unhappy with the amount of money that Viktor demanded for the hit, orders his thugs to secretly watch him.
When Danila finally finds Viktor's apartment, he is welcomed by Viktor. To avoid exposure, Viktor passes his assignment to his brother, gives him money to settle into the city, and then lies to him that the Chechen has been extorting from him, and asks Danila to perform the hit. Although Danila claims that his army service was spent at the headquarters as a clerk, he carries out the task professionally. First, he asks German to find him a room in a communal flat in the city center (much to the dismay of the old alcoholic landlord who threatens to shoot German with his vintage hunting rifle, as revenge for World War II). He then constructs a makeshift silencer out of a plastic soda bottle and an oil filter, as well as a decoy firecracker out of a matchbox. Finally, he follows Chechen and, despite the latter's security, takes him out without being spotted. As Danila makes his exit, Roundhead's thugs spot him and chase him. Making his escape, Danila jumps into a freight tram and, despite being wounded in the abdomen, manages to kill one of the pursuing thugs.
The tram driver, a woman named Sveta (Svetlana Pismichenko), helps Danila escape. Later, despite her marriage to an abusive husband, the two begin an affair. Danila later recovers, with German's help. With the money given to him by Viktor after the hit, he begins to enjoy St. Petersburg, gives his provincial image a makeover, goes to a concert with Sveta to see his favorite band, Nautilus Pompilius, and manages to scare away her husband. He meets up with Kat to go to a nightclub and then smokes cannabis in an afterparty, where he taunts a French tourist whom he mistakes for an American. The night ends with him sleeping with Kat.
Roundhead's loss of a thug and the fact that Viktor employed Danila to carry out the hit aggravates him even more. He decides to draw him into a combined raid. Once again Viktor, suspecting a trap, passes the job to Danila. The two thugs raid the apartment, but their main target is away. While they wait, in an apartment on the floor above, a party is taking place with several well-known Russian rock stars. A young radio director, Stepan (Andrey Fedortsov) mistakes the raided flat for the party flat and is almost killed by the thugs, who take him as a hostage. Vyacheslav Butusov, the lead singer of Nautilus Pompilius, makes the same mistake, but Danila instead follows Butusov above and relaxes in the friendly musical atmosphere. Realizing the balance between right and wrong, he comes downstairs and finds that the thugs have just killed their main target, and are about to do the same with Stepan. Instead, Danila kills both thugs. Danila and Stepan drag the corpses to the Smolensky Lutheran Cemetery, where German and his friends dwell. Once again, German helps Danila by disposing of the bodies.
Roundhead is furious upon finding out what happened. Instead of going after Tatar, he decides to track Danila and intercepts Sveta's tram. They later raid her apartment, where his men beat and rape her, and learn his phone number, as well as his address. A henchman nicknamed "Mole" ambushes Danila near his apartment building, but the bullet hits Danila's music player, giving him a chance to fire back and kill Mole. Realizing that staying home is unsafe, he travels to Sveta's house and is shocked at her state. Initially thinking it was her husband, he then learns who was responsible and realizes that the only way they could have tracked Sveta was when he returned a phone call from her home telephone to his brother.
At the same time, Roundhead raids Viktor's apartment and forces him to call Danila at gunpoint, so that he comes to pick up his payment. Realizing the depth of the situation, Danila decides to end it all at once. He goes back to the communal room that he was renting, buys the rifle from the old man, converts it into a sawed-off shotgun, and replaces the duck-hunting pellets with nailheads. At Viktor's apartment, he makes easy work of Roundhead and two of his henchmen and tells the surviving thug to warn the rest of the gang that anyone who hurts his brother will be killed. In reply, the thug tells him that it was Viktor who turned him in.
Danila forgives his brother, gives him some of the money from Roundhead's suitcase (keeping the rest for himself) and then tells him to return home and to work for the militsiya. Danila decides to go to Moscow, as St. Petersburg, according to Viktor, "is a pretty town, but provincial nonetheless". Once again he visits Sveta, intending to take her with him, but her husband has returned and is beating her. Seeing Danila, he challenges him to a fight, but before he can come closer, Danila fires a shot into his leg. Sveta rushes to her husband and begins to treat his wound. Danila urges her to come with him, but she tells him to get out and never come back. He leaves her a Nautilus Pompilius CD. He then meets up with German, converses with him about the influence of the city on its residents, saying that everyone is weak here, to which German replies that the city is an evil that drains the strength from those who enter it. Danila offers him money, but German declines, saying "What's good for the Russian is death for the German". Before he leaves the city, he finds Kat to say goodbye. She is indifferent to his departure, but he gives her money nonetheless.
The last scene of the film shows Danila walking out of a snow-covered forest. He hitches a ride to Moscow on a passing Kamaz truck. As he chats up with the driver, the final shot is of the winter road stretching far into the wilderness.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Humorous, Yet Touching.
This a simple story told in narration by a brother, who describes growing up and his odd family.
It is both humorous and tragic.
Most of all, it was captivating and very touching.
It's very quiet, and you have to give it your full attention.The narrator describes everyone in his family, all of whom are shown in claymation form.
Most of the shots are fairly quick and they are stills.
There is very little movement in this, just one "snapshot" after another.
Everyone is odd mainly because of some physical affliction, so the humor is dark.
The claymation figures are "cute" and add much-needed lightness to a story that, basically, is fairly dark, especially at the end.
Actually, the claymation figures are more than cute: they're fantastic.
You'll laugh and marvel at each figure, from the poor brother and his weird eyeglasses, to the boys' pet lizard.Overall, this is different; it's excellent and it will keep you riveted to the screen, wondering what odd tidbit you'll hear next about this family.This is one of a trilogy done by the writer-director Adam Elliot.
I haven't seen the other two but if they are anywhere near as good as this, I look forward to seeing them..
Weird but very, very captivating.
This is a very strange short film that is also very captivating.
Oddly, however, when this film was shown on cable TV, it was called "Uncle" but this is NOT the correct title, but "Brother".
Uncle was another video by the same director--part of a trilogy made up of UNCLE, COUSIN and BROTHER.The film is a strange journey through claymation into the world of the narrator as he talks about his childhood.
All the family is introduced, but the bulk of this film focuses on the narrator's odd brother.
This brother had a lazy eye, was an asthmatic and was a very strange kid--most of which made me laugh--especially when the claymation animation was so cute and enlivened the narration.
However, at the end, a poignant moment occurs--making this a very sad tale indeed.While there have been many claymation films before AND many which had better animation, rarely was I as touched or laughed as much as I did here.
I particularly liked the rather dead-pan narration and the incredible weirdness of the animation.
A sweet little film--it got me looking for COUSIN and UNCLE so I could complete the trilogy..
What a brilliant short!.
I was deeply moved by this movie, certainly the most powerful in the Trilogy.
I especially like the way Elliot treats the subject of disease as though it were a character trait.
The timing between the narration and claymation is very effective.
Watching this tragicomedy a second time, I couldn't decide whether to laugh or cry.
Most claymation movies are light-hearted and silly.
I never thought claymation could be used to spark such intense emotion but I guess it's the artist behind the medium who should truly be commended..
tragicomic memories.
Adam Elliot's childhood was certainly shrouded in darkness, his entire family seems to have been prone to some misfortune, and yet, in all of this darkness, Elliot is able to find plenty of absurdity, humour, and heart.
'Brother' is the third installment in his autobiographical trilogy.
A deadpan narrator tells us of his brother and recounts scattered events and memories and details over the course of seven strange, engaging, and emotional minutes.
Bordering on tears, I finished this short film.
The ending is greatly disquieting, while the majority of the film, while extremely dark and even morbid in parts, is rather humourous (it's definitely the most consistently funny of the trilogy, though the other two parts are filled with plenty of humour as well).
Such an ending gives this film even further strength than it already had, and what is left unsaid is really where its power lies..
Ouch, very touching.
This short is one of those creations that is just too personal and lovely to entirely accredit a score to, really.
However, it's not so personal that it doesn't have any place to connect with the audience with (like another animated short I've seen where the guy went on talking about his father in the most uninteresting way for a good twenty minutes).This short is kind of beautiful mostly in its simplicity.
The narrator just describes a person in his life as a pretty simple story, "We lived here, we did this, I remember this and this, and then this happened." The feeling of loss and grief, but happiness with past memories, pervades, especially in the grayish cinematography.
Despite the fact that the clay characters are very oddly shaped, they don't come across to me as caricatures, they seem much more like Elliot wasn't trying to make them seem particularly special...
just individually important.--PolarisDiB.
The final chapter.
This is "Brother", an 8-minute animated short film in black-and-white from the year 2000.
So this one is already over 15 years old.
The writer and director is Adam Elliot and this short film here is the final chapter of his trilogy on male relatives.
Ot followed "Uncle" and "Cousin".
My favorite and the only one I liked was "Cousin".
My problem with "Brother" here is that it occasionally felt as if the focus is too much on other family members.
This should actually have been almost exclusively about the narrator's brother and it is not.
I also think that this approach only works well and stays interesting for a couple minutes and 8 minutes may have exceeded that maximum already.
In any case, the atmosphere and tone is very similar to the previous two and death plays a big role again as well.
All in all, I was not entertained or touched watching this short film (in contrast to the wonderful "Harvie Krumpet").
I give it a thumbs-down.
Not recommended..
Excellent short, the third of three shorts in a series by Adam Elliot.
This is the last short in Adam Elliot's set of shorts about members of his family.
There will be spoilers ahead:This is perhaps the saddest and oddest of the three shorts by Adam Elliot as he relates stories about his family.
He has a quadriplegic father, an asthmatic older brother with a lazy eye and an over-burdened mother.The bulk of the short concerns Elliot's brother, who is an odd child with more than his fair share of problems.
In addition to his asthma and eye problem, he has lice and is laughed at in school for his pains.
The two brothers do the typical things most brothers do.This short is somewhat more odd and disturbing than Cousin or Uncle.
We meet the neighbor with hydrocephaly, who has a quirky view of just who will wind up in Hell, his brother's best friend in school and an interesting bully.
The end of the short is incredibly sad and typically twisted at the same time.This short is available on the Harvie Krumpet DVD as well as being a part of The Animation Show, Volume1.
This short and both DVDs are most recommended.
|
tt0068131
|
Search
|
The film begins and ends on October 16th, 1999, with 20-year-old Kolia, (Maksim Emelyanov), a Russian army recruit, recording and narrating with a handheld video camera, as young, drunken Russian soldiers taunt, terrorize, and finally execute a civilian Chechen couple in front of their teenage daughter Raissa (Zukhra Duishvili). Kolia's story is one of four personal narratives that unfold against the backdrop of the ruins of a village in Chechnya, the flood of civilian refugees from the village, and a family partially reunited. We first meet Kolia as a pot-smoking guitar player in Perm, 2300 kilometers from the Chechen border, where he is taken into custody for possession of drugs and drafted into army service. As a new recruit, he undergoes a brutal transformation from an innocent youth into a "dehumanized killing machine." When Kolia's fellow soldiers, kill the Chechnan couple, the couple's nine-year-old son, Hadji (Abdul Khalim Mamutsiev) hides and watches and when it is safe, he is able to carry his infant brother to relative safety. The trauma of his parents' death renders him mute. He is helped along the way to the refugee camp by other Chechen refugees and eventually, he is befriended by Carole (Bérénice Bejo), a French-born, Chechnya-based NGO worker. Carole, who works as a researcher and representative of the Human Rights Committee of the European Union, helps Hadji regain his ability to speak. Hadji's elder sister Raïssa searches for both brothers. Helen (Annette Bening), a Red Cross worker, is interviewed by Carol and places hope in the International response to the Second Chechen War to the centuries-old struggle of the Chechen people. Raissa, reunited with her baby brother, escapes once again from the village with the help of other Chechen refugees. She has to leave without Hadji, against her will, because of the Russian federal forces' aerial bombing. Raissa helps Helen at the International Red Cross orphanage. Both Helen and Carole are discouraged when the United Nations Commission of Human Rights report of April 2000 does not declare the situation in Chechnya a humanitarian disaster. Carole delivers her report to the United Nations but soon realizes that not many of the participants are listening. With the help of Carole and Helen, Hadji is reunited with his siblings. The film ends at the beginning, with Kolia's filming of the attack on Hadji's family.
|
intrigue
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
"Search" is a series that failed to find its audience mainly because most of that audience was already in bed (time slot 9 or 10 PM on a school night; it was the first series I got to stay up late for!).
It's also a series that could not have existed before the world watched Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon, since the concept of a room full of specialists monitoring and assisting the agent is, of course, based on the room full of specialists in Houston who monitor and assist our astronauts.Note that Bob Justman (of Star Trek fame) was involved; undoubtedly it was because of Star Trek's influence that the aforementioned room full of specialists included African-Americans, Asian-Americans and women.All in all, it's a shame it didn't catch on, but then again, most of the audience had to be in bed early on school nights.
This was one of the great shows that didn't last.The teamwork shown by the group working behind the scenes was perhaps too "upbeat" for people.
You didn't watch the show expecting the good guys to fail, but instead tried to guess which specialist or gadget would get them out of a jam this time.I don't remember how good the writing and dialog was, but I clearly remember Burgess Meredith's character as a very compelling influence in the "control room".
I would love this show to return to the air or come out on DVD, but I suppose it has been gone for so long that any chance of that happening is pretty low.In any case, it is good to see the show immortalized to some extent by being listed properly here (I searched for "Search" a long time ago and couldn't find it)..
Probe Control computer center assists agents on dangerous recovery missions.
I learned of this show even before it aired on NBC back in 1972 (prepublicity), and decided I liked it even before seeing it.
One thing that I thought was really cool was how Probe Control communicated to the agents via an implanted audio pickup through radio telescope communications.
Of course, Burgess Meredith was essentially the show stealer every time; not many other actors could give an engaging performance sitting at a computer panel.
A couple of years ago a local TV station rebroadcast the pilot episode, co-starring John Gielgud (sp?), and I caught the whole thing on VHS.
When they decided to cancel the series, I was actually put out enough to send in a letter of protest.
After all, it had cool effects, mostly involving things that could be seen in other parts of the spectrum, picked up by the agents' ring-bound scanners..
reasons to recreate the Search TV series.
Search had some of the best elements of the spy genre (handsome persuasive and strong male leads, beautiful women, exotic rich locales, and mysterious missing objects, etc) and of the science fiction genre (an elaborate Mission Control center, computer assisted artificial intelligence information, man/machine embedded implants etc).
The plots where were sometimes not that interesting or hung together well but the relationship of the characters (especially Probe Control irascibly trying to keep the three independent minded agents in line) was fun to watch.When you consider the ongoing popularity of the spy genre and the enthusiastic support of science fiction series by it's fans the series Search should have been a very good success.
It could be that it was just a little ahead of its time.
I encourage the TV production community to consider the creation of a new Search series or something along the same lines.
The TV audience is more interested in both the spy genre (James Bond, the Bourne series etc) and the science fiction series (Star trek, Star Wars, etc than at any time in the past..
I loved the theme music!.
As a brat raised in LA during the mid 60s, I was mad about UNCLE, I Spy, The Avengers, THE Cat, all the good old TV spy and action shows.
Returning to Japan in '68 was a big culture change, especially the dull and boring TV shows (not much change in 2006, even worse).
It was around '73 that one of the network here aired 5 or 6 episodes of Search.
It was dubbed in Japanese (no bilingual TV at that time), and I can't remember any story, but the brilliant titleback and the superb theme music is something that I wish to see and hear again.
One scene I recall is a bird's eye view of an orange Nissan Z car driven by one of the Probe agent.
I thought it was so cool!
It seems difficult to see this series even in the USA now, but I am sure that there are thousands of "hidden Search fans" in the world.
I will definitely buy the whole series if sold on DVD..
Whilst the premise of "Search" was interesting, indeed somewhat foreshadowing "The Six Million Dollar Man" by a couple of years, i.e., people with bio-electronic enhancements, the very premise of it limited the show to running out of steam, ultimately.
After all, how many things can you search for?
Jewels, people, renegade SEARCH-systems scientists, etcetera?
Wouldn't mind seeing it in reruns again, though no doubt some things would seem somewhat dated, over thirty years later.
Still, it is nice to remember when this show was "cool.".
The network got a head cold on this one.
A very nice set-up for a series that looked like it was going far.
In the pilot (The film 'Probe') the controller, B.C. Cameron (The late Burgess Meredith)warns Probe 1 (Hugh Lockwood, played by Hugh O'Brian) that he should avoid a head-cold as it messes with the electronics.
Well I think that the Network got a head cold over this ahead-of-its-time semi-sf spy series.
Like another reviewer, I would love to see the series restarted, perhaps someone could persuade a network to buy the rights?
Leslie Stephens created several series like this (Invisible Man etc), and it seems a pity to waste such inventiveness.As to casting, I wouldn't dare to put forward a suggestion, except that, as a Brit, I wouldn't mind them filming an episode or two in the U.K. with a British 'Probe'....
Search, a great show with high-tech gadgets for 1972.
I used to watch "Search" all the time.
The Probe headquarters was so advanced, that they could use one of the Probe agent's ring for a camera, recorder, Geiger counter around radiation, and a reviver, if one of the agents was knocked out, on thrown overboard into the Sea(like one of the episodes.) What some viewers have failed to mention, is that Probe agents had a dental implant too, so they could click their teeth and send a signal if they were in trouble, and could not talk.
However; one episode where a Probe agent was captured by terrorists(or mad scientists)the enemy became aware of the implant and used it to send their signals into it, to cause pain, obedience, and to basically control the agent like a robot.
However; Probe found the agent's location, and blocked the signals of the enemy, and even talked to the enemy, warning them, to release their prisoner, of Probe would bombard them with an electronic attack.
Shows written today don't have this kind of writing, like Search.
The Actors were well seasoned, and played their roles very well.
Search was best when Probe control room was black with red lights shining down.
Burgess Merridith played his part very well as the Head of Probe, and the Agents, Lockwood(Hugh O'Brian), Nic Bianco(Anthony Franciosa)(My favorite agent.) I loved it when Nic would say to the Probe headquarters; "We did it your way first; now we are doing it Nic Bianco's way." Search at times, was along the lines of Star Trek characters too.
You could see them going through all the switching, and powering up for each Agent they sent out.
Search ran from 1972-1973, but it spawned other shows that came later; like "LeFemme Nikita", movies like "Johnny Neumonic", and of course "24".
Search was a pleasant alternative to the other shows available in 1972, on a WED night.
Some of the episodes would appear very 70s, but in it's time, Search was with the times, if not ahead of the times..
My all-time favorite show.
Its a shame quality, well written and intelligent shows like SEARCH don't last.
I think it was just too far ahead of its time.
I think the show could be done today, but I think the producers would be to tempted to put "pretty boys" as the agents, instead of older, more cerebral actors.
I think I would cast Anthony Zerbe as V.C. Cameron, Steven Weber as C.R. Grover, Ted Danson as Lockwood (yes I think Ted could handle a semi-dramatic role), and Eric Roberts as Nick Bianco.
It would be one cool show....IF...the writing was of an intelligent quality.
The original show, as well as the pilot movie were awesome!!!.
Search pre-empted too much, maybe why it failed.
I know that in the San Francisco Bay Area it was preempted 5 times ( !
) in it's original run, including for 2 shows on the energy crisis !!I loved the show, but the best episodes were the one's with Hugh O'Brien and I can still hear Burgess Meredith going practically insane and yelling " Lockwood !
" and Lockwood ignoring him.The episodes with Doug McClure, and Franciosa weren't as good.I had a terrible crush on Angel Tompkins, too.A guy in Palos Verdes Peninsula was selling copies of the Probe scanner.
Wish I still had one but I lost it.George Senda Martinez, Ca. Super Cool TV Series of the 70s'.
I was in high school when "Search" ran and thought it was the coolest show around!
It was way ahead of it's time.
I'd love to see it re imagined and with the right cast and writing could be an excellent series.
Burgess Meredith was perfect as Cameron, his speech patterns owed to classical theater training.
There's a spot on the web where you can see low quality episodes but i'd still like to see a DVD set of the series.
probe control.com has tons of info on the series.
As long as they stay true to the original it would be a way cool movie!
I remember watching this show when I was a kid.
I really liked it back then, but the one thing I remember about it was Burgess Merideth's speech pattern.
He had this way of over enunciating everything.To this day I can remember him saying "beeeee caaaareful LLLockwooooooddd".I also remember the female controller.
She was the one who was always flirting with the agents.I can almost remember the music too, sort of like the old jewel heist music I think (but I could be confusing it with something else).
Search - pilot name was originally Probe.
This was an awesome show, some great actors.
Burgess Meredith as B.
I think he was a great actor and was so impressive in this show.
There were some very fine actors in this show Hugh O'brian as Hugh Lockwood was the best in this show (aka "Wyatt Earp" another of my fave shows).
Doug McClure and Tony Franciosa were awesome as well.
Yes us old timers have seen a lot of TV and movies this show was so great I was so wanting it to make it at the time.
The Man From UNCLE, I Spy, The Avengers, THE Cat, were all great TV spy and action shows.
Search was so great with all the "cool tools" and great spy stuff.Maybe someday someone will create a new revised "Probe".
But alas it was one of many fine shows that didn't last because of network popularity.
There were many great lineups on all the 3 major networks then NBC, CBS, and ABC.
This show is in my top ten list and besides "Star Trek" is my very all time favorite..
Search series.
I was a kid when I saw Search and it was fantastic.
Hugh O'Brian...Doug McClure and Anthony Franciosa were handsome, interesting and excellent investigators.
World Security headquarters were outstanding, plenty of new technology.
Burguess Meredith (Cameron) was a serious boss but also funny.
adventures and different situations worldwide were interesting ,,, plenty of mystery and action.
I would like to know if I could get it, by somewhere -I meant-.
Hope soon, very soon, we could see those TV episodes in DVD.
I'll be the very first client, I'll really do that purchase But please do the 12 episodes.
In did Search is one of my favorites TV shows.
Great action show with a hook..
A wicked cool "mission control" room.
Three known actors in rotation - all with previous film and tv success.
Great Concept for the time.
I vividly remember watching this show every week.
For the time the technology was pretty amazing.
We were still using a good old rotary dial phone back then and no one even heard of a personal computer or miniature wireless surveillance cameras.
That was even more technology than they used on Star Trek!
Burgess Merideth was wonderful working in "Cameron Probe Control" and Doug McClure was probably my favorite agent.
Today, technology has exceeded the tools used in this program but it would be great to see it brought back in a present day form using the technology we have now.
If this program ever re-appears in some media format, I would love to see it again..
"Search" was truly a lead into the future.
"Search" changed my life.
I thought it was so cool and gave me an interest in computers.
The actors were the greatest and I, like most of you, liked Burgess, Hugh, Doug and Tony.
It was so interesting to me to watch Burgess sitting in front of his computer monitor, directing the agent that was in the field for that episode.
Watching the tapes whirling around and the lights flashing and then all the amazing things that the agent could do with the touch of a button.
It has been so long ago that I really am foggy as to what really happened in most of the shows but it changed my life forever.
Didn't Hugh wear a necklace around his neck that he could talk to Burgess through?
I really wish that they would re-run all the episodes so that I could tape them all..
"Search" Agents?.
I seem to recall that there were THREE agents of Probe in "Search, or "Search Control", (as it was called here in the UK) and not just the two mentioned here already?Hugh O'Brien and Anthony Franciosa have both been included in several previous comments, but wasn't there a third agent who was played by Doug McLure, (the name of whom escapes me.) Am I correct in this, or is it just a warped memory and I'm confusing the actors concerned with another programme completely?
I was about twelve years old at the time "Search Control" was first broadcast and I remember being totally enthralled by the sophistication and creative ingenuity of the technology involved.For me, Burgess Meredith stole the show completely each week, but it was Hugh O'Brien who was the most interesting of the three agents, and three actors who played them.The show was absolutely fantastic and well ahead of it's time!!!.
I LOVED this show when I was a kid!.
I don't remember a single plot from this series, so don't expect any spoilers!
I was a big computer geek long before the personal computer (never mind the Internet) so this show got me where I lived.
I haven't seen it in many, many years, so I have no idea what I'd think of it today.
Obviously the technology would seem quaint, at best, but I recall the stories as being quite good.
I'm afraid I'd laugh too much at their computers though (has anyone seen "Colossus: The Forbin Project" lately?) "Search" is definitely a candidate for a modern-day make-over though!
It's "Mission: Impossible" tailor-made for the Internet Age...instead of a team that goes into a situation, a single person does...supported by a team somewhere else who have the world's information and expertise at their fingertips.
The only question is, in this day and age, would the viewers be amazed at what the "agents" can do with the help of their geeky behind-the-scenes comrades, or would they just think "Big deal...anybody could do that stuff these days!".
Latching on to the superspy genre, this excellent series failed to peak in popularity.
As the superspy genre on TV degenerated into cartoony comedy as the later episodes of Man from Uncle did, this series' updated spook gadgetry such as the use of remote viewing with telemetry analysis and diagnosis via rings and tie clips worn by the Probe agents.
The whole premise however became prosaic and cheesy with the arrival shows like the Bionic Man/Woman with over the top gadgetry that practically turned the characters into robots.Probe was the title of the pilot episode which starred Hugh O'Brian as the field agent.
Retitled as Search for the series, each episode had him, Doug McClure and Tony Franciosca on a round robin basis reminiscent of The Four Just Men of '50s vintage.O'Brian plays the cool, handsome ladykiller and perfect secret agent to the hilt while Doug Mclure portrays the vulnerable and consequently more sympathetic spook complete with various gaffes and goofs.
Tony Franciosca channels it like a Mickey Spillane school of hard knocks private eye with a liberal sprinkling of the inimitable Franciosca humor.But the absolutely coolest thing on this show for me is the theme music.
Couldn't find a track of it so I would actually turn off the radio when driving to play it in my head ---- tuhtuhrahrahrahrah - tararah- rah-rah.
Great!
Caught the theme recently on You Tube and there are two very similar versions, one for Probe and the more refined one for Search.
|
tt0498465
|
Arashi no yoru ni
|
A goat named Mei wanders into a barn one night, seeking shelter from a storm. In the barn, the goat meets another refugee. The two can neither see nor smell each other, but nevertheless they huddle together, fending off the cold, and begin to talk. Eventually, they establish a friendship. The two decide to meet later and will recognize each other by using the password "one stormy night". The next day, when they meet, Mei learns that his companion from the night before was a wolf named Gabu. Despite their natural predisposition as enemies, they share a common bond and begin meeting regularly. However, Mei's flock and Gabu's pack eventually find out about their relationship and forbid the friendship. In a truly underhanded tactic, the pack and flock attempt to force Mei and Gabu to use each other to get information on their enemies. Mei and Gabu, no longer wanting to bound by their respective clan's unjust regulations and hoping to preserve their friendship, cross a river during a storm. They hope to find an "emerald forest" free from persecution.
However, Giro, the leader of Gabu's pack, holds a grudge against goats and views Gabu as a traitor to all wolves. Giro and his pack begin to hunt down the two companions. Gabu and Mei reach the summit of a mountain where they stop and rest, exhausted from fighting their way through a snowstorm. Mei, knowing that Gabu has not eaten in days, offers to sacrifice himself as sustenance. Gabu agrees initially, but soon realizes that no matter how hungry he is, he cannot eat his friend. Gabu hears his pack approaching and leaves Mei to face them, ready to defend his goat friend to the death. As Gabu is about to go face the wolf pack, there is an avalanche which sweeps them all away. The next morning, Mei digs through the snow blocking the cave and sees the "emerald forest" they had been searching for in the distance. Gabu is missing, but Mei finds him in another cave. Mei finds that Gabu has lost his memory of their friendship and all the events that preceded the avalanche due to the trauma of surviving that disaster, and Mei knows not how to undo the damage. While waiting for the moon to come out, Gabu taunts Mei that he plans on eating him. Mei, saying that he wouldn't have minded being eaten by Gabu before, accuses the wolf of not being the Gabu he previously knew and deems him pathetic for not even attempting to remember his past. Disappointed and disillusioned, Mei shouts that had he known things would take this turn it would have been better if they had never met each other on "one stormy night". On hearing these words, Gabu's memory slowly returns in flashes before in a rapid burst. After regaining himself, Gabu turns to Mei and speaks his name as well as wondering why they are in the cave; having no recollection of his time while amnesiac. A stunned and overjoyed Mei, deciding it would not matter to tell Gabu about his amnesia, claims to have been waiting for Gabu this whole time and they happily reunite. In the end, Mei and Gabu both enjoy watching the moon as it rises, marveling at its beauty and swearing that their friendship will last forever no matter what. Giro and the wolf pack are shown to have survived the avalanche and are seen running away back to their home gorge.
|
allegory
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
There really hasn't been a movie like this that can capture the hearts of those who watch it so easily and yet almost 5 years after release it still hasn't been seen by most of the world officially outside of Asia.But when the time comes where the movie will be officially available worldwide, I'm certain this will be a new children's classic for generation to generation.
You may think I'm over-exaggerating these words to get more people to see it, but I couldn't be more honest even if I tried."Arashi No Yuru Ni", or "One Stormy Night", is by far and beyond the best non-franchise, non-Ghibli anime movie you could possibly see.
Released in 2005 and based on the phenomenally successful Japanese children's book of the same name, the story is about a goat and a wolf who accidentally met each other in a barn during a heavy thunderstorm.
The next day, they decide to meet each other and from then on, after knowing what they are and accepting who they are, they end up having to make unbelievable sacrifices in order to remain friends.There is way, way more to this story but the story is so well weaved- together and so intelligently-written that it would be cruel to say anything more about it to those who haven't seen it.
The entire plot evolves naturally, but is such an incredible story that you very easily emote to the main characters as if they are living, breathing creatures and that whatever happens, you'll be on the edge of your seat hoping for the best for both Gabu (the wolf) and Mei (the goat).The animation is beautiful, it's similar to that of "The Snowman" in that it captures storybook art so well but coupled with such a great story it really immerses you into the world of the movie quite well.
Music is beautiful as well, definitely mirrors the beauty of the movie really well but also compliments the most emotional of scenes without being too over-the-top.Some of the lines are overly-simplistic and repetitive in some certain scenes, but it really doesn't get in the way of the enjoyment of this movie too much and it's only a very minor complaint.This really is the perfect animated movie for families to watch.
It's well written, beautiful animation that I haven't seen since Akira, great voice talents, a nice ending, and it was kid friendly without being cheesy.Admitedly the odds of a wolf and a goat being friends are practically zero, but after seeing a lioness take care of a gazelle there's really nothing to far-fetched about it.
The friendship between Gabu and Mei was a strong bond that was able to get them through even life threatening situations throughout the film.
I will grant, many anime tend to show a bond of friendship being close to that of guy love, and Arashi no Yoru Ni isn't an exception, but it's easy to look past that.
I actually got a tear in my eye when I though Gabu had died.What stunned me most was the animation.
The colors in the film were vibrant, the shadows and highlights were smooth and easy moving without seeming like paint, and the backgrounds looked as if they had been drawn by Da Vinci himself.If you want a good story that is fairly kid friendly without being cheesy, wonderful animation and some lovable characters, Arashi no Yoru Ni is right for you..
A beautiful animated movie, worth watching by anyone..
This movie can be considered a piece of art, not thanks to the outstanding background renderings or the beautiful voice acting, but for all the different messages that you may get from it.
I really believe this movie will at least touch you with something.I think kids might enjoy this one but I sincerely believe they won't be able to get as much as an adult would be able to; so yes, this is an animated movie but that doesn't mean it's only meant to be watched by kids.It's a definite "must watch" for those who like movies that contain deep messages rather than those which are only shown in the shallow area of the images.
Really one of the best and very worthy animated films I have watched.
It's one of those films that must be watched without having any idea of what the main theme is, just let the things unfold before your eyes and let the environment and atmosphere of the scenes get to you.
An enchanting tale of two characters, enemies by nature, but friends in heart.
One Stormy night is 100X better than anything animated Disney has been chucking out the past few years.
The very revival of Classic animation with a fresh story and two characters that will stay with you long after the movie ends.
In my opinion the best animated film since "The Lion King" A MUST SEE!.
A wonderful animated movie.
"One Stormy Night" is one of my favorite anime movies.
At first, this could look as a rip-off of "The Fox and the Hound" (Also a good movie) being a story of how two natural enemies became friends, but this movie manages not only to be different, but also to be good as well, telling a beautiful and heartwarming story, with very likable characters.
The animation is beautiful, all the movements are very fluid, and the backgrounds have the level of detail of one movie from Studio Ghibli.
I know that friendship is one of the main themes of many Japanese animations, but not many are so tender as this movie.
"One Stormy Night" have many emotional and dramatic parts, but combines this with humor and optimism, something that made this movie very enjoyable.
'Arashi no yoru ni' is a beautifully rendered animated film.
It's a modern fable about wolf and a goat who overcome their natural enmity and become the best of friends.On a stormy night, (the English translation of the title) Mei, a goat, and Gabu, a wolf, seek temporary shelter in the same barn.
As a story goes, it is a better than average presentation of the "your enemy isn't so bad if you get to know him" theme.
It's an attempt, within the short time constraints of the film, to depict how a strong friendship can develop between traditional enemies.
From a child's-eye view, the connection between the two can be seen at face value--the two become good friends.
Keep your eye out for a US release of a film entitled something like, "On a Stormy Night." I give this film a 7..
This, now, is by far, my favourite movie.I originally found it on TvTropes looking for a gay romance, hopefully in the Anime category.
However, considering that "The moon is beautiful, isn't it?" signifies love in Japanese literature, combines with the amount Mei and Gabu talk about the moon, and all of the giggling and blushing when they meet, I do not think considering it a romance is far fetched at all.
Surprisingly, it was on YouTube, which was a nice benefit itself!This movie was not just good though, but probably my favourite movie of all time!
I usually don't cry during movies, but this one caused me to cry approximately four times.
This film is amazing, and heart breaking, and heart warming, and just plain beautiful!
The animation is beautiful too; character design is great, the landscapes are beautiful, and especially when the lightening scares Mei and Gabu, it is very expressive.This was such a good movie, that I just had to write a long review on it, as I just couldn't get the sheer quality out of my head!
This movie is unbelievably charming and cute.It's about the friendship between a wolf and a little goat.
and you can really believe they love one another!But the movie does deal with more adult themes too.
The designs for the wolves don't look like typical anime designs.
It was unusual that I stumbled upon this film by accident while looking for an almost similar story called The Ringing Bell, and, after watching both films, I have concluded that, in my opinion, this film is superior.The tale of the friendship between these two is enough to enchant and touch anyone, and, being an animation student, I found the animation style wonderful and refreshing.The acting is great.
They really bring the characters to life, and actually make their friendship believable and heartwarming.
Their friendship stands firm throughout the trials they're put through, and they prove that true friendship can never be destroyed, no matter how many other people object to it and try to stop it from happening.Really, if you can get a hold of this film, do it, and watch it!
And I'm sure you who'll watch and enjoy this film will find a piece of yourself in one of the characters, guaranteed..
This is a great movie with unique animation and interesting characters.
I originally found it on TvTropes looking for a gay romance, hopefully in the Anime category.
This seemed to fit (although whether it is a romance or a friendship is somewhat ambiguous), and I decided to watch it, expecting it to be good.
This was not just good though, but probably my favourite movie of all time, hence this rambling and praising review!
This one caused me to cry approximately four times.This even goes beyond movies like Spirited Away for me at the moment at least, and by quite a margin.
This movie, quite simply is amazing.It's amazing, and heart breaking, and heart warming, and just plain beautiful!
I can't stop praising this film!I consider this a romance rather than a friendship myself, btw, because for one, it makes it more relatable for me, and secondly, because there a clear romantic signs like "The moon is beautiful, isn't it?" which apparently signifies love in Japanese literature, and the blushing and giggling.
I have not seen a better film in my entire life, and have barely even seen any comparable ones!This was such a good movie, that I just had to write a long review on it, even if it is kind of rambly and doesn't contain much actual information.
That's how good this movie was in my opinion!.
That's how good this movie was in my opinion!.
There is so much to say about how amazing this movie is, I'm not sure how best to begin.The basic theme of the movie is that true friendship exists between those willing to sacrifice anything and everything for each other.
A goat and a wolf meet on a stormy night, they exchange words regarding a few things about themselves.
They manage to look past their physical differences because of the bond between them, but the fact that they are natural enemies puts a heavy burden on their friendship.
I won't say much more than that because I don't want to spoil it for anyone who wants to see.The main characters, Gabu (wolf) & Mei (goat), are very well developed, you can really feel how much they care for each other and you as the viewer would want nothing more then to see them live happily ever after as best friends.
The supporting characters are Gabu's pack and Mei herd, they are there to fuel the conflict of the movie, they are the biggest obstacle when it comes to their friendship along with the laws of nature about predators and prey.The animation is wonderful, the environments are lush, colorful and detailed, the characters are well drawn, they can emote all kinds of expressions without coming off as overly cartoony but not all that realistic either.
The animation is just a joy to look at.The music is also very good, it always fits the situation occurring and is nice to listen to.Overall it's a must see for anyone of all ages, it teaches the viewer how important friendship is no matter who you are.
It's been a long time since a movie made me cry.
It feels good to feel again^^ With all the soulless crap that Disney has been putting out lately, it was so refreshing to watch something that truly made me believe in the power of animation again.
However, there WAS a truly scary villain, incredible animation, lush backgrounds, great music, tear jerking drama, and two protagonists that that will stay in my memory forever.
There was one point during this film when I thought my favorite character (Gabu) had met his unfortunate end.
If you can get to the end of this movie without caring deeply for one of these characters, then there might be something wrong with you.
Some people say that the level of friendship between the two main characters borders on homosexual.
(Even I was thinking it) I think it's safe to say that Mei and Gabu love each other, but not in a sexual way.
This love is actually the film's most striking and beautiful feature..
When Gabu the Wolf "accidentally" befriends Mei the goat, a bond between them forms that is far stronger than either one anticipates.
Each finds in the other something neither has had before (though this is made less obvious with Mei than it is with Gabu), and they defy both of their respective kinds to seek a friendship that would be permanent.As an adult, I have to admit that some of the dialogue and the choice of editing during the film made it seem that there was something in their relationship that was quite carnal in nature: Their both wearing of scarves; Gabu's recollection of how he didn't fit in with the other wolves and his later lamentation of why he was born a wolf.
The friendship could have been demonstrated to be just as strong without such suggestions being made, but an innocent young child watching this film will not likely draw such conclusions.
Instead, they will simply see two unlikely friends forge a wonderful friendship, and this is how it should be.The music is wonderful, and the visuals are stunning; the high-definition version of this film is jaw-droppingly beautiful to watch.
The voice work is typically childish in delivery (given the nature of the film) but it doesn't detract from the emotion that is delivered throughout the film.You know a film has succeeded when you reach the end of it, you wipe a tear from your eye, and you wish both protagonists all the best with the rest of their relationship.I would recommend this film to all..
A sad and excellent anime film.
A couple years ago, there was a story book series called, "Arashi No Yoru Ni (One Stormy Night)".
It was the story about a goat named, Mei, who becomes friends with a Wolf named, Gabu.
But soon, they have trouble trying to stay friends because Gabu's Wolf pack eats Goats.In 2005, Japan released an anime adaptation of the story books and it became very popular in Japan.The film has a nice story and it kinda reminds me of Pocahontas except with no kissing nor love connections and it has animals.
The film also has some good voice acting mostly because it had Shido Nakamura (The guy that did the voice of Ryuk in the Japanese version of, Death Note, and he played Lieutenant Ito in, Letters from Iwo Jima) as the voice of Gabu."Arashi No Yoru Ni (One Stormy Night)", is a great anime film that's filled with emotion and heart..
The basic story is wonderfully simple: Mei and Gabu, a goat and a wolf - natural enemies - become friends by chance.
When their friendship is discovered - and forbidden - by their respective groups the two decide to run away to a place where a goat and a wolf can live together in peace.Yet overlaid with this simple tale are some rather deep themes - identity, society, and even war.
Children will enjoy the movie for its surface themes but a watchful adult will be able to pick out and appreciate some of the more subtle story elements.Gabu and Mei's growing friendship is the source of most of the emotion delivered by this film - and it is at times very powerful, such as when Mei, seeing no other alternative, tells Gabu that he should eat him so that at least one of them will survive.
The moral - stick by your friends and your convictions - has the same beautiful simplicity as the story and both are delivered flawlessly.One IMDb reviewer mentioned that Gabu and Mei's relationship had an "unintended layer of sexuality".
I didn't see this, but it should be pointed out that the word "friends" doesn't quite do justice to what Gabu and Mei are.
It is perhaps a sad reflection on our society that such a relationship might be seen by some as necessarily sexual or even "creepy" as I once heard elsewhere.The animals in this film are somewhat anthropomorphised, but to a level not often seen: they use human gestures and are able to use their "hands" as humans do (by grasping things), walk bipedally on occasion and of course talk.
Yet despite this, they usually walk on all fours and their behaviour is very animal-like much of the time (but especially when fighting or running).
It's something audiences may not be used to, but I think it was executed very well.There is only one flaw that this movie has, and it concerns the animation.
Still, there is a certain charm to it and as the movie progresses it is easy to simply accept and enjoy how the characters look.
It is also an interesting change from both American animation and the more common anime style most westerners are familiar with.All in all, this is a great movie, and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants to see something with a simple yet well-told story of friendship over adversity.
|
tt0156130
|
Thazhvaram
|
Balan (Mohanlal) is in search of Raju (Salim Ghouse) and the search takes him to a hillside. Balan reaches a house, where he is welcomed whole-heartedly by both Nanu (Sankaradi), the house owner, and Kochutty (Sumalatha), his daughter. Balan realizes that Raju stays with them as Raghavan. Balan comes to know that Nanu has helped Raju to start farming and that Nanu intends to get his daughter married to Raju. Balan decides to wait for Raghavan, alias Raju. Raju, on his arrival, smells his enemy.
The film progresses with the two having to pretend before Nanu and Kochutty that they are good friends. The film cuts to flashback, where Raju alias Raghavan is shown as a friend of Balan once. He, in greed for money, one day killed Balan's wife and ran away with Balan's hard earned money. Balan is now back in search of Raju to avenge for the death of his wife.
Raju attacks Balan in one of the numerous encounters the duo has and almost kills Balan. Balan survives the attack to save Nanu and his daughter from Raghavan.
The film is special for the mood it creates of the friction between the Balan and Raju. The dressing code matches what the director often symbolizes to a vulture.
|
revenge, murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Classic Movie !.
I was a child when the film was released and didn't get anything when watched it first time.
But after years i was so much excited watching this beautiful movie which was picturised with perfect mix of everything needed for a classic movie.
Director Bharathan did his own style to tell the story of a revenge without filling it with disturbing action scenes and gimmicks.
Mohanlal's lead role as balan and salim's role as raghavan are really great.
I was a fan of sumalatha after i watched "Thoovanathumbikal" and in this film she is simply awesome.
Bharathan & M.T has given so many classics to Indian movies and this is to be listed on the top of them.
if you haven't watched it please do it soon because it is a movie "must see".
A perfect classic.
Today, watched the 90's classic malayalam movie "Thazhavaram-The valley" once again, in a TV channel,after a long period.
But this time ,thought of writing something here about the movie .
This movie, I would say, one of the best movie by Bharathan,.
I know that there is no point in describing the story of the movie and tell you repeatedly that the movie is excellent ,because its already known to all .
So I will point out some of the good features of the movie which I was attracted to ."Thazhavaram" is a masterpiece in all aspects.
A well crafted movie, which makes us remember some Hollywood classic thrillers.
It can not be considered fully as a dramatic movie .
By genre, it's a thriller , in my opinion.Bhartahan was keen to make this movie, grammatically perfect as well as thematically strong.
The theme of the movie is not so unusual, ...a man who reaches an isolated valley in search of his old pal, the murderer of his wife , so as to have his vengeance.
What makes it different is the treatment .
Technical ########## First thing that can be noticed is the technical quality of the movie.
First of all Venu has done an excellent cinematographic work.
Next one is, director, Bharathan, has composed each frames very carefully.
I haven't watched much more movies, in which a director keeps the grammatical aspects of movie-making so brilliantly.
The film consists of so many beautiful wide-shots, which nowadays can never be seen in any reginal movies, but is an essential part of a visually stunning movie.
Another brilliant composition ,in which director used "Golden Mean" which is a dynamic balancing technique , usually got to see in western movies..(the scene in which the character "Balan" played by Mohan lal walks through the valley ,just after passing a hanging brdge,and some cattles crosses him.
;two by third of the frame occupied by the sky and rest by the surface,and the character moving from left towards right of the frame...) This technique is very rarely used in our films.
Almost all of the frames are geometrically perfect.
Visual elments are well composed in the frames to achieve good depth to the scenes which makes them visually brilliant.
Sound recording was also remarkable.
One of the best feature of the movie is that the background music coming only in required situations.
(Remember ,in Hariharan's classic movie "Oru Vadakkan Veeragadha" , a major drawback we can point out is the mishandled background score.) Performance #############There are not much protagonists coming to main plot, the main characters are played by, Mohan lal, Sumalatha,Sankaradi and Salim Gouse, all of them has done their job well...The performance of Saleem Gouse is especially remarkable.
And of course, Mohan lal is brilliant in his lead role.(A scene in which he is listening to Sankaradi explaining the fake story told by the anti-hero ,he is responding to the narration of Sankaradi and at the same time he is shocked hearing the story.His expression at that moment is simply amazing)Screenplay ###########Script by M.T Vasudevan Nair is outstanding .
There are no signs of any particular time period in the script.That makes the movie a unique one ,.No matter after how many years since it's release ,you are watching this movie, you will feel the same freshness.
But credit goes to the director who was able to screen a beautiful script without losing its soul, in a well disciplined manner, avoiding disturbing action scenes and gimmicks which could have been added easily in this kind of themes.
Usually flashbacks in a movie would become little bit irritating and may affect the flow of the central theme.But in this movie, Bhartahan shows flashbacks in certain intervals and complete it at a point and move forward with the current theme from that point , which is a classic style of storytelling, so that the audience will be immersed in the central theme, without breaking the flow, cinematically speaking,creates a suspension of disbelief.
Definitely,Thazhavaram is a movie which deserves a place in your personal movie collections.Overall I'd give 9/10 for the movie..
Poignant!.
Poignant is the right word to describe this movie.
From one view one might think it is slow, but every moment is loaded with the haunt of what could happen next.Simple storyline: A man shows up at a village with the intent to kill the thief who stole his savings and killed his wife.Hats off to Mohanlal and Salim Ghouse for their excellent performances.It's surprising when you look back, there are not many characters in the film.
Shankararadi does well, and Sumalatha adds the beauty quotient.Another unique point is that the main plot does not cover a large time- span.
Instead relies on timely flashbacks to tie up the loose ends.The movie is a showcase of the director Bharathan's genius.A truly unique film in Malayalam cinema.
True, it takes inspiration from the Western genre.
Never before nor after has one such been attempted!The ending is especially commendable.
No sentimental gimmicks!Truly a must-watch!.
review.
World classic ,
super acting
exelent direction
avery one shoud be see it.
This film needs a Blu Ray ......
To all fans of Westerns,I wish there was a Blu-ray with English subtitles for this film.
It deserves more recognition.
There are nothing but a few blurry Youtube videos and an awful pixelish Video CD.The film is a revenge Western in the Malayalam language.
Balan (Mohanlal) arrives in a remote valley to take revenge on his former best friend Raghavan(Salim Ghouse) who murdered his wife and stole his savings.
A violent fight between them leaves Balan injured.When the unsuspecting father-daughter duo with whom Raghavan lives, gives shelter to the injured Balan, a cat and mouse game between the two men begins.
Sumalatha in a blouse and mundu is a sultry presence in the midst of the violent feud between the two men.
Shankaradi plays her kind and industrious father.The film also offers glimpses from the everyday lives of the people who live in the valley.
The title sequence and the background score are excellent.It is definitely one of Bharathan's best films.
The setting is quite similar to his earlier film called Kathodu Kathoram in the sense that both films focus on the tense interactions between a few characters in a very remote place.
Though Kathodu Kathoram was a lot more light-hearted compared to Thazhvaram.
MT Vasudevan Nair lends authenticity to the settings through some realistic dialogue that sheds light on the attitudes of the valley dwellers and their ways of living.
Unfortunately, I am unable to provide any context to the film's era or setting.Mohanlal is quite bulky and him fighting the muscular and athletic Salim Ghouse was a bit hard to believe.
A leaner actor like Suresh Gopi or Mammootty would have fitted the role and surroundings better.Best Regards, Pimpin.(8/10)
|
tt0057259
|
The Long Ships
|
The first book covers the years 982 to 990. While still a youth, Orm is abducted by a Viking party led by Krok and they sail south. They fall captive to Andalusian Muslims and serve as galley slaves for more than two years, later becoming members of Almanzor's bodyguard for four years. They return to Denmark to King Harald Bluetooth's court where Orm meets Ylva. Orm later returns to Scania with Rapp. Orm and Rapp join a Viking party raiding England again after a brief period of peace in that area following the reconquest of the Danelaw in the mid-10th century by King Edgar, Ethelred's father. Orm joins a party led by Thorkell the High in England and when he learns that Harald's daughter Ylva is staying in London, gets baptised and marries Ylva. They move to a neglected farm, his mother's inheritance in Göinge, northern Skåne, near the border with Småland. During the following years (992 to 995), Orm prospers, and Ylva gives birth to twin girls (Oddny and Ludmilla), a son, Harald, and later to another son (though possibly from Rainald), Svarthöfde (Blackhair in the Michael Meyer translation). Meanwhile, Orm also gets busy in converting the heathens in the district, with the help of Father Willibald.
The year 1000 passes without Christ returning. In 1007, with Orm now forty-two, his brother Are returns from the east, bringing the news of a treasure ("Bulgar gold") he had hidden. Orm decides to travel to Kievan Rus for the gold, and together with Toke and the Finnveding chieftain Olof mans a ship. They recover the treasure and return home safely. From then on, Orm and Toke live in peace and plenty as good neighbours, and Svarthöfde Ormsson becomes a famous Viking, fighting for Canute the Great. The story ends with the statement that Orm and Toke in their old age "did never tire of telling of the years when they had rowed the Caliph's ship and served my lord Al-Mansur."
|
violence, action
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
"The Long Ships" is the story of a mighty gold bell "as tall as three tall men," the one people call the Mother of Voices, cast long ago by the monks of Byzantium
Prince Aly Mansuh had searched from the mountains to the sea for the bell
Now he must know what lies beyond the horizon until Allah's divine guidance leads him to the treasures of Islam
Prince Aly's wife Aminah thinks that her husband is chasing a legend, a fairy tale that has already cost them dearly in lives and gold
But the prince is no dreamer
He is sure that the bell does exist and it rests somewhere in this world, in a Christian land
For him it was stolen by the Christian armies when they plundered their way across his cities to the dishonor and humiliation of his ancestors
In that morning, the obsessed Moorish prince is informed by his guards that a stranger in the market knows the whereabouts of the golden bell
The stranger is arrested and taken to a tower for interrogation
The stranger assures to the prince that he knows nothing but stories and legends, and swears that, out in the market he was trying to earn some money for food and shelter
He also said that he is a sailor, a dreamer, a Norseman, a Viking who was shipwrecked and was simply trying to get back to his homeland
Richard Widmark is the true Norse warrior who swallowed the ocean
He tells his father that he has returned because he needs another ship and another crew
Rolfe said that he had found the bell
He heard it booming away like a god's hammer on a mountain of ice
Nothing else would've brought him back after losing his ship
That ship cost his father the tribute money he owed the king
Sydney Poitier promised Rolfe that he would not be prepared to die so calmly
He shall give him an example of real courage that comes from authority, 'his' authority
Aly Mansuh asks Lady Aminah to select one of his guards to be the first to feel the kiss of steel before the Viking
Rosanna Schiaffino could offer Rolfe and his comrades the chance to live and to sail from these shores as rich men
With fire in her cheeks, Lady Aminah looked lovely as the most envied woman with eye-catching legs
Orm (Russ Tamblyn) asks the great Odin what did they do that he turns his rage against them ruining his father
Gerda (Beba Loncar) is the beautiful snow princess taken as a hostage and whom to be sacrificed as a maiden to lift the curse of the death ship
Krok (Oskar Homolka) is the old, ruined man who asks himself how a thane whose entire fortune consists of two gold pieces, find or even equip another ship
King Harald (Clifford Evas) practically stole the ship build by Krok's men
He cheated the broken man in giving him two gold pieces for his funeral ship, the difference between the ship's price and two years' tribute he owes him
Sven (Edward Judd) is the sailing master to King Harald of Norseland who really thinks the ship is cursed for being a funeral ship
He commands the sailors, these 'greedy devils' to turn back or they'll be hanged in the king's name
With great stars, mutinous sailors, beautiful cinematography, and a look at a Moorish harem, "The Long Ships" remains another fine Viking adventure with a lot of humor and fun.
For this was the mother of voices¨.Rolf (Richard Widmark) as leader of a band of Norsemen along with his brother Orn (Russ Tamblyn) stealing a ship sets sail for the unknown land in search of a missing solid-gold bell .
Widmark heading off a mysterious place, defending his people and battling for his survival against mutinous crew , evil oppressors(Clifford Evans) and especially fighting Moorish prince named El Mansuh(Sidney Poitier) There're also some gorgeous babes ( Rosanna Schiaffino, Beba Loncar) around to offer us certain comfort .This enjoyable picture packs adventures, thrills, good action scenes and is very amusing.
In this film called " The Long Ships " we have a Viking reciting a legend which was once told to his people of a great bell which was as high as 'three tall men.' Said to have been created by the monks of Byzantium, in actuality, they had indeed cast one out of solid gold, but was small enough to be handed as a gift to the German emperor, for his personal chapel, during the middle ages.
Here we have, Richard Widmark as Rolfe, a seafaring Viking who is captured by Aly Mansuh, the Moorish prince (Sidney Poitier) who threatens him with torture is he does not reveal its location.
That's certainly did not come out in this film which has all the appearances of something that Vince McMahon might have directed.I'm guessing that Richard Widmark, Sidney Poitier and the rest of the cast wanted to do something that paid well without too much strain on the talent.
The Long Ships has some of his best work and it also has a stirring musical score.I saw this film in theaters as a teen and over forty years later I still enjoy this rollicking medieval romp.Vince McMahon couldn't have staged it better..
The entertaining if somewhat protracted interest in spectacular pseudo- and quasi-classical myths, legends, histories and fantasies has been a healthy undercurrent in popular film from right around the time when Jack Cardiff's The Long Ships was released.
On one side is the Moor army led by king Aly Mansuh (Poitier), on the other is the Norsemen led by Rolfe (Widmark).Thought to be an attempt at cashing in on the success of Richard Fleischer's The Vikings and Anthony Mann's El Cid (in spite of there being a 6 and 3 year gap respectively?), The Long Ships is a messy film bogged down by confused intentions and a poor script from Beverley Cross & Berkely Mather.
Over the years, my memory has been deceiving me: the scene in question is extremely tame, only one person, a Moorish guard, riding the Mare, his demise not in the least bit graphic, making the film as a whole quite the disappointment.The humdrum story sees ruffian Rolfe (Richard Widmark) leading a group of scrawny Viking warriors on a quest to find a fabled bell made of solid gold.
Also looking for the bell is Moorish king Aly Mansuh (Sidney Poitier), who isn't about to let the pale northerners steal his prize.Poorly executed action scenes rub shoulders with moments of embarrassingly bad slapstick comedy (the raucous vikings' wild antics—drinking, brawling and raping—are played for laughs), leading to an uneven film that lacks the rousing sense of adventure to be found in the earlier Hollywood viking epic The Vikings (1958).A usually reliable cast do little to distinguish this mediocre romp, Poitier clearly not taking matters seriously judging by his ridiculous James Brown hairdo, Widmark and Russ Tamblyn (as Rolfe's younger brother Orm) failing to put any swash into their buckling, and Brit comic actor Lionel Jeffries camping it up in black-face as an effete eunuch!And don't even get me started on the film's many goofs, which include the massive bell being towed on a raft (which would sink immediately under the weight of all that gold), Rolfe seemingly able to swim from the Barbary coast to Scandinavia, and the small matter of who has been ringing the bell all this time and why (the rocky outcrop on which it is found being totally deserted).My rating: 5 deafening golden bell bongs out of 10.
I felt Richard Widmark did not take his character too seriously, likewise Sydney Poitier, Oskar Homolka and Russ Tamblyn, Thr big plus for the movie was a great soundtrack.
It's basically a good old adventure yarn, and it's still actually a load of fun, even if it gets a bit bogged down in the middle.Richard Widmark is a Viking (only slightly more ridiculously than his nemesis Sidney Poitier as a Moor) who is shipwrecked and thinks he has found the location of the fabled 'Mother of Voices' - a gigantic golden bell as tall as 'three tall men', made by monks somewhereorother.
The first sequence including the monks features an unusually inventive use of color;wonderfully using shadows and light it promised great things.But what follows does not rise to the occasion,by a long shot.Intended to match the critical and commercial success of Richard Fleischer's "the Vikings" (1958),it signally fails in its purpose.The story must have been found in pulp fiction .Besides,the treatment fluctuates between pure adventures yarn and parody.Richard Widmark,realizing how silly the part he played was ,gives a tongue in chick rendition whereas Poitier seriously performs his baddie .What a gap!It's true that the Vikings did plunder the monasteries and they sometimes enslaved the monks whom they did not kill.They traded with the Muslims too.And the golden bell could have provided a good start.But you 'd rather pick up Richard Fleischer's movie instead..
Richard Widmark and Sidney Poiter create two adversaries who end up searching for a long-lost golden bell, referred to as the "Mother of Voices." At first, Richard Widmark, as the Viking adventurer, has to convince his father, a Viking thane (leader of a Viking village) that, one the bell exists, two he knows where it is, and three, he needs a ship that the village has built for the king in order to find it.
Also, the Viking king, Harold, has put to sea in his long ships, expects to search the seas for Rolfe, and hang him for the aforementioned crimes.If the viewer takes this film with a touch of humor, and simply looks for entertainment, this is a very nice film to watch The music score is stirring, and the action, coupled with touches of wry humor, gives a true sense of enjoyable movie fun.
Widmark and Poiter have good support cast members, Russ Tamblyn, as Rolfe's younger brother, Oscar Homolka, as the father, Rosanna Schiaffino, wife of Mansuh, all of whom contribute to the movie's action and humor..
Just Take It As What It Is. Though released at about the same time, "The Long Ships" was not intended as an epic spectacular film in the line of "The Vikings" (1958), "Ben Hur" (1959), "Spartacus" (1960) or some other of the 50's and early 60's classics.
This movie has to be assumed just as what it was planned to be: a colorful period costume extravaganza in the times of the Vikings with lots of action and adventure; as such it stands as a most enjoyable product all the way.A very impressive color photography in beautiful open-wide outdoor locations, perfect settings and an interesting cast help too.
Richard Widmark is the Viking chief that leads his men in the search of the "Mother of Voices" a legendary huge bell made of gold; Sidney Poiter plays a sort of villainous Muslim leader who also wants the bell and fights the Vikings for it.
Beautiful Italian actress Rosanna Schiaffino adds the feminine touch as Poitier's favorite wife.If you don't think much in realistic terms and just let yourself go with action and adventure you'll surely have a good time with this film.Just for the record: in Argentina "The Long Ships" was renamed as "Los Invasores Vikingos" ("The Viking Invaders")..
As a moorish ruler obsessed with a wrong done by christians there is some relivance to today,but the obsession is for GOLD not correcting the wrong deed.Richard Widmark is NOT a Viking,but this movie is a laugh a minute with mistakes and unbelivable happenings.Still Oscar Hominka is right on in his small but important role,and its good to see Russ Tambyn in a non West side story role.Not to be taken to seriously as the much more recent 13 warrior is to be..
Imagine giddy vikings raping their way through a room filled with women being played for laughs or Sidney Poitier as a Moorish king surrounded by blackfaced subjects: the film hasn't aged well and it's not fun enough or good enough to make up for that.
Meanwhile, Sidney's wife, Rosanna Schiaffino, is more than frustrated with her husband's lack of intimate interest in her, and with another good-looking man in the picture, she might look elsewhere to get her needs met.While you're busy scratching your head wondering why anyone cast Dick Widmark in a period piece, you'll find out he's not the only unconvincing Viking in the movie.
the waining pagan faith.Orm's growth,as both a warrior and a man are really quite an inspiring story.And this film doesn't cover any of it.We have some sort of a worked -up plot about searching for a lost golden bell,and some casting that is bizarre.Widmark plays Widmark,tough,glib,and cynical.He does a fine job,but it isn't anything that he hadn't done in at least 20 pictures before.Who,in the name of all that's holy,cast Poitier in a role that called for Anthony Quinn to repeat his performance in"Sinbad the Sailor"?Did Sidney take this on because he was short of funds?Tamblyn is his own sweet self,and Homolka,Judd,Evans,Blakely,Jackson,and Lodge are their usual capable selves in their roles.Schiaffino is lovely to gaze upon,and at least tries to create a character,which is more than can be said of Loncar.(By the way,why couldn't we see more of that voluptuous blond sneaking into the smokehouse with Tamblyn?Has anybody got her phone number?)The last act is pretty implausible.The Moslems return to town with the bell,enter a silent city with the crowds NOT giving them the expected adulation,and walk right into an ambush.GIVE ME A BREAK!These are Moors,not morons.
This story tells a fanciful tale of a Great Golden Bell that only the Viking Long Ships can get to by navigating the "Maelstrom." Exciting fun and adventure!.
The Long Ships is one of three movies Sidney Poitier made with Richard Widmark.
RELEASED IN 1964 and directed by Jack Cardiff, "The Long Ships" chronicles events circa 1000 AD when a Viking misadventurer, Rolfe (Richard Widmark), and a Moorish king (Sidney Poitier) from the Barbary Coast strive to find "The Mother of All Voices," a priceless gigantic golden bell near the Pillars of Hercules, which refer to the promontories that flank the entrance to the Strait of Gibraltar (the northern "pillar" is Calpe Mons, aka the Rock of Gibraltar).
The storyline involves the hero, Rolf, played intelligently by non-classically-trained Richard Widmark as an infinitely resourceful rogue coming home--having lost his previous Viking ship in a maelstrom.
What follows is a battle, capture by Poitier's men, an escape that goes awry in the King's harem, and a voyage at sword's point by the Vikings to find and bring back the great bell.
The climax of the film is a battle fought in the Emir's city made possible when the Viking King comes to claim his ship and then fights with Rolf to make the great treasure his own.
It it is what it is...the OTHER Viking film of the sixties, A Moorish King, Aly Mansah (Sidney Poitier) cajoles after much fighting with his Viking adversary, Rolfe (Richard Widmark), looking out of place as much as the British supporting cast for a legendary 'Golden Bell' named 'The Mother of Voices' at the 'Pillars of Hercules'...
The film sees Richard Widmark playing a Viking in search of a legendary golden bell, while Sidney Poitier stars against him as a Moorish prince equally intent on getting said bell for himself.What follows is an often rousing and entertaining adventure filled with all manner of seafaring, scrapes and beautiful women.
Richard Widmark is excellent in the Kirk Douglas role, Sidney Poitier cast very much against type as the villain and Gordon Jackson as a cowardly Viking providing comic relief many years before he became the authority figure made famous by his roles in The Professionals and Upstairs/Downstairs.2 things that really stand out about this film, the revelation of the giant bell (which seems to float very well considering it's supposed to be solid gold?)and the 'Steel mare' torture device which really is the stuff of nightmares, like the Tarzan film where his African porters would be ripped apart by being tied to criss crossed palm trees.
Beautiful color photography, excellent atmosphere and sets, a great title theme, and a sly sense of humor that doesn't take itself too seriously.Some critics have called it comic book level, but hey, this a Fun movie and not actual history.It is also somewhat ahead of its time by featuring an interracial marriage between Mansuh and his wife.After returning to Norway and after much intrigue, Rolfe{ Widmark: gets a crew together and sails off on the Kings magnificent fighting ship.After going through the malestrom and ruining his second shipt they confront the Moorsbut surrender because they are outnumbered.After repairing their ship, they set out again to find the bell.
I put it on the other night to watch and he loved it,we have never laughed so much.This film is not to be taken as a history lesson it is just a fun film and nothing more,most of the time its unintentionally funny,for instance the long distance swimming Richard Widmark does at the near beginning of the film.The amount of costumes Sidney Poitier goes through,the different accents the viking crew have and who they are{Gorden Jackson}is one of them,Lionel Jeffries plays a black Enoch,so you see what i mean,how can you take this film seriously.
The 1964 British-Yugoslavian epic "The Long Ships" with Richard Widmark and Sidney Poitier, concerns a rivalry between marauding Viking seafarers and Moorish swordsmen.
The hero and villain are searching for a fabled gigantic golden bell of legend reputed to be as tall as three men and made with 'half the gold in the world.' This entertaining, formulaic, far-fetched nonsense has Widmark hamming it up as a rogue Viking while Poitier plays his Moorish prince with a straight face as well as straightened hair.
|
tt0037055
|
The Mask of Dimitrios
|
The year is 1938. Dutch mystery writer Cornelius Leyden (Peter Lorre) is visiting Istanbul. A fan of his, Colonel Haki (Kurt Katch) of the Turkish police, believes Leyden would be interested in the story of Dimitrios Makropoulos (Zachary Scott), whose body was just washed up on the beach. Leyden is so fascinated by what Haki tells of the dead arch-criminal that he becomes determined to learn more.
He seeks out Dimitrios' associates all over Europe, none of whom has a kind word for the deceased. They reveal more of the man's sordid life. His ex-lover, Irana Preveza (Faye Emerson), tells of his failed assassination attempt. Afterwards, he borrowed money from her and never returned.
On his travels, Leyden meets Mr. Peters (Sydney Greenstreet). Later, he catches Peters ransacking his hotel room. Peters reveals that he too had dealings with Dimitrios (he had done prison time when Dimitrios betrayed their smuggling ring to the police), and he is not convinced that the man is really dead. If he is alive, Peters plans to blackmail him for keeping his secret. He generously offers Leyden a share, but the Dutchman is interested only in learning the truth.
Wladislaw Grodek (Victor Francen) is the next link in the trail. He had hired Dimitrios to obtain some state secrets. Dimitrios manipulated Karel Bulic (Steven Geray), a meek, minor Yugoslav government official, into gambling and losing a huge sum, so he could be pressured into stealing charts of some minefields. Bulic later confessed to the authorities and committed suicide. Meanwhile, Dimitrios double-crossed Grodek, selling the charts himself to the Italian government.
Eventually, the two men track Dimitrios down in Paris. Fearful of being exposed to the authorities, he pays Peters one million francs for his silence but, true to his nature, goes to Peters' home shortly thereafter and shoots him. Leyden, his rage over Peters being shot overcoming his fear, grapples with Dimitrios, allowing the wounded Peters to grab the gun. Peters sends Leyden away to spare him from witnessing the violence to come; then shots are heard. When the police show up, Peters admits to shooting Dimitrios and does not resist arrest, satisfied with what he has accomplished. As he is taken away, he asks that Leyden write a book about the affair, and to kindly send him a copy.
|
revenge, cruelty, murder, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
It's wartime and Warners is short of those hot, young leading men, so they bring on one of the all-time great screen odd couples - Sydney and Peter - to work their magic.
And as always, they deliver, in "The Mask of Dimitrios" starring Zachary Scott, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, and Faye Emerson.
Though never leaving the back lot of Warners, the film takes writer Cornelius Leyden (Lorre) through Istanbul, Athens, Sofia, Geneva, Belgrade and Paris, following the life and career of an intriguing figure - Dimitrios - whose dead body Leyden has just seen in the morgue.
Finally, Cornelius meets Mr. Peters (Greenstreet) who has some startling information...and a plan."The Mask of Dimitrios" captures a European flavor with its international cast and creative sets, and director Jean Negulesco keeps the action moving.
This excellent slice of film noir sees classic actor Peter Lorre in a role that is less sinister than what we're used to seeing from him, but nevertheless; the refined performer manages a portrayal that really is a major asset for this film.
Much of the film's plot takes place in flashbacks, and in this respect, Jean Negulesco's film is very clever as we get to see the central figure's actions at the same time as learning about the kind of man he is; and like the writer at the heart of the tale, it's easy to become intrigued with the character of Dimitrios by watching the flashbacks.The cast really is a strong element of this film, and starring alongside Peter Lorre is his co-star in The Maltese Falcon, Casablanca and The Verdict (to name a few), Sydney Greenstreet.
The plot moves very well as it straddles between what is happening in the present and what went on in the past, and Frank Gruber's screenplay does a great job of ensuring that the characters are well thought-out in a film that is as intriguing as it is thrilling.
Faye Emerson as one of the women, Irana Preveza, Dimitrios used for his own selfish purposes then discarded is uncanny as she changes from a beautiful nightclub singer (in the flashback) to the worn out haggard shadow of a person she has become when relating her story to Cornelius Leyden (Lorre).
Victor Francen gives a powerful portrayal of Wladislaw Grodek, someone else Dimitrios has double crossed.The story unfolds as Leyden, a writer intrigued by Dimitrios' treachery, sets about to uncover as much information as possible about the archfiend in order to write a book.
They would appear in nine films together; this was one of their best.The movie's only real drawback is the complete absence of Greenstreet & Lorre during the lengthy flashback sequences.
Faye Emerson, the picture's leading lady, has actually a rather limited role, but she makes good use of her screen time as a Sofia nightclub owner with a sad story to tell Lorre.The large supporting cast features a considerable number of European character actors.
Chatty Florence Bates livens up her one short scene as an American society hostess living in Istanbul.Set in 1938, the film was produced during World War Two. It is a fine example of how movie magic and back lot technology could transport an audience to a temporarily inaccessible geographic location..
Mystery writer Cornelius Leyden (Peter Lorre) attends a dinner party where he is told about the recent discovery of the body of a master criminal by Colonel Haki, chief of the local police.
When Leyden learns that the criminal, Dimitrios Makropoulos, avoided capture for years, and engaged in everything from smuggling, blackmail, murder, and political assassination, he becomes intrigued, and begins an odyssey which takes him to many exotic locals in a bid to meet the actual people who dealt with, and managed to survive, encounters with the ruthless Dimitrios.
A fiction writer Cornelius Leyden (Peter Lorre) gets interested in Dimitrios' story and decides to conduct an investigation about his life and death with the intent of writing a book about it.
On the way he is joined by a mysterious stranger Mr. Peters (Sydney Greenstreet) who, as it turns out to be, has the same mission of finding out about Dimitrios' life, but whose motivations are quite different.
Peter Lorre plays it straight as a writer, Charles Latimer, who discovers for the first time that there are men like Dimitrios Makropoulos, a man who can draw others to him but who has no love for anyone except himself a man who is truly amoral.
Wonderful suspense film, with Lorre and Greenstreet, the Mutt and Jeff, of international intrigue, at the very top of their game, a great screen debut by Zachery Scott in the title role, and Victor Francen's very best performance in a minor but vital part.
It stars Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, Zachary Scott and Faye Emerson.
Plot finds Lorre as mystery novelist Cornelius Leyden, who after learning of the body of master scally-wag Dimitrios Makropoulos (Scott) being washed up dead on the shores of the Bosphorus, seeks out his history in the hope of writing a novel about him - aided by the suspicious Mr. Peters (Greenstreet).
The original movie shows the difference between actors ( Greenstreet,Lorre, Francen, Geray,and Scott who is probably the greatest personification of the Oily Weasel God on screen.)and "stars" past and present.
A mystery writer (Peter Lorre) visiting Istanbul is told stories of a notorious criminal named Dimitrios (Zachary Scott) whose body was just found washed ashore on the beach.
Along the way he's joined by a mysterious man named Mr. Peters (Sydney Greenstreet), who had his own dealings with Dimitrios.Intriguing noir thriller, directed by Jean Negulesco with a fine script adapted from an Eric Ambler novel.
Most classic movie fans know any picture with Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet is bound to be good and this is one of their best.
Mask of Dimitrios is a rare film noir gem starring two of the genre's great actors in leading roles.
Mystery man Dimitrios (Scott) is found dead, causing novelist Lorre to piece together the man's sinister life, taking him all over Europe as he gets involved in a number of sub-plots.Okay, the super-dudes have their Butch and Sundance, but eccentrics like me have Pete and Syd, Lorre and Greenstreet, that is.
Alfred Hitchcock apparently thought the story was "hypnotically fascinating", and I can only wonder what he might have come up with if he'd made the film!The death of the thoroughly rascally individual Dimitrios interests a Dutch writer of detective fiction Cornelius Leyden (altered from the English Charles Latimer in the book for some reason) played by Peter Lorre whose interest is fanned by the head of the Istanbul secret police Colonel Haki.
It was Zachary Scott's film debut and most memorable role - a similar part to Orson Welles' Harry Lime five years later in The Third Man - and as the years went by neither of them seemed to be able to get a decent part.Nowadays of course Leyden would've done all his researching and travelling on his smartphone and the story would be completely different and shorter still, even with sex and violence padding it out!
Originally viewed this film in 1944 and was spellbound by the great acting skills of Sydney Greenstreet (Mr.Peters),"Christmas in Connecticut'45", who gives Peter Lorre (Cornelius Latimer Leyden), "Quicksand",'50, a very hard time, pointing guns in his face and warning him against Dimitrios (Zachary Scott),"Flamingo Road",'49, who is a ruthless villian up to all kinds of evil tricks in order to make money.
Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet star in this atmospheric noir from 1944.Lorre plays a writer who becomes fascinated with a criminal known as Dimitrios, who's cut a path of thievery and murder across the Mediterranean.
These shady dealings take Lorre, and the audience, to all manner of exotic locales, from Istanbul to Austria."The Mask of Dimitrios" isn't that different from any number of international intrigue stories from the same time period, but what does give it a touch of the unique is the relationship between Lorre and Greenstreet, two men who form a kind of tentative friendship even though neither much trusts the other.
The movie's got great atmosphere, a rock-solid script, and two legendary character actors in the forms of Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre, and yet it remains basically unknown and unheralded.
But I still think "The Mask of Dimitrios" is ripe for rediscovery and reassessment by film buffs.The thoughtful storyline centers around the efforts of a mystery writer (Lorre) to uncover information about the life of Dimitrious (Zachary Scott), a master criminal.
(As much as I like Greenstreet, listening to him talk at length about Dimitrious isn't as interesting as seeing the man in action.) But the plot is episodic, moving between different exotic locations and different times in Dimitrious' career, so any lulls in the action are relatively brief and not too detrimental to the film as a whole.Out of all the anecdotes about Dimitrious, I must say my favorite is the one where he cheats a hapless government clerk, Karel Bulic.
All in all, an excellent movie and film to add to any mystery library or collections of Greenstreet and Lorre..
He is a mystery writer on vacation in the Levant and becomes intrigued by the story and exploits of Dimitrios Markopoulos (Zachary Scott), a spy/assassin in the Balkans in the period between the two World Wars.
He goes on a fact-finding tour to learn more about the fascinating Dimitrios, and attracts the attention of a Mr. Peters (Sydney Greenstreet), who is also interested in Dimitrios, but for very different reasons."The Mask Of Dimitrios" is an excellent story with some unexpected twists and some very good acting.
The film stays close to the Eric Ambler novel on which it is based and Scott is helped with the classic presence of Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre in the cast.
In fact Lorre and Greenstreet have as much screen time as Scott.The film is told mostly in flashback after Peter Lorre who is a mystery writer by trade identifies a body that has been fished from the Bosporus to Turkish police as that of Dimitrios Makropoulos a ruthless adventurer for hire.
Geray is the one you remember after Zachary Scott in this film.The Mask Of Dimitrios holds up remarkably well after almost 70 years.
Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet usually played in support of other Warner stars, most notably Humphrey Bogart.
Lorre plays Dutch author Cornelius Leyden who is on vacation in Istanbul when he listens to the tale of the career of legendary criminal Dimitrios Makropoulos, whose bloated body has washed ashore that day.
This movie its main character is also featured (almost) entirely just in flashback, when an intrigued detective-story writer (Peter Lorre) ventures himself into a search of who the notorious criminal Dimitrios Makropolous (Zachary Scott in his first movie role) 'was', by interviewing people he met and had business with.It's a perfect treatment for the main character, who takes mysterious and grand proportions as a cold-hearted ruthless criminal, who isn't afraid to kill and use people to complete his assignment.
Though it's debatable whether it aren't Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet who are the real main characters of the movie.
Mr Leyden (Peter Lorre) is a famous crime author who takes an interest in the story of Dimitrios (Zachary Scott) when his body is washed up on shore.
Peter Lorre is always fun to watch while Zachary Scott makes an effective baddie as Dimitrios.
Peter Lorre is a mystery writer in Istanbul who delves into the life of a master criminal by the name of Dimitrios (Zachary Scott in his film debut).
Popular Pairing of Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet from a Novel by Eric Ambler.
A Slick looking WB Film with an International Flavor and a near Perfect Performance by Zachary Scott as a Greasy, Charming Criminal.The Movie is very Well Regarded and the Style is Norish with Flashbacks and Key Lighting Flourishes and Offbeat Characters.
For hard evidence that the fabled team of Lorre and Greenstreet was just a fable, check out this limp "thriller," in which the most intriguing episodes feature not Peter and Sydney but Zachary Scott.
(Some Spoilers) Washing up ashore off the Turkish Bosphorus Straits is a body identified as that of Dimitrios Makropoulos; a crook murderer spy blackmailer assassin double-crosser and all around lowlife no good scoundrel.Taking a well earned vacation in Istanbul is famous Dutch detective writer Corelios Leyden, Peter Lorre,who's a good friend of the local police chief Col.Haki, Kurt Katch.
Peter then together with Leyden plans to blackmail Dimitrios for one million Francs in order to keep that information for getting to the Paris police.Good pairing of Lorre and Greenstreet as they track down that slimly rascal Dimitrios Talat (aka Makropoulos) and give him a taste of his own medicine.
The Mask of Dimitrios features a writer, played by Peter Lorre, who travels the world learning about a heartless criminal named Dimitrios whose body has just washed up on the shore.This Citizen Kane approach of interviews and flashbacks is fine in theory, but neither the talky flashbacks nor the talky present-day scenes are actually interesting.
Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet are both at their best in this outstanding noir of far-reaching qualities, many depending on excellent direction and fascinating cinematography.
Peter Lorre is an innocent writer with exclusively human interest, who on a visit to Istanbul encounters the case of the discovered dead body of the notorious criminal Dimitrios, universally infamous for his ruthlessness and sensational criminal career.
And so they join hands in a most intriguing human research for the truth, and both are more rewarded for their interest than they bargained for.This is a classic noir and one of the best, the atmospheric settings are irresistible, Greenstreet's enigmatic acting fills you both with awe, misgivings and reliefs, and for once Peter Lorre is a wholly sympathetic and innocent character.
But Peterson manages to turn the tables on Demetrios, and kills him (finally and fully).The film makes the most of a grand cast of character actors led by Greenstreet as Peters/Peterson, Lorre as Van Leyden, and Scott as Demetrios.
Jean Negulesco, a fine director, did well with Greenstreet and Lorre here, and would have a good second chance at it in THREE STRANGERS in a year.But while the film is an excellent example of a spy noir, it does not do the novel full justice for the extent of it's irony.
I adore "The Maltese Falcon" so "The Mask of Dimitrios" was essential viewing since I love both Peter Lorre and Sidney Greenstreet.
I think just viewing the film for Greenstreet and Lorre's many scenes together is reason enough to see "The Mask of Dimitrios".
While movies about a character told in flashback don't necessarily always excite me, I think it works in this case because Zachary Scott is a rather boring actor (to me anyway) and seeing him in small doses helps the film.
Criminality, espionage and betrayals all figure strongly and the unclear motives of some of the characters add enormously to all the intrigue involved.During a vacation in Istanbul in 1938, Dutch crime writer Cornelius Leyden (Peter Lorre) is approached local Police Chief, Colonel Haki (Kurt Katch), who says that he's a great fan of the author's books and thinks that he may be interested to hear about a criminal that the Turkish police had pursued unsuccessfully for many years and whose dead body had been found earlier that day, on a nearby beach.
As this character, Zackary Scott, in his first screen role, is faultless as he looks suitably suave and slimy and brings to life all of the notorious criminal's qualities extremely convincingly.Fay Emerson is especially effective in portraying the profound sense of disillusion that Irana Preveza feels as she tells her story that's so appropriately accompanied by the sound of a band playing "Perfidia" and the combined talents of Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet are simply terrific.
The lifeless body of a notorious master criminal Dimitrios Makropoulos(Zachary Scott)washes up on the beach and a Dutch mystery writer Cornelius Leyden(Peter Lorre)becomes obsessed with the character.
After several supporting pairings in such Warner Brothers classics as "The Maltese Falcon" and "Casablanca", character actors Peter Lorre and Sydney Grenstreet were given their own series, basically a sinister variation of Bob Hope and Bing Crosby's "Road" movies, taking them to exotic locations with calculating and sometimes confusing plots.
Here, they are total strangers who encounter each other on a train and end up in a story of espionage, betrayal and greed where the Dimitrios of the plot is an apparent corpse at the very beginning of the film whom Lorre wishes to write a mystery story about.
Through convoluted flashbacks, Dimitrios's amoral character is explored and Lorre learns through Greenstreet (sometimes at gunpoint!) of why so many people were interested in him.At first, Greenstreet and Lorre seem to be on the outside of the plot looking in as various shady characters pop in and out of the film, involved with the mysterious dead man.
Released in 1944 and possessing Warner Brothers' trademark slickness, The Mask of Dimitrios is a fast-paced, Europe-trotting tale of international intrigue boasting the two masters of intrigue, Sydney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre.
Along the way he encounters many colorful characters, among them is a mysterious Englishman named Mr. Peters (Greenstreet) who seems most interested in Leyden's research.
For once Peter Lorre plays a good guy; not merely a sympathetic character, but perhaps the only one with a genuinely pedestrian motive regarding the dapper Zachary Scott, as the criminal mastermind Demitrios.
Lorre doesn't naively accept the other characters' machinations, but looks for the good in people, a trait which serves him well with Greenstreet.As some others have noted, the last part of the movie is the best.
Definitely worth a look for Lorre's and Greenstreet's performances, and for mystery and film noir fans as well..
|
tt0067402
|
Mary, Queen of Scots
|
Mary, Queen of Scots, awaits her execution by order of Queen Elizabeth I of England. Mary composes a letter to Elizabeth, to whom she feels a close kinship as her cousin and a fellow female monarch. Through flashback, Mary narrates to Elizabeth the events of her life, starting from her birth in Scotland to the French Mary of Guise, who sends her to France as a child for her protection.
Mary is raised in French court, where she had for companions her Scottish ladies Mary Beaton, Mary Seton, Mary Fleming and Mary Livingston, as well as the Italian musician David Rizzio. Upon reaching adulthood Mary is married to the Dauphin, Francis, who becomes King of France when his father dies. News arrives that Queen Mary I of England has died and her sister, Elizabeth, has become Queen despite her official status as a bastard. Mary is aware of her own legitimate claim to the English throne; although she writes to Elizabeth promising not to challenge her, she insists on using the English coat of arms and the title "Queen of France, Scotland and England".
After Francis's early death, Mary returns to Scotland with her ladies and Rizzio. There, she is treated with suspicion and skepticism by her half-brother, Lord Moray, the Protestant clergyman John Knox and other Scottish lords. Mary struggles to ingratiate herself to them, but ends up isolating herself further by relying on Rizzio for political advice, marrying Englishman Darnley without the Lords' consent, and supporting the controversial Scottish border Lord Bothwell. Mary's love for Darnley fades when she learns of his extremism in pursuing the English throne; Mary has strong affection for Elizabeth, and wants to be her heir instead of usurping her.
Darnley conspires with Moray and the Scottish Lords to murder Rizzio in cold blood in front of a heavily pregnant Mary. Afterwards Mary begins to see visions of Rizzio, who warns her of worse things to come. Mary gives birth to her and Darnley's heir, James, but she is effectively separated from Darnley and has a new passion for Bothwell, with whom she has an affair. Soon afterward Darnley is killed in a gunpowder explosion, and Mary marries Bothwell because she is pregnant with his child. The marriage is heavily protested, with the Scottish Lords taking up arms against Mary and Bothwell. Eventually Mary and Bothwell are outnumbered, and Bothwell flees from Scotland while Mary travels to England in the hopes of getting protection from Elizabeth. Instead, Elizabeth has Mary incarcerated, and decades later Mary is executed by order of the cousin she has never met.
|
historical, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The casting gets better with Trevor Howard as William Cecil, Ian Holm as David Rizzio and Patrick McGoohan as the half-brother James Stuart.
It's been quite some time since I saw this movie, so have forgotten many of the details, but quite enjoyed this portrait of the clash between Mary Queen of Scots and her rival Tudor cousin, Elizabeth I.
The movie chronicles the struggles of Mary Stewart, who returns from France, where she had been wife to the sickly (now deceased) king Francois II, to Scotland, where her Protestant half brother, Jamie, is acting as Regent.
The most devastating enemy proves to be her royal English cousin, Elizabeth I, who sees Mary as a threat, especially when Mary produces (with Darnley) a son while she (Elizabeth) remains unmarried and childless.The main asset of the movie lies in its two female leads, who portray the warm, emotional Catholic Mary and the cool, calculating Protestant Elizabeth.
Others in the star studded cast include Patrick McGoohan as James Stewart (Mary's brother), Timothy Dalton as Lord Darnley (Mary's weak, conniving second husband), and Nigel Davenport as Bothwell (Mary's true love and third husband).
Two of Elizabeth's ministers are portrayed by Trevor Howard as Sir William Cecil, and Daniel Massey as the queen's devoted Dudley.Beautiful Oscar nominated Tudor period costumes and scenes.
This is true: the major characters remain Mary herself (played by Vanessa Redgrave), and Elizabeth I of England (played by Glenda Jackson).
The story progresses through her time as Queen to the sickly Francois of France, to her return to a Scotland dominated by Protestantism and regented by her brother Jamie (played by Patrick McGoohan), through her unfortunate marriage to the weak and selfish fop Lord Darnley (Timothy Dalton) and her eventual deposition following marriage to Lord Bothwell (played with charm by Nigel Davenport).
Vanessa Redgrave, although a bit too old for the role of Mary in the earlier part of the movie did a good job at capturing Mary's character as well.
Vanessa Redgrave portrays an excellent Queen of Scots in this film; Mary Stuart's frivolity, passion for life, religious devotion, and emotion-stirring conscience is perfectly captured by this talented actress.
Glenda Jackson, as Elizabeth of England, has completely captured the hearts and imaginations of the audience as the best actress to ever play the Virgin Queen, and as I watched her manipulate her Catholic enemies and rise above the snares of danger that her fellow Queen blindly stumbled into, I was amazed at her complete understanding of the role.
Along with massive doses of romance, the film provides an interesting depiction of the long-distance tension between Mary and her Cousin, Elizabeth I of England, and the forces at work in the courts of continental Europe and of England and Scotland that made Mary's life hazardous from the moment she set foot on Scottish soil.
This is above all a vivid portrait of the interrelationships of fascinating personalities--none more so than those of the Queen, played with riveting and unselfconscious elegance by Vanessa Redgrave, and her great love Lord Bothwell--in which role the gifted and compellingly attractive Nigel Davenport is perfectly cast..
Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson are thrilling as rival queens in this movie.
This is the contrast that so many writers have been fascinated with, the contrast between her cousin and rival Elizabeth of England.Mary, Queen of Scots has the story start where it properly belongs in France where the Queen Consort of the sickly Francis II has two deaths happen to her which forever alter her life.
Her mission was bring back the old religion.Like John Ford's Mary Of Scotland the film turns on the performances and rivalries Vanessa Redgrave as Mary and Glenda Jackson as Elizabeth.
Katharine Hepburn and Florence Eldridge played Mary and Elizabeth in the Ford film and Redgrave and Jackson are every bit their equal.
Glenda Jackson is quite the calculating machine, her scene with Trevor Howard as her chief minister William Cecil where she sends both Dalton and her lover Daniel Massey as Robert Dudley later Earl Of Leicester to Mary and explaining how if Mary chooses either, she Elizabeth will wind up a winner.
Queen Elizabeth I has been the central figure of many movies and has been portrayed by many great actresses, and now Mary, Queen of Scots gets her turn in the spotlight.
But Vanessa Redgrave was truly exquisite as Mary, fleshing her out and making her a naive and vulnerable person who was ruled by her heart and her passion instead of her reason and her mind, which would lead to her downfall.Sidebar: I love Bette Davis and all (who was Queen Elizabeth I in "The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex" and "The Virgin Queen"), but as of this writing, I consider at least two actresses to be better at portraying Elizabeth: #1 Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth" and #2 Glenda Jackson here in this film.
Vanessa Redgrave is "Mary, Queen of Scots" in this 1972 film which stars Glenda Jackson, Patrick McGoohan, Timothy Dalton, Ian Holm and Nigel Davenport.
These two women are powerhouses playing two completely different types of women - Elizabeth (Jackson) is powerful, distrusting and manipulative, while vulnerable, sensitive Mary is in way over her head.The story covers the death of Mary's husband in France and her arrival in Scotland to be their Queen.
With the birth of her son, James (who became James I of England and James VI of Scotland), Mary fights as best she can so that her son will one day rule.The acting is magnificent from all of the stars; it would be impossible to choose one as better than the other, though certainly McGoohan, as Mary's brother, and Ian Holm, as Riccio, had excellent roles that showcased their abilities.
I love a historical film...hmm...because after watching the movie, you can research online or in a book and compare differences between the film and what really happen back then.This film is about one of my favorite royal women Mary Stuart, Queen of Scotland, who claimed the Scottish crown from her mother upon her death.
Elizabeth, whose own reign is shaky (given a strong Catholic presence in her country), is nervous about her Catholic cousin -- and made more so by Mary's seeming inability to appreciate the political niceties of the period.In the film, the ever-luminous Vanessa Redgrave (Camelot) takes on the role as Mary, and the sharp-edged Glenda Jackson as Queen Elizabeth, who knew a thing or two about palace intrigue.
This lush and well-photographed movie hits all the right notes yet only skims the surface.Vanessa Redgrave makes a lovely Mary and Glenda Jackson a fiery Elizabeth, yet neither actress really taps into the deeper contrast between the two queens.
Even the way Vanessa Redgrave hugs the pillow with both arms is a sly, knowing comment on Mary Queen of Scots and her French love of luxury and comfort.Later in the film, when Mary is Elizabeth's prisoner, it's noticeable that Elizabeth comes to visit her in secret, and literally catches Mary dozing, this time with armed guards standing just outside her chamber.
Although the figure of Mary Stuart has always been distorted by Hollywood, this is a good movie which is actually an attempt at giving us a glimpse at the women, not the Queens, in their historic context.Unfortunately, even this one is a bit sweet with Mary and goes on hard on Elizabeth.The players are all first class, starting with a Clash of Titans between Vanessa Redgrave and Glenda Jackson.
Noooooh, the Gentlemen went on producing other insignificant stuff, but never cared on re-releasing this one in Letterbox format.Second: although I liked it when it was released, especially for its cast and more than beautiful music scored by John Barry, why wasn't an attempt made at remaking it in a more true to history perspective?After all Mary was not as innocent as depicted by Katie Hepburn or even Vanessa Redgrave.
And they all fell for her.The reasons for her mad conviction of being the only true Queen of England were inculcated into her by her family due to some contentions they had already back when Henry VIII reigned.All this though was certainly not enough to make her the legitimate Queen of England and she should have contented herself by already being Queen of the Scots.Anyway, she remains a pathetic and sad figure in History and well deserves a movie such as this one as a remainder that at times it is better to be happy with what one already has, rather than wanting the whole pie.In this instance Mary truly was too immature and too arrogant to admit defeat even if it loomed right in front of her eyes.
After all, it is seldom they make movies like these.And if you're interested by more Tudor Lore, try also "Henry VIII and his Six Wives", "Anne of the Thousand Days", the filmed Play by Robert Bolt "A Man For All Seasons".The King is dead, long live the Queen....
The myth of the tragic Mary Stuart is further tangled by imagined meetings between herself and her unwilling nemesis, Elizabeth I.Somewhat episodic, it reminded me of another Vanessa Redgrave vehicle, also involving Patrick McGoohan: "Three Sovereigns for Sarah".
As that film also did, this movie attempts to tell a thirty year long story, this time starting with Mary's beginnings as a widowed teenager and not ending until her execution twenty-seven years later.
Vannessa takes great command of her role and the film, despite being upstaged at times by the absolutely wonderful Glenda Jackson.
A case in point is the scene where she receives the news that Mary has been delivered of a baby boy and quotes literally Elizabeth I with `The Queen of Scots is lighter of a fair son, while I am but a barren stock' Generally speaking the viewer of the movie should not take the `historical' events portrayed as true historical accuracy.
In Ford's movie featuring Katherine Hepburn ,we already attended a meeting between the two queens.And with two actresses as fascinating as Redgrave and Jackson,Charles Jarrot felt compelled to film two scenes with both of them.Historically,they never met.And Bothwell was not a romantic knight but a hairy brute.The Lochleven episode and Mary's escape are passed over in silence and however what a suspenseful story it was!
On the other hand,Maurey (James Stuart)'s part is more prominent than in the previous film ,which is a good thing.The prologue in France in Chenonceaux "le Château des Dames " is welcome too:Mary's life in France was sweet ,probably the happiest time in her life although mother-in-law Catherine de Medicis did not like her.With hindsight,it's easy to see why she could not cope with the harshness of her native country where,in spite of her three crowns , she remained a papist.The two great thespians get excellent support from all the male cast:Thimoty Dalton gives a Shakespearian performance as Darnley,Ian Holm is equally good as Riccio.The cinematography is lavish and the story is never dull.I saw the movie when it was theatrically released and every time it's on the telly,I watch it again.Despite Queen Elizabeth's appearance ,the ending seems more historically accurate than in the 1936 version:before her death,the queen did not think of Boswell anymore,she wanted to become a martyr to catholicism.And so she died..
I love period films, I love late legendary John Barry's music and I like Glenda Jackson, Vanessa Redgrave and Patrick McGoohan a lot.
Mary, Queen of Scots was a truly wonderful film, true some of the history is suspect but I was past caring because everything else was done so brilliantly.
The acting is a marvel, Vanessa Redgrave is a very convincing and regal Mary, and Patrick McGoohan an excellent James, but Glenda Jackson who embodies Elizabeth is a revelation.
The same events had been previously filmed in Hollywood by John Ford as MARY OF Scotland (1936) with Katharine Hepburn (as Mary Stuart), Fredric March (as Bothwell) and his real-life actress wife Florence Eldridge (as Queen Elizabeth I); here these same roles are played by Vanessa Redgrave who had already appeared (as Elizabeth's mother, Anne Boleyn) in the magnificent A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (1966), Nigel Davenport (ditto) and Glenda Jackson (who was currently starring as the same English monarch on British TV) and, like its above-mentioned predecessor (albeit to a lesser extent), the film found favor at awards ceremonies of the day with both Redgrave and Jackson being up for Oscar (the former) and Golden Globes (both).
Still, where the film impresses most is in the performances of the ensemble cast: apart from those already pointed out, we also have Patrick McGoohan (who just died at 80 as Mary's devious half-brother James), Trevor Howard (as the English Queen's wily chief adviser), Timothy Dalton (as Mary's second and tyrannical husband), Daniel Massey (as Elizabeth's ambitious lover), Ian Holm (as Mary's link to the Vatican) and Andrew Keir (as a Scottish lord).
"Mary, Queen of Scots" falls neatly into this profuse dramatic line, telling the story of the rivalry between Mary (Vanessa Redgrave) and Elizabeth I (Glenda Jackson).
It is difficult to think of a movie or play dominated by two such powerful and splendid actresses, and there's no point to arguing who is better in this film because each dominates the scene when alone and the sparks when the two appear together are like fireworks in the sky.
The historicity of the script is questionable but the rivalry between Mary and Elizabeth was real and the successful plot to dethrone Mary by her bastard brother, James Stuart (Patrick McGoohan), is likewise accurate.
Although Elizabeth I has been portrayed many times in recent years by many great actresses, Glenda Jackson more than holds her own in the role.
This basic error is compounded by the appalling performance by Mr Patrick Mcgoohan as Mary's brother,James.His attempt at a Scottish accent is frankly embarrassing.Mr Nigel Davenport as Bothwell is equally bad but at least he has the good grace to tone it down a bit.
Unfortunately many people seem to see "Mary Queen of Scots" as a great historical movie.In truth it is about as accurate as "Carry on Henry" and nowhere near as funny..
Vanessa Redgrave is excellent as Mary, the Scottish queen who married the King of France only to be drummed out his country by his rotten family...unwelcome in England, she returns to Scotland intent on remaining on the throne.
Redgrave's performance is matched by the great cast: Patrick McGoohan, Timothy Dalton, and Ian Holm (who steals his scenes as the "little Italian").
Glenda Jackson plays Queen Elizabeth and she's dynamite.
This is a clear example of this, and it's painfully obvious before, during, and after watching the film.It's a bizarre case of Mary Queen of Scots being chosen as the subject of Vanessa Redgrave's sweeping epic, rather than finding the best choice to play Mary and this leads us to the first problem - the casting of the main star.
Mary Queen of Scots is directed by Charles Jarrott, has a screenplay by John Hale, has music by John Barry and stars Vanessa Redgrave, Glenda Jackson, Trevor Howard, Nigel Davenport, Timothy Dalton, Raymond Massey, Patrick McGoohan and Ian Holm.The young Queen consort of France Mary(Vanessa Redgrave),is taken from France to Scotland to become Queen there after her husband dies.Mary is aided by an Italian spy David Riccio(Ian Holm)and the Scottish Lord Bothwell(Nigel Davenport).
Bothwell is very blunt and is a man of action, he becomes totally loyal to the Queen and falls in love with her.Mary poses a threat to the English Queen, Elizabeth Tudor (Glenda Jackson).
Elizabeth's friend and adviser Lord Cecil (Trevor Howard)urges her to have Mary killed because she is too great a threat, Elizabeth won't do that and insists another way be found to stop her.The entire cast are excellent with Vanessa and Glenda giving the standout performances.
These things are made with gusto and they sound natural within the movie.So,it is this cinematographic intelligence that pleases.Mary, Queen of Scots (1972) was released in '71 and was filmed on location at Chenonceaux,and in Scotland,Northumberland, Sussex and at Shepperton studios.In the previous decade,the '60s,several British historical dramas were made with big success: Becket (1964), A Man for All Seasons (1966),The Lion in Winter (1968),Anne of the Thousand Days (1969),Cromwell (1970), etc...
I watched this after viewing Howard's End a few time, which is a movie I like despite a problematic, mechanical supporting performance from Redgrave.
Despite its title the film is not just the story of Mary Queen of Scots (Vanessa Redgrave) but is also the story of her cousin Queen Elizabeth (Glenda Jackson).The film features a couple of great performances from Redgrave and Jackson who are both Oscar winning actresses.
Further the secondary characters are perhaps to numerous as many disappear rather quickly without sufficient resolution.As iconic as Cate Blanchett has become of late in her portrayals of Queen Elizabeth, at one time Glenda Jackson virtually owned the role with both this film and an Emmy winning performance in Elizabeth R..
Basically in 1560, Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots (Oscar and Golden Globe nominated Vanessa Redgrave), returns to her native land following the death of her husband.
Queen Elizabeth I of England (Golden Globe nominated Glenda Jackson) fears that Mary has ambitions to to the throne of England, so she sends ambitious Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester (Daniel Massey) to distract her, by wooing her.
Redgrave and Jackson are both terrific as the monarchs at loggerheads, it is fact that Mary Stuart and Queen Elizabeth did not meet in real life, but the scene created for them to do so does work well, and the performances of supporting cast members Dalton (young, with blonde hair?), Holm, Davenport and Howard are also well done, what I did understand worked well, it is written well, and the period detail is splendid, all together it is a worthwhile historical drama.
|
tt0064373
|
Gojira-Minira-Gabara: Oru kaijû daishingeki
|
Ichiro Miki (Tomonori Yazaki) is a highly imaginative but lonely latchkey kid growing up in urban (and at that time, polluted) Kawasaki. Every day he comes home to his family's empty apartment. His only friends are a toymaker named Shinpei Inami (Eisei Amamoto) and a young girl named Sachiko (Hidemi Ito). Every day after school, Ichiro is tormented by a gang of bullies led by a child named Sanko Gabara (Junichi Ito). To escape his loneliness, Ichiro sleeps and dreams about visiting Monster Island. During his visit he witnesses Godzilla battle three Kamacuras and Ebirah, a giant sea monster. Ichiro is then chased by a rogue Kamacuras and falls into a deep cave, but luckily avoids being caught by Kamacuras. Shortly afterwards, Ichiro is rescued from the cave by Godzilla's Son, Minilla. Ichiro quickly learns that Minilla has bully problems too, as he is bullied by a monstrous ogre known as Gabara.
Ichiro is then awoken by Shinpei who informs him that his mother must work late again. Ichiro goes out to play, but is then frightened by the bullies and finds and explores an abandoned factory. After finding some souvenirs (tubes, a headset, and a wallet with someone's license), Ichiro leaves the factory after hearing some sirens close by. After Ichiro leaves, two bank robbers (played by Sachio Sakai and Kazuo Suzuki) who were hiding out in the factory learn that Ichiro has found one of their drivers licenses and follow him in order to kidnap him.
Later, after his sukiyaki dinner with Shinpei, Ichiro dreams again and reunites with Minilla. Together they both watch as Godzilla fights Ebirah, Kumonga, and some invading jets. Then in the middle of Godzilla's fights, Gabara appears and Minilla is forced to battle it, and after a short and one-sided battle Minilla runs away in fear. Godzilla returns to train Minilla how to fight and use its own atomic ray. However, Ichiro is woken up this time by the bank robbers and is taken hostage as a means of protection from the authorities.
Out of fear and being watched by the thieves, Ichiro calls for Minilla's help and falls asleep again where he witnesses Minilla being beaten up by Gabara again. Finally, Ichiro helps Minilla fight back at Gabara and eventually Minilla wins, catapulting the bully through the air by a seesaw-like log. Godzilla, who was in the area watching comes to congratulate Minilla for its victory, but is ambushed by a vengeful Gabara. Godzilla easily beats down Gabara and sends the bully into retreat, never to bother Minilla again. Now from his experiences in his dreams, Ichiro learns how to face his fears and fight back, gaining the courage to outwit the thieves just in time for the police, called by Shinpei, to arrive and arrest them. The next day, Ichiro stands up to Sanko and his gang and wins, regaining his pride and confidence in the process. He also gains their friendship when he plays a prank on a billboard painter.
|
comedy, prank
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Godzilla's Revenge is often regarded as one of the worst Godzilla films,and it's reputation was not helped by coming after the terrifically entertaining Destroy All Monsters.
However,look closer and the film is actually quite interesting,especially if you remember it was aimed at very young children.Having all of the monster footage exist in the mind of a small boy almost justifies the stock footage in a way,as if he was remembering previous stuff he'd seen.
The 'real'footage takes place in a much more realistic environment than usual,and addresses concerns that might mean a lot to young children-parents spending not enough time with them,loneliness,bullying,etc.
Of course things like the son of Godzilla shrinking down to human size and talking irritate some older Godzilla fans,and none of the 'new'monster footage is particularly good,but some films one just has to judge by thinking of the target audience,and as a kid's film it's really quite good,perhaps a perfect film for parents to introduce Godzilla to their children!People who claim Godzilla movies are all the same should see this and maybe the surreal Godzilla Vs Hedorah,both are very unusual and original variations on the kaiju formula..
Films like Bionicles or HotWheels are better than a sedative, but this one isn't quite so bad thanks to the Godzilla footage and little side-stories the kids will ignore, but the adults will enjoy (admittedly not many of these, but at least they tried).the most interesting of these side stories involves the boy's friend and neighbour, the typical mussy-haired scientist-tinkerer we find in most Godzilla films.
Given that, it all makes perfect sense, the plot, the dialog, the flashbacks and everything, and if you happen to actually BE a very young person, then it not only makes sense, but it enters your own life.We were setting place-mats and pillows for Minya for months after they first watched this movie.Minya fans will also be happy to know that the diminutive atomic monster returns as a principle character in the 2004 Final Wars, albeit with a non-speaking part :).
Since the idea of going postal hadn't been invented yet, Ichiro spends his afterschool hours dreaming of Monster Island and Godzilla's son Minya.
He learns some valuable life lessons from Godzilla's son on Monster Island every time he sleeps.
The film goes on and it's kind of fun in a way, but in the end, after the boy has learned a valuable lesson, the final scene has him doing what the bullies dared him to do in the beginning.
Kids often imagine themselves in movies essentially as they happened, so the introduction of a new monster is something unusual in that regard.Child actor Tomonori Yazaki is wonderful as Ichiro (whose name simply means "first male child"), and his parents are simply stuck in their situation.
Even if they don't belive something is real, they like to pretend it is, anyway.When Ishiro Honda cut this film for festival exhibition, he deleted the comic ending which is really inappropriate and suggests that the lessons Ichiro learned from Gojira are okay.
This plays against the final scene with the mother, who promises Ichiro she will never work at night again, while her non-verbals convey that she cannot hold to this promise, in effect fulfilling one responsibility mandates coming up short on another of equal importance.It might perhaps be better if the film were regarded as an experimental drama, one the parents should watch with children and discuss.
This is really two films.One film is a kid's visit to Monster Island, where he witnesses a compilation of fight scenes from "Son of Godzilla" and "G.
Some of this footage looks like out-take or alternate take material; the whole Gabara episode may well have been intended for "Son of" and excised, in the way that "Frankenstein Conquers the World" was to include a fight with a giant squid, some footage of which finding its way into "King Kong Vs. Godzilla".The second film is a story of a young boy of the working class in an overly-industrialized modern Japan, neglected by his parents, bullied in school, who finds himself kidnapped by a gang of bank robbers and has to learn courage and wit in order to deal with his situation.The first film is notorious as a "stock-footage" fiasco with a talking monster.
Hard to identify with, and easy to wish away, I feel no sympathy with him at all as an individual, only as representative of the thousands of neglected children like him.It should be noted that the stock-footage here was filmed by the 'other Godzilla director', Jun Fukuda - so why does Ishiro Honda use it, why not use his own Godzilla material?
Mostly, I think the Godzilla fans who hate this film so vehemently are jealous Ichiro gets to hang out on Monster Island!
In this Godzilla movie, the series takes the path of the early Gamera movies, in that a kid is the main character, and that the monsters seem to react to him.
In that it tries to mimic the life of a Japanese boy, who looks up to Godzilla, as a hero.This movie, could have been a lot better, if it was not for the fact that the special effects wizard Eiji Tsuburaya died while the movie was in production, the budget was then cut, and instead of just canning the movie, stock footage was added to complete it.
Minya talks,Godzilla does'nt.Gabra looks ludicrous.The little kid is goofy.This is NOT for Godzilla fans.However,little children should enjoy this story.From a kid's point of veiw this is good entertainment.I think it's good for kids.It's name should be more kid-inviting though..
I believe this movie only had so much stock footage because Toho was running out of money and this kid, Ichiro, has these battles memorized.
Alone most of the time, the way he finds peace away from the bullies and loneliness is dreaming about his favorite monsters, and for himself to go to Monster Island to hang out with Godzilla's son, Minya.
Tenth Godzilla film is also the worst, an incredibly weak, pointless affair about a bullied Japanese boy who daydreams about hanging out on Monster Island with the son of Godzilla, where they try to help each other overcome their respective bullies...Godzilla does what he can to help.
Ichiro often day dreams to escape to Monster Island where he plays with Minya (Godzilla's son).
Ichiro soon learns many life lessons by learning from both Minya and Godzilla during their experiences on Monster Island.For young kids this film is great.
The added annoyance of Gabara's roar not to mention Minya sounding like Barney the Dinosaur are other deterants for this film.The Japanese Version is a little different though.
The word "Damn" is used a lot in the Japanese Version, maybe the most times I can remember in a Godzilla film.
Gabara is a monster who, for lack of a better word would probably do better in an episode of Ultraman than in a Godzilla film, but I really don't think it's a bad film.
Even if you watched all other Godzilla movies - be sure to miss this one!As long-time fans of the Big One we all are quite used to silly plotwork, but this one sure beats all competition.
While one has to respect director Ishiro Honda for not simply repeating Destroy All Monsters, the return to the kiddie approach of Son of Godzilla was ill advised when that film had been the biggest flop in the series.
When he has time to relax, he dreams about being on Monster Island and befriending Minya - Godzilla's son.
Taken as a Godzilla movie, "Godzilla's Revenge"* is a god-awful collection of clips from earlier films bound together by a tedious story of bullied kid Ichirô (Tomonori Yazaki) being mysteriously transported to Monster Island to hang out with Godzilla's chubby son Minilla.
An alternative interpretation is that the tormented child is dreaming about being on the lush Island to escape from his dreary industrial environment, that Minilla is the friend and confidante that he needs to help deal with his tormentors, and that gruff, aloof Godzilla represents absent parents as Ichirô and Minilla learn to deal with the bullying monster Gabara (who is incarnate in both worlds as a mean kid or as a mean monster (the latter with orange hair that brings to mind a certain current world leader)).
In the latter interpretation, most of the technical problems (e.g. the changing Godzilla suit) that makes the monster scenes so ridiculous can be explained away (i.e. all of the monster scenes are simply imagined by a young fan who is recreating in his mind what he saw in the films), the tedious side-plot about bullies and bank robbers is the actual plot of the film and thus warrants inclusion, and the goofy saurian father-son bonding over radioactive fire is simply the human child's wishful thinking.
As a monster/horror/sci-fi/camp movie, "Godzilla's Revenge" is watchable only by hard-core fans (who will likely despise it) but as a fable about growing up in which the iconic kaiju characters are stand-ins for childhood fears and hopes, the film rates much higher (albeit from a different audience).
The worst part about it is probably how it just reuses stock footage from other Godzilla movies.
It's there that Ichiro meets Minara, Godzilla's son who speaks dubbed English.It's seeing how Godzilla handles a family bullying crisis with another monster called Gabara where little Ichiro learns some life lessons.These films are carrtoonish and childish, but this one is the first I've found marketed for kids.
The main story isn't even about Godzilla, it's about a kid who gets bullied and whose parents are always off working.
Just watch the Godzilla's revenge Monster Madness to see what I'm talking about.The final thing to explain is the other subplot.
So this kid daydreams a lot about Godzilla, adopting the big monster as a sort of replacement father, I suppose.It's a pretty interesting setup, but unfortunately, I think the film is ultimately too inept and annoying to really work.
Plus the film has other obvious defects, including one of the most annoying music scores imaginable.Other commentators have defended this movie on the grounds that it's more thoughtful than other Godzilla fare, and I respect that point of view.
what can be said that has already been said.it's mainly stock footage from other films,bad dubbing and bad plot only godzilla in it is the only reason to watch it but be warned it is bad.
the Sea Monster than he does in Son of Godzilla, and since footage is used from both of these films, some scenes look really weird next to each other.
Jeez, even Ed Wood is infinitely preferable to this retarded piece of junk...The plot line would put even an infant to sleep with its jaw-dropping nonsense about a bullied and lonely boy dreaming himself on Monster Island and befriending Godzilla's diminutive, dopey-looking and cowardly son (but which is somehow capable of speech)!!
The numerous monsters one-on-one, with their pathetic rubber costumes and equally wretched effects, are a riot - but these are offset by the utter tedium of the 'real' narrative (particularly the subplot involving a couple of inept robbers).GODZILLA'S REVENGE is the third film I've watched from the never-ending series - following KING KONG VS.
Gabara was an annoying monster that didn't do much accept fight Godzilla's son like a bully.
The film's story is incredibly stupid and rarely makes too much sense as we follow this young kid from his normal life to his imaginary life on Monster Island.
The film contains battle scenes from other movies in the series and while you can make a great case that this here is just cheap, you can also make the case that it's fun to see all the monster fights.
GODZILLA'S REVENGE is a silly little movie that runs a very quick 70-minutes and fans of monster movies should enjoy it..
I began to have a bizarre dream that was extremely hallucinatory.I dreamt that I saw a little kid in microscopic shorts talking to a monster that looks like the Pillsbury Doughboy and that sounds like Barney Rubble.I dreamt that I was watching a Godzilla movie full of stock footage from earlier films so that Godzilla's appearance changed from scene to scene.I dreamt that I saw a ridiculous looking bright green monster named Gabara who's roar sounded like a rooster gargling mouthwash.I dreamt that I saw 2 idiot gangsters who couldn't even catch that little boy in the microscopic shorts.I dreamt that the little boy took a PanAmerican flight to Monster Island.I dreamt that Godzilla battled a giant bird, spider, preying mantises and a giant shrimp!I dreamt......Oh wait.
The story is actually pretty cute, involving a boy with a vivid imagination who wishes himself to Monster Island so he can hang out with his sorta-imaginary-friends, Godzilla & Co.
(Although one wonders, when the kid is running for his life from some of the less-friendly monsters, just what the heck he was thinking when he wished himself there!) My kid brother and I thought the baby-Godzilla-thing was a riot, blowing his smoke rings.I tried to find this movie again as an adult but had some trouble because the Godzilla films keep changing titles.
My rating for Godzilla's Revenge (and don't hate me please) well I'm gonna give it a 6.0/10 because if you watch this movie has a kid you will like it this movie was actually made for kids i know some fans hate this movie because they want Godzilla movies to be serious not for kids but anyways i watch this movie has an open minded person and i enjoyed it i think it was very fun to watch to bad there is no Portuguese dub or i would let my little sister when she gets 5 years old watch this movie.i love anything that has to do with Godzilla no matter how terrible it is some people use to say to me damn you're a real fan.
This was the begging of Godzilla films being for children, and Godzilla being just a regular hero instead of an anti-hero which defeats the purpose of why Godzilla fans watch Godzilla movies.In the movie we see a boy who is a Godzilla fan, he gets picked on by a group of kid's and dreams he's on Monster Island with Godzilla and his son.
The boy then finds the son of Godzilla and he quotes "Godzilla say's I should to fight my own battles." There is a new monster in this film who they call Gabera which looks pretty stupid.
The two bank robbers kidnap the boy and try to use him as a means of escape (even though they could off just as easily kidnap, the boy take the driver's license and left him in the warehouse.) The dream he has with the son of Godzilla fighting Gabera in turn helps him to fight back.You shouldn't naturally care what's going on half the time because, a movie needs characters with conflict and emotional depth.
If they could have shown us that and maybe cops trying to find the boy while Godzilla's fighting Gabera with his son in the city that could have at least been fun.With this Godzilla film Ishiro Honda wanted to make a film for children, but there was no way he could have succeeded with that idea because Godzilla as presented in a few movies is a force of nature or an anti-hero.
Useless pratfalls and an excess of camp hampers the presentation overall.This film has some fine and dandy photography and editing, although some of it is pieced together from stock footage and scenes from previous Godzilla movies.
Fun As Long As You Turn Your Brain Off. A bullied schoolboy (Tomonori Yazaki) dreams of traveling to Monster Island, where he befriends Godzilla's son Minya, who is also having bully troubles.This film was specifically geared towards children, and that might explain its silliness.
There is no message here about nuclear weapons (or anything else besides maybe the plight of the latchkey kids), there is simply a boy with a healthy imagination who comes across numerous cheesy monsters.I have no idea who dubbed Godzilla's son, but the voice makes the movie even sillier than it already is.
I thought it was fun and a joy to watch, but only because I made every effort not to think about it.Whether for children or not, the film deserves to be considered among the lowest Godzilla films simply for its use of stock footage.
It was mostly made up of stock footage taken from various other Godzilla films like 1966's Godzilla vs.
Ichiro befriend's Godzilla's nice, yet timid son Minilla, who's having problems with big bully monster Gabara.
Another good Godzilla film for kids.
This was my favorite film as a kid-what child wouldn't want to hang out with Minya and Godzilla?
This was the first Godzilla film I remember seeing on a program every Saturday called "Monster Movies".
Looking at it now you will notice the film is pretty much stock footage from earlier Godzilla films added to a simple story line(remember, this was for kids).
Therefore, he takes a little "vacation" to Monster Island where we see Godzilla, Minya and a few of the monsters from the previous film, "Destroy all Monsters." *spoiler ahead* The kid's little vacation is actually a dream and most of the monster scenes are stock footage from previous films.
I think that GODZILLA'S REVENGE must be watched in the right frame of mind in order to enjoy it properly, i.e. you must imagine yourself as an imaginative child to get something out of this film.
As for the stock footage I haven't seen many previous godzilla movies to this point and with respect to story it really doesn't matter.
I also believe that this kid is nothing more than a Godzilla fan and that he's simply visioning all of these things inside his head and somehow, Minya teaches this boy how to stick up for himself by fighting his bullies and...It's just a bad movie.
|
tt0244479
|
Tmavomodrý svet
|
In 1950, during the Cold War, František (Franta) Sláma (Ondřej Vetchý) is incarcerated in Czechoslovakia, because of his prior service in the RAF. His recollections of the war begin in 1939, just days prior to the German invasion of Czechoslovakia. After the invasion, the Czechoslovakian military is disbanded and has to give up its aircraft. However, young pilots Franta and his friend Karel Vojtíšek (Kryštof Hádek), among others, refuse to submit to their occupiers and flee to the United Kingdom to join the RAF.
The British make the Czechoslovaks retrain from the basics, which infuriates them, especially Karel, who is both impatient to fight the Germans and humiliated at being retaught what he already knows. Karel also sees the compulsory English language lessons as a pointless waste of his time.
The RAF is in such a dire need of pilots during the Battle of Britain that eventually the Czech and Slovak airmen are allowed to fly, and after their first sortie, they realise why the British have trained them so intensely: a young Czechoslovak nicknamed "Tom Tom" is shot down by a Messerschmitt Bf 109. Franta becomes the unit commander, with the younger Karel under his charge.
While shooting at a Heinkel He 111 bomber, the rear gunner hits Karel's Spitfire fighter aircraft. However, he manages to bail out and find his way to a farm. There he meets and falls in love with Susan (Tara Fitzgerald), although she thinks he is far too young. The next day, after returning to the aerodrome, Karel brings Franta to meet Susan. The latter begins to get on well with Susan, although Karel believes that he is still Susan's boyfriend.
Following a mission to France where the squadron attacks a train, Karel is shot down, but Franta lands and rescues him, a move that shows that their friendship endures. Soon after, Karel learns a sort of love triangle has developed, with Susan being involved with Franta, which leads to a quarrel between the two friends.
A few missions later, while escorting American bombers, Franta's Spitfire malfunctions and he is forced to ditch into the ocean. His life raft bursts as he tries to inflate it, so Karel decides to drop his own raft, but he flies too low and fatally crashes. The raft emerges from the water, allowing Franta to survive until he is rescued.
Afterward, when the war is over, Franta drives to Susan's home, only to find her with her injured husband recently returned from fighting overseas. Knowing he has no future with Susan and wanting to preserve her honour, he pretends to have lost his way and asks directions to the next town.
Disappointed by what has happened, Franta returns to Czechoslovakia and finds his old girlfriend has married the neighbourhood jobsworth, has given birth to a child, and has taken over Barča, his dog. All Franta can do is endure the situation as stoically as he can. Arrested and thrown in prison, he only has his memories of his friendship with Karel to sustain him.
|
melodrama, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0100438
|
Puppet Master II
|
The film begins in 1991, when Andre Toulon's grave is being excavated in Shady Oaks, a cemetery in the backyard of the Bodega Bay Inn. We see Pinhead digging Andre’ Toulon's grave. Pinhead opens up the coffin, climbs out, and pours a vial of the potion on the skeleton, with Tunneler, Leech Woman, Blade and Jester watching. After pouring the formula, the skeleton raises its arms, indicating that Andre Toulon is alive again. A few months later, a group of parapsychologists, led by Carolyn Bramwell (Elizabeth Maclellan), are sent to the hotel to investigate the strange murder of Megan Gallagher and the lunatic ravings of a now insane Alex Whitaker. It is explained that Megan's brain was extracted through her nose (by Blade), and Alex, suspected of the murder, is now locked up in an asylum. While at the asylum, he begins to experience terrible seizures and premonitions.
That very evening, one of the investigators, Camille Kenney (Nita Talbot), decides to leave after spotting two of the puppets in her room. However, while packing, Pinhead and Jester attack and kidnap her. The next day, Carolyn talks to Michael (Collin Bernsen) about the disappearance of his mother, due to finding Camille's belongings and car still at the hotel. That very evening Carolyn's brother Patrick (Gregory Webb) gets his head tunneled by Tunneler. Another investigator, Lance (Jeff Weston) runs in, knocks Tunneler out, and kills him by crushing him with a lamp. After dissecting Tunneler, they realize that the puppets are not remote controlled, but rather that their gears and wood are run by a chemical. From this, they deduce that the chemical must be the secret of artificial intelligence.
The next morning, while still trying understand the puppet's motivation, a man named Eriquee Chaneé (Steve Welles) comes in, stating that he had inherited the hotel, and that he was in Bucharest while the investigators moved in. Afterwards, Camille's son Michael travels to the hotel, trying to figure out what happened to his mother. That very evening, Blade and Leech Woman go to a local farmer's house, where Leech Woman kills the husband, Matthew (George "Buck" Flower), but gets thrown into the fireplace by the wife, Martha (Sage Allen). Just before Martha shoots Blade with her shotgun, a new puppet, Torch, walks in and burns Martha with his flame-throwing arm. It is then revealed that Eriquee is really Andre Toulon and he created Torch after being brought back to life, and he believes that Carolyn is a reincarnation of his now deceased wife, Elsa.
Toulon then has a flashback of him (played by Steve Welles) and Elsa (also played by Elizabeth Maclellan) buying the formula of eternal life from a Cairo Merchant (Ivan J. Rado). The next morning, Michael and Carolyn go into town to find Camille and to find out more about Eriquee Chanee. During this, it is revealed that the puppets are killing because they are growing weaker and need the secret ingredient that makes that formula: brain tissue. Carolyn finds no records of Eriquee Chaneé, and starts to connect Eriquee to the disappearance of Camille and the death of her brother, Patrick. At the same time, she also realizes she has a crush on Michael. That same evening, Carolyn and Michael kiss, and have a little romantic interlude, as do Lance and Wanda (Charlie Spradling), the remaining two investigators. While Wanda goes back to her room, Blade kills Lance, killing Wanda afterwards. After killing them, he uses their tissue for the formula.
During this, Carolyn sneaks into Eriquee's room, and finds two life sized mannequins in the wardrobe. Eriquee sneaks up behind Carolyn, and still thinking she is Elsa, ties her up. Michael, hearing her screams, wakes up and goes to rescue her, all while fighting off Torch, Pinhead, and Blade. On his way up, the dumbwaiter opens, revealing Jester and Michael's dead mother, Camille. Toulon transfers his soul into one of the mannequins, and explains that after seeing Carolyn, he decided for them to live together forever. The puppets, upon hearing this, realize Toulon used them for his evil needs, and start torturing him. Michael then breaks into the room, saves Carolyn, and the two run out of the hotel. Up in the attic, Torch sets Toulon on fire, causing him to fall out a window and die. Afterward, Jester goes back to Camille's body with the remaining of the formula.
Several days later, it is revealed that Camille's soul has been put in the woman-sized mannequin, and is now running her own little puppet show. Blade, Pinhead, and Jester, are locked up in a cage, leaving Torch free. Camille takes them to the Bouldeston Institution for the mentally troubled tots and teens. Camille puts the puppets in the back of her car, and Torch up on the passenger's seat, and drives off, leaving this movie as a cliff-hanger.
|
revenge, murder, violence, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The murderous puppets from part one (plus a new, fire-jetting doll named Torch) resurrect the long-dead corpse of their original puppet master, Andre Toulon.
The puppets return, this time they hunt down some locals and paranormal researchers to assist their master in his evil plan.Charles Band's story and David Pabian's screenplay is almost a remake of the first film.
Effects wizard David Allen in the directing chair exceeds the 1st certainly in terms of effects and atmosphere.While this installment reduces Andre Toulon / Eriquee Chaneé to a walking nod to the Invisible Man and other Universal classic characters, in contrast to how he is presented in the later adventures, it is by far the creepiest of the bunch.
Steve Welles performance is wonderfully over the top and steals every scene.Veteran Nita Talbot is on fine form and the remaining cast are a mixed blessing, Charlie Spradling and Elizabeth Maclellan give solid performances while here at least Collin Bernsen and Jeff Celentano are as mechanical as Tunneler's innards.Despite it's editing and story flaws Allen gives us a darker faster paced and eerier film than it's predecessor.
There are many stand out moments in part 2, Leech Woman's demise, Torches encounter with a toy whipping boy and the unworldly human puppets reminiscent of the aliens in Carpenter's (1988)They Live to name a few.As with all the films in the Puppet Master series they always leave you with one burning question, in two's case: Why didn't Julianne Mazziotti/Nita Talbot's Camille get her own sequel with your favorite little puppets?.
There's just something really strange about this film, I think it's because towards the end of the film it gets really really far out and creepy.After mutilating there selfish and evil Puppets Master, The puppets Blade, Pinhead, Jester, Tunneler and Leech Woman are back to resurrect there sweet and kind Puppet Master Andre Toulon but he's no longer sweet and kind, he's a psychopathic, evil, and greedy zombie that wants to kill the investigators of the Bodega Bay Hotel and in Andre's insane mind, he thinks one of the investigator is his wife incarnated.The film introduces us to a new puppet by the name of Torch, who is a robot puppet that shoots flames out of his right arm, I still think Blade is the best though..
The life-size puppets were a very eerie, and gave the film a new twist.While still under Paramount, Full Moon was able to present a decent Horror movie, with a much bigger budge than any of their $50,000 "wonders" they are putting out now.
The puppets return, this time they hunt some paranormal researchers to take their brain fluid for the living-dead puppet master, Andre Toulon (Steve Welles).This film has some good things going for it: first, more exposition on the background of the puppets.
I must say that I enjoyed this second installment to the series better than I enjoyed the original PUPPET MASTER.
Which I believe, would be followed up by the best entry of the series "Puppet Master III: Toulon's Revenge", as after that film I didn't particularly care for the rest.
The second film of the franchise keeps pretty much the same structure of the original, as a group of government paranormal researchers head to the ocean facing cliff top hotel to look into Alex Whitaker's stories (the survivor of the original now in a mental hospital) and soon become targets of the puppets and the resurrected Andre Toulon (dressed in bandages) from the dead in the quest to collect enough brain fluid for his reanimation serum to keep them alive.
But when Toulon encounters Carolyn, he's quickly reminded of his dead wife Elsa and the plans seem to change.Director / visual effects wizard David Allen does a resourceful job with his low-budget, instilling a clean-cut Gothic atmosphere with an underlining eeriness and donning sensational puppet creations (a newly added one too -- Torch) and stop motion effects.
Welles is the life of the party (getting plenty of screen time --- where a little more is explained about his character), as the rest of the cast (Elizabeth Maclellan, Collin Bernsen, Gregory Webb, Jeff Celentano and a perky Charlie Spradling) are immensely one-note.
The story is good, the acting isn't great and the special effects are good...well for its time.This is definitely a fun film to watch, especially with friends and a keg of beer, or not depending on your taste.Like other great cult horror film classics you are introduced to a lot of corny moments, but that is what makes this film so amazing.
It manages to get away with it- the grand hotel at Bodega Bay is after all a fantastic setting, so it is a joy to return there, and though it may initially feel like a complete retread (paranormal investigators returning to the hotel rather than psychics etc etc) it does have a few interesting plot developments to draw the audience in.Toulon is brought back from the dead, with his own maniacal plan that involves human sacrifices- he is no longer the sweet, paternal toymaker we met in the first film, but a monstrosity wrapped in bandages with his own sinister desires.
We get an interesting insight into the origin of the living puppets, and there are also some scenes that will definitely make you smile- for once in a film the annoying kid actually gets it!
The Puppet Master series is great, and this is a very satisfying sequel.
I had a good time watching the film and I would totally recommend it to fans of campy horror pictures..
An improvement over the limp original, this direct sequel to the 1989 cult classic isn't exactly grand cinema but it's got that Full Moon Entertainment charm - namely, an ominous musical score, an enthusiasm for the genre and charmingly lowbrow special effects.
Featuring more likable characters than the original, a tighter pace and better actors, this one has memorable moments that make it worth a watch for the undiscriminating horror fan..
Arriving at a rural estate, a team of researchers studying the psychic connection of the facility learn that the series of strange deaths surrounding them are the responsibility of a group of malicious puppets working for their master and must stop his deadly plans.This one proved to be a rather enjoyable sequel.
This is played out over the course of several rather enjoyable action scenes here where they get into several rather fun moments, from the first abduction in the bedroom to the encounter with the psychics in their own quarters which gives away their presence to the others when they capture it after the brutal kill involved, though the film's greatest set-piece is the encounter in the couple's shack which is a great deal of fun with the shock kill being committed before the whole thing gets started, the chillingly suspenseful stalking scenes against the first puppet before bringing in the newest creation which gives this a strong action- packed moment.
There is a few flaws to be found with this one, which mainly stems from the fact that there's a rather sizeable portion of the film that doesn't really get anything of much interest going for it as this here is filled with the couple's romance that isn't in the slightest bit interesting or enjoyable as they go about their brief and rather flat escapades that take up time away from the killer puppets.
For those who enjoyed the original "Puppet Master", the first sequel offers thrills and spills on an ever so slightly larger scale.When a group of paranormal investigators arrive at the deserted hotel from the first movie, they find themselves pursued by the blood-thirsty puppets and their back-from-the-dead creator, Andre Toulon (who looks very much like the original Claude Rains "Invisible Man").
The film introduces a charming new character to the puppet cast, Torch, a vicious looking 12" Nazi doll who's gimmick is a nifty flame-thrower device instead of a hand.The film is simply good fun.
I didn't think the first was that good however I thought it was decentThis sequel was start of really good, As the Puppets brought back the Master of the Dead.I liked this movie just a bit a better then first movie, I liked the fact that show a lot more of the Puppets.The movie didn't take to long to get started, i found most of really entertaining but however after second half, some parts did drag on a little and found those part a little boring,The ending was just really odd and a bit Creepy,I give this movie 6 out of 10 __________________.
The guy who plays Andre Toulon - he can act, but his character just gets too boring and stupid at the films climax.
Pinhead there beating people up, Blade's there slashing away, Jester's there twisting his head and there's a new guy, Torch, who burns his victims - including a little boy (moron Full Moon guy Charles Band's son) who is playing with an action figure.
The next film in the series is cool, however: Puppet Master III: Toulon's Revenge in 1991.
This sequel to the original puppet master is very well made - Ok so the acting is pretty atrocious but other than that it's a fun way to spend 90 minutes in the company of the killer marianettes, this time they resurrect their master - Toulon so they can live forever.
Puppet Master II (1991) ** 1/2 (out of 4) This better than average sequel finds the puppets from the first movie back in action.
At the start of the film they're digging up their master Andre Toulon (Steven Welles) and bringing him back to life.
At the same time a group of paranormal investigators arrive at the house and it's good for Toulon because he needs their brain tissue in order to keep living.
PUPPET MASTER II is certainly a notch above the previous film as director Dave Allen really tries to keep the action going and he also creates some pretty nice moments with the killers.
I think one of the best things going in the film are the killers, those from the original return but we also get another puppet who can blow fire from one of its arms.
The main female has her brother killed early in the picture and her determination to find out why he was killed makes for some light entertainment, although her "troubled" past really brings the film down a little towards the end and especially when she gets into a silly love story with another character.
The violence this time out isn't all that graphic but we get a couple fun kills including Blade doing his throat-slashing, Pinhead drilling some holes in heads and the new guy gets to set a few people on fire.
PUPPET MASTER II really surprised me because it's actually a well-made picture that people should enjoy even if they're not fans of the series..
Still enthusiast after the unexpectedly pleasant surprise that was "Puppet Master", I quickly watched the first sequel but found it slightly less imaginative than the original, yet still entertaining and recommendable enough.
What I liked about part 2 is that certain plot enigmas of the first film are clarified and finally start making sense, like for example how André Toulon managed to bring his puppet creations to life, and that the stop-motion effects and make-up art are truly sublime.
William Hickey's role as Toulon in the first film was brief but legendary, and I'm very curious to see what Guy Rolfe will do with the role in "Puppet Master III", but Welles (most of the running time dressed up like "The Invisible Man") doesn't add the raw and grim edge the Toulon character desperately needs.
The obvious thing to love about "Puppet Master II" is the gory killings, and personally I also very much liked the totally demented climax with life-size mannequin dolls..
The second in Charles Band's incredibly long-running PUPPET MASTER series, following on from the distinctly average horror B-movie thrills of the original.
PUPPET MASTER II features less of a story than the first; the story sees the evil toymaker Toulon brought back from the grave by his creepy puppets to hassle and harass a group of paranormal researchers from a US university.What this all boils down to is another series of gory murders perpetrated by the inimitable living puppets from the first film.
There are some fun flashback scenes thrown into the mix, and given that the actor playing Toulon didn't come back for the sequel, the villain is dressed up as Claude Rains in THE INVISIBLE MAN and looks good.
Inevitably the characters are all one-dimensional and the dialogue is poor enough that this would have been better as a silent film, but the plethora of low budget effects work is actually pretty decent, particularly the inventive climax with those ultra-creepy life-size dolls..
The same puppets (Blade, Pin Head, Tunneler, Leech Woman & Jester) return on the same location (the Bodega Bay Mansion) - in fact, they never left there - and manage to resurrect the corpse of their beloved master André Toulon.
A group of paranormal investigators takes up residence in the mansion to investigate the past events of the first film and the nightmare begins all over again, this time with Toulon having an evil scheme up his sleeve, commanding the puppets to do his bidding, even creating a new doll, named Torch (armed with a highly effective mini-flamethrower).
"Puppet Master II" is directed by Dave Allen, the special effects artist also responsible for the stop-motion bringing the dolls to life.
The real Pupper Master (as in the man who created the puppets) Dave Allen directs this film and does so well but perhaps struggles to take control of his amazing creations in a way aside from animating them.
Tunneler, Jester, Blade, Pinhead & Leech Woman are back to kill some more paranormal investigator types, this time once again under the thrall of the original Puppet Master, Toulon, after the puppets resurrect him, however zombie Toulon is a bit of a nut-case.
Puppet Master was a classic B-Movie about some Puppets that can move without string and go around killing people in the Inn. The sequel to Puppet Master is even more fun since we get a little bit more of the Puppets and Andre Toulon since they bring him to life again.Set a while after the first film a group of paranormal investigators go to the inn trying to figure out what happened to cause Alex to go mad, the other psychics to be killed and the owner to have her brain removed.
Andre Toulon needs brain fluid to make more liquid to re-animate the Puppets again but he has plans of his own has Carolyn is his wife Elsa reincarnated.So Andre gets his Puppets to keep collecting brain fluid from the investigators to complete the fluid and use it to be with Elsa again but the Puppets don't take to that.A very good sequel that has a new Puppet: Torch, a mechanical Puppet that has a flamethrower attached to his arm.
Puppet Master II is a sequel that is great to watch on a night..
Great sequel to the original Puppet Master.
Now, if you're just a horror film watcher and not a fan of Puppet Master, good ol' Charles Band or Full Moon films, I don't really recommend this film.
"Puppet Master II" Blu-ray breathes new life into the classic horror B-movie.
The murderous puppets exhume the rotting corpse of their long dead master Andre Toulon (a lively and colorful performance by Steve Welles) and bring him back to life so he can continue to produce the special serum they all need to continue living.
It is often a tie between the first film and this one and the first one for me, and although I love them both, I think I like this one a little better.The film has a relatively creepy and unsettling vibe to it that neither the original Puppet Master nor the ones that followed ever seemed to portray.
They use the last of the elixir which gives them life to reanimate their old master, Andre' Toulon (this time, for the most part, played excellently by Steve Welles).
Puppet Master II is a fantastic film that is so much fun to watch during those late stormy nights.
I love all the homages it pays to classical horror films, such as The Invisible Man. Many of my friends and fellow horror fanatics who love the Puppet Master series have always noted the second as "too creepy and weird" for them to enjoy.
Even in Puppet Master III Toulon was shown as a hero unlike the villainous creature from this movie.
It's just sad, that Puppet Master II: His Unholy Creations doesn't bring anything really new to the concept, and felt like a remake of the first film.
One thing, I didn't like, about this film is how the puppets are now control, by a new owner called Eriquee Chanee (Steve Welles), whom in no surprised to anybody, turn out to be the reanimation body of Andre Toulon; looking for a new body to take over.
Anyways, like the first movie, what was Toulon's plan on betrayal his puppets.
Made in 1991 this is the first sequel to the original and highly enjoyable Puppet Master.
We open in a cemetery where the killer puppets from the first film dig their creator Andre Toulon (this time played by Steve Welles) up.
Again the puppets are great and I felt sort of sorry for the ones that were killed, much more sorry than any of the human characters in the film.
Meanwhile, the puppets, including a new one called Torch(a blow torch on it's arm sets victims on fire), decide to take up where they left off from the previous movie, killing people.
|
tt0059447
|
Mickey One
|
After incurring the wrath of the Mafia, a stand-up comic (Warren Beatty) flees Detroit for Chicago, taking the name Mickey One (from the Greek ethnic name Mikolas Ongeoffery on a Social Security card he steals off a homeless bum). He uses the card to get a job at a seedy diner hauling garbage. Eventually he returns to the stage as a stand-up comic, but is wary of becoming successful, afraid that he will attract too much attention. When he gets a booking at the upscale club Xanadu, he finds that his first rehearsal has become a special "audition" for an unseen man with a frightening, gruff voice (Aram Avakian). Paranoid that the mob has found him, Mickey runs away. He decides to find out who "owns" him and square himself with the mob, but he doesn't know what he did to anger them or what his debt is. Searching for a mobster who will talk to him, he gets beaten up by a bunch of nightclub doormen. Mickey finally concludes that it's impossible to get away and be safe, so he pulls himself together and does his act anyway.
In traveling about the city, Mickey continually sees a mute mime-like character known only as The Artist (Kamatari Fujiwara). The Artist eventually unleashes his Rube Goldberg-like creation, a deliberately self-destructive machine called "Yes," an homage to the sculptor Jean Tinguely.
|
neo noir
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0995036
|
Einstein and Eddington
|
The prelude is set in 1919 on Eddington's expedition in Príncipe to observe the solar eclipse that year, before moving back in time to 1914. At the outbreak of the First World War, Eddington is appointed chief astronomer at Cambridge by Sir Oliver Lodge and instructed to research Einstein's work and defend the Newtonian status quo. Meanwhile, Einstein is lured back from Zurich to the Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin in an attempt to aid the war effort by embarrassing Britain by disproving the work of its great scientist Isaac Newton. In Berlin, with his marriage already under tension, Einstein falls in love with his cousin Elsa.
A Quaker and therefore unable to go to war, Eddington sets out to bid farewell to his friend William Marston, as the latter goes off to war as an officer, but just misses Marston's train. He then presents his lecture to his fellow astronomers at the university — defending Newton, but still thinking Einstein might be right — and takes the German Müller family into his home after saving them from a violent anti-German mob. When Einstein's wife arrives in Berlin, she discovers Einstein's affair and leaves him, whilst Eddington faces down protesters who despise his status as a conscientious objector. Einstein arrives late at a demonstration of Fritz Haber's poison gas and is so disgusted by this application of science to murder that he rejects an offer to convert his citizenship back from Swiss to German and refuses to sign the "Manifesto to the Civilized World", a list of prominent German scientists, artists and academics supporting the war.
Eddington finds his research into Einstein's work obstructed by a British ban on the circulation of German scientific literature. Realising that Mercury's orbit is precessing slightly less than it should be according to Newton's laws, he writes to Einstein despite the ban to inquire into his view on the problem. Einstein's relationship with Elsa deepens, and on receiving Eddington's letter he starts work on this new avenue with Max Planck, whilst consoling colleague Planck on the loss of his son in the war despite Einstein's lack of belief in a human-like God or an afterlife. They find that Einstein's work agrees with Mercury's orbit where Newton's does not, and send this reply back to Eddington.
At the same time, Eddington grieves over Marston, among the 15,000 killed by German use of chlorine gas at the Second Battle of Ypres, causing doubts in his faith, but leading him to fight all the more loudly against an expulsion of German scientists from the Royal Society. The expulsion has been initiated by Lodge, whose son was also among the killed and who clings to Newton as a consolation of "order in the universe", but Eddington is unable to admit to Lodge that he too is grieving for a loved one.
News of the gas attack also leads Einstein to an outburst against his fellow scientists, which leads to his being cut off from the university, and — overworking — he falls sick and Elsa leaves him. Even so, he manages to complete his work on general relativity and on how starlight bends and gets this result through to Eddington via Planck. Eddington realises he can prove that space and light are being bent by observing the solar eclipse of 29 May 1919 on the west African island of Príncipe, and with Dyson as an ally, manages to gain funding for his expedition, despite Lodge's initial opposition. As the war ends, Eddington's sister and housekeeper, Winifred, sets off to help the Quaker relief effort in war-shattered Germany despite her fears as to Eddington's waning faith.
The action returns to the Principe expedition, delayed by bad weather until the very last moment, while Einstein briefly returns to his ex-wife and children. Bringing back two photographs from the eclipse to compare to photographs of the night sky in normal conditions, Eddington compares them in public, with Lodge and Winifred in attendance, and not only proves Einstein right but also finds this confirmation reaffirming his faith — as he states, "I can hear God, thinking". News of his vindication reaches Einstein, and crowds of press arrive at his door just as Elsa returns to him. A year later, in the closing scene, Einstein visits Cambridge and meets Eddington. The closing credits remark on both scientists' later work, Einstein's celebrity and Eddington's obscurity.
|
historical
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0220608
|
The Last of the Blonde Bombshells
|
After her husband's death, Elizabeth (Dench) decides to return to her musical roots and begins busking with young guitarist Paul (Chapman) in a plaza overlooking a London ice rink, much to the dismay of her daughter Patricia (Dean) and son Edward (Palliser). One day she is spotted by Patrick (Holm), who attempted to avoid enlistment during World War II by dressing as a woman and playing drums with the Blonde Bombshells, a supposedly all-female band. Elizabeth performed with the Bombshells when she was only fifteen years old.
The two reminisce and eventually begin dating. At the encouragement of Elizabeth's granddaughter Joanna (Findlay) they begin searching for other band members for a reunion concert at Joanna's school dance. At first they have little success - one has died, another is suffering from dementia. A third, Evelyn, is serving time, while trombonist Annie (Whitfield) is dedicated to the Salvation Army and refuses to play "the devil's music". Elizabeth and Patrick eventually locate piano player and band leader Betty (Sims) working in a seaside saloon; she has kept all the band's old costumes, as well as Patrick's drums. The group post bail for Evelyn and convince Annie to play in exchange for a sizable charitable donation. Singer Gwen (Laine), performing in a nightclub in Wolverhampton, agrees to sing, although she refuses to rehearse with the group. Evelyn learns that trumpeter Dinah (Dukakis) has become an alcoholic living in a secluded manor in Scotland, who agrees to play after Elizabeth and Patrick pay her a melodramatic visit. While in Scotland, Elizabeth learns that the roses painted on Patrick's drum kit indicate how many of the Blond Bombshells he managed to sleep with during the War – he managed to bed all of them except Elizabeth, who was shielded from Patrick's affections by Betty.
Early rehearsals prove to be disastrous, but encouraged by Joanna and determined to shine in the limelight one more time, the group steadily improves. On the night of the dance, they are unexpectedly joined by double bass player Madeleine (Caron), who had left the band to join the French Resistance and finally was tracked down by Joanna. Gwen arrives just in time and the Blond Bombshells bring down the house. Gwen notices that Patrick's drum kit is adorned with an additional rose; Elizabeth confirms they have consummated their relationship. As the Bombshells play on, Elizabeth narrates what the bandmates got up to following their successful concert.
The present-day story is interspersed with flashbacks to the band in its wartime heyday that capture the music and atmosphere of the period.
|
romantic, fantasy, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0427969
|
Hollywoodland
|
In June 1959, Louis Simo (Adrien Brody), a Los Angeles private investigator more interested in generating an income than in devotion to his clients, is spying on the wife of a man named Chester Sinclair to find if she is cheating. On a visit to his own ex-wife Laurie, Simo learns that his son is upset over the recent death of actor George Reeves, who played Superman on television. Reeves was found dead inside his Beverly Hills home with a gunshot wound to the head, which police ruled a suicide.
Simo learns from a former police colleague that the Reeves suicide has aspects that the cops don't want to touch. Sensing the potential for making a name for himself, Simo begins investigating and notes several apparent conflicts with the official version of Reeves's death. He also bickers with Laurie over his failures as a father, particularly now when his son seems so troubled.
Years previously, in 1951, Reeves (Ben Affleck) is a charming man whose acting career has stalled since appearing in Gone with the Wind. He catches the eye of a beautiful woman and they end the night in each other's arms. In the morning, a newspaper photo reveals to Reeves that the woman is Toni Mannix, the wife of Eddie Mannix, the general manager of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer.
Frightened that an affair with a studio boss's wife will destroy what is left of his career, Reeves is angry that Toni did not tell him. She claims to have an open relationship with Mannix and tells him not to worry. The much wealthier Toni begins to buy Reeves expensive gifts such as a house, a car and jewelry.
Reeves lands the starring role in the television series Adventures of Superman, based on the comic book hero. The role makes Reeves famous and gives him a steady income, but he longs for more "serious" work and is uncomfortable with the public's stereotype of him as Superman, resulting in snickers when he is seen on screen in the war film From Here to Eternity.
As the years pass, Reeves becomes bitter at being a kept man and at Toni for not using her clout to help his career. He barbeques his Superman costume to "celebrate" the program's cancellation in 1958. He also meets a young woman in New York City, actress Leonore Lemmon, and leaves Toni for her. Toni is broken hearted and furious and seethes at her "mistreatment" by Reeves.
Simo initially suspects that Leonore might have accidentally shot Reeves during an argument and imagines how the scenario might have played out. Simo is beaten at his home by thugs, apparently working for Mannix, who are trying to scare him off the case. This and other evidence leads Simo to suspect that Mannix was the one who had Reeves murdered. Simo has a vision of how that killing would have occurred.
Sinclair murders his wife, having grown impatient waiting for Simo's report. A guilt-plagued Simo gets drunk, then visits his son's school, where his inebriation scares the boy. Simo visits Reeves' manager, Arthur Weissman, who has a home movie that Reeves shot to promote some wrestling work. Reeves' sadness and disappointment with his life is on display in the footage. Simo's final imagined variation on Reeves' death concludes with the actor shooting himself. This is the most vivid of the three scenarios, and Simo imagines himself in the upstairs bedroom watching the suicide.
Each of the scenes imagined by Simo begins with Reeves playing guitar and singing "Aquellos Ojos Verdes (Green Eyes)" in Spanish for his house guests. After each of the three imagined renditions, Reeves says goodnight to his guests, then retires to his bedroom upstairs, just before the gunshot.
Reeves' quest for success and Simo's realization of parallels to his own existence cause the detective to re-evaluate his life. Simo watches another home movie, this one of himself and Laurie and their son in happier days. He goes to Laurie's house wearing a suit and tie, greeting his son hopefully.
|
flashback, romantic, neo noir, murder, home movie
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0119870
|
Paws
|
Alex, a computer programmer from a cold place very far away, receives a visit from an intruder named Anja but before she breaks in he writes an important message to a colleague named Susie, transfers it to a floppy disk and gives it to his dog PC, warning him that he should give it only to Susie and trust no one. He hides PC just before Anja breaks in with her dog Sibelius and threatens him for money. He tells her details of the new account, after which she kills him. But later she finds that money is missing and sees the name of Susie on disk writer and starts spying on Susie.
PC reaches Susie's neighbourhood but gets hit by a car and is taken in by the family of 14 year old Zac (the film's main narrator along with PC) who had recently moved to Sydney from Melbourne with his mother Amy, step-father Stephen and his younger sister Binky. Zac thinks the disk is one of his and keeps it.. Zac is then introduced to neighbour Susie and her daughter Samantha who lives next door and they recognise PC. Then they learn of Alex's death and PC continues to stay with Zac's family. PC uses Zac's computer to make a translation programme that could translate any language or sound into plain Englis;, even his barking.He demonstrates it to Zac and Zac gives him a new voice with a Scottish accent and installs the software onto a palmtop computer with a microphone in a bow tie so he can talk away from the desktop.
Zac's relationship with PC is strained and after a spate of incidents the dog decides to tell him the truth. PC was originally from Iceland where Alex wrote computer programmes and he was married to Anja who was his assistant but she never loved him. Anja stole Alex's programmes and made at least a million dollars from them. Alex gets heartbroken when he finds the money and he withdraws and comes to Australia to escape from her but Anja finds him somehow.
Zac finds the floppy disk which has a clue on where to find information on where to find the money. Zac goes with PC and Sammy to Alex's flat and completes the crossword puzzle on the computer to see a video of Alex saying "A note to follow so" followed by a picture of a pea-like object. After singing Do-Re-Mi they figure that the password is LAP then they see another video of Alex this time saying "Well done. The rest is in and under your nose. Bonne Chance". Anja arrives and threatens them with a dagger so Zac deletes the file to stop her but she kidnaps PC.
Back home Stephen, who Zac had previously seen taking a loan from Anja, agrees to help them and they go to the greyhound track where Alex and Susie worked. PC tricks Sibelius into letting him out of the cage but when Zac comes to help him he lets out Anja's dog who chases after them. Sammy deciphers the clue but takes "LAP in" to be the French word for rabbit and tells PC who is then catapulted into the commentator's box where he announces that the money is in the rabbit. Anja takes this to mean the mechanical rabbit on the track and starts tearing it apart but gets stuck and is dragged around the track not finding any money. Binky find's Sammy's Hollywood pin badge and asks "What's a Hollywood?" and Sammy explains that it is a place in L.A. then they realise that the clue means L.A. pin and they find jewellry inside it.
The film ends with PC making out with Sammy's dog Cordelia.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Has a lot of problems but it is bright, breezy and good natured.
This flawed but watchable family comedy means well and essentially it is bright, breezy and good natured.
The script has its weak spots, Nathan Cavaleri is rather bland as Zac, the story is rather standard and the pace is uneven a little too rushed for my taste.
But the film is enjoyable thanks to a cute and appealing little Jack Russell terrier named PC voiced brilliantly by Billy Connolly and some inspired physical comedy and action.
It is nicely filmed and the direction is not that bad.
Sandy Gore has fun as villainess Anya too.Overall, "Paws" has a lot of problems but it is a harmless and fun family film.
I will say if you want a more adorable, heart warming and fun Australian family film I recommend "Napoleon".
6/10 Bethany Cox. Another Great Aussie Film.
Nice to see another great Australian film come out of our film industry.
Acting was quite good for some unrecognised Australian(?) actors and an outstanding performance by comedian Billy Connolly.This is the second great animal flick to come out of Australia in recent years.
Napoleon (1995) being the other..
Not bad....
The person who wrote in from Sleepyville seems to have been doing just that during this movie...
sleep!
I mean, if the great Billy Connolly's witty vocal delivery didn't keep him wide awake and laughing out loud, I don't know what would!
True, the movie is one for kids mainly and there are a lot of inaccuracies, but it all evolves around Connolly's sterling work on the vocals.
Not bad movie at all, enhanced all the more by Billy Connolly, the Scot of the Anarcich..
Sunday Morning Movie, to Watch Only While Breakfast is Ready.
This movie, specially made for kids have been obviously inspired by Disney, some magic can be seen, but that magic will only work for child, and this will last only till breakfast, because the movie is bad, not too bad but simply bad.
You can spend some time with your kids but that's all!.
The resemble to Cruella De Ville (101 Dalmatians) in Anja is so obvious that you'll get laugh, the old man expert on computers is funny and also weird, and the PC dog that's more intelligent than Einstein is also funny, this unbelievable plot hides a story of finding a treasure that literally bored me to the edge!.
If someone have read this and suddenly turn the TV on and see this, i recommend that quickly change to Disney channel!.
Some people said that they wanted to see this movie because Billy Connolly made the dog's voice.
Really?, who want to see a movie for a voice?, i won't and actually i have never listen "hey let's see Finding Nemo, there's Albert Brooks voice in it!", i saw it a shiny Sunday morning just before breakfast on TNT, and that's it!, no excuses.ABOUT THE MOVIE: PC is Alex's (Norman Kaye) dog, Alex is an old man that loves computers (you can said so because of the dog's name), and who has hidden 1 million dollars from Anja (Sandy Gore) an evil old witch (aka Cruella De Ville); Alex left the clues to find the money on a disk that send to his friend Susie (Caroline Guillmer) with his dog just before dying.
PC finds some troubles giving the disk to Susie and ends on her neighbor's house, where a boy, Zac (Nathan Cavaleri) take the disk, but also finds that PC is a dog expert with the computers, they create a software that made the dog talk by some type of mechanism (this is where the long expected voice of Billy Connolly appears!), they join forces also with Susie's friend Samantha (Emilie Francois) in order to find this million dollar before Anja does.
In this they face some funny and entertaining situations trough the movie.4/10!
and sorry i have to go, breakfast is ready..
No real laughs, no story and too much pressure to put on Connolly to deliver without giving him much to work with.
Alex may seem like a perfectly ordinary old man but the fact that he knows the whereabouts of a stolen $1 million fortune means he is more interesting than he seems.
When the wicked Anja come to force him to reveal his secrets one way or another, Alex saves the details to a floppy disk, puts it on his dog PC and sends him off to deliver the disk to Susie.
On the way PC is hit by a car and ends up in the house of Zac and his family and unable to complete his mission.
However PC is no ordinary dog and this should hopefully be no more than a bit of a setback when he works out how to get Zac's computer to make him speak.Having just watching one Billy Connolly film where he took money for very little effort, I decided to watch another one in Paws.
The story is a mishmash children's film where the whole joke appears to be that the dog can talk.
The plot is a strange affair where a sub-par Cruella de Ville chases information squirreled away on a floppy disk carried by a dog; quite what is on the disk and what the point of it all is will be of little importance to child viewers and even less to adult viewers because it often takes second billing to the fact that the dog can talk.
You see, this is a film about a talking dog I know I have said that three times already but it bares repeating because that is what the film is built on.
This is maybe enough to satisfy children because it does produce some laughs and slapstick comedy but it certainly will not do anything for adults or older children because it doesn't have anything other than the occasional funny line.This puts a lot of weight on Connolly's shoulders and mostly he cannot carry it.
With a voice over that sounds remote from the on screen action and a "computer software" gimmick that saves the film doing lip morphing on the dog, Connolly essentially plays his stand-up character except with all the swearing and laughs cut out.
Here and there he is funny but mostly the material isn't there for him.
The rest of the cast don't do much; Cavaleri is bland and uninspiring, Francois is obvious and the majority of the adult cast just mug along.
Gore marks herself out by showing that Glen Close was actually pretty good in the Dalmatians films or at least she cannot be easily copied.Overall this is a so-so kids movie but barely.
The laughs are thin on the ground for all age groups and the plot can safely be ignored by audiences just as it was by the writers, which leaves the studio-bound Connolly carrying the bag, which he can't do with the material given to work with.
Nothing special then and certainly not a film worth seeking out for your kids when there are much better things out there..
Keep this away from America..
I just saw this movie on my Satellite box, and let me tell you, this is as horrible as it gets.
The dog in this film was cute, but the budget of $3 for this film made it terrible.
Computer inaccuracies, horrible comedy, and fake slapstick are not desired by me.
I wouldn't call this a "Great Aussie Masterpiece", but is a good movie for little kids, and sure hope that any Australian adults did not find this movie entertaining.
This movie is also a bit of a bad example for children (e.g. the kid tells his step-father to "Go to hell")..
the 'villainess'.
Is it just me or did she sound like ET in the beginning?
I don't like to make fun of people, but...
holy crap.
I swear.
Is she TRYING to sound ridiculous?The dog's pretty cute though.
lol I was impressed by all of the things it did.The whole 'talking' thing is more than a stretch, but oh well.
The electronics were a little dated, but what can you do?
The odd music when PC first 'speaks' is..
interesting lol.
The constant rowling and making other noises to speak was cute.I suppose it was a tad cute.
I was amused by all the stuff Billy Connolly was saying as PC..
A very good, unfortunately underrated film..
PAWS is a generally great film.
It, of course, has its bad points.
But THE EXORCIST and other classics weren't perfect either.
Then again, maybe I shouldn't be comparing a gruesome horror movie to a funny, Australian yarn.
But I have, and that's that.The movie follows a dog called P.C., which leaves me wondering why the movie was named PAWS.
Nevertheless, the dog is named P.C. and is owned by a man called Alex.
He knows the whereabouts of one million dollars, so surprisingly scary Anja raids his apartment to get it.
Alex sees her coming and hides the answer on a disk - which he then gives to P.C. The dog scampers off, beginning a quest to find Susie, who apparently needs the disk.
Unfortunately, he's hit by Susie's new neighbour's car and needs to get her the disk without dying, and all the associated pain and suffering this usually causes.The acting is generally good.
Zac could use a few acting lessons, and his little sister is enough to send you on a murderous rampage.
One thing that really twits me: The Australian accents.
God, I am an Australian myself (my profile tells lies)and even I find them annoying.
Thank god Samantha sounds like a Brit.
Hooray for the English!But then, we have some relief from the Australians in the form of Billy Connolly voicing P.C. However they got Billy Connolly to voice a character in such a small Australian movie I don't know, but anyway.
How can a dog talk, you may wonder?
He doesn't, actually.
Zac the computer genius rigs him up with a special microphone that can understand his whimpers and barks, which then transfers them to a speaker which is hidden in a stylish (cough) orange bow tie.
Surprisingly Sci-fi for such a movie, but what do you expect?The answer to the money's whereabouts will keep you guessing right until the end - and even then you will be wondering how in the hell they characters figured it out.
A great movie - very underrated.Watch with the kids and get ready for a laugh..
Paws.
When I heard that a great Scottish comedian was voicing the canine hero of this film, I was quite looking forward to seeing what it is like.
Unfortunately, it is not what I hoped for, in terms of a talking animals film also.
Basically PC the dog witnessed the villain, French wig-wearing Samantha (Emilie François) killing his master, who in his dying moments tells him to take a disk with him.
PC finds a place to hide in the house of a moved family, with son Zac (Nathan Cavaleri).
But PC still can't tell anyone what has happened, so he learns to type onto a computer keyboard and speak.
Zac decides to make this ability more accessible by putting a special growl translating speaker in a bow tie so that PC can talk, with the voice of Billy Connolly.
The film until towards the end (well, that is bad as well) just has mucking about and too much chat.
In the end, the disk reveals a treasure, that Samantha is looking for, and it has a stupid location.
The only good thing about this film is Billy Connolly voicing the dog, other than that, it is absolute rubbish.
Pretty poor!
|
tt0926110
|
Missionary Man
|
A lone stranger named Ryder (Dolph Lundgren) comes into a small Texas town on his Harley-Davidson motorcycle for the funeral of his good friend J.J., a local Native American carpenter. Ryder spends his time in town reading the Bible while drinking straight tequila sans salt and lime. Ryder talks to J.J.'s sister Nancy (Kateri Walker) who says that J.J. drowned in a river, but J.J.'s teenage son Junior (John D. Montoya) doesn't believe that. Local businessman John Reno (Matthew Tompkins) introduces himself to Ryder and tells Murphy (Charles Solomon Jr.), one of his employees, to keep an eye on Ryder. Sheriff Acoma (James Chalke), who seems to be alcoholic, tells Ryder that now that J.J.'s funeral is over, Ryder should leave town.
Ryder beats up a group of Reno's thugs who are beating a local drug user named Billy (Jonny Cruz). White Deer (August Schellenberg), the father of Nancy and J.J., talks to Nancy's 15-year-old daughter Kiowa (Chelsea Ricketts), who is Junior's older sister. Kiowa believes that J.J., who was a member of the tribal council, was killed because he knew something about Reno. Kiowa thinks that some of the tribal council members might be on Reno's side.
Chief Dan (Richard Ray Whitman) announces that Assistant Chief Lance (Titos Menchaca) has suggested that the council still discuss the Gaming 3 proposal – a proposal for the building of a state-of-the-art casino on tribal property by Lance's construction group. That proposal would bring many new jobs and much revenue for the tribe's people, but the council is concerned with the many negative aspects of the proposal. J.J. had proposed a plan that offers more highly skilled jobs and training for the tribe's people, and takes advantage of gaming profits without the negative aspects.
Billy tells Ryder that Reno runs the town, and that everyone's afraid of him, and Reno had J.J. murdered. Nancy tells Sheriff Acoma something has to be done about Reno. Sheriff Acoma says that the last time he tried to investigate Reno, a judge quickly called the investigation off. Kiowa and Junior go to the Save More Grocery Store, where clerk said that J.J. came in and got a case of beer on the day of his death. But Kiowa knows that J.J. did not drink, but Reno is a drinker.
Kiowa goes outside and sees some of Reno's thugs roughing Junior up. They tell Kiowa to tell Nancy to drop J.J.'s proposal that the tribal council is considering. They start roughing up Kiowa, and then Ryder shows up and beats them up. Ryder takes Kiowa and Junior to their home, and they invite him in for dinner. During dinner, Junior says that as soon as he turns 18, he's going to leave the town and not end up like J.J. did. Kiowa admits to Ryder that she never knew her father, and that J.J. took care of her like he was the father she never had.
That night, Billy witnesses a drug deal between Reno and some Mexican men. Reno has his men kill the Mexican men, and then Reno tells Murphy to find Billy and kill him. Later, Lance says that Reno's ways of doing things attract too much attention. Lance had told Reno that if he got J.J. out of the way, then Lance would get approval to build the casino. Reno plans to kill Nancy and her family in order to make sure no one is in the way.
Ryder is teaching some of the Bible to some kids that White Deer regularly teaches, and Junior yells for Nancy to come down to the old camp ground near their home. Junior has found Billy, who was shot in the arm. They take Billy to the house, and some of Reno's men arrive. Ryder beats them up, and shoots up their vehicles. Ryder has White Deer take Kiowa and Junior to a safe place. Ryder and Nancy find Sheriff Acoma, and tell him that Reno's men shot Billy because Billy witnessed the drug deal. Reno shows up and talks about filing assault charges against Ryder for beating his men up.
Reno offers to let Ryder work for him, but Ryder refuses. One of Reno's men tries to beat Ryder up, but Ryder shoots up Reno's bar. Sheriff Acoma arrives and tells Reno to put the gun down. Reno calls a gang of bikers into town, and the gang is led by a man named Jarfe (John Enos III). They are the bikers that Reno is trying to get the casino built for, and Jarfe had also shot Ryder once before. Jarfe and his gang are also the biker gang that killed Nancy's husband, the father of Kiowa and Junior. By now, Billy is out in the town, and Jarfe finds him and fatally shoots him.
Jarfe heads into the hotel that Ryder is staying in, and Jarfe and his men attack the hotel's owner. Jarfe and his men kill a pair of arriving deputies. When Ryder gets into town, Jarfe sees him, and sends his men after him. Ryder starts killing Jarfe's men as they find him. Ryder gets some help from Hoss (Brad Imes), a man who used to work for Reno. Sheriff Acoma finds Reno with his two main henchmen, Murphy and Gomez (Lawrence Varnado). Sheriff Acoma kills Murphy and Gomez, and knocks Reno to the floor. Ryder finds Jarfe and shoots him, using the gun that Jarfe shot Ryder with.Later, Sheriff Acoma locks Reno up, and Ryder leaves town.
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0245378
|
Quarantine
|
On the evening of March 11, 2008, news reporter and cameraman, Angela Vidal and Scott Percival, are assigned to follow firefighters Jake and Fletcher during their nightshift. They are given a department tour, but an emergency call dispatches them. Arriving, screams from a self-barricaded apartment block room were heard by the landlord and residents. The firemen, police officers, and crew enter; they are attacked by an aggressive elderly woman, who bites a policeman and is then killed. As the residents head safely downstairs, the team finds a second old woman in a similar condition and bring her downstairs with others. Fletcher then mysteriously falls to the base floor, incapacitated.
The residents panic as the authorities and CDC suddenly quarantine the building, allowing none to leave; injured are taken to the woodshop. Meanwhile, Angela interviews an ill, young local named Briana, who states that her dog, Max, is at the vet because he "was" sick as well. A health inspector wearing a hazmat suit arrives and attempts to treat the bitten people, but they thrash violently, forcing the others to flee.
The health inspector reveals that yesterday, a dog was taken to a local veterinarian. The dog became violent and infected the other pets at the clinic, later euthanized; the CDC traced the dog back to the building via collar. The inspector tells the distraught residents that a virus has transformed those infected into bloodthirsty creatures. Angela realizes that the dog was Max. When confronted, Briana snaps and bites her mother, escaping upstairs. The team are forced to handcuff the mother to the stairs to stop her from following Briana. All the other infected also break loose and start attacking. The team retreats upstairs and lock themselves in a room, but discover two people have been bitten. A panicked resident who decides to signal for help by breaking through the window is shot by an Army Sniper overlooking the building. The landlord reveals that the basement, which connects to the sewers, may be the only way out. The two infected then attack, forcing Jake, Angela, and Scott to flee the room. Everyone else is infected or dead, leaving the three to survive.
Jake is eventually bitten as the trio find the basement key. Angela and Scott now appear to be the only human survivors. Rather than making their way to the basement, the pair are forced upstairs to the attic apartment by the remaining infected. They then search that apartment and discover that its former owner from Boston was a doomsday cult member responsible for breaking into a chemical weapons lab and stealing a virus. As they continue through the apartment, a door opens from the attic and Scott uses the camera light to investigate, only for a boy to swat at it and destroy the light. Scott turns on the night vision and he and Angela hear loud banging noises inside the apartment. When Scott looks around with the camera, he sees a man, who along with the boy seems to have been left in the apartment to rot.
The emaciated man begins searching the kitchen, unaware of the duo's presence. Scott attempts escape but trips and drops the camera. Angela retrieves it and looks around the room, only to see the man eating Scott. In fright, she cries out and is attacked. She drops the camera and is unable to locate it; as she is crawling in pain, she is then dragged screaming into the darkness.
|
sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
MINIMAL MATTER TO DIGEST HERE.. Canadian Charles Wilkinson, who wrote and directed this banal affair, seems inadequately prepared to handle his subject: autocratic control of a populace, as a feature film. Made in British Columbia with a Canadian cast, some of whom have done good work elsewhither, this piece stars Beatrice Boepple (who, after a short stint in cinema, blessedly chose a career change) as a rebel against the system who nearly single-handedly routs a governmental conspiracy. Cinematographer Tobias Schliessler attempts to make some scenes interesting but the script is so jumbled and inane that one immediately wishes for events to move along toward some sort of conclusion. Despite a narrow operating budget, the writer/director attempts to graft a surfeit of sub-plots onto an already shallow point of view, with predictable results. Awkward usage of extras and stunt personnel seals the fate of any movement to achieve narrative flow, and one cannot help but wonder about what sort of film was intended to be made.. Great Content, Social Commentary. I'm only giving it an 8 out of 10 because it is a little dated so I wouldn't watch it too many times, however the content is great. Set in a dystopian 1984 - like Dictatorship regime where an 'alleged' disease is spreading out of control and quarantining as many people as possible seems to be the favoured cure.Blown away to see 2 Stargate SG-1 celebs sharing as intense screen time as this. Garwin Sanford and Tom McBeath as opposing idealist both pitted against each other's ideals more so than each other personally. Filmed in BC, Canada. I'm watching it right now which prompted me to write this. I fear it has been quite edited unfortunately, definitely for language, a few 'F words' , 'Moth---ker', I think there's some scenes cut to. I'd love to have a copy of this unedited and on DVD, I'll try looking into it.
|
tt0080754
|
The Formula
|
The film opens in the final days of World War II as the Russians are on the outskirts of Berlin. A German army Panzer Korps general (Richard Lynch) is dispatched to the Swiss border with top secret materials, with orders to hide them from the Allies.
In contemporary Los Angeles, Lt. Barney Caine (George C. Scott) is assigned to solve the murder of his former boss and friend Tom Neeley, which presumably occurred during a drug deal gone wrong. However, Neeley has written 'Gene' on a newspaper in his own blood, and Caine finds a map of Germany with the name 'Obermann' on it. Caine is surprised to learn that Neeley provided drugs at parties hosted by the tycoon Adam Steiffel (Marlon Brando). When he interviews Neeley's ex-wife (Beatrice Straight), he quickly catches her in several lies, and when he returns to interview her a second time, he finds her shot dead in her hot tub.
Steiffel reveals in his interview that Neeley was working for him as a bagman, executing all the bribes (Baksheesh) that are required of an American energy firm to operate in the Middle East. Neeley was sent overseas by him frequently to distribute money to business partners. Steiffel then makes reference to a formula for a catalyst that converts coal into petroleum and claimed that the Nazis had relied heavily on their coal reserves and the formula to fuel their war efforts, given their lack of petroleum resources. Steiffel asserts that the formula has been kept secret by the powerful oil cartel, which would lose power if coal-rich countries like the United States could simply rely on their natural resources. Caine becomes convinced he must go to Germany to solve Neeley's murder, and after he convinces his Chief (Alan North) to allow him to pursue the investigation in Europe, the Chief is seen phoning one of Steiffel's cronies (G. D. Spradlin) to tell him that Caine has taken the bait.
Once in Berlin, Caine meets up with Paul Obermann (David Byrd) at the Berlin Zoo. Olbermann explains that the formula was in fact real, and the Nazis hid it as the war ended in an operation code-named 'Genesis'. This confirms Caine's hunch that Neeley was killed over the formula, rather than a drug deal. Obermann is murdered outside the zoo, and back at his apartment, his niece Lisa (Marthe Keller) shows up to be interviewed by the police. At Obermann's memorial service, Caine asks Lisa to accompany him on his investigation, acting as his interpreter. Lisa agrees and they follow up on a lead that Obermann gave him regarding Professor Siebold who worked on the formula.
During their interview with Siebold (Ferdy Mayne), he reveals that the inventor of the formula, Dr. Abraham Esau (John Gielgud), is still alive. After they leave his apartment, Siebold is shot in the head through a window. On their way to visit Esau, Lisa and Caine sleep together. When they meet up with Esau, he writes down the formula for Caine, after he makes Caine promise to make it public. Lisa and Caine make photocopies and send them to the LAPD and a Swiss energy company. Caine also hides two copies from Lisa, depositing them in the hotel's safe. Subsequently, he reveals that he has deduced that she is not Obermann's niece at all, but a spy sent to keep tabs on him. Lisa admits it, but claims she didn't sleep with him because of her orders.
At the border with East Berlin, Caine confronts the assassin who killed the Neeleys, who reveals Steiffel ordered their murders. Lisa kills the assassin to prove she wasn't lying about her feelings for Caine, and then she flees into East Berlin. At the airport before flying home to Los Angeles, Caine realizes the two copies of the formula in the hotel safe were replaced with fakes by Lisa, and that the only real copies are with the LAPD and the Swiss.
After landing in Los Angeles, he heads straight to Steiffel's office. Steiffel has kidnapped Caine's partner (Yosuta) and is holding him for ransom, that is, for the copy of the formula that Caine had received from Esau.
Steiffel gives a speech about the reason that the "cartel" for which he works has been keeping the formula secret since 1945. The cartel's plan is to keep the formula secret until it has acquired control of the planet's coal reserves which—to the possessor of the formula—will be worth their weight in gold when the world runs out of oil. They had been able to keep it secret until a Swiss business man named Tauber began searching for the members of the original Genesis team, in the hopes of reconstituting the team and recreating the formula. Tauber's actions made the (now aged) members of the Genesis team a liability to the cartel, so Steiffel had pulled strings to get Caine sent on a trip to Germany, which would serve somehow as a cover for the cartel's plot to eliminate all of the remaining members of said team.
Caine offers to turn over the original copy of the formula (which he had got from Esau) in return for the release of his partner Yosuta. Steiffel agrees, and Yosuta is released. Just before leaving, Caine reveals that he sent the formula to Tauber. Before leaving, Caine says if he could, he'd put a bullet in Steiffel's head.
Steiffel rifles through his rolodex for a business card and makes a phone call to Tauber, asking him to keep the formula secret for another 10 years (during which time the cartel can acquire more coal fields, and the price of oil will continue to increase) in exchange for a 30% share of his anthracite (i.e. coal) holdings. They negotiate briefly, and the Swiss executive agrees to hold off on producing petroleum with the formula.
|
neo noir, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0072732
|
Brannigan
|
Tough Chicago Police Lieutenant Jim Brannigan (John Wayne) is sent to London to extradite a notorious American gangster, Ben Larkin (John Vernon). Brannigan is assigned a local officer, Jennifer (Judy Geeson), to help while he is in London. But before Brannigan can collect his man, Larkin is kidnapped.
Larkin's finger is cut off and mailed to the police to prove how serious the kidnappers are. The mobster's lawyer, Mel Fields (Mel Ferrer), tries to arrange a ransom drop while Brannigan makes his way around London in search of Larkin. Whilst struggling to adapt to the British way of life, and the restrained style of policing, he employs techniques not usually seen in Britain.
In the meantime, a contract had already been put out on Brannigan's life by Larkin, so hit man Gorman (Daniel Pilon) tails Brannigan in a black Jaguar, making several attempts to kill him and nearly shooting Jennifer by mistake.
Commander Swann (Richard Attenborough), in charge of helping get Larkin to America, is a stuffy, titled, upper class Metropolitan Police commander who's not afraid to get his hands dirty. There is continual conflict between Brannigan and Swann about the American's carrying, and use of, his .38 Colt Diamondback revolver.
Permitted to go alone to deliver the ransom payment, Fields personally eliminates the kidnappers. He and Larkin celebrate having pulled off a scheme to get the money, Larkin calling the loss of a finger a small price to pay. Brannigan bursts in to foil their plans. As he and Jennifer walk away, Gorman tries to mow them down with his car, but he is shot by Brannigan, who can now return home to Chicago.
|
comedy, revenge, humor, murder, violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A year after looking silly starring in the Dirty Harry clone "McQ," John Wayne gave the modern-day cop thriller another try to much better effect in "Brannigan," a fine vehicle for the aging legend.
Brannigan also spends a great deal of the film dodging a hit man whom Larkin hired prior to his kidnapping.What follows is an amusing, and low-key, caper that is culminated by a well-choreographed chase through the streets of London, a hilarious bar brawl, and several attacks by the hit man, including one in which Jenny is almost killed.
He was likable, frank, good-natured, decent, down-to-earth, and tough -- "so damn solid," as Geeson's character put it (to which he replied, "Fat, you mean") in a nice, genuine scene where Brannigan talked about wanting to catch the hood responsible for killing his rookie partner because it was his duty to protect the kid even though, no matter how "nice a story" it would make if the kid had been like a son to him, he had not even liked the "smart-aleck" kid.
What gives it a boost is the strong supporting cast headed by leading British 'luvvie', Richard "Dickie" Attenborough and the good use of London locations including Tower Bridge which is utilised in an above average car chase.
Also there is a large-scale brawl in a city pub ( in Leadenhall Market) which is a direct transfer from a saloon of one of the Duke's innumerable westerns.Tough Chicago cop, Jim Brannigan, is sent to London to extradite notorious American gangster, Ben Larkin, but before he can collect him, Larkin is kidnapped and Brannigan spends the rest of his time chasing around London in search of his quarry.
In the meantime, a contract has been put out on Brannigan's life by Larkin to prevent him from being extradited.Though menouvring his way around London like a big vintage Cadillac, John Wayne lends his unique blend of charm and charisma and inevitably, he is given most of the best lines in what is a lively screenplay.
This is vintage John Wayne and there is no harm in this as he was very good at what he did and as a consequence he has a devoted following of movie fans around the world.Richard Attenborough gives sterling support as the (on the surface)stuffy, upper-class Metroplitan Police Commander not afraid to get his hands dirty .
Look out too for an appearance by Tony Blair's father-in-law, Tony Booth, as a small time con given the 'good cop-bad cop' treatment.Humorous, though a little bloody, 'Brannigan' is good entertainment and if you are a fan of the Duke, it is well worth adding the DVD to your collection.
Lieutenant Jim Brannigan (John Wayne) is sent to London to extradite an extortionist called Ben Larkin.
However, things become more complicated when Larkin is abducted by some hoods and at the same time, Gorman (Daniel Pilon), a contract killer is out to kill Brannigan.Exciting, fast-paced and slickly directed by Douglas Hickox who directed Oliver Reed in "Sitting Target" (1972 - see my review), and in common with that film, his direction has the right feel for tough guy thrillers employing the right actors and staging some fantastic action scenes such as a marvelous pub brawl in a London bar.
Great performances from John Wayne as Brannigan and Richard Attenbrough as the commander of Scotland Yard frustrated at the former's police methods which seem unorthodox by British standards.
In fact by the time Brannigan came out, Eastwood had two of them already done.I suspect that John Wayne was also looking for modern stories for reasons of health.
Vernon's lawyer Mel Ferrer arrives from Chicago to pay the ransom.It's a merry chase from then on and while the ending is no kind of surprise the film is a lot of fun.Richard Attenborough makes an effective British foil for Wayne's all American hero.
Nicely directed by Douglas Hickox, and complemented by lots of good supporting performances, it is also entertaining in patches.Chicago cop, and all-round hard man Jim Brannigan (John Wayne) is ordered to fly out to London, England, to bring back bail-skipping gangster Ben Larkin (John Vernon).
Aided by stiff-lipped Scotland Yard detective Charles Swann (Richard Attenborough), Brannigan attempts to track down the kidnappers so that he can get hold of his man.Wayne looks pretty old for this kind of energetic action stuff, but he has a certain rugged charisma that allows him to more-or-less get away with it.
The supporting cast is generally very good - Attenborough registers well as the Scotland Yard detective; Judy Geeson looks lovely and has a good role as the lady assigned to look after Brannigan during his stay; Vernon adds another unpleasant bad guy to his villains' gallery; and little-known Daniel Pilon has the best scenes in the film as a genuinely evil hit-man assigned to erase Brannigan.
It's just good old-fashioned fun!By the way, according to Robert Osborne on Turner Classic Movies, John Wayne was offered the role of Dirty Harry BEFORE it was given to Eastwood!
In Brannigan, Wayne plays the role of Jim Brannigan, an American cop who goes to London to capture a runaway fugitive played by John Vernon.
This may not be one of his top films, but it's a piece of slick entertainment with a good script and some clever lines and situations.He may have been sixty-eight when he did BRANNIGAN, but he was still convincing enough as a "kick butt" cop transplanted rather suddenly to ye olde London and coping with some shrewd and cunning kidnappers demanding a great deal of ransom money.
In addition, he has to cope with RICHARD ATTENBOROUGH as the police chief who doesn't like Wayne's Yankee ways.It's a tale that gets off to a brisk start and never stops feeling like a spin off from a "Dirty Harry" movie starring Clint Eastwood.
In fact, given Wayne's age, Clint probably would have been a more suitable, age appropriate choice for the leading role here--but Wayne still had enough energy and spirit to play the part in his usual style.JOHN VERNON and DANIEL PILON make an interesting pair of villains, as does MEL FERRER as a crooked lawyer who's in on the kidnapping scheme.
John Wayne plays the titular character in the 1975 cop film "Brannigan" and this film, unfortunately, is not one of the Duke's best.
Brannigan and the London police force, led by Commander Swan (Richard Attenborough) must try to save him and dodge assassination attempts made by the enemy.This is a fine plot in a film that just doesn't quite work.
"Brannigan" has slow pacing, not much in the action category, and it's quite clear that it's trying desperately to top off with the classic action cop movies like "Dirty Harry" (1971) even down to the music score, which resembles Lalo Schifrin's score from the mentioned Clint Eastwood film.
I recently watched the reruns of two action movies, McQ & Brannigan, both starring John Wayne, on cable TV.
He was sent to London to bring back an American mobster on the run, Ben Larkin, (played by John Vernon) & along the way he got entangled with the conservative work-style of Scotland Yard.Despite his age, John Wayne was really remarkable in both roles.
The dialogue in both movies was witty, too.In Brannigan, one could see how big & tall John Wayne was, when he was in London among the crowd.
Here Big John Wayne/Jim Brannigan takes on London in Chicago Style .
Stirring film in which there are nail-biting action scenes , intrigue , blasts , suspenseful set pieces and a big star as well as an excellent plethora of secondaries such as : Judy Geeson , Richard Attenborough , Mel Ferrer , Ralph Meeker , Daniel Pilon , James Booth , Bruce Glover and brief acting by Lesley Anne Down as a prostitute .
If their departments required a primary weapon to be say a .38 calibre or .357 magnum, they would get them for use as a secondary weapon.So it came to pass that one Marion Michael Morrison, having been in the Picture business for nearly 50 years, as John Wayne of course, was into portraying that "Loose Cannon" or "Rogue Cop." In 1974, it was "McQ" with the 'Duke' as a Dirty Harry-type Detective involved with trying to expose some internal conspiracy within the Seattle Police Department.That brings us up to 1975 and "BRANNIGAN".
In short, Lt. Brannigan (it's Jim or Joe, because continuity dropped the ball leaving him with this dual identity problem.) is to travel to London, England in order to extradite one Big Time Yank Hood, Ben Larkin (John Vernon).
The plot has been seen many times in other movies - "Black Rain" comes to mind - but its a formula that works, so check this one out if you want to kill a couple hours watching an older John Wayne in a non-western.
Tough Chicago cop Brannigan (John Wayne) goes to London to extradite an American criminal named Larkin (John Vernon) but the bad guy is seemingly kidnapped before Brannigan can get to him.
He's determined to get his man, no matter how many British toes he has to step on to do so, including those of a stuffy police commander (Richard Attenborough).A fun 'fish out of water' movie for John Wayne; his second attempt to duplicate Clint Eastwood's success at moving from westerns to police thrillers.
It's a better movie than Wayne's previous attempt at a Dirty Harry-style cop flick the year before, the underwhelming McQ.
Chicago detective John Wayne (as Jim Brannigan) tracks an escaped gangster to London; then, it's culture clash time as he partners up with relatively young Judy Geeson (as Jennifer), and knocks heads with Richard Attenborough (as Commander Swann).
Mel Ferrer, John Vernon, and Daniel Pilon are fine as villains; in fact, you may cruelly root for them to win.At this point in his career, outfitting Mr. Wayne as "Dirty Harry" in London was a woefully ill-conceived idea.
** Brannigan (3/25/75) Douglas Hickox ~ John Wayne, Richard Attenborough, Judy Geeson.
It looks like old fashion ol' western saloon brawl from the 50s.Cmdr Swann (Richard Attenborough) is the proper London cop who is working on the Larkin case.
A lot of comments here consider that BRANNIGAN would have been a better film if Clint Eastwood had been cast instead of John Wayne .
***SPOILERS*** John Wayne as Chicago cop Lt. James Brannigan is sent off to the UK to expedite Chigago hood Ben Larkin, John Vernon, who among his other crimes was responsible for the death of Bargginan's partner who he was trying to brake in.
For all the things that made McQ work, there's Brannigan to show you what not to do with John Wayne at the end of his career.
While some folks might scoff at Wayne's foray into the cop genre with McQ (and they're wrong, damn it!), simple scoffing can't come close to adequately denigrating this ridiculous mess of a tough-Yank-goes-to-London-to-set-them-Limeys-straight crime drama.From the horrendously dubbed voices to the nose-thumbing at British law, from the clichés and forced humor and Judy Gleeson hugging the Duke saying something about him being "so damn solid" (and don't forget the hit man who matches Inspector Clouseau for incompetence), you're going to be asking .
Wayne's character, Lieutenant Jim Brannigan, is a Chicago policeman sent to London to escort Ben Larkin, a fugitive gangster, back to America.
Several years prior to this movie, John Wayne turned down the tough cop movie "Dirty Harry", which turned out to be a big hit.
I don't remember "McQ" that much, so I'll stick with critiquing "Brannigan" Certainly, the premise of the movie - tough American cop Wayne in jolly old England - did have great possibilities.
The Queen had best be prepared because the man who settled the wild west and had such a hand in winning WWII is touching down on her little isle.Nearly a sequel to the Duke's 'McQ' (not to say he didn't have acting range), the story didn't stretch the character, while it did actually make for a rather good whodunnit story.Typical of the 'cop' vehicles of the time, a good mix of action, drama and a bit of the blood.A little lengthly, but definitely a popcorn movie.Only Wayne's second 'policeman' film, and great genre film like 'Dirty Harry hits England'..
In fact the on screen pairing of both Duke and Attenborough was a stroke of genius as the two men play of each other very well, their scenes are well written and there's an undeniable energy and excitement these scenes.Brannigan will never be remembered as one of John Wayne's best movies which is perhaps accurate, however it is also not remembered as a good movie which is completely unfair, it has some great scenes, interesting characters and a good storyline, it certainly deserves a much better reputation than it currently has..
After the success of MCQ(1974),John Wayne decided to make another cop movie,this time going into partnership with Wellborn Limited,Levy-Gardner-Laven and United Artists,the result was an action masterpiece known as BRANNIGAN.Brannigan is brilliant and one of the best action movies of all time,it's got a great and brilliant storyline,fantastic acting and characters,hilarious one liners and legendary action scenes.The storyline is kept simple and it feels like it's come right out of a 70s cop TV series and John Wayne is brilliant as Jim Brannigan,whom he puts his all into playing,Richard Attenborough is equally good as Brannigans partner Commander Swann.The picture contains elements of comedy,One liners like That's Right Commander,You Can't Get A Decent Hamburger Any Place and Get Brannigan Out Of There,Use A Forklift If You Have To really bring the movie to life,the scene in which Brannigan pushes a young Tony Robinson into the River Thames is painfully funny,but the funniest scene of all has got to be where Brannigan bursts into a bookmakers house,slams hims face down on a table and says I Would Talk If I Were You,Not Unless You Want To Pay For Englands Free Dental Care,this scene is comedy gold,by the end of the movie you will be in tears from laughter,but you have to see it to appreciate it.There's plenty of action to enjoy,there's car chases,shootouts and an epic brawl inside a pub,the car chase is really funny as the duke steals a civilians car and causes havoc on our British roads,skidding around bends at breakneck speed and finally making a breathless leap across an closing/opening Tower Bridge,later remarking The View From Tower Bridge Was Terrific,honestly,you'll laugh your heart out.There's another car scene at the end of the film,it's not really a chase but it's still very exciting,after the duke has taken care of the bad guys,a mysterious assassin in a sports car turns up and races at the duke while trying to run him down,but the duke is able to shoot the driver in the head with his magnum,sending the car flying over the edge of a ramp and exploding into flames,very exhilarating stuff.The brawl is one of the greatest movie fight scenes ever as 50+ men beat each other to a pulp with the duke and Commander Swann joining in on the fun,the funniest part of this scene is where some poor Joe is repeatedly thrown against a Jukebox,changing the tune each time,during the chaos,chairs and bottles are thrown,people are sent crashing through bannisters to the ground below and some guy is thrown right across the bar,it's one of the greatest scenes ever to be seen in a movie,the other action scenes are a shootout in which the mysterious guy in the sports car tries to kill the duke with a small machine gun but the duke smashes a window,fires shots at the car and sends it screaming down the road wishing it had never picked on him(part of this scene is done in slow motion,making it really funny),other action includes exploding toilets and exploding flower vases,Brannigan contains some of the greatest action scenes ever filmed.The soundtrack is very good,Brannigan is a lot better than the dukes previous cop drama,Mcq,if you want a good laugh and lots of action,this is your movie,i highly recommend this film to all fans of John Wayne and action movies.A gem..
He and Brannigan go like chalk and cheese and it's just hilarious to watch.John Wayne films are known to have jokes and funny one-liners but none have as much as this classic.
The work of art on wheels is blue :)The film was made 4 years before the Duke's death.Like all John Wayne films it involves guns, so i would recommend it as a 15+ movie..
BRANNIGAN is a routinely plotted late vehicle for John Wayne,not in the saddle as you'd usually expect but in 1970's London.The location and the sight of Wayne in such unexpected surroundings is easily the strongest element of the film.The uninspired script and story (about pursuing gangster John Vernon) is somewhat compensated with some well handled action,some decent light relief,and the sheer spectacle of Wayne sharing scenes with familiar British character actors,a highly unusual and rather fascinating occurrence.Richard Attenborough is his main co-star here,along with Judy Geeson,who gives a good account of herself despite what is a basically underwritten and pointless role,but who would have thought that the Duke would ever share scenes with such actors as John Stride,Tony Booth,Del Henney and Tony Robinson?
In deference to John Wayne's legendary film career in Westerns, Turner Classic Movies moderator Ben Mankiewicz stated that you could move "Brannigan" out West and it would work.
A larger-than-life John Wayne plays the jaded American cop sent to London to bring down a crime lord, and an ensemble cast of familiar faces from the era either help or hinder him along the way.
Judy Geeson plays Wayne's partner while the likes of John Vernon and Mel Ferrer are the bads.
|
tt0061758
|
Hells Angels on Wheels
|
The Angels first take note of "Poet" (Jack Nicholson) after one of them inadvertently damages his motorcycle and breaks its headlight. Poet, with far more guts than brains, challenges the Angel that hit his motorcycle. This is an act that would traditionally result in every Angel present participating in a group beating of the attacker. "When a non-Angel hits an Angel, all Angels retaliate." But the leader of the Angels, Buddy (Adam Roarke), intervenes and tells Poet that the Angels will replace the headlight. In the meantime, he's welcome to ride with them while they take care of business—which turns out to be going to a bar and beating up the members of another club who previously beat an Angel.
Poet is told to wait outside, but ends up helping the Angels. Later that night, the Angels return the favor by hunting down and beating four sailors who beat Poet four-against-one after he parted company with the group. Poet accidentally bumps into one of the sailors and speaks rudely to him before he realizes that the sailor has three other sailors with him. The four sailors then refuse to accept his apology—but the Angels only know that four sailors beat up Poet, and he doesn't tell them how the earlier fight started. One of the sailors pulls a knife on the Angels and is then killed accidentally in the fight that follows.
Poet is allowed to ride with the Angels and is eventually elevated to "prospect" status. He is attracted to Buddy's some-time girlfriend (Sabrina Scharf) who toys with him while remaining hopelessly committed to Buddy.
Much of the story that follows consists of scenes of the Angels partying or being provoked to violence by "squares." Although the Angels are shown as being loud and generally irreverent, they are never shown starting trouble except when taking revenge on members of other motorcycle clubs.
Eventually, Buddy's girlfriend succeeds in provoking a confrontation between Buddy and Poet with only one surviving.
|
cult, murder, melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
This is a pretty good biker exploitation flick although I would recommend Russ Meyer's Motorpsycho if you're in the mood for motorcycle chaos..
Hell's Angels on Wheels, if you're into the biker genre, is not a second-rate vehicle for its promoters, the Hell's Angels (Sonny Barger, reportedly at the time, said it was the "most accurate" of the films on them).
Going by the sort of Roger Corman standard (not just for biker movies but for his brand of 'fast-food' style films, not very good for you but it goes down fast), of a fight or some other form of action happening every 15 minutes or so, the film is hip in its period way, and isn't pretentious in the slightest.
Even with the name of Jack Nicholson's character, Poet, nothing near the intellectual and philosophical realm of Easy Rider comes close (though Nicholson's main scenes are some of the best in the film, more comparable to Five Easy Pieces than the Wild Angels).
Leading along the way, in a sense almost in an unintentional training form for a later triumph, Laszlo Kovacs is the DP and he takes down these images usually in more of a documentary form as they ride around, and there is an added (if of course all in good, violent biker fun) intensity to the fight scenes.
Along with Nicholson, his usual brooding, cool self, is Adam Rourke, turning in not a bad performance as the leader of the gang.Is it trash?
Absolutely, at least if you're curious about/into the period and sub-genre (the music isn't very good, by the way, a sign of what was needed in Easy Rider).
Hell's Angels on Wheels is stupid, rollicking good drive-in style fun, with some technical flair and character actor hipness to cover the tracks of the many flaws..
This Richard Rush biker film is better than the Wild Angels, Angels Unchained, Devil's Angels, Cycle Savages, The Glory Stompers, or The Savage Seven.
Adam Roarke was always a good addition to low-budget films and Nicholson shines as the Poet (a somewhat reluctant biker to begin with).None of these films is high quality, but this one has some refreshing scenes that stand out.
Sonny Barger's Recommendation As The Most Accurate Hell's Angels Movie..
Hell's Angels On Wheels is the movie Hell's Angels president Sonny Barger recommends as the most true to life movie about the Hell's Angels in his autobiography, which is why I decided to rent it and see the movie for myself.Buddy (Adam Roarke) is the Sonny Barger character of this movie and the leader of that particular chapter of Hell's Angels.
The movie starts when Buddy and his crew are passing through a gas station when Poet (Jack Nicholson) gets fired from his job as a gas station attendant.Eventually, Buddy takes a liking to Poet, after an altercation between Poet and another Angel over his broken headlight, and later when Poet backs Buddy up in a barroom brawl.
Pretty soon, they vote Poet in as a prospect and he sees the way of life of the Hell's Angels.
This seems strange to Poet at first, but he finally gets what is going on and decides he does not like it.Plotwise, there is not much to this movie.
Nicholson and Roarke did a great job acting and made the story better than if it would have been had they not been in it.
It's ludicrous!Jack Nicholson is 'Poet,' a bad-ass gas-station attendant who gets fired after mouthing off at a customer and then rides off with the Hell's Angels, chasing after a piece of the macho life and a shot at making it with Shill (Sabrina Scharf), who rides bitch behind club chapter president Buddy (Adam Roarke), the king bad-ass of them all.A confessed example of the B-movie 'exploitation' genre, 'Hell's Angels on Wheels' plays on every possible cliché: chair-smashing barroom brawls, bikers harassing carnival-goers and helpless drivers, cops harassing the bikers, heavy drinking and smoking of the evil weed by the violent Angels, etc.
The acting is adequate--Jack is great as Poet, making the most out of the stilted, silly dialogue, and Adam Roarke, a B-movie leading man if there ever was one, seems to be relishing every bit of his character's corny, macho posturing.
Real Angels wouldn't be caught dead listening to such crappy pap.The film is most interesting for its trivia value: Included are brief appearances by a host of actual Hell's Angels led by Sonny Barger, who to this day remains President of the infamous motorcycle gang.
Apparently the Angels traded the use of their name and insignia for a cameo and a mention in the credits (though one wonders if they would have agreed to do so had they seen the film's final cut beforehand).
Sabrina Schraff, the main love interest, was a former Playboy Bunny and later appeared in 'Easyrider', which, of course, also featured Jack Nicholson in his breakout role.
Schraff, interestingly enough, went on to become a California state senator.This is a silly little time capsule--a nice example of the sixties-era exploitation flick and a reasonable indicator of the widespread paranoia surrounding the motorcycle gang phenomena popularized in the early sixties.
The Angels obviously enjoy being romanticized as fun-loving but fierce rebels against mainstream culture in the tradition of the frontier outlaws of the nineteenth century and the gangsters of the roaring twenties, but trust me, this movie is no history lesson..
Always like Jack Nicholson and some how missed this picture when he was very young and starting on a great career of acting.
For some reason I did not feel like he fit very well in his role as a recruit of the California Hell's Angels.
'Hells Angels on Wheels' is a surprisingly tough and entertaining b-grade 60s biker movie.
Jack Nicholson plays a gas attendant named Poet who becomes involved with some Hells Angels.
Nicholson went on to movie superstardom, Roarke to cult status and an untimely death, and Scharf a bit part in 'Easy Rider' and then a career in politics.
He is actually pretty good here, better than the material deserves, but the real star performance in the movie is from the seriously underrated Roarke.
'Hells Angels on Wheels' obviously isn't anywhere near as good as the latter, but it is much better than you'd expect and definitely worth tracking down..
I found "Hell's Angels on Wheels" on a disc containing three Jack Nicholson films.
However, the print quality on "Jack Nicholson: Cult Classics" was pretty bad and I assume there must be better quality prints available somewhere--especially since at least two of the films (perhaps all three) are widely available from many different distributors.The plot of "Hell's Angels on Wheels" is amazingly slim and it looks as if most of the movie was unscripted and the filmmakers just filmed these folks doing all kids of things--some illegal, some just annoying.
At one point, an angry young guy (Nicholson) gets in good with the gang and is soon allowed to ride with them.
As for Nicholson, eventually he gets tired of the scene and it ends with a face-off with the leader of the pack.
How it all ends is really stupid--so stupid you need to see it to believe it."Hell's Angels on Wheels" isn't a very good film but it is watchable.
This has to rate as the third best biker film of the 1960s behind Easy Rider and The Wild Angels.
As bad as the script is, it's clear that Jack Nicholson as Poet, an angry gas-pump jockey who joins the Hell's Angels is a star in the making.The opening scene alone is worth seeing for any biker-film buff, as over 1,000 Hell's Angels on blazing choppers led by their leader Ralph "Sonny" Barger come rumbling down the California highway.With a supporting cast of Adam Rourke(of Hell's Belles fame) & Easy Riders' Sabrina Scharf, along with "B" movie legend Jack Starrett as a tough-talking state trooper,the movie captures the "wild" days of the 1960s Hells Angels Motorcycle gang.
With bikers, bikes, booze, and brawls, who could ask for anything else in a better than average "B" film?.
A Mess of Fun. Not to say I didn't enjoy this movie, I love the Hells Angels and all the books and movies about them.
Jack Nicholson is good in a very early role,(see what he was like before he started to take himself too seriously!) the girls were hot, hot, hot, and there is a great scene at the start, that shows Sonny Barger in his early days.
But scenes of guys driving around in circles on their bikes, to the weirdest music I ever heard, shows that the director was a film school dropout!.
Good if not great as biker cinema goes, "Hells Angels on Wheels" had the legendary Angel Sonny Barger as its technical adviser, making it supposedly more true to life than other depictions of the notorious motorcycle gang, although the word "supposedly" will need to be stressed.
Jack Nicholson, the obvious breakout star, is prominently featured as a gas station attendant who captures the attention of a bunch of Angels and earns their respect.
Nicholsons' character, who gets nick named "Poet", also does not like the way that they pass their women around, especially as he falls for Shill (Sabrina Scharf), who is ordinarily the main squeeze of this packs' leader, the charismatic Buddy (Adam Roarke).
Director Richard Rush would also direct Nicholson in "Psych-Out", and of course would go on to great fame as director of the cult favourite "The Stunt Man" (in which he again worked with Roarke).
B-grade "wheeler" has motorcycle gang infiltrating a small community, getting everyone riled up, especially service station attendant Jack Nicholson, who is introduced to us roughing up a middle-aged customer who just wants to fill his gas-guzzler with ethyl.
The juxtaposition of city squares and greasy rebels--the culture and the counterculture, if you will--is far more interesting than the 'plot,' which has Nicholson putting his faith in a fickle biker chick.
Nicholson soon escaped from the drive-in movie rut, but co-star Adam Roarke never did.
Rush misses it, too, staging an unexciting final fight scene between Roarke and Nicholson that ends the movie with a thud.
Nicholson shines in a fun biker flick.
HELL'S ANGELS ON WHEELS is an enjoyable addition to the run of biker flicks that filmed cinema screens in the late 1960s.
I liked it better than the arty, overrated EASY RIDER, and it's another one to feature Jack Nicholson, this time in the leading role.
Nicholson has a kind of effortless, likable charm in this film - he's all smiles and fun - which makes the film rather a fun one to watch for fans of the actor.The narrative format is to follow the misadventures of a biker gang as they get into the usual scrapes involved with hard living and hard loving: the expected bar-room brawls, run-ins with the law, fights with rival gangs, stunts, and plenty of padded moments that just show the gang riding around some picturesque Californian locations.It's hardly the stuff of greatness, but the '60s-style direction is fun and there's a surfeit amount of action which makes it an easy watch.
In terms of plot it aims for a certain moment in time & it hits the mark.The choppers R first rate classic 60's builds, the scenery is great, Kovak's DP work is outstanding, Adam Rourke is the stand-out here, he holds his own easily against Jack in all the acting chops departments & Sabrina Scarf is amazingly sexy.
The fights R fun & the magical moments R numerous, for instance, Poet's decision to go with the Angels under a distant moon while sitting on his chopper at a carnival, ambient street sounds & conversations abound around other character interactions just like in real life.If U like biker flicks this is the real deal.
Young Jack Nicholson as a Hell's Angel.
Biker films came into vogue after the 1966 release of the infamous "The Wild Angels;" they remained popular for the next 5-7 years or so.
The third group was comprised of everyone in between."Hell's Angels on Wheels" was released in 1967, one year after "The Wild Angels," and it's a pretty decent biker flick.
You'll see some clips of famed Angel Sonny Barger near the beginning of the film; Barger also assisted as the technical adviser.THE STORY: Jack Nickolson loses his job as a gas station attendant and hooks up with the Hell's Angels as "Poet." The bikers ride, revel and brawl throughout the story while Poet takes an interest in the leader's girlfriend (Adam Roarke and Sabrina Scharf respectively)."The Wild Angels" (aka "All the Fallen Angels") is a cult masterpiece for numerous reasons despite its obvious shortcomings: It takes the subject of outcast bikers seriously, it's truly shocking, its story is refreshingly original and it tackles real-life issues that every viewer can relate to, specifically the nature of grief and how different people respond in different ways (see my review for details).
Although "Hell's Angels on Wheels" is good for what it is -- a late 60s low-budget biker flick -- it fails to even come close to the greatness of "The Wild Angels." It's slightly more goofy, not at all shocking and has little depth.Yet, it's worthwhile for numerous reasons: It's great to see Jack Nicholson when he was so young, there are numerous beautiful 60's babes and the California photography is exceptional, in particular in the last 30 minutes of its 95 minute runtime, not to mention all the bikes.However, throughout the almost pointless story various questions kept coming to mind: -- How do the bikers get money to support their lifestyle of continuous riding, revelry and "free love"?
(work is never mentioned as it is in "The Wild Angels") -- In light of the numerous brawls (with fists, chains, clubs, etc.) why do none of the bikers ever show any injuries, bruises, etc.?
This is one of my favorite biker flicks of all time, not just because Nicholson is in it.
Jack Nicholson's and Adam Roarke's performances were credible.
Jack's character gets caught up with the Hell's Angels after he meets them at his dead end gas station job.
Jack's character falls for the leader of the Angel's girlfriend, which sets up the climactic finale.
I would only recommend it to Nicholson fans because at times it is so bad, it's good, ala "Plan 9 from Outer Space".
It was a big mistake, instead."Hells Angels on wheels" are a total waste of time..
Probably Nicholson's worst movie.
Juxtapose Nicholson's biker boy with his character in "Easy Rider" and see how they'd play face to face.
I call these biker films "Drive-In Movies." They were the films you saw at the drive-in on a summer evening, hopefully with a date you could make out with in the back of a car, so you didn't have to actually pay attention to the plot of any of these films.Now I'm older...I'm watching this film in the cold light of day in my living room...alone.
You know, it really is only by the grace of God that Jack Nicholson ever became the renowned actor he is today, considering the incredibly bad movies he made during the 60's.
In this movie he gets to leer at the chicks as they strip to their underwear (a prerequisite for these cheap films), and get body paint smeared all over their skin by drunken, laughing hooligans (Jack being one of them...sort of....only he's really a nice guy underneath...).
Sonny Barger and the Hell's Angels in this film.
One of the reasons is that Sonny Barger himself, founder and still President of the Hell's Angels, is in the film's opening scene, kicking over his bike and proceeding to run over a flower bed in a city park!
Jack Nicholson is poised and relaxed here, but he doesn't get to show much wit as a good boy who decides to run with the Angels' dastardly misadventures for a spell.
That's why I love these "Biker Movies".
As the Biker said in the (cheap) Biker scene in the movie DUTCH TREAT, "We geek chickens on Saturday night...Know what I mean?" That's what Bikers do.
Long live cheap Biker movies!.
After being fired from his job as a gas station attendant, a man who goes by the nickname of "Poet" (Jack Nicholson) comes into conflict with a member of the local chapter of the Hell's Angels because one of them broke the headlight off of his motorcycle.
Poet then follows the group to a bar where the Hell's Angels then proceed to beat up members from a rival gang.
Now rather than reveal any more of this movie and risk spoiling it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this is a rather basic biker film from the golden age of the genre.
Fun movie captures vivid sense of biker lifestyle in the Sixties.
Jack Nicholson's leading character Poet is continually ridiculed by biker girl Shill as being a square with a middle class set of values, when he tries to have a serious relationship with her.
Ultimately, Poet becomes disillusioned with the Hell's Angels and clashes with Buddy, as it becomes clear that Buddy expects unquestioning obedience from his followers, and imposes his own rules on them, not unlike the Establishment he's supposedly rebelling against.This movie is a fascinating time capsule of a time and place most of us never knew in real life.
Adam Roarke as Buddy and Jack Nicholson as Poet turn in two excellent performances in a meandering, casually thrown together movie that seems almost a documentary of the Hell's Angels lifestyle in the Sixties.Worth seeing, even if you don't care for biker movies in general.
The majority of "Hell's Angels On Wheels" was shot in and around Bakersfield, California doubling for Nevada.
A couple of years later, Jack Nicholson walked the same two blocks in "Five Easy Pieces."
|
tt0117968
|
Trois vies et une seule mort
|
Pierre Bellemare, a French radio personality appears to recount four strange, seemingly non-coexisting, tales that make up the complex narrative structure of Three Lives and Only One Death. In the first tale we are introduced to Andre Parisi, a family man who has woken up with a terrible headache. Andre leaves to a local cafe where he meets one of the multiple enigmatic central characters, Matteo Strano (Marcello Mastroianni). Matteo offers Andre champagne and 1000 francs to listen to his story. Prior to the scene of Matteo’s own storytelling, he reveals he was once married to Andre’s wife. Matteo recounts the day he went out, on a whim, and rented out an apartment. Matteo insists this apartment is inhabited by fairies who eat time and who ultimately devoured 20 years of his life in one night. Matteo uses the story of his “strange journey in time” to entice Andre into going to his “fairy house.” Andre accepts Matteo’s request and is surprised to find that the apartment actually exists. Matteo takes Andre’s fondness for the apartment as an acceptance of a deal that allows Matteo to go home, leaving Andre to remain in the bewitched apartment. When Andre refuses to take Matteo’s place “he finds himself with a hammer in his head, thus retrospectively explaining his headache as a premonition.” After a 20 year hiatus Matteo returns to his former home and his former wife, Maria, as if nothing had changed.
Bellemare then recounts the tale of George Vickers, a 69-year-old bachelor and Professor of Negative Anthropology at Sorbonne. When Vickers ascends the main stairs at Sorbonne, to give the opening lecture at a major conference on Negative Anthropology, he pauses and is overcome by a strange force and feeling. The strange force takes him to a graveyard where he shortly experiences grief. When a storm breaks out he becomes profoundly happy, so much so that he does not look for shelter. He becomes a beggar overnight and strangely finds success. Vickers is ambushed on a routine walk home to an abandoned courtyard, but is saved by a prostitute Tanya La Corse aka Maria Gabri-Colosso. Tanya takes Vickers back to her apartment. Vickers explores her apartment and grabs sight of a series of books by Carlos Castañeda. Meanwhile, it is revealed that Vickers occasionally hears Carlos’s voice. Vickers professes a passionate loathing of those works in Tanya’s apartment. Vickers and Tanya/Maria form a firm friendship; Vickers even moves to a new bench to be closer to his new friend. Tanya/Maria tests the new friendship by entrusting in Vickers to keep a close eye out for her extremely dangerous ex-husband. When Vickers fails to to alert Tanya/Maria he returns home to a bench outside his mother's home. When he learns of her death he “experiences a strange feeling of nostalgia” and returns to his role as a professor. One day the past catches up with him and he learns Tanya/Maria also lived a double life as the president of a huge electric company, who had been led to prostitution by her husband. Vickers and Tanya/Maria rekindle their relationship and marry. Like clockwork, Vickers once again ascends the main stairs at Sorbonne when he suddenly pauses, walks back down the stairs and leaves for the graveyard. Meanwhile Tanya/Maria('s) ex-husband returns and "re-ignites her taste for the perverse.” Both Tanya/Maria and Vickers once again reverse back to their roles as Prostitute and as beggar.
Bellemare opens the third tale with an announcement about the foundation of the tale, that of which “extreme happiness is an extreme form of misery and excessive generosity is an excessive form of tyranny.” Bellemare also proclaims that the next story is “so true it has taken place not once, but several times.” This third tale which revolves around a young Parisian couple, Cecile and Martin, in love sets the stage for the “crossing between the stories and roles played by Mastroianni." The young couple receives a mysterious weekly gift of 2,000 francs in their mailbox and proceed with their perfect happy life. Both Cecile and Martin “embark on affairs out of kindness.” Cecile cheats on Martin with the next door neighbor, Piotr, a college student who cannot bear to hear the couples "all-consuming" love for each other. Martin unknowingly finds employment with Cecile’s mother, Maria from the first tale; they too have an affair. However, the young couple forgives one another. The stories from earlier begin to collide in a seemingly rapid pace. Cecile takes a job working for the businesswoman Tanya/Maria. Later, Tanya/Maria and her ex-husband attempt to entice the young couple into perverse games, but they throw the idea out when they notice the young couple isn’t sexy. One day the couple doesn’t receive their regular earnings in the mailbox, due to the fact that their “protector” has died. However, their protector remembers them in his will and leaves to them the possession of a Mansion and its butler. The butler, another character played by Mastroianni, responds only to the sound of a bell. The butler plays odd games with the couple, who are now expecting a child. The butler hides the bell and drugs them into sleeping for days on end. One strange night Martin finds the Butler conversing with a businessman and a “tramp.” The tramp leaves Martin bloodied and dazed. This leads to the couple's immediate departure. Their inability to recognize Mastroianni as proprietor and butler results in him claiming the couple's new-born child, which he later leaves on Maria's door steps.
In the final tale Bellemare introduces Luc Allamand, a successful businessman in his 70’s. Luc receives a surprising phone call, in the middle of the night, detailing the arrival of his ex-wife, daughter and sister. Luc is taken aback by the news because they do not exist, he invented them for business reasons. Feeling ill Luc returns home and finds his wife, “a 32-year-old star singer in the hands of her accompanist.” Carlos’s voice can be distinctly heard whispering, this appears to turn Luc into a sleepwalker. Luc then wanders aimlessly and returns to Maria and his former home as Matteo, once again as if nothing had happened. Mastroianni’s multiples identities begin to cross at a more rapid pace. Maria supposedly awakes Matteo, but instead hears Vickers talking in his sleep about Negative Anthropology. Maria then confronts Matteo about his “mistress” Tanya/Maria. The sudden sound of a bell brings triggers Vickers the beggar. His begging nearly turns violent, but Maria is able to find a coin in time to reverse Vickers back to Matteo. That same day Mastroianni’s characters return to their former residences. Meanwhile, all the women in his life have been receiving threatening letters. Luc returns to his office where he meets with a famous psychologist Luca Agusta, who congratulates Luc for inventing three women that now exist. After awakening from a bad dream Luc heads to a river where he is confronted by Carlos. In the meantime, all the women in his life rendezvous at a cafe where they encounter all of Mastroianni’s characters. All of the identities become murderous and converge in the cafe, resulting in a series of deaths.
|
psychedelic, avant garde, storytelling
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Weird and Wild.
Chilean director Raul Ruiz created a weird, wild, fantastic world with Three Lives and Only One Death.
Marcello Mastroianni plays four different characters in as many different stories that at first seem completely separate, but by the films end are wholly intertwined.
It is beautifully, almost mystically shot, effectively using shadows, light, and computer imagery to create painted like imagery.
It is a bit confusing, but wholly satisfying film.In the first story Mastroianni plays a salesman who walked out on his wife (Marisa Paredes) twenty years ago.
The wife has since found another husband (Feodor Atkine) and is living a seemingly happy life.
For reasons left unexplained Mastroianni suddenly decides he wants his old life back.
He catches the new husband, at a Tabac and offers to pay him 1,000 francs for a hour of his time.
What proceeds is an imaginative, fantastic tale of why Mastroianni has been gone for twenty years.
It is far to complicated to explain here, but lets say it involves a room with moving walls and tiny fairies who prefer to eat franc bills, but will settle for newspaper.
The end of the story finds Mastroianni wanting to leave the second husband in the fantastic room, while he moves back in with his wife.In the second story Mastroianni plays a successful professor who, for reasons that are all his own, become a beggar, and a rather successful one at that.
He befriends a prostitute (Anna Galiena), who he later finds out isn't all she pretends to be, and whose husband (Jacques Pieiller)is something of a psychopath.In the third story a young couple (Chiara Mastroianni and Melvil Poupaud) find themselves being mysteriously supported by an unnamed friend.
After months of finding 1,000 francs in their mail box each week, they learn this mysterious stranger has died and left them his mansion.
The catch is they must keep on a peculiar butler (Mastroianni of course) or lose everything.
The fourth story is really a means to tie all three stories together, and yes, it is weird.
There is a lot going on throughout the film.
It is visually stunning, complex in story, and a delight throughout.
It is the type of film that really deserves a second, and third viewing to allow thoughtful absorption of the many details.
In what was his second to last film before his death, Mastroianni does a masterful job playing these varied, and interesting characters.It is a film not meant for everyone.
The story is a weird and complex as anything put out by David Lynch.
But for the lover of cinema, there is much to appease the appetite.
It is a beautiful, layered, surreal film that is a true pleasure to watch.Like this review?
Go to www.midnitcafe.blogspot.com for more..
Prescient allegory about euro currency.
Having just read about Raoul Ruiz's passing I was motivated to look up reviews of my favorite film of his.
I am writing this because I was surprised to see that none of the reviewers seemed to get that the film was an allegory for the coming of the Euro currency.
The "craziness" of the film is actually a commentary on the craziness of the Euro.
For instance viewers will notice that the characters lose their personalities on the Rue Maastricht.
The Maastricht Treaty laid the groundwork for the Euro in 1992 that wentinto effect January 1, 1999.
Much of what is happening today with Europe and the Euro was symbolically foreshadowed in the film.If you watched the film and didn't understand its underlying premise I suggest watching again.
I am sure you'll experience an "ah ha" moment and will discover this crazy film of Mr. Ruiz's makes brilliant sense..
Three scaffolds and no edifice to support.
With his work in the 80's Ruiz managed to cast upon the French conundrums about time and reality an oblique, dreamlike light.
A light that diffused the essay into heady magic, into shadow play that was dangerous and sultry with the impossible.
He would see Welles from the other side of the mirror, from the fictional looking in.None of that here, instead dry vignettes like a French Bunuel.
Some wit and irreverence and a few touches about convergent realities that remind of his earlier films are lost in too much transparence.The structure is reminiscent of something he would do.
A surreal comedy where Marcello Mastroyanni is three different characters.
All three stories are framed by a narrator reading them for a radio program.
Eventually the three lives converge, worlds overlap under a single author who weaves himself in fictions that inexplicably become real, but they converge and overlap too late and no real sparks fly.Whereas earlier Ruiz trusted intuition to take him to the place where ideas mean things, here he starts from ideas and structures as he goes on.
It is all scaffold, elaborate, suffocating scaffold, with no edifice to support.
Ideas cast adrift without anchor.
Compare with the richness of his 80's films about sailing inwards..
Three deaths.
Great dark humour, very funny, felliniesque film.
Mastroianni is as good as always.
A tad confusing at times.
Requires complete attention at all times.
The ending is the best part, a very clever film..
Obviously a Farewell Film for this Great Lover.
Wonder how many of his wives and lovers found themselves in this film.
He is old and splits off into many diverse personalities: and does so quite successfully.
The fairies are a little hard to take.
However, one of the wildest roles is the one by msieu Doucard, that evil French spy in the Sharpe movies.
With overalls, he plays a simple Frenchmen who meets a really wierd end at the hands of Mastroiannani.
The actor is too intelligent, though, and he didn't quite hide his intelligence as well as say, Billy Bob Thornton in his similar role.
In other words, you don't buy that Msieu Doucard would be so gullible, or is that the shadow of the Sharp movies overcoming me?Mastroiannani's real daughter plays his daughter in this movie, which i found delightful.
Now I will have to see it again, and find out where the importance of the bells first became known.
The psychoanalyst is precious, so much totally ANTI every psychologist you've ever known, but just as arrogant.Since I'm 65 now, looking at M's hump made me realize how important it is to "Sit up straight and pull my diaphragm up from my tummy." Those humps can really make you look old.
If he was faking it, he was doing a great job.
You won't see another movie like this one, not even "Three Faces of Eve" is in the same genre.
Great cinematography as well.
What the little chickadees do, you don't want to have done to yourself, I can assure you..
Funny and sad, and oh, so tolerant of sexual infidelity....a French movie, indeed.
And no offense meant to the wonderful French, without whom we would still 'be a dependency of England' (Gore Vidal)..
Surrealistic, strange, talky, flat, confusing..
Raul Ruiz has crafted a genuinely surrealistic film, dealing with such subjects as identity, time, chance and the cyclical pattern of events, but for all his camera tricks (some of which are outstanding), his storytelling is rather flat, and his characters talk too much.
Ruiz asks for too much patience and too many allowances on the part of the viewer, without giving his stories the kicker that would justify them; his one big revelation was all but spoiled in pretty much every review of the film, not to mention its own title.
Three Lives and Only One Death.
This French film was another one I found in the 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die book, being a 90s film it was odd that it was hard to find to watch, but I did eventually find it and wanted to see if it was worthy of the book placement.
Basically Marcello Mastroianni plays a man with multiple personalities, the film focuses on four, travelling Parisian salesman Mateo Strano, Sorbonne university professor of negative anthropology Georges Vickers, a mute country house Butler working for a wealthy newlywed couple, and industrial magnate Luc Alamand.
Mateo shows up at the home of the wife he abandoned twenty years ago, María (Marisa Paredes), she remarried André (Féodor Atkine), he tells his story to André that he has in fact been living in an apartment across the street the entire time, he lures André to him and murders him with a hammer, María suspects nothing as he returns calmly, she even introduces him to their adopted daughter.
George Vickers still lives with his cranky mother until he becomes a tramp, on the streets he encounters streetwalker Tania (Anna Galiena) with a passion for philosophy, the hooker and tramp stay together until Vickers returns and leaves, following this George discovers Tania is in fact president of a major corporation, and when he learns she has been jailed for the attempted murder of her creepy ex-husband Vickers comes to her rescue.
The newlywed couple are struggling a little, but their lives change dramatically when a benefactor provides them a marvellous country house, they are also given a mute butler who serves them well, but they slowly figure out their valet, who actually owns the château, is plotting to kill them with slow poising, to steal their fortune, terrified the leave, but he finds them and demands they give him their baby daughter, he gives the child to Maria, Mateo's ex-wife.
Finally Luc Alamand is in trouble, learning that potential clients he wants to impress want to meet his wife, daughter and sister, and they are actually coming, the stress causes his other personalities to emerge, each have wildly different lives, but are all clearly similar characters, and it is all bound to end in s=destruction and confusion for himself and some others.
Also starring Melvil Poupaud as Martin, Chiara Mastroianni as Cécile, Arielle Dombasle as Hélène and Jean-Yves Gautier as Mario.
Mastroianni is amusing playing the four different personalities embodied in one man, the story is okay but rather hard to follow, and to be honest I didn't laugh at a lot of it, I know it is meant to be funny, and I'm not sure the placing in the 1001 Movies book is one I agree with, but it was an interesting enough fantasy comedy drama.
Good!.
Marcello's next to last appearance in the cinema.
"Three Lives and Only One Death" directed by Raoul Ruiz, was probably a vehicle for Marcello Mastroianni.
The film marked the end of the life of one of the greatest actors of all times.
A giant among giants, the actor probably sensing his own death played not only one, but three different roles.
There are many messages within the story, one of which seems to be pointing to the unification of the single currency not only in France, but in the countries of the European Union, something much in the news these days.The narrative consists on three stories that are interconnected.
Each one shows Mr. Mastroianni at the center of the story.
Mr. Ruiz showed his admiration to the surrealists masters of the genre like Luis Bunuel and his followers.
As far as the narrative is concerned, the film has an absurdist character in stories that speak about everyday life, played by larger than life characters.
The situations do not make sense, although there is a basic story line that is kept throughout the film.The best excuse for watching the film is to see Marcello Mastroianni in his heavily accented French having a good time playing disparate people.
Others in the cast include the actor's daughter, Chiara in the third vignette playing opposite Melvil Poupaud.
The first story features Feodor Atkine who meets an unexpected fatal attack.
Marisa Paredes, Aurore Dombasle and Anna Galiena also appear as the three women in the main character's life.
|
tt1176416
|
Tetsuo: The Bullet Man
|
Anthony is a man with an American father and a deceased Japanese mother living and working in Tokyo. One day his son is run over and killed by Yatsu, this film's version of "The Metal Fetishist". Shortly afterward Anthony begins to transform into metal. He discovers that the work of his scientist father may be the key to his transformation. In his father's house he discovers a secret room with files and papers detailing the Tetsuo Project as a way to turn people into androids. He also learns that his father met his mother while they each researched the project. Anthony's wife arrives but before she sees her transformed husband a S.W.A.T. team arrives and she is taken hostage. Anthony's transformation finishes its hold and he defeats the S.W.A.T. team with bullets fired from his body, but refrains from killing them. The severely injured team is extracted, but then killed by Yatsu.
Anthony's father then calls to him and his wife to explain everything: Anthony's mother was disgusted with the outcome of the Tetsuo project, having joined it as a way to help give crippled and sick people new bodies. When Anthony's mother realized that she would soon die from cancer, she insisted that her husband recreate her as a Tetsuo android so that he may still have a child with his recreated wife. That child became Anthony, which means that Anthony and his late son were always part Tetsuo. Meanwhile, Yatsu realizes that the only way he will find peace is to be shot by Anthony's body. Yatsu and Anthony have a final confrontation in which Anthony's wife is nearly killed. Anthony's rage and transformation reaches its pinnacle and he becomes a gigantic metal beast with a cannon in his center. Yatsu provokes and threatens Anthony to shoot him. Finally, Anthony denies this wish and instead consumes Yatsu whole into his metal body and then returns to human form. Five years later Anthony and his wife and new child have returned to a normal, contented life. As he stands before a mirror he hears Yatsu's final words: "You don't know what I'll do." However, when a group of young thugs attempt to intimidate him while walking down the street, rather than allow his anger to overtake him, he simply walks calmly and confidently past them.
|
absurd, psychedelic, violence, sci-fi
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Shinya Tsukamoto's original Tetsuo: The Ironman is most certainly one of my formative cinematic experiences.
I remember watching it for the first time one night with a friend in his parents' basement the summer after my freshman year at college.
The film was just blowing us away, and we were very loud about how awesome and freaky it was.
Tsukamoto had won a fan for life in me, and, indeed, I have very much liked every single piece of work he's produced that I've had the pleasure to see.
The third Tetsuo movie is no exception.
Half-Japanese, half-white Eric Bossick plays the title character here.
When Bossick gets upset, he becomes a metallic, murderous monster.
The story is pretty silly (Bossick has "android DNA" because his dad made it with a robot version of his mom), but it's all about the images, the violence, and the Lovecraftian horror.
There is one major aspect that will detract from the film's value for some: it's in English.
I'm guessing that Tsukamoto felt that this would give the film wider appeal, not only because it could be released in English speaking countries unsubtitled, but in other countries, too, where a good amount of people can understand English.
That's a bad plan, though, as most fans of this type of stuff, especially in the United States, where the film still hasn't opened except for perhaps at some film festivals, much prefer the Japanese films they watch to be in Japanese.
Or perhaps it's about the fact that most of the actors just aren't very good, which makes their dialogue come off rather poorly, or even laughably.
And other actors, most notably Shinya Tsukamoto himself, who co-stars as the villain, has a sometimes incomprehensible accent.
It comes off somewhat like the English dialogue in Takashi Miike's Sukiyaki Django Western, kind of weird and almost hypnotic..
Tetsuo: The Iron Man - A film so manic, hyper, weird, and stylish, it represented the epitome of an experimental film.
David Lynch would have gouged his eyes out.Tetsuo II: Body Hammer - A sequel so intense and crazy, it took the strange visions of the first film and spat them out at the viewer in a refreshing barrage of insanity.The third Tetsuo film, The Bullet Man, is pretty much more of the same.
You can certainly expect the film to break out in hyperactive bombardments of flashing rapid-fire images.
You can certainly expect the main character to mutate into a metal monster and wreak some havoc (and this time, he spits bullets!).
You can certainly expect this to be weird and crazy.However, this Tetsuo film is notably different, and not in a way that's refreshing or necessarily good.
In between the manic freak-out scenes, the film slows down drastically, trying its best to weave in some semblance of an actual story with actual characters and actual reasons behind the madness.
With the terrible dialogue, short runtime, and overall freakiness of the film, I really don't think this story works as well as it wants to.
The film really wants to give a compelling vengeance story (the exact same type that went into the last two films), it really wants to give us emotional characters, and it wants to give us some kind of background to the "Tetsuo Project" and its connection to the characters.
In the end though, it comes off as being too short and underdeveloped for its own good.The experience of the film overall is pretty agitating.
Granted, the other Tetsuo films are agitating as hell, but The Bullet Man seems to be a grade worse.
Given the other issues listed above, I was rather apathetic about the film overall.
I actually value the other two films for their remarkable styles and visions, even though they are pretty hyperactive in their own right, but this third film never felt like it brought anything new to the table.In addition to being really hyper and annoying, the film is rather drab-looking, with lots of dark lighting and gray settings.
On the plus side, the sets, props, and costumes are pretty decent, and it's especially cool to see that the filmmakers preferred to use practical effects rather than cheap CGI.
Music consists of lots of airy noises and metallic banging, further adding to the annoying experience.As much as I value the first two Tetsuo movies, I couldn't bring myself to enjoy The Bullet Man as much as I wanted to.
I halfway wonder if Shin'ya Tsukamoto is purposefully trying to make the most annoying movie possible.
Established Tetsuo fans will probably enjoy The Bullet Man, but casual viewers will probably want to keep their distance.
I personally recommend the first film, if at all interested.2/5 (Experience: Annoying | Story: Very Poor | Film: Marginal).
Similar to the first two movies, Bullet Man is an alternate retelling of the same story.
Plotwise its what you'd expect in a Tetsuo-film.Bullet Man is certainly among Tsukamoto's most experimental films, but in a completely different way, due to its casting decisions, and the bold choice of shooting the dialog entirely in English(with few exceptions), unlike Takashi Miike's Sukiyaki Western Django, the dialog in this movie is in fact comprehensible.
Its very obvious that Tsukamoto was aiming for a broader audience, but it didn't work quite as well.
I must admit that I was skeptical to Bossick in the lead role, but he is actually very well casted, his character is different from Taguchi, but still similar, he is a bit more stable, but furious at the same time.
Akiko Monou as Bossick's wife on the other hand doesn't work that well, its a dull performance mostly because of her dialog being in English.
The chemistry between the two leads isn't present either, but this gets better as the film progresses, and then there is good old Shinya Tsukamoto as " The Guy " you'd be disappointed that he doesn't reprise his role as the metal fetishist, but he still play a pretty bad-ass character, and its a great performance.The digital look of the film is not working in its favor at all, yet there are lots of trademark shots from the previous films, like the close ups of machinery etc, and Chu Ishikawa's industrial theme, are all present, and its shot in the same frenetic manner, but the gritty, and raw 16mm look is absent.The Bullet Man, seems more like an American remake of the first film, it has this mainstream feel to it, and doesn't rely that much on symbolism and metaphors, like the first two films.
Another big letdown is, this time there is no mutated counterpart for protagonist to fight, instead we have a bunch of army guys.
I would still recommend this to all Tsukamoto fans.
It's different, and not among his best, but that doesn't necessarily mean that its bad.
If you know Tsukamoto's other films and you have already seen Tetsuo 1, at the vision of this one you will be unsatisfied.
You will not recognize the original Tsukamoto storytelling, where you must evince everything about the story only by images, and not from an actor that speak and explain what happened since that scene of the movie.
The good thing you can find in the first one or in the other movies by this author are that you must concentrate on the movie, on the images to be able to understand, and the images make you stay on your sit with your eyes open and your mind full operative.
But this chapter of the Tetsuo saga is not that kind of film.
It's more similar to an American movie than a Tsukamoto movie.
I don't understand if it's Tsukamoto changing or it's only because this was an American co-production.
Maybe someone who don't know Tsukamoto will appreciate it for it's fine director's style or for the incomparable music, but it's better if you make a comparison with the first one, that will remain an absolute masterpiece, 20 years before, a lot of money less.
Still,this is a remake, with a lot of changes in the story, but not in the message the author wants to tell us!.
Unfortunately there is almost nothing good to say about this film.The camera is so shaky that it's hard to recognize things in the picture.
If watched on a big cinema screen, it would have made me vomit.Dialogs are mostly pathetic and acting is very poor, many times over the top.
At times it's even difficult to understand what they are saying, because of the strong (bad) accent.Many scenes are tediously long, dark and the "music" is too loud.I really tried to like this film, but I couldn't.I think it's good, when directors try to be daring, but some seem to forget that they are not making a film for themselves, but they want it to be viewed by others.
If so, maybe it's not wrong to try to make a film watchable (visually pleasant) as well..
I was recommended this movie from a friend as he loved it but I didn't I'm afraid, I can't really give a true review of this movie due to fact that I haven't seen any of the previous movies or any of tsukamoto's previous work, so I will not comment on the story itself but tell you the truth I watched it as I thought it was going to be an action flick with many body parts flying around but this wasn't the case and the camera work was very shaky and it was very difficult to know what was going on, If like me you have not seen any of tsukamoto's previous work don't waste your time, but if you really feel the need to watch it all I can suggest is watch the previous movies first to give you at least a certain incl-in of what is going on..
- struck me as a rather mercenary move by Tsukamoto when I first heard about it, and as the first film is so important to me (being what opened my eyes to cinema beyond Hollywood, and remaining in my all time top 20 to this day) I approached this with slight trepidation.
Fortunately, this is very much a Tetsuo movie through and through, largely uncompromised by commercial thoughts, and as frenetic, fast paced and blistering as ever.
The basic plot – a man mutates into metal after a traumatic incident – remains, but the movie still throws up fresh and unexpected ideas throughout.
The decision to have it in English does lead to the occasional stilted feeling in the dialogue, but this is a minor point.
Overall, while nowhere near the heights of the first film, it's comfortably about equal to Tetsuo II: Body Hammer, which is far more than I expected..
On a positive note, this movie does not resort to using CGI or other crappy special effects.
The costume did the job well enough for this movie.Sound was one of my first issues with this film.
There was some metal rifts that were pretty loud.
Then the dialog would come in and either I was suffering from deafness or the actors would whisper their lines.I never have been a fan of shaky cam filming, but this goes way beyond shaky cam to earth quake cam.
The noise, flashes, and bombarding images are just like some hardcore death metal videos.It takes forever for the origins to be discovered and then the last 20 minutes of the film the "bad guy" -with poor motive- gives the Bullet Man just 60 seconds to kill him...
some how 20 minutes = 60 seconds doesn't seem to fit.Overall a poor movie, I have watched worse.
Maybe it would be better as an anime or if I was a big fan of the creator of this film..
OK it seems that Shinya Tsukamoto decided to update his series even more to modern times and also put himself in the movie again.
I guess you could say this was a revamp of the first, but a different story.
I am not saying this is a bad film though.
Some good things about it was the nice grim colors to give it a creepier feel and the story was not confusing.
But becoming the bullet man in this film was way over the top and it got to the point where it was really crazy; then calm.
Eric Bossick was a pretty decent actor and the only one I really cared about.
A couple bad things.
The story was a bit over the top and the voices were really hard to understand at points.
Other than that, it was a decent film..
Man, I don't ever try to understand these 'Tetsuo' movies anymore and simply go along for the ride.
And this surely is one intense and very visually orientated ride, that I overall really enjoyed.Once more, the budget has significantly gone up, when you compare it to the previous 2 movies and of course the original first student film that got made by Shinya Tsukamoto, before he created his first full length movie of the series.
And yes, I can definitely say that this is the best looking movie out of the series.
It's a movie with a great style and atmosphere over it.Yes, it's also definitely a weird movie, in which lots is happening and stuff is being left mostly to the imagination, or rather said; an actual story is hard to find.
Though I must admit that out of all the movies out of the series, this one is probably making the most sense with its story but that's not saying much really.
But then again, people won't watch this movie expecting a clever or provoking story.
They'll expect a visual and intense experience most likely, just like I did.
When you do, "Tetsuo: The Bullet Man" is a movie that won't disappoint you.And how awesome is it that the main character of this movie is the bullet man, who shoots dozens of bullets from his body, ever time he goes into Hulk-mode.
It's truly something awesome, that got done quite well visually, with some nice effects and make-up.You can also really definitely say that Shinya Tsukamoto keeps on improving as a director, though it might be argued that this is also thanks to the higher budgets he's receiving to work with.7/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
Someone is chasing the camera man....
I always wondered what happened to those who were at "The Blair Witch Project", they worked as the camera crew in this movie.
The action/fight scenes in this movie is too shaky for something to register on screen as if the camera man is being chased by the Blair Witch.I never heard of the director before but may have a very promising career.
The accent of the Japanese actors in this film is in a way difficult to understand at times.I totally agree with the two other reviewers that says "you probably have to be a fan to enjoy this" and "For Die-Hard fans only".
The story is weird and confusing at times but still in a way entertaining.Overall, the movie is watchable..
This was not a bad movie.
It didn't have the experimental look of the first Tetsuo flick; however, that's been done.
only much longer and with a mostly Japanese cast...The movie is about a man who, due to a genetic experiment with his mother, sprouted metal parts and guns when angered.
It was kind of like the Incredible Hulk if that movie had been directed by David Lynch.
The acting is mediocre, but the images are definitely powerful.If Francis Bacon made a movie with Rob Zombie, this is what it would look like....
Tetsuo: The Bullet Man. Anthony, a half-American/half-Japanese technological businessman in Tokyo, discovers after the cold-blooded murder of his son, when his anger towards the man responsible fuels a reaction he couldn't possibly have prepared for, that he has "android DNA" causing his body to slowly metamorphose into a machine.
Director Shinya Tsukamoto also stars as the villain who runs over Anthony's son Tom with a car—what's his motivation?
More story here—as Anthony learns a startling secret about his mother, attempts to console his grieving wife who wants revenge for the death of her child, and tries to keep from continuing to evolve into a metal monster—than one might expect from a Tetsuo film.
Too bad Tsukamoto's camera work and editing is so chaotic and epileptic you can't see a damn thing, hoping to actually decipher what is essentially incomprehensible on screen.
Strong story on the power of love and family, however, did surprise me, I must say.
Anthony reads of a scientific project on creating human androids, found in the notes of his father's underground office, which is where he learns the horrifying truth of what he actually is.
Included in the film is a group assigned to eradicate Anthony and Yuriko so that the dangers of an android killing machine rampaging through the streets, a potential threat which might bring blame to those behind Ride's project, would be silenced.
It seems that Tsukomoto's mysterious predator wants to encourage the anger of Anthony so that he will continue to lose control, ending in a climax possibly threatening global catastrophe.
Perhaps Tsukamoto's simply grown weary of his own patented brand of hyperkinetic cinema verite; or maybe the idea well's simply run dry; whatever the reason, TETSUO: THE BULLET MAN is a far cry from the two films that preceded it in this trilogy.
"Destroy all of our lazy peaceful dreams," Tsukamoto himself urges the Bullet Man, and it's his own filmmaking philosophy he's espousing.
But, while we once again have the pounding of hammers on anvils, the fingernails screeching down chalkboards, and the man metamorphosizing into a heavy metal monstrosity, there's something definitely LACKING this time around.
The TETSUO trilogy has lapsed into Formula.
Like PROJECT ARMS or THE GUYVER or any one of a dozen other manga or anime man-into-machine tales, TETSUO has grown stale.
|
tt4337414
|
Gopala Gopala
|
Kanneganti Gopala Rao is an atheist who owns a shop selling Hindu idols alongside his wife Meenakshi and son Moksha as well as his assistant Otthu. He obstructs a holy ritual involving his family, conducted by Siddheswar Maharaj, a fake godman. A sudden earthquake destroys his shop.
Rao approaches his insurance company who deny him assistance, claiming that an earthquake is an act of God. Rao decides to sue God but cannot find a lawyer willing to take the case on. He eventually engages Akbar Bhai, a disabled lawyer, who helps him file the case. Legal notices are sent to the insurance company as well as to Siddheshwar the priest and others from his group, as representatives of God. The court accepts the case, but Rao finds himself trapped among armed fundamentalists, with a creditor Ramji occupying the house and his wife having left him.
Rao is rescued by Gopala Govinda Hari, a consultant, who is revealed to the audience to be the deity Krishna in disguise. Gopala buys Rao's house from Ramji but allows Rao to stay with him. The lawsuit caused a public outcry, so on Gopala's advice, Rao gives an interview to the media about his views, which turns viral; public opinion swings in his favour. Hundreds of people whose insurance claims were rejected due to an Act of God clause turn up at Akbar's house and join the fight. Rao agrees to fight on behalf of all of them.
In the next court session, defending lawyer Shankar Narayana points out that Rao has no document that can prove the disaster was an Act of God. The judge orders Rao to present a written proof that will support his claim. Gopala gives Rao the Bhagavad Gita, Bible and Quran in which to find the answers. Rao subsequently points out a passage saying that "This world is a creation of God, and it is his will to allow it to grow or destroy", which strengthens his case. As he nears the end of his argument, he is stabbed by a staunch follower of Leeladhara.
Rao is rushed to the hospital where he slips into a coma due to heavy blood loss. Leeladhara then plans to make Rao a messenger of God and elevate him to a divine figure across the country after killing him. The lawsuit's verdict goes in Rao's favour and religious organisations are ordered by the court to pay the compensation to all the plaintiffs. After a month, Rao is rescued by Gopala, who later reveals his identity. Rao starts to believe in the existence of God. Meanwhile, Leeladhara, Gopika Matha, and Siddheshwar open a temple dedicated to Rao and accumulate millions in donations. Rao learns that his death is planned for Vijayadasami which coincides with the death of Sai Baba of Shirdi. He escapes with Gopala but is attacked by the priests' henchmen. Gopala manages to show them Narasimha in place of Rao, scaring them off.
Rao arrives to find his statues erected at the place where his shop once stood. He wades through the stunned crowd and breaks the statue, then admonishes the crowd about trusting in godmen. He advises them to search for God inside themselves rather than worshipping statues. Rao prevents the crowd from attacking the priests, asking for them to be allowed to leave unharmed but also insisting that they stop believing in them. After the completion of Ramlila, Rao goes back to Gopala to thank him, only to find him gone.
Rao's family arrive and they are reunited. He sees Gopala's key chain on the floor. When he is about to take it back, he hears Gopala's voice telling him to get rid of it. He throws it away, seeing it disappear into the sky with a flash as Gopala "signs off", promising him they will meet again.
|
satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Victory Venkatesh is apt in his role of an atheist, and carries off a mature character quite convincingly.
The way he has performed in all the courtroom scenes is quite good.
He brings in a lot of simplicity to the film, and all his scenes with Pawan Kalyan have been designed exceptionally well.
Yet another major highlight and best part of the film is Pawan Kalyan's character.
Pawan brings in an emotional effect and all the dialogues that he mouths are well written and thought provoking.
He has played his character with a lot of ease and is especially good in all the combination scenes with Venkatesh.
Pawan & Venkatesh actions are good.
If you haven't seen the original (Oh my God), then you must watch Gopala Gopala.Venkatesh gave a decent performance.Pawan Kalyan presence gives the movie enough liveliness and he was good.Mithun Chakraborty did fine.Pawan Kalyan fans will love the film and its a treat for then with two big stars sharing screen space.Pawan can undoubtedly give a golden underlining for this film "Gopala Gopala" which will remain as a feeling of proud for Power Star FansMind blowing Acting from Victory Venkatesh & Power Star Pavan Kalyan (This is Powerful Victory).
One Of The Best Movie in Film Industry - Hats off Pawan & Venki.
Hello DearOnes,Gopala Gopala set to wonderful start for the film industry at New year starting.
Irrespective of FANS everybody will loved and admit this movie as a Powerful Hit in industry.Every character, Every department hard work you can see in this movie.
Awesome Pawan Kalyan Happy Venkatesh Cool Shriya Saran Made the film with awesomeness performance.
Hatsoff to OMG -Hindi Director / Story writer to introducing this wonderful concept movie and Salute to Suresh Productions to introduced to Telugu Industry People with TWO Powerful Actors in industry like PAWAN KALYAN & VENKATESH DAGGUBATIThanks, RAGs. Far below my expectations....
OMG is more authentic and far better or to be more precise, original is always the best.
Telugu audiences who haven't watched the Bollywood version, OMG may like this film and those who have already watched the original version may find Hindi PK movie more interesting than this one.
Besides, the film may fall below the expectations of Pawan Kalyan fans whose hopes gone in vain.
Mithun Chakraborty does not have much scope to perform in his negative role.
Venky as usual justified his role but Paresh rawal performed very well in OMG compared to him.
Couldn't recommend to people who has already watched Hindi version.
original is best and remake is worst.
first of all remake of original film in another wood is like butter in bread.nothing new in movie, original version is very good, and no one can replace that plot in any woods.Director Dolly struck to the Original with out many deviations.
The first half of the film is strictly average with the all important God entrance poorly shot with worst CG work.
The second half of the film is decent with Pawan Kalyan luring audience with his Charishma.
Dialogues for Pawan Kalyan are written very well.
Production Values of Suresh Productions are dismal and Anoop Rubens' Back Ground Score can be a lot better.so my review is very genuine , all the characters done very well.but when compare to original it misses some punches and scenes.i expect something new in this film , after watching film it is replica as of original..
Story is good and Venkatesh acting is also extraordinary.
One of most willing to watch movie in 2015.Anoop Rubens music especially first song and Bhaje Bhaje song is excellent.
Picturiasation of these songs are also good.Pavan entry and acting is one of the big plus point of this success.
Every one can watch this movie with family.
Don't miss this.Gopala Gopala is a must watch as it is a hilarious entertainer.
Watch it for Power Star and Venkatesh.That is PAWANISM.
No point in wasting to make the same exact movie and making it worse amd cheap .
a good movie for the Telugu audience which makes us to think..
first of all i had no expectations on this movie as it is a remake of Hindi movie oh my god.
but after watching this remake i was satisfied with the stunning performance of pawan and venky ..
he might act in remake movies but he will act very well in any character making you to forget the original and coming to venky his acting in sentiment scenes is awesome..
so do watch the movie .
Gopala Gopala – Thought Provoking Entertainer.
Gopala Rao (Venkatesh) is an atheist who owns a shop that sells Hindu idols in Koti area.
When he claims the insurance, it's rejected as earthquake is an 'act of God'.
Rest of the story is all about how Lord Krishna (Pawan Kalyan) saves and powers Gopala Rao towards victory.Verdict:- On the whole, Gopala Gopala is a film which is made straight from the heart.
Icing on the cake are the stunning performances by Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan which make this film a thought provoking entertainer during this festive season..
Clean and decent thought provoking film.
But Gopala Gopala (and for that matter PK) handles the toughest challenge quite well.You know that this is a remake of Oh My God in Hindi.
Venkatesh delivers a stellar performance as he has done in other similar non action films like Drishyam, Seetamma vaakitlo....
He has a great comedy timing and that is used very well in the film.Its good to see a refreshing Shriya Saran - after all that roles she has been doing once her market has gone down.
No where in the film the director chose to show any skin show nor vulgarity - making this a real family entertainer.
There is not much for her to perform.Pawan Kalyan did his best in a different kind of role.
There is no need for a separate comedy track as Venkatesh himself carries superb comedy timing.
Some people after watching the film with me were commenting, in the end, they showed only HINDU God. But I think that is due to other religions especially Islam doesn't prescribe any form of Idol, that is justified.Overall, a decent family entertainer.
Must Watch Movie for the concept.
Power Star Pawan Kalyan's screen presence & mannerism, eternal & charming smile, inspiring & meaningful dialogues and divine look & dressing made it to next level.
Superb performance by Victory Venkatesh throughout the movie.
The one line which utters by Pawan Kalyan about Bhagavad Gita will make us to think about Dharma and humans.
Venkatesh has done a wonderful job once again.
We can watch this movie any number of times.
It has an excellent human values mixed with the commercial elements put together an awesome complete family entertainer, with divine acting from power star and natural acting from venky sets a trend to the film heros in telugu.
Must watch movie for the movie goers.Pawan Kalyan fans will love the film and its a treat for them watching with two big stars sharing the silver screen.Pawan can undoubtedly give a golden underlining for this film "Gopala Gopala" which will remain as a feeling of proud for Power Star Fans Mind blowing Acting from Victory Venkatesh & Power Star Pavan Kalyan..
Gopala Gopala movie is official remake of oh my god but the highlight of this movie is pawan kalyan and venkatesh which drives into huge expectations.first of all forget oh my god and don't expect to repeat the same scenes completely because original version include many controversial scenes this cannot be played here because pawan kalyan is involved politically in reallife so some of the oppoents may take benefit of this.1.oh my god runs seriously whereas Gopala Gopala runs in a entertaining way which connects well for telugu audience,and venkatesh done it perfectly,performance of godman are better than original.2.PAWAN KALYAN is the main highlight of this film who plays the role of Sri Krishna has done a fabulous job,one should have a divine and clean heart to do such roles.3.dialogues are the one of the highlights of this film which are very inspiring.sai madhav has done a great job.4.music is pretty good,bgm could be better.5.CG works are descent.6.venkatesh(who plays the role of atheist) can do these types of roles easily ah we know he is a legendary actorFinal verdict:Gopala GOpala is Strong Message oriented Movie which makes you to question yourself and that message was given by the youth icon of telugu people hope it reaches and connects to them this film runs in a entertaining way one can sit in seat and enjoy this film more than twice sure it will be a feast for venkatesh-pawan kalyan fans.
Done watching Gopala Gopala A short review: A perfect "Multistarrer" Plus: *Pawan kalyan presence and his smile *Venkatesh Daggubati *Posani *Songs especially "Bhaje Bhaje" Minus *Editing in some parts of the movie where it was expected much *Background score will surely disappoint you As expected the movie starts in exciting phase which continues till the end for sure.
Verdict: Pawan kalyan and venky's fascinating Drama.A must watch for all.Go with your family.
Standing Ovation for Pawan in Gopala Gopala Theatres Venkatesh Daggubati and Pawan kalyan has done a great job.
As most of the audience are aware that this movie is a remake of the Hindi movie Oh My God !!
The Power packed performance of the lead cast has kept the audience stick to their seat.
Definitely this movie runs only on the start cast.
Yes Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan have given their best to make this movie work.
Venkatesh has carried the movie on his shoulders during the first half and from there Pawan joins him to run the show.
Felt like Shriya was not at all needed in the movie anyways she delivered what was expected from her.
Posani Krishna Murali and Mithun Chakraborty have done justice to their roles.
All the character artists have done well.Technical credits:Major credits to be given to the Music composer Anup Rubens for keeping the movie live from beginning till the end with his outstanding Back ground music.It is for sure not an easy task for any director Dolly to direct to superstars of the Tollywood movie industry and we can say that he was able to meet (not exceed) the expectations of the audience.Photography is OK.
VFX could be even more better not sure felt like the same was not given much importance in the movie.Editing has not been impressive, few scenes could easily be chopped off to help the movie become even more entertaining.Dance movements especially in the song "Baaje Dhol Baaje" are cool and very apt for Pawan kalyan.On the whole there is no doubt that this movie will turn out to become one of the must watch family entertainer in the year 2015..
The most awaited movie of the season, Gopala Gopala is out in theaters.
Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan's combination has generated huge hype for this film, which is a remake of Bollywood hit, Oh My God. Venkatesh played the role of a commoner who questions the existence of God and Pawan Kalyan plays the God who gives answer to all his questions.What is it about?Gopala Rao (Venkatesh) is an atheist who doesn't believe in God. He sells the idols of Gods and makes a fortune out of it.
One day his shop completely collapses due to earthquake and the insurance company rejects to give him any compensation as it is an 'Act of God'.
Gopala Rao takes this to court and files case against God. When Gopala Rao falls in trouble Lord Krishna (Pawan Kalyan) comes to his rescue.Performances:Venkatesh:Venkatesh is very good as a common middle class man, who doesn't trust in the God. His character is entertaining as well as enlightening.
He is too good in the court scenes.
This is yet another matured role for him after Drishyam.Pawan Kalyan:Pawan Kalyan is undoubtedly the biggest asset to this film.
Pawan Kalyan who is usually known for energetic roles has to stay away from all his antics and look pleasant throughout the film.
He did a very good job in getting the Lord Krishna act right without hitting a single bad note as an actor.
Watch out for his simple yet effective dance moves in Bhaje Bhaje song.Others:Shriya has a very limited role and she is alright as the middle-class housewife.
Mithun Chakravarthy who also did the same character in the original is too good with his body language and mannerisms.
Krishnudu is good as the loyal assistant of Venkatesh.
Rest of the cast chipped in with decent performances.Technicalities: Direction:Kishore Kumar Parthasani did some subtle changes to the script without disturbing the soul of the original.
This is a faithful remake of Oh My God, which comes close to it in terms of execution.
We expect better output from a film having such a huge star cast.Thumbs Up:Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan Kishore's Direction ConceptThumbs Down:Slow pace Weak EndingAnalysis:Oh My God itself is a well-made satirical film which was backed up by superb performance of Paresh Rawal.
However Telugu remake of Oh My God chose to have big stars to back the content.
People expect a paisa vasool masala entertainer from this star cast.
One section of audience who goes with very high expectations looking at the lead actors, will feel disappointed with the film.
They don't get their ticket's worth even with Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan in the lead.
It would be hard for die-hard fans of Pawan Kalyan to accept him in a subdued supporting role.
The other section of audience who look for different entertainment will be pleased with Gopala Gopala.
It offers ample entertainment and remains faithful to the subject irrespective of the star cast.
They will give thumbs up to everyone who has dared to make this attempt.Gopala Gopala is neither a typical commercial entertainer nor a family drama.
Gopala Gopala is a decent film with strong content.
This film doesn't need any stars as it has enough potential in the content.
But the makers felt that having big stars could take this film to wider audience.
This theory could also impact the film's result as audience will expect more from its stars.
Pawan and Venkatesh did their best to shoulder the film and they will play a huge role in the box office prospects of it.
Gopala Gopala is a remake of OMG but its far more better than the original one.Victory Venkatesh done a fantastic job.
Being a super star, he made his middle class man character reach the audience.
Powe Star Pawan Kalyan is simply superb.
His style and presence took the movie entirely different mood of the audience.
Definitely PK is huge plus for this movie..
He given his 100% as usual.Families with Kids and retired elders must watch this for some plain and pleasant entertainment..
I feel gopala gopala as B-town movie(north nativity) as locations are also similar to OMG.Agreed remakes are tested-and-proved, but it doesn't stop a filmmaker from throwing in some creativity to give it a personal touch.
With a thought-provoking universally appealing subject, there's so much one can do with a film like OMG.But sadly director Kishore Kumar Pardasani resorts to merely retelling the story in a different language with different characters barring Mithun who's retained from the Hindi version.For those who've seen the original, it's unlikely that the remake will keep them hooked.
And for others, it might come across as a refreshing change from the stink of commercial cinema which usually serves stories that have been milked dry.Verdict: No excitement after watching movie.
Much needed remake for Telugu people unfortunately goes wrong!.
We have had a decent history of remaking movies.
In short, Gopala Gopala is written and directed by somebody who either did not quite understand the essence of "Oh My God!" or could not make what he intended to.
The movie starts with an atheist Gopal Rao (Venkatesh) struggling with the devotion of his friends and family towards god and that does not make any sense to him.
The rest of the film goes around how Gopala files cases against god his committee managers (Godmen) to get his money.When I watched Oh My God!
and PK movies, I felt there is a necessity to remake any of these films and show to people who cannot understand Hindi.
It takes a Pawan Kalyan to keep you awake through the boring and illogical logics.
Most actors except Venkatesh and Pawan Kalyan seem to have over done it.
Mithun Chakraborty's role did wonders in the original but its poorly dealt with here.
Another huge let down for the movie is Pawan Kalyan's role as god Krishna who guides Gopala through tough times.
Well, you know that because of that dialogue where Venkatesh says "It's you who guided me through all this".
Otherwise you never know what Pawan Kalyan is doing in this film.
His role was more like a brand ambassador to the film than actor.
Overall, I wish this movie is only better.
You may watch it because you don't want to miss a Pawan Kalyan film simply because it is not good!.
Gopala Gopala is easily one of the most thought provoking films made in recent times in Telugu.
There are dialogs like "Nayakudu ante Nativity Laud , Gelichevadu Laud Gelipinche VDU" and "Manishemo Raayini Good dividing chestnut, Kansan AA devoid mandolin mannish GA chest he Charla" which will stay with you long after watching the film.2) The film's story itself evokes a lot of empathy for Gopal Rao's (Venkatesh) character.
Initially, he tries to play by the rules in the beginning and when all doors are shut, he begins to question the logic behind the rules which suggest that no insurance company is liable to the 'Act of God'.3) Pawan Kalyan's entry into the film is the most whistle-worthy moment in the film and there's an unusual calmness to his entire characterization in the film.
|
tt0848537
|
Epic
|
17-year-old Mary Katherine, or M.K., moves in with her eccentric scientist father Professor Bomba who has been searching for tiny humanoid soldiers called Leafmen. They protect the forest that Bomba lives near from wicked creatures called Boggans and their malevolent leader Mandrake. An independent young soldier named Nod decides to quit much to the ire of the no-nonsense Leafmen leader Ronin.
The queen of the forest, Queen Tara, must choose an heir to her throne and goes out to a field of leaf pods, guarded by a laid-back slug named Mub and a wannabe Leafman snail named Grub. Immediately after she chooses a pod, the Boggans attack. Tara flees the area with the pod, and though her bodyguards do their best to protect her, they are soon overwhelmed by the sheer number of Boggans. Eventually, Ronin arrives for her and the pair fly off on his hummingbird mount. They are then attacked by Mandrake and his son Dagda. Dagda is killed by Ronin, but the former shoots Tara beforehand.
Meanwhile, M.K. decides to leave after having an argument with Bomba about his research. Before she can leave, Bomba's dog Ozzy runs into the woods. While looking for Ozzy, M.K. sees Tara falling. Dying, Tara gives her the pod and uses her magic to shrink her. She tells M.K. to take the pod to a Glowworm named Nim Galuu before she dies, and M.K. joins Ronin and the Leafmen, along with Mub and Grub. Ronin discovers that Nod has entered a race against other creatures and bugs on birds. Nod goes back on a deal with a tough bullfrog named Bufo to throw the race. Before Bufo and his two henchmen can feed Nod to a snake for not throwing the race, Ronin intervenes and orders them to leave. A reluctant Nod joins him, M.K., Mub, and Grub after hearing about Queen Tara's death which Bufo overhears.
Ronin, Nod, M.K., Mub, and Grub eventually track Nim Galuu down. He then leads them down to the scroll library, where M.K. discovers Tara's brief message before shrinking her, and a message that will get her back to normal size. When Ronin leaves, Nod takes M.K. on a deer ride and they begin to fall in love. Meanwhile, Mandrake has had the Boggans bring Bufo to him, finding out the location of the pod. Mandrake goes to Nim Galuu's place to steal the pod, which, if it blooms in darkness will help Mandrake destroy the forest. He takes the pod and kidnaps Mub and Grub. Ronin scolds Nod for not being there to protect the pod. To get into Boggan territory undiscovered, M.K., Nod, and Ronin set out to Bomba's house to get some disguises, where M.K. learns that the Leafmen have deliberately been leading Bomba off their trail. Bomba sees that he has visitors and captures M.K., fainting when he sees her. M.K. marks the location of Moonhaven on a map Bomba has made of the forest before rejoining Nod and Ronin.
When they reach the Boggan land Ronin distracts the Boggans while M.K. and Nod rescue Mub, Grub, and the pod. Mandrake discovers them and orders the Boggans to stop them. M.K., Nod, Mub, and Grub escape alive, but Ronin sacrifices himself to ensure their escape. Before the full moon can sprout the pod at Moonhaven, Mandrake's bats block the light, causing the pod to begin sprouting in darkness. The Leafmen set out to fight the Boggans; M.K. tries to get help from her father by visiting his various cameras he had set in the forest. However, upon regaining consciousness, Bomba believes that he didn't really see M.K. and that he has been insane all these years, and shuts down all his cameras. He changes his mind when he sees a red push-pin that M.K. had put on his map.
Bomba is overjoyed to see that he has been right and he follows M.K. to Moonhaven. M.K. uses Bomba's iPod to make bat sounds, luring Mandrake's bats away. Meanwhile, Mub and Nim Galuu try to stop Mandrake from reaching the pod, but are unsuccessful. Just then, Ronin appears, bearing scars and bruises from the Boggans. Mandrake manages to outdo him, but Ronin is defended by Nod, who finally realizes the importance of teamwork. Before Mandrake can obtain his victory, the pod blooms in moonlight, defeating the Boggans, and sealing Mandrake into a nearby tree.
The chosen heir is the flower child who helped save Tara earlier in the film. Grub becomes a Leafman, Nod and Ronin reconcile, and Nod and M.K. kiss before M.K. is returned to her original size. After reuniting with Bomba and becoming his assistant, the human family still keeps regular contact with their small friends as they continue the research of their world.
|
good versus evil, fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0033029
|
Second Chorus
|
Danny O'Neill (Fred Astaire), and Hank Taylor (Burgess Meredith) are friends and rival trumpeters with "O'Neill's Perennials," a college band. Both have managed to prolong their college careers by failing seven years in a row. At a performance, Ellen Miller (Paulette Goddard) catches Danny's and Hank's eyes. She serves them a notice for her boss, a debt collector, but the fast-talking O'Neill and Taylor soon have her working as their manager.
Tired of losing gigs to the Perennials, Artie Shaw, playing himself, comes to woo Ellen away to be his booking manager. She tries to get Danny and Hank an audition for Shaw's band, but their jealous hi-jinks get them fired.
Ellen talks Shaw into letting rich wannabee musician J. Lester Chisholm (Charles Butterworth) back a concert. It looks like the jig is up when Hank pretends to be Ellen's jealous husband, and then her brother. Danny and Hank manage get Chisholm back on board, then get Shaw to agree to put Danny's song into the show. All they have to do is keep Chisholm and his mandolin, which he wants to play in the concert, away from Shaw until after the show; the solution is sleeping pills to knock Chisholm, and incidentally Hank, out.
To Ellen's relief, Danny finally acts professionally, arranging his number for the show, which Shaw says "has really grown up into something special." He hands the baton to Danny, who successfully dance-conducts his own composition.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
A couple of good dance sequences - one with Paulette Goddard, who is not impressive on the floor, and one where he's tap-dancing while conducting Artie Shaw's orchestra.
The plot is dismal, Burgess Meredith as comic relief is faintly amusing at best, though in his defense the script gave him very little to work with.Fans of swing will want to see "Second Chorus", though, for the musical sequences.
It's worth renting for that sequence alone.It's a real shame that the director couldn't work out a sequence in which Astaire dances to Shaw's clarinet - playing, say, "Begin the Beguine", or "Frenesi", or "Traffic Jam", or any other his many other hits.
In this 1941 Paramount film Fred Astaire has a new dancing partner in Paulette Goddard.
'Cause He's Got Paulette!" Mostly Astaire dances solo in this story about two musicians, Astaire and Burgess Meredith, who try vainly to get jobs in Artie Shaw's band.
The number, viewed today, is not only totally professional; it's good.Interesting note that Goddard's other male lead was Burgess Meredith, whom she went on to marry years later as she was still married at the time to Charlie Chaplin..
(but not so the film.)The Wonderful Fred Astaire and the vibrant, young, healthy and sexy Paulette Goddard struggled valiantly with this picture.
but then that is my weakness) I liked the little Russian number that Mister Astaire had some fun with.Burgess Meredith and Fred Astaire actually were pretty snappy as a comedy team.
That's what he does best, so it was disappointing not to see much of that in "Second Chorus."Although I thought Charles Butterworth's character was stupid, I really enjoyed seeing a young Burgess Meredith and it's always a treat to see Paulette Goddard, one of the real beauties of the 1940s.
Overall, this was a good- hearted story and when Astaire danced, he was fantastic, as always.The songs are in here are good and band-leader Artie Shaw even showed he could act, too.
In this 1940 film, Fred Astaire (Danny) plays a 7th year college student (he was only 41 at the time), who keeps flunking courses so he can stay on in town and play trumpet in a very successful dance band.
Fred & Burgess are vying for the affections of the lovely Paulette Goddard (Ellen), who meets Fred at a dance, and later takes a job as his booking agent and secretary.Ellen is hired away by Artie Shaw, and the remainder of the movie takes place in New York.
Charles Butterworth plays the unfortunate Mr. Chisholm, who is the butt of many of the jokes and mishaps.Not very original, and on the DVD I saw, pretty muddy, but still it's Fred Astaire, and there is one nice dance number featuring Fred as a band conductor who just busts out dancing.
There are also some nice big band numbers, and Paulette Goddard makes a nice foil for Astaire.Worth seeing, if you are a Fred Astaire fan or just love big bands and Artie Shaw..
Dancing And Band Leading Don't Mix. After Fred Astaire finished his RKO contract in 1939 with The Story of Vernon and Irene Castle, he freelanced for the rest of his career.
His first film under the Paramount banner was Second Chorus which had him co-starring with marrieds to be Paulette Goddard and Burgess Meredith and big bandleader Artie Shaw.
There seems to be a consensus among the reviewers that this was Astaire's worst musical film and I'm not going to dispute that.Of course second rate Fred Astaire is better than most and he does have some nice dance numbers, but even they're not up to his usual creative genius.
Anyway she got a long term Paramount contract for the Forties and much better parts including three DeMille films.As an actor, Artie Shaw was a great clarinetist and bandleader.
His band has a few great numbers though I would have liked to have seen Shaw reprise his all time classic instrumental hit, Begin the Beguine.The film starts off kind of dumb to begin with.
We're asked to believe that the 41 year old Fred Astaire and his pal Burgess Meredith are a pair of perennial college students who keep flunking courses to stay in college so they can advertise their band as a college orchestra.
But unless you like Fred Astaire and/or Artie Shaw you might well skip Second Chorus..
There are not many strong points to "Second Chorus", and it is really only watchable because of Fred Astaire, whose talent and charisma provide for some good moments.
The whole premise of the college band does not work for a moment, and there is never a time when the viewer is not overly conscious that the whole situation is contrived.To be sure, some of Astaire's most enjoyable pictures have lightweight plots, which allow him and the rest of the cast to be the center of attention.
It's a shame that these reviewers missed the musical subtlety of the performance--a slightly different but equally powerful direction for Fred.For example, there's one number where Astaire dances a fabulous romp while conducting a band.
Second Chorus has two good scenes; the one where Fred and Paulette take the floor for some good old fashioned dancing at the end of the I'll Dig It number; and the one where Fred conducts the band and taps at the same time.Plotwise it is wafer-thin.
Astaire and Burgess Meredith play rather over-aged students (Fred Astaire a 'young man'??) who play in a band called the Perennials, a college band who start to take all the bookings from more established outfits like Artie Shaw's, thanks to their enterprising manager Goddard.
Artie Shaw and his band appear and play great music, although he was no actor - you'd think all those dumb movie star brides would have taught him some tricks of the trade ...
Charles Butterworth also appears as a lousy mandolin player who finances a big concert for the band.Fairly enjoyable despite the shortcomings but no great shakes when up against Fred's best work with Ginger..
Arte Shaw's music is great, and the Jazz numbers while perhaps unknown by today's standards should not be overlooked, Paulette Goddard from her loss 2 years before as Scarlett shows she is a fine performer, and Burgess Meredith 24 years before Batman and 35 years before Rocky, also demonstrated he is a really good actor..
At 41 years of age, we are meant to believe that Fred is a perennial college student in his mid-twenties, who has just graduated and is vying with his ex-room-mate (Burgess Meredith) both for a job with Artie Shaw's band and the affections of Paulette Goddard.The songs are few and far between, and (with the exception of "Poor Mr. Chislom") not very good.
Artie Shaw's band adds a little more pop to the music than is found in most Astaire films.
The only things that save Second Chorus from being a complete disaster are Astaire's dancing and Artie Shaw and his band's music.The writing is horrendous, managing to make even Astaire's character dislikable, as he does truly nasty things to his "friend," the equally dislikably nasty Burgess Meredith.Charles Butterworth, who is supposed to be the comic foil in this picture, is as lame an actor as I've seen.Finally, the look of the film is awful, with harsh lighting and shadows.
However, if you're a die hard Astaire and/or big band fan, it's worth fast-forwarding through the dialog to get to any scene where Fred's dancing or Artie and his band are playing..
Music is Great, Cast Is OK Too. This is the last film in which Artie Shaw would actually do some acting.
Artie Shaw would be married 8 times during his lifetime.Fred Astaire has a sequence conducting & dancing Shaws Orchestra, and it is an interesting sequence.
Instead, there are just three lack-lustre routines: a brief mock- Cossack dance, a decent tap routine at the end (but nothing he hadn't done far better in other movies) and a routine with Paulette Goddard who simply was not a dancer which shows in both the performance and the limited choreography presumably intended to keep within what she could do (dancing apart, she is probably the best thing in the film, beautiful and sparkling).In addition, what songs there are, by Artie Shaw and Johnny Mercer, are below par.
Shaw's band makes up for this with some good numbers and Shaw unexpectedly turns out to be a respectable enough actor, albeit in some undemanding scenes.But I can't help wondering if it was the presence of Shaw who wrote the score that resulted in the limited amount of Astaire routines – the big band numbers may not have left enough time for dances.
SECOND CHORUS (Paramount, 1940), directed by H.C. Potter, from an original story by Frank Cavett, was an unlikely production for which song-and-dance man Fred Astaire ever appeared.
While much of the plot devotes itself to the current phase known as "the big band era," featuring band leader Artie Shaw as himself, and with more emphases on comedy during the non musical portions, for a Fred Astaire film, this might prove disappointing for having the least amount of dancing of any Astaire musical up to this point.The story starts off with a social function of a New England university where students and guests are being entertained by the band called Danny O'Neill's University Perennials.
Roommates Danny (Fred Astaire) and Hank Taylor (Burgess Meredith), trumpet players who've remained in college for seven years to take advantage of lucrative college band bookings, take notice of their friend Stu's (Frank Melton) date, a young brunette named Ellen Miller (Paulette Goddard).
Lester Chisholm (Charles Butterworth).With music and lyrics by Johnny Mercer, Hal Borne, Bernie Hannigan and Artie Shaw, the motion picture soundtrack includes: "Second Chorus," "Sugar" (instrumental); "Everything's Jumpin'" "I Ain't Hep to That Step" (sung by Fred Astaire/ danced by Astaire and Paulette Goddard); "The Ivy Shuffle," "Sweet Sue," "Love of My Life" (sung by Astaire); "I'm Yours," "Double Mellow," "Poor Mr. Chisholm," "The Moon is Shining," "Hoe Down," "Swing Concerto" and "Poor Mr. Chisholm" Marked by none of the visual scales of the RKO Radio musicals where Astaire peaked during his six year screen partnership (1933-1939) with Ginger Rogers, for his Paramount debut, the script finds him, along with dramatic actor Burgess Meredith, in their only pairing, enacting that as friendly rivals, in something much better served by Bing Crosby and Bob Hope, playing tricks on one another in order to either get the girl or land the job in Shaw's band.
One amusing scene occurs where Hank (Meredith) rearranges the musical notes of Danny's (Astaire) song sheet prior to his audition with Shaw, and trumpet playing out of synchronization with the other players to offbeat tunes causing him not to get the job.
While her dancing was adequate, but no match to the style of Rogers, Goddard never danced on screen again; and the "Swing Concerto" finale where Astaire not only conducts the band, but tap dances and plays the trumpet simultaneously.
Worth it For Artie Shaw & Fred Astaire Dancing Numbers.
"Second Chorus" is an underwhelming Paramount musical filmed in black and white and stars Fred Astaire.
Astaire is trying to hook on with Artie Shaw's band as a trumpet player while chasing Paulette Goddard around and trying to shake her free from buddy Burgess Meredith, also a trumpet player.
Fred Astaire reportedly considered Second Chorus his worst film, and after seeing it I have to agree.
Paulette Goddard has very little to work with mostly is not the best of dancers, a contender for Astaire's worst partner in this regard, but she looks entrancing and some of her comic timing amuses, would have done even more if the material was stronger.Second Chorus has some nice songs (if nowhere near the most memorable score in an Astaire film), especially Poor Mr Chisholm and Love of my Life, and a whimsical and suitably energetic incidental score.
Choreographically, it's not the most inspired but it's far from leaden or amateurish either, while it is not classic Astaire Poor Mr Chisholm is a lot of fun and I Dig It is cleverly choreographed and charmingly danced (even if Paulette Goddard's inexperience as a dancer does show at times here but her personality shines).
A large part of me does wish that Me and the Ghost Upstairs was kept in the film, it is a delightful scene and would have been the clear highlight if kept intact, a number so good that it deserved more than just being featured on regional DVDs.Charles Butterworth does bring some pleasing whimsy to his role and is the one character that we feel a small amount of sympathy towards, but mostly the comedy is not very well-written in Second Chorus and even Butterworth struggles in making it funny and some of his humour grates.
Meredith is occasionally amusing here in a role where his sense of comedy is not very well-used but his character is even more loathsome and irritatingly grating than Astaire's, another victim of not-so-good writing, and anybody who knows him from his numerous villain roles will find it very difficult to shake off that feeling here.While there is nothing wrong with the music, singing and dancing, there should have been much more of them.
with the first act being his dance partnership with his sister and his second act being his RKO years."Second Chorus" is not a widely known film, but it will probably be enjoyable to any fan of Fred Astaire.
The story is that Danny O'Neill (Fred Astaire) and Hank Taylor (Burgess Meredith) are leaders of a band.
Also, if you're watching this film to see lots of Astaire's wonderful dancing, you'll likely be somewhat disappointed.
Rather dull musical comedy starring Fred Astaire and Paulette Goddard.
Believe it or not, frisky Fred Astaire (as Danny O'Neill) and boyish Burgess Meredith (as Hank Taylor) are a pair of trumpet-playing college roommates.
They meet pretty secretary Paulette Goddard (as Ellen Miller), who dances and romances Mr. Astaire and Mr. Meredith (one will win her on-screen, one will win her off-screen).
The Astaire/Goddard highlight is easily "Dig It (I Ain't Hep to That Step)" as you'll see, and don't expect any competition (unless you want to include the version by Les Brown and Doris Day).*** Second Chorus (12/3/40) H.C. Potter ~ Fred Astaire, Paulette Goddard, Burgess Meredith, Artie Shaw.
In this case, Artie Shaw is convinced by lovely manageress Paulette Goddard to try out the services of trumpet players (and perennial university-flunkers!) Fred Astaire and Burgess Meredith but, given the rivalry resulting from their choice of instrument and mutual feelings for Goddard herself, they end up sabotaging each other's chances for both spots.
You know a film is in trouble when middle-aged Burgess Meredith and Fred Astaire play college students!!!
Then, how the two best pals try to sabotage each other for the love of their young manager (Paulette Goddard, who would end up marrying Meredith in real life!) during a public audition with Artie Shaw's band isn't realistic considering the alleged closeness of their friendship.
Toss in Charles Butterworth as the mandolin playing benefactor of a concert Shaw is giving and a plot to keep him off stage with his mandolin during the performance, and there's little to do but groan.In spite of the fact that next to Joan Fontaine, Goddard was considered Astaire's weakest dancing partner, she actually does good in their one number together.
The big band sequences feature some fun if unmemorable jazz music, and Astaire's dance while conducting Shaw's band seems strangely out of place.
Second Chorus as a movie is a little disappointing to say the least.Paulette Goddard, despite the great acting ability and the great beauty she possessed, is alarmingly miscast when it came to anything slightly musical.The Characters portrayed by Fred Astaire and Burgess Merideth are both shockingly underused - Astaire is given but two or three dance routines at the most and the odd song, whilst Merideth who was obviously the comic relief was given very poor material and very little to do, especially when both were capable of so much more.
He was by all accounts portraying a man named Artie Shaw, a clarinet playing band leader and no acting was really required.
He was in the film purely to showcase his music and his orchestra and it must be said, he fulfilled his contract perfectly.Only two or three scenes save this already obscure picture from the deeper obscurity it would so otherwise deserve.1) The scene where Astaire having had his Trumpet solo completely rewritten by Merideth for his long awaited, life changing and career defining audition with Artie Shaws band, starts blasting out bum notes and discordant musical passages that foul up the entire song.
In this film it seems he talks more than he actually plays.3) Astaire again conducting Shaws band to "Poor Mr.Chisolm" while tapping his merry little head off.
Interesting, fun and full of entertainment starring Fred Astaire and Burgess Meredith, two guys who purposely fail their subjects in college each year so that they can stay on and play in the band and make money for themselves.Owing money for encyclopedias purchased is the cause for them to meet Paulette Goddard, secretary to the guy who is ready to take them to court for non-payment.
Involving themselves with the Artie Shaw band, they do an excellent job of sabotaging each other and become venomous to the band industry.Of course, they are able to get back but they soon get involved with an investor who thinks he can go and play music as well as having intentions with Goddard as well.Lots of fun and nostalgia for movie-goers here..
So of course, he dances to Artie Shaw's music.
The musical numbers with Artie Shaw and his Orchestra are the only real reason to watch this one unless it's the only Astaire film you have not yet seen and really HAVE to complete that list.
|
tt0093578
|
Mr. India
|
Mogambo (Amrish Puri) is a brilliant yet insane General whose goal is to conquer India. From his island, he monitors the evil-doings perpetrated by his henchmen. All of his subordinates know the formal salute "Hail Mogambo!", emphasising his complete authority over his minions.
Arun Verma (Anil Kapoor) is an orphan and a street-walking violinist who rents a large, old house. There, he houses a dozen or so orphaned children and takes care of them with the help of his cook and caretaker Calendar (Satish Kaushik). Arun is poor, owes debts to the local food merchant Roopchand (Harish Patel), and is overdue to pay the landlord Maniklal (Yunus Parvez). In spite of these problems, Arun tries to look on the bright side of every situation. As time goes by, Calendar reminds Arun that the cost of running the home continues to rise. Arun decides to rent out the room on the first floor. When he goes to the local newspaper to run an advertisement for the room, he meets Seema Sahni (Sridevi) and makes her his tenant. They get off to a rocky start but Seema eventually becomes friends with everyone.
One day, Arun receives a mysterious letter from a family friend, Dr. Sinha (Ashok Kumar), who reveals that Arun's late father had created a device that would make its user invisible. With the directions in the letter, Arun, accompanied by his ward Jugal, enters his father's laboratory and finds the device. The device is in the shape of a gold watch worn on the wrist. When it is activated, it makes the wearer invisible to the naked eye. This invisibility is pervasive except for one flaw: when red light is focused on the wearer, he becomes visible. Arun and Jugal decide to keep the device a secret between them. Seema goes to a lavish party hosted by Daaga (Sharat Saxena) and Teja (Ajit Vachani), where she performs a song under the guise of a Hawaiian dancer. She is nearly killed by the criminals after her disguise is spoiled, but Arun invisibly rescues her, styling himself "Mr. India". Thereafter, Seema falls in love with her rescuer, though not attracted to his civilian alter ego.
Mr. India later defeats Mogambo's men in several encounters, foiling their criminal plans. Mogambo's computer-aided intelligence teams reveal that Mr. India's specific actions against the gambling den bring benefit to Arun Verma. Mogambo has bombs disguised as toys, planted in places where children can find them. One of the bombs kills Arun's youngest and dearest charge, Tina, driving Arun to immense grief. Arun, Seema, Calendar, and the surviving children are brought before Mogambo. Mogambo tortures them so that they reveal Mr. India's true identity and the location of the invisibility device. Arun eventually admits to this when Mogambo threatens to drop two children into a pit of acid; but because Arun has dropped the device, he cannot become invisible to prove himself. Frustrated, Mogambo has them sent into the dungeons.
However, they are all able to escape. Mogambo activates four ICBMs, which are poised to destroy all of India. Arun confronts him, and the two fight. When Arun has overcome Mogambo, he deactivates the launch which culminates in the missiles detonating on the launch-pad. Arun, Seema, Calendar, and the children escape, while Mogambo's fortress is destroyed. Mogambo dies inside the big fireball caused by the explosion of the missiles on the launch pad.
Arun's dual identity remains a secret to most people, while he returns to his former life.
|
good versus evil
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Superb classic.
This Classic from the eighties is one of the few sci fi films to be produced in India incidentally it is also one of the best.
Directed by shekhar kapur of "Elizabeth" fame Mr India is one of his earlier works.
The cinematography may not be great but the rest sure is!
An interesting and intelligent story that makes for full on family entertainment.
This movie will make you smile laugh and cry and bring out all the other various emotions in you.
Sridevi players the bubbly cheerful news reporter and Anil kapoor the Super Hero who upon discovering the invisibility formula sets out to avenge the worlds evils.
Aka Mogambo played by the greatest villain ever to grace the Indian screen Amrish puri.
His mogambo still strikes terror into the hearts of kids.
Anil Kapoor & Sridevi's relationship is more of a homage to the Louis lane Clark Kent type relationship seen in several superhero movies.
The rain and wind dance number by sridevi.
could easily give the new crop of actresses a run for their money.
brilliantly acted and executed her dance with the invisible man is simply unforgettable and who can forget her cheeky "hava hawi" number.
you can watch this film time and time again and not get bored.
The special effects may be basic but the story and acting are just brilliant.
directors and actors of today take a note.
Its not just about the visuall appearance.
its also about soul that films of today lack which this film is full of.
watch it and be truly entertained one of my definite favourites....
Mr India- Salim- Javed's last classic.
This movie was a firm childhood favourite of mine and it still hasn't lost its magic.
This was the movie that sent Anil Kapoor into stardom and the pairing of Anil Kapoor and Sridevi was used in other movies.
The scripting was absolutely perfect, the songs were brilliant (my favourite was Hawaa Hawaii) and add to a mammoth budget and you have a bollywood classic.This is essentially a kids film, which is a market rarely catered to in Bollywood.
Amrish Puri gave the performance of a lifetime( who can forget his Mogambo Khush Hus dialogue).
There are many other memorable characters, like for instance Sridevi's boss or Mogambo's henchman Goga and Daga.
This movie ranks amongst other Salim Javed's best work, for instance Sholay and Shaan.
Tremendous fun from start to finish..
the movie has soul.
As a wise young fellow mentioned, what makes this movie so watchable today is that it has soul.
Watching it after 15 years, it brings back a lot of childhood memories.
The movie is just full of entertainment and does not look outdated at all.
Shekar Kapur's direction is fantastic.
Because of his direction, the movie moves on a constant pace and the scenes aren't overdone in a silly way.
Sridevi's performance is, as always, top-notch.
Anil Kapoor is very likable.
The kids are good too (but annoying in the songs and dances).
The songs are funny and catchy giving us Sridevi's memorable Hawa Hawai and the sensual sari dance in Kaate nahi.
Of course, who could forget one of Amrish Puri's most memorable roles as Mogambo?
In my humble opinion this is definitely one of the most entertaining movies that I could watch over and over again with friends or family.
If you want to be entertained and have a good time, watch Mr. India..
Excellent.
"Mugambo Kush Hua (Mugambo is pleased," is the famous line that was repeated several times by the late Amrish Puri in this 1980's classic movie.
The movie stars Anil Kapoor as "Mr India," who can turn invisible when he needs to fight against the villain, Mugambo, but has to be very careful of "red light" at all times, Sri Devi as journalist who believes that Mr India exists and tries to find him, Satish Kaushik, as Anil Kapoor's friend "Calendar," who helps him to look after a bunch of orphaned children, one of which is none other than Aftab Shivdasani, now a Bollywood heartthrob.
The movie itself is a science fiction, which was first for its type from Bollywood and what has made it even more memorable was the special effects used by the director, Boney Kapoor.
The songs and the music are also very memorable and especially: "Hum Karte Hai Pyar Mr. India Se (I Love Mr India), "Hawa Hawaii," and not to mention the seductive song by the late Kishore Kumar, "I Love You," which enabled him to receive a film fare award for the best song.Conclusion: Excellent movie which can be enjoyed with your family.
Watchout for the re - make of this movie..
One of the only Indian movies worth watching..
In the fast growing world of Indian cinema, it's hard to find a good, family movie.
Thankfully, Mr. India fitted and continues to fit this category with great humor, romance, and is overall the only good Indian movie I've seen.
It's funny and doesn't include submissive women, hostile violence but is made for the entire family and is definitely worth watching.
And, it has English subtitles =).
All time best.
The movie is the best movie i have ever seen in my life.The direction is brilliant.Screenplay is fantastic.The dialogues are brilliant.The cinematogrpahy is excellent.Excellent Cheoreography.The story is brilliant.It tells about Arun who is an orphan.He is the care taker of a few orphaned kids.One day he goes and gets a gadget.He becomes invisible.He can only be seen through red light.One day a Journalist Seema is fascinated over him.A villain Mogambo wants him.He is being taken to Mogambos lab.he loses the gadget.With the help of Seema he saves the day.Excellent.Anil is brilliant.Sridevi was brilliant too.Amrish was brilliant too.The kids were quite annoying.The music is fantastic.The comedy was wwonderful.The singers do a good job.This is a must see.A taotal masala flick with Romance,Comedy,Action and Musical.
The Indian family version of 'The Invisible Man'.
From the film industry which releases the largest number of movies in the world (more than Hollywood can even dream!), Mr. India was the perfect mix of dreams and reality.
On the one hand is Arun, the caretaker of orphans, trying to have a living for everyone out of his non-existent income, and on the other is Mocambo (or Mogambo), the villain who wants to destroy India and take over control.Things change for Arun when he discovers a secret to become invisible.
The magic band does wonders for his love life and comes in handy to do good for the humanity..
fighting the bad guys and ultimately saving the world!Mr. India can be described as the 'Indian twist' to 'The Invisible Man', where the hero can never do anything bad.
Shekhar Kapoor (The Director) has done a good job in mixing adventure, comedy, drama and romance, while retaining the original flavor of the 'good old' Indian film musical.
Overall, a delight to watch!.
All Time Classic.
This is one of the oldest and greatest films I've ever seen, I used to watch it all the time when I was younger.
It is about a orphanage owner who struggles to keep it running but one day he and one of the orphans come across an invisibility mechanism which helps them fight the bad guys that are trying to shut them down.
It's an all time classic, I loved this movie a lot, not just because it was one of my first but it was an all round family movie which could make me laugh and cry.
I'd give it a perfect 10.0.
Yes, it's another movie about Invisibilty....
But we all love a bit of sci-fi...
This is a great movie.
It was a great childhood memory for me and still watching it now I still enjoy it.Invisibility, Sri Devi, Anil Kapoor, laughs, an evil Villan (Mogambo, portrayed brilliantly by Amrish Puri...
what more does one really need?All in all a great movie with the only flaws being some of the scene changes for effects purposes were a bit laughable...
But I guess it was India in the 80s...Still ranks among my favourite Bollywood movies, and I'm not too hot on Bollywood...9/10.
The best villain the world has ever seen!.
"Mogambo Khush Hua" is the signature line of the villain Mogambo played by Amrish Puri in the classic "Mr. India".
I must say, Mogambo is a kind of villain which will remain immortal in every hearts.
Amrish Puri displays the act of villainy with perfection.
He shows the required amount of menace and that helps to make his character a classic.
Apparently, this movie is not about Mogambo.
It's about "Mr. India" played by Anil Kapoor who has inherited a magical watch from his father with which he can become invisible.
But here, the hero is overshadowed by the villain.
Anil Kapoor does his job pretty well and I guess no actor would've been able to pull off that role with aplomb like him.
Sridevi is truly the devi of India.
Her "Hawa Hawaii" dance number is also the highlight of "Mr. India" and she was also likable as a reporter.
Like most of her movies, Sridevi gets her comic timings and the scene where she disguises as Charlie Chaplin is hilarious!
"Mr. India" is one of the best movies of Bollywood as it created an immortal villain by the name of Mogambo.
Every kid in India is scared of the name "Mogambo" and every mothers use this name to lure their children to sleep in India.
What an impression!
The only thing I didn't like about this movie is the scene where the little girl dies in a bomb explosion.
This scene was unnecessary and made the film quite heavy.
Barring this scene, almost all the scenes are memorable and are worth repeat-viewing.
I rate it 9/10..
I rate it 9/10..
Three words: MOGAMBO ...........
KHUSH HUA!!!!.
Forget the guy who turns invisible, his insipid romance with an overly bubbly then-queen-bee-trying-hard-to-entertain, even (with some effort) forget the army of kids adding tenderness....this movie and its massive success rested squarely on the powerful shoulders of Amrish Puri, a.k.a Mogambo, the unforgettable embodiment of pure evil, raw power and lord of carnage (superior even to Gabbar Singh).
The roles of the others are merely a sprinkling of "garam masala" to the "chicken biryani" that was puri's performance, best described as controlled AND over-the-top, unbelievable AND YET believable, and terrifying AND somewhat comedic all at the same time..
The most complete movie ever made..
I am yet to see a movie which has Sci-Fi, Comedy, Romance, Music, Action, Drama and Patriotism in it.
This film excels in every department.
Anil Kapoor and Sridevi are great in their parts.
Amrish Puri has an unforgettable role as Mogambo.THIS ONE IS A MUST WATCH.
THE BEST OF BOLLYWOOD..
Horrible Blatant Copy of Marvel's Captain America.
Captain America was a character created back in 1941 for comic and put into his first film in 1944 then later into a TV series in the 1960's.
Whoever created this obviously read or watched some of media from Captain America and adapted it for an Indian audience.
I recommend Stan Lee bring up copyright claims for this movie to prevent them from making another one.
Instead of watching this i would recommend watching one of the 3 Captain America movies that had been made prior to this one or one of the two newer ones , one of which has just been released.
Any Americans might be watching this film please don't be offended by it's plagiarism..
Thanks for making this movie.
I remember when Anil Kapoor sir debuted in this movie and it really a great contribution and it's the really nice movie which is one of my favorite movies.
Awesome film.
Some films never get aged, Mr India is one of them The film is set on a simple premise but the way it's handled it's superb The last film of Salim-Javed together, they had split after Shakti but returned to write this film.
The film also was one of the first films of Anil-Sridevi The film starts off well, the scenes amongst the kids, the problems Arun faces, the entire Mogambo part which seems an extension of SJ's own SHAAN(1980).There are several great scenes like Sridevi spoofing Charlie Chaplin, the fight scene when Sridevi is kidnapped, The Annu Kapoor scene and the climax though a bit lengthy and similar to SHAAN(1980) yet it's goodDirection by Shekhar Kapur is great Music by LP is amazing, Zindagi Ki Yehi Reet is my fav song sung by Kishore Kumar, I Love You, Karte Hai Hum Pyaar and other gems are really wonderfulAnil Kapoor in a role supposed to be done by Big B is simply lovable and suits it to the T, he also wears just 1 costume throughout Sridevi is amazing in her role, her pairing with Anil is simply magical Amongst child artists, Aftab, Karan Nath, Ahmed Khan and all are amazing Amrish Puri is simply terrific in a role only he could play, what with those expressions and the booming baritone, he is fab,Annu Kapoor is simply class in the role of a troubled editor Sharat Saxena, Bob Christo, Ajit Vachnani,Harish Patel and rest are good too
|
tt0023238
|
The Most Dangerous Game
|
Sanger Rainsford and his friend, Whitney, are traveling to Rio de Janeiro to hunt the region's big cat: the jaguar. After a discussion about how they are "the hunters" instead of "the hunted", Whitney goes to bed and Rainsford remains on deck. While Whitney returns to his quarters Rainsford hears gunshots and climbs onto the yacht's rail to get a better view of the nearby Ship-Trap Island, and falls overboard. After he realizes he cannot swim back to the boat, he swims to Ship-Trap, which is notorious for shipwrecks. He finds a palatial chateau inhabited by two Cossacks: the owner, General Zaroff, and his gigantic deaf-mute servant, Ivan.
Zaroff, another big-game hunter, knows of Rainsford from his published account of hunting snow leopards in Tibet. After inviting him to dinner, General Zaroff tells Rainsford he is bored of hunting because it no longer challenges him; he has moved to Ship-Trap in order to capture shipwrecked sailors, whether due to storms or by luring vessels onto the rocks. He sends the sailors into the jungle supplied with food, a knife, and hunting clothes to be his quarry, although he also runs a "school" of sorts to prepare sailors for this hunt should they be out of shape or disoriented from being washed ashore. After a three-hour head start, he sets out to hunt and kill them. Any captives who can elude Zaroff, Ivan, and a pack of hunting dogs for three days are set free. Zaroff reveals that no one has lasted that long, although a couple of sailors had come close. Zaroff also says that he offers sailors a "choice"; should they decline to be hunted they will be handed over to Ivan, who had once been official knouter for The Great White Czar. Rainsford is against this and denounces it as barbarism. Zaroff reacts in a cosmopolitan manner that "life is for the strong". Realizing he has no way out, Rainsford reluctantly agrees to be hunted.
During the three-hour head start, Rainsford begins to lay an intricate trail in the forest and then climbs a tree. Zaroff finds him easily, but decides to play with him like a cat would a mouse, standing underneath the tree Rainsford is hiding in, smoking a cigarette, and then abruptly departing. After the failed attempt of eluding Zaroff, Rainsford builds a Malay man-catcher, a weighted log attached to a trigger. This contraption injures Zaroff's shoulder, causing him to return home for the night, but not before he shouts out that Rainsford laid a good trap that few hunters can make. The next day Rainsford creates a Burmese tiger pit, which kills one of Zaroff's hounds. He sacrifices his knife to make a Ugandan knife trap, however Ivan is killed when he stumbles into this trap and the knife plunges into his heart. To escape Zaroff and his approaching hounds, Rainsford dives off a cliff into the sea; Zaroff, disappointed at Rainsford's suicide, returns home. While enjoying a celebratory dinner, Zaroff is preoccupied with two issues: Ivan would be hard to replace and that Rainsford had evaded his hunt.
Zaroff locks himself in his bedroom and turns on the lights only to find Rainsford waiting for him; he had swum around the island in order to sneak into the chateau without the dogs finding him and killing him. Zaroff congratulates him on winning the "game", but Rainsford decides to fight him, saying he is still a beast-at-bay and that the original hunt is not over. Accepting the challenge, Zaroff says that the loser will be fed to the dogs, while the winner will sleep in his bed. Though the ensuing fight is not described, the story ends with Rainsford observing that "he had never slept in a better bed" - implying that he defeated and killed Zaroff.
|
violence, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt2245003
|
Miss You Already
|
Milly and Jess are best friends who met in grade school and do everything together. As they grow older, Milly settles down and marries her rocker boyfriend Kit while Jess becomes an environmentalist and marries her long-time boyfriend Jago.
Milly, busy with her career and her young family, learns that she has breast cancer after a long-delayed checkup. She finds herself unable to tell Kit and, after a week, finally confides in Jess. Once she tells Kit and their children, Scarlett and Ben, Milly tasks Jess with helping her get through chemotherapy and the two women joke around as Milly receives her treatments. During this time period, Jess, who has been unable to conceive naturally, puts off IVF treatments with Jago, feeling that she cannot keep trying to have children while Milly is sick. After Jago grows exasperated, Jess finally decides to give it a shot and the couple manage to conceive a baby shortly after.
The night Jess learns that she is pregnant, Milly learns that though she has responded to the chemotherapy, she still needs a double mastectomy. She goes to a bar and gets drunk and, when Jess retrieves her, confesses that she has a big ego and does not want to appear unattractive. Jess reassures her that she will always want her in her life. Milly goes through with the double mastectomy but Jess finds herself unable to tell Milly she is pregnant as she feels as though her good news would cause Milly grief. Meanwhile, Jess learns Jago must go away to work on an oil-rig to pay for their IVF treatments.
Milly finds herself growing increasingly distant from Kit after the surgery. After he arranges a surprise birthday dinner, Milly walks out, taking Jess with her and the two go all the way to Yorkshire ostensibly to see the moors where the Brontë sisters grew up, though, in reality, Milly is chasing down a bartender, Ace, that she had sex with post-surgery. When Jess discovers the deception, she and Milly fight and she reveals her pregnancy to Milly.
For a while, Milly and Jess are estranged. During this period, Jess learns that she is having a high-risk pregnancy while Milly learns that while her breast cancer is in remission she also has fatal malignant tumours in her brain. Milly tracks down Jess and the women reconcile. She also confesses her affair to Kit and although he feels betrayed, he decides to make love to Milly knowing that her days are numbered. Milly eventually tells her children that she will die and must go into hospice care. While there, she tells Jess she is holding on for the birth of Jess' first child.
Jess goes into labour early while Jago is still on the oil rig. While Kit does not want Milly to attend the labour, her mother, Miranda, helped her sneaked out of the hospice so she is able to be there when Jess gives birth. Some days after, Milly dies at the hospice with Jess by her side.
Epilogue: A few years later, Jess is pregnant again, this time started naturally, and the two families are shown being close and having lunch together. Jess muses on how her friend was irreplaceable, but then recognizes a trait of hers in Scarlett, Milly’s daughter.
|
comedy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0280605
|
Dirty Deeds
|
High school student Zach Harper (Milo Ventimiglia) sets out to complete the "Dirty Deeds" - an outrageous list of ten challenges that must be completed between dusk and dawn on the Friday night of his high school's homecoming weekend. The only student to complete the entire list, Duncan Rime (Todd Zeile), did so in 1989 when only 8 tasks composed the list. Rimes later reveals that whenever someone completes the entire list, more are added to it.
Zach attempts to complete the deeds for his classmate, Meg Cummings (Lacey Chabert). Meg's younger brother, Kyle (Wes Robinson), wants to do the challenge to earn the respect of the school's jocks, who are constantly bullying him. Meg is concerned for her brother, and insists that Zach stop him from trying to do something so foolish. While Meg had no intention of Zach attempting the deeds in place of her brother, Zach decides to take on the challenge.
The night begins, and Zach easily checks off the first item on the list, drink beer in front of the cops, by pouring a beer into a coffee cup and consuming it in front of them. This way, the cops, who are determined to stop all those who attempt the deeds, have no idea of Zach's intentions of completing the list. As Zach attempts the nine remaining deeds, the jocks do everything in their power to prevent him from completing it. Throughout his crazy night, Zach enlists the help of those around him to accomplish the difficult tasks. Along the way, Zach meets Duncan Rime who tries to warn him about how hollow the victory can be. Afterwards, Zach refuses to continue, but Dan and JD (the tough kid from Deed #2) decide to try to ruin the carnival so that Zach will be blamed. With some last-minute help from Vincent Scarno (the owner of the car from Deed #8), Zach is able to turn the tables in time. In the midst of everything, Zach and Meg begin to develop feelings for each other, and end up falling in love over the list of "Dirty Deeds".
|
comedy, cruelty, murder, violence, flashback, suspenseful
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
As all the comments here are Australian and a year old, the film has obviously been leaked late to the rest of the world in advance of its video or dvd release.
Bryan Brown and Sam Neill stand out, inevitably, but John Goodman and Toni Colette are sound in support.I smiled from the moment this started to the closing credits, laughed out loud more than once, and salute the repeated use of "bouf-head" as a term of endearment..
A nice little mix of genres; gangster movie, period flick, fish out of water story, and even a travelogue!The cast is excellent, even though I have trouble buying John Goodman (an actor I adore) as a wiseguy.
Sam Worthington comes across great as a slightly naive kid with a good heart just rolling with the punches and unsure of himself.
Bryan Brown performs admirably, Toni Collette continues to wow me (I had no idea she was actually an Aussie) and the rest of the cast acquits themselves well.All in all, a really charming movie chock full of 60's era flourishes and cultural differences.
Saw this stumbling my way through OZ on holiday and really glad i did - it's fast, funny and full of action.I had no idea before i saw this of the real history of the slot machine wars, so it was good to learn about that but FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY this is just a great night out and makes you leave the cinema wishing you could remember more of the many really good lines.The acting is fantastic throughout but John Goodman is just brillant.
In an age when the Australian movie scene is dominated by "larrikin" family comedies, gritty urban dramas shot on cheap film stock and whatever epic movie Peter Jackson gestates in the grit under his fingernails, David Caesar has crafted a small celluloid gem.
A movie about the enduring Australian goal of killing everything in our path until one day the entire world will hit itself on the thumb and say "Bugger!" instead of "Sh*t!", "Dirty Deeds" is a camp classic, a knowing pastiche of the Australia of the early 1970s with more lashings of violence than most people care to remember.
The film's depiction of Australian organized crime is in itself fantastic, the gangsters drink lager, run poker machines and swear a great deal.
Dirty Deeds - A Movie For Anyone Who Remembers Australian Criminal Activity.
Bryan Brown is respectable as the leading role and he is helped out greatly by his supporting cast, mainly John Goodman.
Goodman's trademark has almost always been the soft big guy type, and he proves in this film that he has playing those type of characters down to a science.
The action takes place in King Cross, an area where night life was the main attraction.David Caesar and his cinematographer, Geoffrey Hall, created a film that seems to have been shot in that era, as they have given the movie a faded look that works well with the story they are telling.
The inside joke seems to be about how to really make a good pizza, something that might not have been done at the time.The film makers have to be congratulated in bringing a brilliant cast together for the movie.
Toni Collette is one of the best actresses working in films, who is at home in drama as well as comedy, and she has a rare opportunity to show her talent playing Barry's wife, Sharon.
John Goodman is good as the American mafioso who is outsmarted by his Aussie counterpart.
The only one that has nothing to do is Sam Neill."Dirty Deeds" works well as a drama and a comedy because there are elements of both in it thanks to the way David Caesar presents his material on the screen..
Cardboard characters with zero dimension.Newcomer Sam Worthington needs a few years in acting school he DOES have an excuse.Toni Colette was ridiculous as Brown's wife.
True story, in the 1960s the American government was trying to control Vietnam and the American Mafia wanted to take over organised crime in Australia.Both failed, we know about Vietnam, this movie fictionalises what happened in Australia and uses it as a metaphor for what happened in Vietnam (and what is happening in Iraq today).It is fun, it is very Australian (it has Bryan Brown in it, what more can I say), it downplays Australian criminals abilities but shows them as brutal thugs capable of some quick thinking.It is not an American bashing movie and has a pro-American message and an Anti-American message that Americans could learn from.
Very good.Basically, I believe its a great plot, brilliantly casted, produced and directed.I don't know how it'll go down in the US though because the story line doesn't have them saving the day as usual..
There is no real evidence, but perhaps Brown was trying to save his marriage to older, but still beautiful Toni Collette (as Sharon)...Not an Australian expert, but there isn't much here that looks like contemporary movies from 1969.
There is something extra to see within the end credit roll.***** Dirty Deeds (7/18/02) David Caesar ~ Bryan Brown, Sam Worthington, John Goodman, Toni Collette.
Sad to say, but despite a fantastic cast, great design and some genuine laughs, "Dirty Deeds" is ultimately a disappointment.
Toni Collette is equally good as his no-nonsense wife, while a solid cast of Aussie professionals such as William MacInnes, Sam Neil and Paul Chubb fill out an amusing ensemble.
Even the get-a-US-release stunt casting of John Goodman, as a Brown's even-tempered American rival fits nicely.In addition, the design of the film is wonderfully evocative of late sixties Australia, complete with garish curtains, funky wallpaper, beehives and bowler hats.
The romantic sub-plot featuring Sam Worthington (as Brown's straight-arrow nephew) and Kestie Morassi (as Brown's mistress) is flat and entirely predictable.Relative newcomer Worthington sadly sticks out like a sore thumb among the otherwise distinguished ensemble with an inexpressive, lifeless performance, which undermines certain crucial scenes.
Morassi is however a definite find and will certainly be one to watch in the future.A lot of excellent talent has gone into making "Dirty Deeds" and that only serves to make the end result an even greater disappointment..
I usually go for good actors when choosing a film to view, and that usually works, but as I said on the prior Aussie movie it did not.
Go and watch it you like funny Gangster comedies, want to get a feeling for the old Australia of the seventies and see some of Australia´s best actors in action.
David Caesar's 'Dirty Deeds' is a black comedy about gangsters set in 1960's Australia.
Moreover some of the main characters should have been more properly defined.The performances, mainly by Bryan Brown, Toni Collette, John Goodman and Sam Neill are brilliant.
The cinematography is good and the score is brilliant.'Dirty Deeds' thinks it's a smart black comedy and that may be so to an extent but it does have its share of flaws, a few big ones.
It was just an opportunity for a bunch of Aussies to have fun without having to do any acting (John Goodman or no) and the scriptwriter to not have to do any writing, and the photographer to not have to see anything, and they stick in Toni Collette as if that is going to help.
if you are a fan of john Goodman, this would be a great movie.
the only reason I gave it a 5 was because of a couple of twists that were worth the waste of time.showing the "heart" side of the Australian mob is not really the best plot in the world, either.
Bryan Brown is a good actor, but he adopts a completely different acting method and character in each scene.
"Two Hands' was preferred however as a similar style of Aussie gangster movie (also starring Bryan Brown) with more effective black humour with a darker plot..
Dirty, But Fun. Approached this one with caution after some iffy reviews, but shouldn't have worried.David Caesar shows he can handle big cast, big story, big entertainment;not just the character-driven, quirky little films he does so well.Bryan Brown shows there's still no better dinki-di larrikin than him.
The two young stars are good too, and Felix Williamson all but steals the show as John Goodman's not-too-bright, but definitely too vicious sidekick.The 1969 Sydney underworld setting is wonderfully captured (even to accurately having Hair playing at the Metro Theatre), and its great to here so many old songs, and old Aussie sayings, that are barely remembered (and no, hardly anyone had heard of pizzas here then, except in the lyrics of "That's Amore".)The design and camerawork are eyecatching, and all in all, while its not the deepest Australian film ever, it's very entertaining..
If you liked Two Hands and thought it was a bit dark you will love Dirty Deeds!
With an excellent cast (look it up) and excellent wry set design and hilarious costume styles so perfect for the time, DIRTY DEEDS looks great on a wide screen and is dangerous and funny in equal measures.
However, DIRTY DEEDS was released during a spate of OZ crim comedies: TWO HANDS (good); CHOPPER (excellent), BAD EGGS just OK), THE (shoddy miscast) POSTCARD BANDIT...
This film is thoroughly entertaining, perfectly representing Australian culture and giving insight into 1960's Australia.
Veteran Aussie actor Bryan Brown puts in a strong performance as hard arsed Barry Ryan with great performances by Toni Collette and John Goodman.Why the Australian people are so critical of films made in their own country continually shocks me.
Yes, at times 'Dirty Deeds' was a tad predictable and the characters in the film were mere extensions of the actors themselves, but to the man on the street, this is a clever film with a strong sense of Aussie humour highlighted by it's setting in 1960's Australia.'Dirt Deeds' deserves an 8 out of 10.
Two marks deducted for it's predictability and it's slightly disappointing ending thrown in as a 'feel good' denouement.See this for: the superb camera work, the bush jail, Toni Collette and Bryan Brown, the romantic tension between the four mains..
Dirty Deeds - the movie and the soundtrackDirty Deeds, is the latest movie from renowned Australian film-maker David Caesar (Mullet, Idiot Box).
The film features some of Australia's finest actors in lead roles (Bryan Brown as Barry, Toni Collette as Sharon) as well as Sam Neill and the US's John Goodman.
Set in Sydney in 1969, Dirty Deeds is a story about the American mafia wanting to be part of the illegal Sydney casino scene.
Convincing the Australian hillbillies' to hand over the reins of their business wasn't going to be as easy as the American's had expected.As with any big film, comes a soundtrack.
Tim Rogers (frontman of Aussie band You Am I) once again teams up with David Caesar as producer of the Dirty Deeds soundtrack.
Just like the movie, the soundtrack is a showcase of some of the best Australian talent around today, as well as from the past few decades.
Tex Perkins, Billy Thorpe, Powderfinger's Bernard Fanning and Grinspoon's Phil Jamieson are just a selection of musicians who can be heard on the soundtrack.While Dirty Deeds may just seem like another Australian crime film, following in the likes of Two Hands and The Hard Word, it is a surprisingly amusing and well-written script.
It seemed like a gratuitous Australianism directed at an American market.Attention to detail is important for a movie that is set over three decades ago.
At one point a camera seemed to go through a pig's gunshot wound, which was unnecessary because it felt like that particular effect was used for the simple reason that it could be done, not because it added meaning to the story.Australians know that it's best not to mess around with people's accents.
Caesar must have enjoyed poking fun at the Americans and showing their ignorance when Sal (Felix Williamson) and Tony (John Goodman) were discussing what language was spoken in Australia.
Some cultural differences like tipping were also addressed in the movie.As a refreshing change from many American movies, all the songs from the soundtrack were featured at some point in the film.
The soundtrack was a collaborative effort from Rogers and Caesar, making sure each song worked in the movie.
Great movie that non-Australians may find a bit hard to get.
Dirty Deeds sets itself apart from most other gangster films by thebrilliant portrayals of each of the main characters, and it's unusuallocation.Bryan Brown plays Barry Ryan, an Australian mobster who runsthe slot machines in Sydney in the late 1960's.
His nephew, Darcy(played by Sam Worthington) has just come back from Vietnamand is looking for work.
Meanwhile, Tony (John Goodman) andSal, Mafia mobsters from the US, come over to Australia to seewhat they can do about getting a piece of the action...What I loved about this film was that we didn't see all of the oldcliches come out about mobsters.
It's undeniable that John Goodman does an excellentjob of portraying a guy who knows what's expected of him, andhow to deal with things in a businesslike manner to get results.His confusion at Australian customs in the 1960's is amusing,and the movie plays up to the cultural differences very well.One other point to note is that this movie gives a great deal of timeto strong female roles.
The viewer is left with astrong sense of what is required to be married into 'the business'.I highly recommend this film to all gangster fans, but be warned,there are many Australian colloquialisms that non-Australiansmay find a little hard to follow.
Dirty Deeds however was immediately memorable and very savourable-meaning that the camera work, the acting, the direction, Caesar's script-all begged to be watched again because these aspects were so good.My wife and I thought the script was very rich in detail: the settings deserve special mention because they were so accurate by our memory of thirty years ago.
Because Dirty Deeds was a recent "period piece" that had been done so well this viewer was left savouring each scene and each little snippet of dialogue-the clothes, the furniture, the cars-it all added up to a very rich feast.When I watch such a superb film my mind goes to the mush turned out by Hollywood year after year.
David Caesar seems to like films where everyone is threatened and seems to think its fine to use meaningless violence as entertainment.
Dirty Deeds is a fabulous representation of inner city Sydney, and many other Australian cities, of this time.
you can see that they are in a spot light, you can even see the outline of the light.but overall a great movie that you dont have to see at the movie, not going to be the film of the century, but still good.P.S. i am not normally a movie critic looking for flaws, these were just to obvious..
Bryan Brown plays the occer Australian perfectly, and it was good to see Toni Collette back on screen playing an Aussie.Whilst obviously not a big budget film, Dirty Deeds was as entertaining as many of the US blockbusters I have seen lately.
In an effort to get a US release, John Goodman has been cast as one of the American mafia, in Australia to promote their latest invention, the electronic poker machine and break into the potentially lucrative Australian market.
Overall, this is a great film to watch if you are ever feeling nostalgic for the days of terry towelling clothing, green and brown geometric prints and big hair.
I loved Dirty Deeds.the film I most enjoyed in recent times.
I loved the actors and their characters, most particularly the fabulous Sam Worthington, who plays young Darcy.
Sam Neill and John Goodman are classy and cool.A great Aussie film, a great film full stop..
Finally David Caesar makes a good film.
Dirty Deeds is set in 1969 Kings Cross where Barry Ryan (Bryan Brown) runs a crooked scheme siphoning off a large percentage of pokie machine winnings.
Other than the occasional tussle with competition this runs well for him when the US Mafia decides to get in on the scheme and send Sal (Felix Williamson) and Tony (John Goodman) to either buy or muscle their way in.Barry's nephew Darcy (Sam Worthington), having just returned from a tour of duty in Vietnam is recruited straight away by Barry to, amongst other things, look after his mistress Margaret (Kestie Morassi).
Neither really trusts the other and are not sure what the other is really up to.The film looks far bigger, budget wise, than anything David Caesar has done before and is far more entertaining to boot.
There's a lot of fun to be had with 60's fashion, particularly some of the wallpapers and room decors are worth the price of the movie ticket alone.Bryan Brown basically plays a similar character to most he's played so far, although here he is truly in mean mode.
He plays very much against character and is all the better for it.There's a bit of a running joke on the fact that no one in 60's Australia knows what Pizza is which I found a bit hard to believe.
Bryan Brown and Toni Collette are brilliant, however newcomer Sam Worthington really steals the show.
I'm getting the impression that both The Hard Word and Dirty Deeds followed the same rule book in making Australian crime movies.
Brian Brown played the part to a tee, there is no doubting that David Caeser was only thinking him when writing this film.
Brian Brown (I don't know why, but he always reminds me of Michael Caine), Toni Collette (far from her About a Boy role), John Goodman (has he ever been bad, even in bad movies?) and Sam Neill (Absolutely perfect as the matter-of-fact but easy-to-bribe police) + the rest of the cast of for me unknowns.Can we today even imagine that there was a time when there wasn't at least one pizza-place within a few blocks?
|
tt0097100
|
Communion
|
In 1985, New York based author Whitley Strieber (Walken) lives with his wife and child in Manhattan and seems to be successful. However he is woken at night by paranoid dreams that someone else is in the room.
On a trip to the family cottage in the woods, on the first night the intruder alarm is triggered and Strieber sees a face watching him from the doorway. Bright light fills the cottage windows and wakes his son and two other family friends but his wife remains asleep.
Disturbed by this they all return to New York and life seemingly returns to normal but Strieber finds that his work and personal life are becoming affected by recurring nightmares and visions of strange alien beings including greys, blue doctors and bugs. This upsets his son and puts strain on his marriage.
After an incident at their cottage in which Strieber is so convinced that there are alien beings inside the home that he pulls his gun out and almost shoots his wife, and signs that his son is beginning to have the same visions, he is finally convinced to see a psychiatrist specialising in hypnotic regression therapy (Sternhagen).
The therapy confirms that he has possibly been abducted by unknown beings and experiments have been performed on him however he is still skeptical about it and reluctancly attends a group therapy session of fellow 'abductees'.
Eventually he realises he has to confront his visions, real or not, and returns to the cottage where most of the incidents seem to occur. He interacts with the alien beings and realises he has been in contact with them his whole life and it was passed on from his father and he will, in turn, pass it on to his son.
Making up with his family Strieber comes to accept the alien visitors as part of his life and in the last scene he sits in his office and embraces the face of a 'grey' alien.
|
psychedelic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
In "Communion," Whitley Strieber's autobiographical book comes to life...sort of.
Tough task...it's easy to see why the film seems diluted and without chemistry.However, this also provides the film with an atmosphere that can also help enhance the whole point, which is not "was Whitley Strieber abducted by aliens," but rather "how did Whitley's interpretation of an inexplicable event effect him and those around him?" One of the last scenes, an exchange between Strieber and his wife in a museum, conveys this point perfectly.
Some have complained about the scene in the psychiatrist's office being so bright, but I think it also helps get the message that there may be an outside presence surrounding all of us, whether we recognize it or not."Communion" is an interesting movie that suffered from a view that was perhaps too short-sighted.
If the film were made today, one can be sure the message might have been lost on overbloated special effects, and the surreal effect would've been diminished to appeal to the lowest common denominator of movie-going audiences.
The film depicts the personal and professional crises a writer experiences after a series of encounters with non-human beings.The film strongly benefits from the performances of Christopher Walken and Lindsay Crouse.
Walken (always engaging) manages the challenging task of making Whitley Strieber a compelling character; you care about him even if you don't necessarily like him 100% of the time.
Crouse succeeds as Whitley's wife; the two together are immediately believable as a married couple.The film is arguably the most intelligent film about the alien abduction/ visitor phenomenon.
This is what makes COMMUNION transcend every other film about the phenomenon.Director Phillipe Mora successfully creates a "you-are-there" atmosphere, letting the actors improvise a lot of their dialogue.
Mora's direction is subtle, with cues in both the dialogue and a detailed, occasionally wry visual style.Another plus is Eric Clapton's opening and closing theme music.This is a seriously underrated film.The director's cut (with commentary by Mora) is recommended..
Director Philippe Mora has made some bizarre movies in his time, and 'Communion' is one of the strangest.
Christopher Walken plays writer Whitley Strieber who finds his life going in a very odd direction.
He has a personality that is difficult to hide behind another persona, but which always adds a little something to it.This is a suitably creepy film, but is very realistically and believably handled, given the fantastic story matter.
One is never quite sure what is really happening...oft times it is like something out of an early David Lynch movie...lying on the borderline between funny and nightmarish.The film does make you think about all angles of the situation, especially when you consider the point of views and personalities of the people at the abduction support group that Walken's character goes to, and his reaction to it.The special effects are excellent...not gaudy, but quite realistic (for lack of a better term).I've seen the real Whitley Strieber on television and read a few of his novels.
Walken is definitely not Strieber, but I think he is the only actor who could've made this movie work..
Whitley suddenly finds himself in an alien world, where once he tells his abduction story, he becomes subject of, strangely enough, his own ridicule, but also public skepticism.
The symbolism is powerful in this movie, suggesting that it's not what is obvious, but that there is a hidden meaning behind a life-altering experience.From a creative point of view, a story like this might be quite appealing, and regarded as extravagant, but how would we cope with somebody claiming to have lived such things?
Some may view this film as a silly alien movie.
This is mostly due, I believe to, the director Philippe Mora and Christopher Walken's quirky yet memorable acting presence.This film is very eerie, frightening, surreal and disturbing.
The scenes involving his son and the other dream sequences are perhaps the most disturbing.I felt empathy for Strieber in Walken's very convincing performance.
There are some very memorable lines in this movie that will stay with you long afterwards.If you like thought-provoking, eerie, movies involving alien abduction then this may be well worth your while..
Christopher Walken gets an anal probe in this alien abduction movie.
Horrible special effects (the blue creatures are especially laughable) are one of the films biggest flaws, but the absolute biggest flaw of them all is Walken's portrayal of Streiber.
An successful novelist Whitley Strieber (Oscar-Winner:Christopher Walken), who finds himself being visited by strange creatures from another world in his cabin at the woods from the state of New York.
This independently made film is well acted and keeps your interests for making up for the movie's occasional flaws.DVD has an good anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an fine digitally remastered Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound.
"Communion" is truly an flawed film but director Mora and screenwriter Strieber (Based on his Best Selling Novel) keeps you on the edge of your seat.
I've never been abducted by aliens, and I hope to God I never am, but god damn 'Communion' is the only movie I have ever seen that has absolutely captured the primal fear, freaky mind-bending bizareness, and profoundly life changing aspects of what one of those experiences might possibly be like.
ok, I've said enough.Watch it alone, with the lights out, very late at night, and it may very well change your life.My vote for the most underrated film of all time.
The X-Files, though a good show, never quite reaches the level of freakiness that "Communion" has in moments like those in which Walken confronts the aliens.
At one point, he states upon waking up to a suspected abduction that, "I don't want to think about that so, I go back to bed." There are so many classic lines of dialogue between Walken and the aliens that the movie reaches a point where it seems almost like a bizarre, personal delusion--portrait of a madman rather than alien abductions..
Nothing has kept me up at night like that since "The Excorcist." Sure - there is bad stuff in this film, and Walken's character is almost too eccentric to take.
The story is supposedly based on true facts and lifted from Whitley Strieber's novel, which also did the screenplay for the film.
But Walken is simply ace in a role that's fits him perfectly.The first half of the film is actually creepy with its atmospheric lighting, bone rattling sound effects and stinging score.
I got to say that the best time to watch this one - is late night
I guarantee.It's not totally successful, but it's an interestingly odd project with capable direction by Mora and a sensational central performance from Walken..
The film itself is actually more entertaining than the book, so again, Strieber managed to write a clever adaptation.
True, near the end the story gets quite fragmented, and results more in the telling of anecdotes than actually trying to wrap up an already incoherent story (note that I'm not using the word 'inconsistent', because Strieber is very consistent in his way of telling the events, both in the book and the movie).
Christopher Walken plays Strieber, and he simply owns the film.
Reading the book gives you a more in-depth look on what happened and might help you to understand how the movie came to be..
Christopher Walken gives a compelling performance as Whitley Strieber (Strieber probably isn't this eccentric in real life).I wish I could say this film was perfect but this was not so.
Still the film is a good introduction to the alien abduction phenomenon and to Strieber's book.
Christopher Walken is superb in the role of Whitley Streiber, a rather wacky and annoying New York writer, who encounters alien beings at his country house.
The first sight he has of the creature in his bedroom is one of the most intensely frightening scenes ever filmed and is the beginning of the real life nightmare Strieber and his family are then plunged into.
There are also scenes that are overly stylized, detracting from the enormity of the subject.Christopher Walken, while a fine actor, is completely off in his portrayal of Strieber.
Walken plays one of the most bizarre characters in this film.
I read the book, and this movie is different in some ways (I don't remember any blue guys in the book, for example), which is odd because Strieber wrote the screenplay.
You have to watch this movie for the pure enjoyment of witnessing Christopher Walken "do his thing"...
Make a night of it by pairing this movie up with "Brainstorm" another classic Christopher Walken performance.
Been a very long time since I watched the movie or read the book.
This movie is just insane...I don't know were to start, its supposed to be about alien abduction but it goes beyond to weird territory, i honestly saw Chistopher Walken become Tommy Wissau in some scenes, it is so surreal you think your watching a comedy when its supposed to be science fiction, i don't know what was in the directors mind when he mixed aliens and Christopher Walken, we get one of the most insane movies ever made i don't know if to compare it with Brazil or Eraser head.Its not bad or good its in a rating limbo, you have to see it for yourself to believe what your watching and trying to make sense of it, its entertaining specially if you like strange premises, i honestly would say give it a watch and judge it for the craziness that it is.
There's a close contest between the other-worldly beings and Christopher Walken as to who is creepiest in this (allegedly true) tale of a writer who isn't sure if he's being visited by aliens or by insanity.
Good alien movie with Christopher Walken.
Communion is a good alien movie that's based on a true story.
I can say I strongly recommend you see Communion!Movie Nuttball's note: If you like alien movies I also recommend the following films: The UFO Incident, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T. the Extra- Terrestrial, Time Walker, Invaders from Mars, Fire in the Sky, Independence Day, The Arrival, Xtro 3: Watch the Skies, Life Form, Alien, Aliens, Alien 3, Predator, and Predator 2!.
Novelist Whitley Strieber adapted his own book to the screen, a "non-fiction" account of his encounter with aliens.
Christopher Walken plays Strieber as an unassuming family man who suffers the alien encounter while vacationing in the country.
Christopher Walken gives a distractingly bizarre performance in this trippy alien abduction movie.
This kind of day to day indecision may be common in real life, but it is odd to see a character change his mind with each scene in a movie.
This movie is so bad, it's bad.A man is visited by aliens a couple times, and nothing more happens.
There are some vaguely entertaining surreal parts, when the main character encounters the aliens (both of which look like cheap X-Com rejects), but the whole fun of the surreality is that a willing viewer can briefly pretend he is not watching "Communion" and is instead enjoying an ugly acid flashback.
Communion is directed by Phillipe Mora and adapted for the screen by Whitley Strieber from his own book of the same name.
Photography is by Louis Irving, with locations for filming at Big Bear Valley and Running Springs in California."Based on the true story of one American family" It continues to be a controversial movie to this very day, its subject matter, that of alien abduction/experiments, one that ensures the most divisive of audiences.
It also feels like a collage of other sub-genre movies, eschewing the philosophy and scientific theories of Strieber's best selling book, in favour of Walken wielding a shotgun and freaking out under the inevitable hypnosis treatment.
I don't think Communion would work nearly as well, in its own sort of warped-entertaining way, without Christopher Walken.
Another actor might play Whitley Streiber- named after the author and supposedly based on the author's actual experiences with aliens- with a straight face, maybe like Richard Drefuss in Close Encounters of the Third Kind, a down-to-earth father and husband who is good to his kid (more or less) and loves his wife and has wisecracks and an original sensibility as a novelist to spare.
But if you love Walken being "Walken", and want some cheesy alien-abduction sci-fi, you can surely look here for the goods - certainly it's a big step up from a more recent self-serious "true story" alien movie, The Fourth Kind..
I don't know who's scarier
Christopher Walken or Abducting Aliens..
Whitley Strieber, who turned his own novel into a screenplay and co-produced the film, unceasingly claims that "Communion" is based on his very own experiences as being the target of alien abduction and examination.
Now this given could easily be dismissed as a cuckoo and sensational gimmick to promote the film, but simultaneously you can't deny that Strieber and director Philippe Mora ("The Beast Within", "The Howling II") attempted – and mainly succeeded – to insert a lot more psychological depth and feeling into this film than usually the case with alien movies.
"Communion" is, above all, an extremely weird film and undeniably one that provokes thoughts and opinions that go far beyond the experiences you usually have when watching late 80's movies that deal with extraterrestrial encounters.
The author Whitley Strieber is depicted by Christopher Walken – I'll get back to his unforgettable performance later – and the movie begins somewhere early October 1985.
It's quite remarkable how Strieber and Mora manage to put the emphasis on the impact that Whitley's behavior has on his social life, rather than on the actual alien encounters itself.
If half of the film's power relies on atmosphere, than the other half definitely relies on Christopher Walken's performance!
Walken is famous for his outrageous performances and eccentric characters, but he truly surpasses himself as Whitley Strieber.
Also, on a lesser important note, you better not have seen the pilot episode of "South Park" too many times, otherwise you can't help comparing Whitley Strieber's alien encounters with the anal probes that Eric Cartman had..
I found this film to be a major disappointment, especially since the book had a powerful effect on me, and the director is a friend of the author.
The character of Whitley Strieber as played by Chris Walken is unrecognizably goofy to me, and the effects photography fail over and over to capture the imagery of the book.
I read "Communion" about 16 years ago and the feeling of terror was palpable so I waited with great expectations for this movie to see if Whitley Strieber's vision could be captured on-screen.
Walken truly gives it his all here, in service to a less-than-stellar narrative in a less-than-stellar films from an almost worthless book.The actual joy of watching this film (and I've viewed it several times now) is that it seems Walken's character is forever commenting on the film itself, with such lines as "I've got to get out of here" and some ironic looks from Christopher.
Walken plays Whitley Strieber, a man that investigates his supposed encounters with aliens.
***SPOILERS*** Based on the "true story" best selling book of the same name "Communion" has to do with the Strieber family in general and Whitley Strieber, Christopher Walken,in particular.
It's when he learns that what he went through is very common among people who claim to be victims of alien abductions that Strieber really starts to freak out!
And with that Strieber instead of running away from them starts to confront his kidnappers and with that slowly learns the real reasons for their actions which is, if true, nothing short of mind boggling to say the least!The movie based on Whitley Striebers book and screenplay has developed over the years a large cult following among the UFO and alien abduction community.
True or not the movie as well as book makes interesting reading as well as watching..
The phallic 'probe' that slides through the wall is almost hilarious, and the "aliens" were so fake-looking it is very hard to take them seriously.Overall the film comes off as an amateur production, and I'd advise anyone to avoid it like the plague ...
As I was watching this, I started with a '10' due to impact, atmosphere (I loved the NY ooze of Christopher Walken and Lindsay Crouse and the 1989 vibe as 1989 was a magical year for me - I just never realized it back then), message, blending of genres, and potential for being memorable to me (kinda like impact, lol).
As a person who used to be very interested in UFOs and all related stories (the kind that are barely a blip on the news or TV radar these days), Communion has forever left a permeant impression on my psyche.Having read the book several times back in the day, the movie sort of follows it but takes on a life of its own.
And while it does sort of cross over into the following book's territory, the movie is plagued by Christopher Walken's overall weirdness that prevents this from being a really good alien/horror movie.As much as I like CW's performances overall (you can never have enough cowbell after all) it just ruins what could possibly have been one of the better first hand accounts ever put to film.It's a shame that this never got the full attention it deserved.
above average flick is quite creepy at times with beautiful images that are sometimes down right moody and creepy it also had good character development and the acting was amazing Christopher Walken was astonishing here in my opinion he is this film and he alone makes this worth watching he was creepy funny all at the same time i cared for him and his character and i felt for him when he went through these things Lindsay Crouse is good as the caring and concerned wife she gives a credible performance and is likable good job!
|
tt0140348
|
Mahanadi
|
Krishnaswamy (Kamal Hassan) is a widower living happily along with his mother-in-law Saraswathi (S. N. Lakshmi), daughter Kaveri (Mahanadi Shobana) and son Bharani (Mahanadhi Dinesh) in a village near Trichy. Dhanush (Cochin Haneefa); a con from the city has an eye on Krishnaswamy's prosperity and asks him to join his chit fund business. At first Krishnaswamy is reluctant; however when a rich friend from a foreign country visits house, he too wants to be rich like them. Hence he agrees to Dhanush's proposal and arrives at the city. However, he is unaware of Dhanush's tricks and when Dhanush swindles away the chitfund money, the blame is put on Krishnaswamy. and he lands up in jail. He finds that even his future father-in-law Panjapakesan (Poornam Viswanathan) is also in jail for same reason whose daughter is Yamuna (Sukanya) working as nurse. He advises Krishnaswamy not to be angry if the jailor is cruel; as he might be released sooner if he is submissive in the jail. During Krishnaswamy's tenure in jail, Yamuna takes care of his family. Due to unavoidable situations, his mother-in-law dies and his son and daughter go missing. Krishnaswamy learns this after coming out from the jail suffering unnecessary hardships.
Krishna finds his son, with street-artists and gets his son back. He later finds from Dhanush that his daughter is in Kolkata, at a Red Light area called Sonagachi. When Krishnaswamy was arrested, Kaveri had attained puberty and 3 months later Krishnaswamy's mother-in-law becomes sick. kaveri and her brother go to dhanush asking financial help. Dhanush takes them to his higher boss, so that the virgin Kaveri could sleep with him to get money. Though the boss provides money to dhanush for treatment of old lady, he chases out barani with his dog, and keeps the money for himself. Kaveri is brutally raped by the boss and is then raped by many till she ends up as a prostitutes in Sonagachi
Krishna goes to Kolkata with his father-in-Law and tracks his daughter Kaveri. Unable to bear the grief, he grabs Kaveri and tries to escape, while the pimps there beat him blue. The elder sex-workers/madam make truce and insist that Krishna take Kaveri, while they would work extra-hours to pay the pimps for the loss of Kaveri.
After coming back from Kolkatta, he wants to start a new life with Yamuna, but his friend in Police Muthusamy (Rajesh) tells him that Danush has planned to jail Krishnaswamy further by plotting a murder case against him & would be arrested the next day. Also Krishnaswamy overhears his daughter blabbering in sleep, that not to rape her. He is heart-broken due to the state of his kids and decides to curb the root of all sin and grief against Dhanush, goes to seek revenge. He comes to know that Dhanush is just a pawn in the big game of cheating. He not only kills Dhanush but also the main person who was behind this game; but at the cost of losing his arm.
Krishna is sentenced to 14 years life-imprisonment and comes out a contented man, to see his daughter married and has a child, son being a grown up man. The whole family moves back to their native village and the movie ends with his son swimming in the river, reminding Krishna his own antics.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0102411
|
The Marrying Man
|
Charley Pearl is the heir to a toothpaste empire's fortune. He is a playboy who doesn't work for a living, spending his time indulging in hobbies like speedboats and fast cars. Charley is engaged to be married to the daughter of Lew Horner, a foul-mouthed, hot-tempered Hollywood studio mogul. Horner is concerned that Charley has no ambition of any kind and no apparent guilt about it. The studio chief warns Charley that if he should make Adele unhappy in any way, there will be hell to pay.
His four best friends—a comedian, a songwriter, a singer and a baseball manager (none particularly successful as yet)—accompany Charley on a drive to Las Vegas for a final bachelor's fling. Charley is willing to foot the bill for Phil, Sammy, Tony and George but is eager to get back home to his fiancee. They make a quick stop for a drink at a nightclub where Vicki Anderson, a glamorous singer, immediately disrupts Charley's thoughts of wedded bliss. He tries to pick up Vicki after her performance but is sternly warned that she belongs to somebody else. Vicki responds to Charley's charm, however, and obligingly offers to leave a window open at her home. Charley shows up and they end up in bed, only to be caught in the act by her other lover—Bugsy Siegel, the notorious gangster.
Rather than react violently, Bugsy amuses himself with the notion that he will take the scared-stiff Vicki and Charley to a justice of the peace in the middle of the night and make them marry one another. Charley drives her back to California and offers to pay her expenses, but Vicki walks out, wanting nothing more from him. In the meantime, their wedding photo pops up on the front page of the morning newspaper—with Charley's engagement announcement to Lew Horner's daughter appearing on a later page, as the enraged studio boss points out. Charley apologizes and still wants to marry a sobbing Adele. He agrees to get an annulment from Vicki and to pay a considerable sum to charity if he should dare disappoint Horner's daughter again.
Charley accidentally runs into Vicki again and can't help himself. Charley remarries Vicki and once again leaving his fiancee in the lurch. Lew Horner stops just short of killing Charley, instead sending a couple of thugs to beat him and toss him into a swimming pool. Charley accepts this as fair. Vicki is happy, too, momentarily, coming home with an offer that could advance her career, only to learn that Charley's father has died and he is needed on the other side of the country in Boston, where he is now expected to run the family's business.
Vicki puts her career on hold and spends two years in Boston, enduring high society and boring tea parties. She can't wait to get back to California and her career, but when Charley reneges on his promise, Vicki promptly gets a divorce. It doesn't take long for Charley to return west. He and his friends track Vicki to a nightclub where she has taken up with another shady figure. They become involved in a violent brawl. Charley then makes off with Vicki and marries her a third time, to the amazement of his pals. As a gesture of gratitude, Charley sinks millions of dollars into a movie studio where he intends to produce pictures featuring his wife. But while the careers of his buddies take off, Charley and Vicki begin to have children and raise a family. Nothing at the new studio gets under way and Charley goes broke. He angrily blames Vicki, who walks out on him yet again.
Divorced and depressed, a haggard-looking Charley is found by his friends quite a bit later at a nightclub, where he tells them he has recently gone into a promising new line of work: computers. He stares dreamily at the stage where Vicki is performing her act. Charley shows his friends a diamond engagement ring that he has brought with him. Vicki slides it onto her finger.
|
humor
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0066871
|
Burke & Hare
|
The film opens in Edinburgh. Narration by Angus the Hangman explains how the corpses of the hanged are transported to Dr Robert Knox for dissection. Knox's rival, Dr Alexander Monro, wants the steady supply of cadavers but is forced to rely on severed limbs for dissection. Monro's assistant Charles Darwin arrives with a forged letter directing that all corpses thenceforth must be sent to Monro. Angus tells Knox's assistant, Patterson, the news. Patterson delivers the message to Knox.
William Burke and William Hare, immigrants from Ulster, attempt to sell cheese mould as a patent medicine. When their fraud is discovered, they flee to an inn owned by Hare's wife, Lucky. She tells them that one of the lodgers has died. Burke and Hare decide to sell the corpse to Knox. They are forced to break the corpse's spine to fit it into a barrel in order to smuggle it through the city. They stop at a pub along the way, where a young former prostitute, Ginny Hawkins, loudly performs an excerpt from Macbeth. The patrons ignore her. Burke asks her why she did this, and she says that it is her ambition to become an actress. They share a drink; Hare reminds Burke that they must continue to Knox's house.
Burke and Hare present the now-mangled corpse to Knox. After some negotiation, Knox agrees to pay them a good sum of money for each corpse they bring him for dissection. Burke plans to use his money to finance Ginny's theatrical ambitions, and Hare decides to open a funeral parlour. Returning to the inn, they find Lucky drunk and barely conscious. Lucky says she is drinking because Joseph, another lodger at the inn, is near death. Not willing to wait for the outcome, Burke and Hare suffocate Joseph and take the body to Knox.
Afterward, Burke tells Ginny about the money. She allows him to take her home. Hare meets Fergus, the henchman of villain Danny McTavish, at a bar. Fergus says that McTavish uses him to cheat at games of chance, but keeps all the winnings for himself. Hare details the arrangement with Knox. Fergus relays the information to McTavish.
Burke is kidnapped from Ginny's side and bundled into a horse carriage by McTavish and Fergus, who have already captured Hare. McTavish threatens to kill them unless they give him half the money from Knox. Forced to agree, they are then thrown from the carriage. As they trod back to the inn, they plan a string of murders to make up their losses to McTavish. Lucky becomes suspicious of the mounting death toll, as does Police Captain Tom McLintock. McLintock seeks the advice of Lord Harrington and William Wordsworth, who give permission to hunt down the criminals and have them hanged.
McTavish kidnaps Hare again and attempts to extort the remainder of the money. Shortly afterward, McTavish appears as Knox's next dissection cadaver. McLintock takes notice. He arrests Burke and Ginny, and Hare and Lucky, while both couples are having sex. He tells them that if any one of them confesses to the murders, the others will go free. Burke agrees to confess if he and Ginny can finish what they were doing when McLintock apprehended them.
Just before Burke's hanging, Angus advises him to speak if he has any final words. Burke sees Ginny in the crowd, and says, "I did it for love."
Onscreen text over the credits describes the fates of all the characters in the story, concluding with an image of the actual skeleton of William Burke at the Anatomical Museum of the University of Edinburgh Medical School.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0764662
|
Rumpelstiltskin
|
In order to make himself appear superior, a miller lies to the king, telling him that his daughter can spin straw into gold. (Some versions make the miller's daughter blonde and describe the "straw-into-gold" claim as a careless boast the miller makes about the way his daughter's straw-like blond hair takes on a gold-like lustre when sunshine strikes it.) The king calls for the girl, shuts her in a tower room filled with straw and a spinning wheel, and demands she spin the straw into gold by morning or he will cut off her head (other versions have the king threatening to lock her up in a dungeon forever). When she has given up all hope, an imp-like creature appears in the room and spins the straw into gold in return for her necklace (since he only comes to people seeking a deal/trade). When next morning the king takes the girl to a larger room filled with straw to repeat the feat, the imp spins in return for the girl's ring. On the third day, when the girl has been taken to an even larger room filled with straw and told by the king that he will marry her if she can fill this room with gold or execute her if she cannot, the girl has nothing left with which to pay the strange creature. He extracts from her a promise that she will give him her firstborn child and so he spins the straw into gold a final time. (In some versions, the imp appears and begins to turn the straw into gold, paying no heed to the girl's protests that she has nothing to pay him with; when he finishes the task, he states that the price is her first child, and the horrified girl objects because she never agreed to this arrangement.)
The king keeps his promise to marry the miller's daughter. But when their first child is born, the imp returns to claim his payment: "Now give me what you promised." She offers him all the wealth she has to keep the child but the imp has no interest in her riches. He finally consents to give up his claim to the child if she can guess his name within three days. Her many guesses fail, but before the final night, she wanders into the woods (some versions she sent a servant in the woods instead of going herself to keep the king's suspicions at bay) searching for him and comes across his remote mountain cottage and watches, unseen, as he hops about his fire and sings. In his song's lyrics, "tonight tonight, my plans I make, tomorrow tomorrow, the baby I take. The queen will never win the game, for Rumpelstiltskin is my name'", he reveals his name. Some versions have the imp limiting the number of daily guesses to three and hence the total number of guesses allowed to a maximum of nine.
When the imp comes to the queen on the third day, after first feigning ignorance, she reveals his name, Rumpelstiltskin, and he loses his temper and their bargain. (Versions vary about whether he accuses the devil or witches of having revealed his name to the queen.) In the 1812 edition of the Brothers Grimm tales, Rumpelstiltskin then "ran away angrily, and never came back". The ending was revised in an 1857 edition to a more gruesome ending wherein Rumpelstiltskin "in his rage drove his right foot so far into the ground that it sank in up to his waist; then in a passion he seized the left foot with both hands and tore himself in two". Other versions have Rumpelstiltskin driving his right foot so far into the ground that he creates a chasm and falls into it, never to be seen again. In the oral version originally collected by the Brothers Grimm, Rumpelstiltskin flies out of the window on a cooking ladle.
|
fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0374308
|
United
|
On the morning of September 11, 2001, passengers board United Airlines Flight 93, bound for San Francisco, at Newark Liberty International Airport, including Tom Burnett, Mark Bingham, Todd Beamer, Jeremy Glick, Richard Guadagno, Louis J. Nacke, II, William Joseph Cashman and Patrick Joseph Driscoll. Four al-Qaeda terrorists Ziad Jarrah, Saeed al-Ghamdi, Ahmed al-Nami, and Ahmed al-Haznawi also board the flight.
Meanwhile, newly promoted FAA National Operations Manager Ben Sliney is in a meeting when it is reported that American Airlines Flight 11 from Boston to Los Angeles has been hijacked after Mohamed Atta is overheard on the radio saying, "We have some planes". Minutes later the aircraft crashes into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Much to Sliney and his staff's horror, they learn that a second flight United Airlines Flight 175 also from Boston to Los Angeles, has been hijacked and after New York air traffic controllers attempt to contact the aircraft, it is seen live on CNN plowing into the South Tower of the World Trade Center as reported that day. Sliney and his staff realize they are dealing with several hijackings and orders the military to be on the lookout for American Airlines Flight 77, which is reported missing and presumed to have also been hijacked.
On United 93, Jarrah appears hesitant to initiate the hijacking plan, perhaps seems to be having second thoughts about going through with it. Impatient, the other three hijackers prepare for invasion themsevles. al-Haznawi assembles a fake bomb out of clay and plastic during breakfast, then al-Ghamdi makes the first move and grabs hold of flight attendant Debbie Welsh at knifepoint. After a passenger is fatally stabbed and the "bomb" is revealed causing mass panic among passengers, al-Nami and al-Haznawi force the first class passengers to the back of the plane. Meanwhile, Jarrah and al-Ghamdi threaten Welsh and wrestle their ways into the cockpit. The pilots send out a mayday call but are killed and dragged from the cockpit. Welsh herself is killed. Jarrah turns the plane, intending to crash the plane into the United States Capitol.
Sliney, still debating on what to do about the unfolding disaster, is in shock when American 77 crashes into the Pentagon and comes to a decision that all aircraft be grounded and planes are not to enter or leave US airspace until further notice.
Aboard United 93, the passengers become aware of the dead bodies, and learn from family members via airphone of the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon; they decide to take action organizing a revolt against the hijackers. Their plan is empowered with the knowledge that passenger Don Greene has experience in flying.
After passengers arm themselves, pray, and make final phone calls to loved ones, Todd Beamer says, "Let's Roll!" The group begin their counterattack, rushing down the aisle and overpowering Ahmed al-Haznawi; Mark Bingham crushes Ahmed al-Haznawi's skull with a fire extinguisher, killing him. Seeing this, al-Nami alerts Jarrah and al-Ghamdi in the cockpit of the ongoing assault. Jarrah shakes the plane violently to throw the passengers off balance; nonetheless they continue their assault, overpowering Ahmed al-Nami who is killed by Glick snapping his neck. Seeing the passengers getting nearer, al-Ghamdi and Jarrah debate whether to take the flight down, knowing they'll never reach their intended target. The passengers then breach the cockpit with the food cart, and al-Ghamdi orders Jarrah to crash the plane. Nonetheless, the passengers finally gain entrance into the cockpit, and battle both hijackers over the controls. As the passengers and hijackers struggle for control of the yoke, the plane plummets into a nosedive and goes upside down as the screen cuts to black. Title cards reveal the plane crashed into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, killing everyone on board.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0331632
|
Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed
|
Mystery Inc. (Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy and Scooby-Doo) attend the opening of an exhibition at the Coolsonian Criminology Museum commemorating their past solved cases with monster costumes on display. However, the celebrations are interrupted by a masked man known as the Evil Masked Figure who steals two costumes using the reanimated Pterodactyl Ghost. The gang are ridiculed by journalist Heather Jasper Howe, who starts a smear campaign against them. Concluding an old enemy is the mastermind, the gang revisit old cases, dismissing the former Pterodactyl Ghost, Jonathan Jacobo, due to his death during a failed prison escape, they guess that Jeremiah Wickles, the Black Knight Ghost’s portrayer and Jacobo's cell mate in prison, is the culprit.
Going to Wickles mansion, Fred insists on ringing the door bell twice, which activates a trap door that drops the gang into a cage. Velma identifies that the lock can be unlocked with Wickles's fingerprint. Daphne ingeniously releases them all using the makeup from her bag to recreate the previous thumb print left by Wickles, thereby effectively unlocking the prison. The gang find a book that serves as an instruction manual on how to create monsters. Shaggy and Scooby-Doo find a note inviting Wickles’s to visit the Faux Ghost nightclub. They are attacked by the Black Knight Ghost, but escape when Daphne fights him off while Velma discovers its weak spot and disables it. Before fleeing, the rest of the gang had previously discovered through the book found in Wickle's mansion that the key ingredient to creating the monsters was a substance called "randomonium", which can be found at the old silver mining town.
After Daphne helps Velma overcome her fears of intimacy and assert herself by changing up her image, Daphne, Velma and Fred go to the museum, accompanied by the curator Patrick Wisely, but discover that the rest of the costumes have been stolen. Heather Jasper Howe ridicules the gang further by turning the city against them. The gang go to the mines, finding Wickles's plans to turn it into an amusement park. As they confront Wickles, he states that he and Jacobo were cell mates who hated each other and that he has no connection to the museum robberies.
Shaggy and Scooby, after overhearing the rest of the gang criticizing their tendency to bumble every operation, and especially their most recent offense failing to tie the rope and secure the Pterodactyl Ghost, resolve to better themselves and become real detectives. Following a lead from their first clue ever, which was stuck to Scooby's foot after he played around in Wickles mansion, sneak into the Faux Ghost to try and solve the mystery. After speaking to Wickles, they learn he has resolved his ways. Scooby eventually causes a scene and his disguise falls off, leading Scooby and Shaggy to escape through a trash shoot. On their way out, they spot Patrick uncharacteristically assaulting who appears to be a member of his staff, ordering him to find answers to who vandalized his museum. Escaping an awkward interaction with Patrick, Shaggy and Scooby spot Wickles leaving the bar and follow him.
The gang then find the Monster Hive where the costumes are brought to life as real monsters. Shaggy and Scooby play around with the machine’s control panel, bringing several costumes to life, and the gang flee with the panel as the Evil Masked Figure terrorizes the city. Escaping to their old high school clubhouse, the gang realize they can reverse the control panel’s power by altering its wiring. Captain Cutler’s Ghost emerges from the bayou, forcing the gang to head back to the mines, encountering the various monsters along the way. Velma sees Patrick in the mines, finding a shrine dedicated to Jacobo, but Patrick proves his innocence by helping Velma after a catwalk unexpectedly gives way under her.
The gang confront the Evil Masked Figure as Tar Monster captures all of them but Scooby, who uses a fire extinguisher to freeze the Tar Monster’s body. He reactivates the control panel, transforming the costumes back to normal. The gang take the Evil Masked Figure to the authorities, unmasking him as Heather, who in turn reveals she is actually Jacobo in disguise, having escaped death and sought to get revenge on Mystery, Inc. by discrediting them. Jacobo’s cameraman Ned is also arrested as an accomplice. Mystery, Inc. are praised as heroes once again in Coolsville. In the Faux Ghost, the gang celebrates their victory with the now reformed criminals whom they unmasked in the past (including Wickles).
After the credits, Scooby-Doo is seen playing a Scooby-Doo 2 Game Boy Advance game. After he succeeds, he tells the viewers to enter the Scooby-Doo 2 Game Boy Advance code. (This is only seen on the VHS and DVD release)
|
good versus evil, psychedelic, horror, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
The film concerns about our friends ¨the Mystery Inc.¨ group with Scooby Doo , Shaggy ( Matthew Lillard ) and the remaining group (Sara Michelle Gellar , Freddie Prince Jr, Linda Cardellini )and takes place an eerie museum of criminology where are robbed some stuffed monsters for nefarious purposes .
This movie was a funny look back at all the episodes of Scooby-Doo. I thought that putting all the evil characters from their other mysteries was brilliant.
Fred is still the committed leader who loves his admirers and especially Daphne.My rating on this movie is a 10 because it was like watching a cartoon episode of Scooby-doo, only being a motion picture.
Plus of the movie is that it also has actors Alicia Silverstone, Tim Blake Nelson and Seth Green in it.The monsters are enjoyable and are good looking.
The character of Scooby-Doo himself is also looking more convincingly this time.It's not really a memorable or great movie but it is simple good entertainment to watch.6/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/.
I can't give "Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed" a whole-hearted recommendation, but it's great fun for the kids, and if you still find humor in the cartoon then you just might find yourself enjoying this live-action version.
Scooby Doo 2 Monsters Unleashed is a funny,light hearted family film that stays true to the Hanna Barbera series.Its one my favorite family films and one I remember fondly because I loved the series as a child and I enjoyed the way they combined different monsters from the series and put them into one big adventure for Scooby,Shaggy and the gang.I like it more than the first one,which I also enjoyed but feel it doesn't have much of what you would usually see in the series and don't like how they take a huge stab at Scrappy Doo.Scooby Doo and the gang face there biggest adventure yet as the costumes of monsters the mystery gang are brought to life after getting robbed by the Coolsville Museum Of Nstural History,the gang investigate while Shaggy and Scooby try to be better detectives and take there job more seriously,Velma falls for a history geek played by Seth Green and Fred keeps getting exploited by the media..
The original live action SCOOBY DOO was rather like the cotton candy you buy at the fair: pretty to look at and fun to scarf down.
But a little goes a long way, particularly when all the air has been beaten out and it emerges as overworked taffy.Freddie Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard, and Linda Cardellini repeat the roles of Fred, Daphne, Shaggy, and Velma.
They are supported by Seth Green, a truly talented actor who gives a very nice performance indeed; unfortunately, Peter Boyle is largely wasted and Alicia Silverstone is, well, Alicia Silverstone.Silverstone aside, the cast might have recreated the lightness of the first film--but once you mix in a story about stolen costumes that come to life, huge sets, wild outfits, a dance number, and a ton of CGI effects they pretty much get lost in the shuffle.
It's all about as much fun as a carnival after the crowd has gone and you're left alone with gum on the bottom of your shoe.Kids probably won't notice the shortcomings, and older fans will be glad to see numerous references to the original cartoon series--and to be fair the film does have its moments, largely thanks to Lillard, Cardellini, and Green.
I Love the Scooby Doo cartoons and I think this movie was great.
Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed is a very good film that has a good cast which includes Freddie Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard, Linda Cardellini, Seth Green, Peter Boyle, Tim Blake Nelson, Alicia Silverstone, Neil Fanning, Pat O'Brien, and the Tazmanian Devil!
If you like The the first Scooby-Doo movie and the classic cartoons, Freddie Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard, Linda Cardellini, Seth Green, Peter Boyle, Tim Blake Nelson, Alicia Silverstone, Neil Fanning, Pat O'Brien, the Tazmanian Devil the rest of the cast in the film, Comedy, Action, Adventure, Thrillers, Family, Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Horror, Dramas, and interesting Halloween seasonal films then I strongly recommend you to see this film today!.
i was rather disappointed in this movie.i just felt it didn't have the same charm and sense of fun as the first one.i think it tries to take itself too seriously at times.don't get me wrong,there are some funny moments,but there are less of them and they don't work as well this time around.i think they just got old.there's also a bit of a subplot which i didn't think had much point.there are a lot more monsters in this one,so it should be exciting,but it it really isn't.in fact,i found it slow at times.it doesn't have the same pacing as the first one.this movie also gets into the "just be yourself,we're all OK" syndrome.now there nothing wrong with that.it is a good message.but this movie shouldn't really be the forum for that.this is a type of movie that should just be fun and entertaining.beside,it throws off the pacing of the movie.also,there is a bit of innuendo,some sexual,some not.it's very subtle,but it's there.any way,i can't give "Scooby Doo 2:Monsters Unleashed" more than 5/10.
Although I'm slightly biased for this film (due to the fact that I watched some of the filming in Vancouver and Stanley Park) I believe this movie felt more like an episode of "Scooby-Doo Where Are You?" than the first.
Adults who grew up with this and have moved on are the ones who this would have attracted only to be let down by the childish nature of the movie.Sitting and watching it with my 6yo and 3yo, they love this and the first one because as they say, it's fun like the cartoon.
) as Shaggy Rogers , Freddie Prinze Jr(Shes All That) as Fred Jones,Sarah Michelle Gellar(Buffy The Vampire Slayer) as Daphne Blake ,Linda Cardellini(Legally Blonde) as Velma Dinkley, Neil Fanning(Crocodile Hunter:Collison Course) as Scooby-Doo, Seth Green(The Italian Job) as Patrick Wisely, Peter Boyle(Doctor Dolittle) as Jeremiah Wickles, Tim Blake Nelson(Holes) as Dr.Jonathan Jacobo and Alicia Silverstone(Clueless) as Heather Jasper- Howe.
I actually didn't mind this film but I felt it was cheesy and cartoony the characters weren't bad in second act as expected the second act was darker but i also enjoyed the Humor as well .Score by David Newman(Galaxy Quest),Cinematography By Oliver Wood(Freaky Friday) ,Screenplay By James Gunn(The Specials) & Direction By Raja Gosnell(Home Alone 3) An Amusing second Act for The Live Action Scooby Doo 7/10.
Monsters Unleashed brings back the Mystery Inc. gang who must save Coolsville from an attack of past unmasked monsters they had dealt with including the Black Knight Ghost, Pterodactyl Ghost and the Tar Monster, who were brought to life by an evil masked figure.This is a somewhat adventurous movie filled with ghosts and goblins, with Scooby filmed in CGI, and Freddy Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Matthew Lillard and Linda Cardellini returning in their respective Mystery Inc. gang roles; each did a creative job in portraying Fred, Daphne, Velma and Shaggy.
It was nice seeing Alicia Silverstone make an appearance in the movie; it is too bad her role was only confined to a TV reporter role, which didn't contribute much to the story.Like the first film, the special and visual effects were colorful and and flashy, and I thought the ghost action was executed pretty well.
Love it or loath it the first live action Scooby film was a hit and therefore it is no surprise to see a sequel.Pleasantly it is an improvement on the original with more humour, more depth and more monsters.
Even the 3D Scooby looks more life like.There are some new faces such as Alicia Silverstone and the dearly missed Peter Boyle but by and large it falls upon the talents of Matthew Lillard and Linda Cardelllini to create the movies' magic moments.
Lillard is as close to the original character as you could get and it is no surprise that it is his antics that dominate the film most though the sub plot about Velma and a possible love interest is also very sweet..Overall an enjoyable film for fans of the original series as well as those discovering Scooby for the first time..
Now i watch the DVD and i realized that i lost a good time.Unlike other franchises that equate sequels with changes, here the same ingredients apply and remain unchanged: ideal cast, bright colors and "cliches" from the classic show.Following the previous movie, the story has (a bit of) reflexion about the team and the cement that makes friendship.
If this had been the first film, I think that many would have thought it was much better, but, when you weigh it against the original 'Scooby Doo' movie, it pales....
We still have the cast of "Mysteries Inc" running around in the Mystery Machine van - with Scooby Doo (created in CGI), Fred (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard), Velma (Linda Cardinelli) and Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar).
This time, they're joined by some old favorites: Seth Green (as a love interest for Velma), Peter Boyle (as the classic 'Old Man Wickles'), Alicia Silverstone (as a great foil for Daphne), 'Inside Edition' host Pat O'Brien shows up and even 'American Idol' alum Ruben Studdard gets a turn to show us his acting chops.The story line revolves around a reappearance of some of Mystery Inc.'s old school monsters coming back around in town.
OK, so they weren't even remotely scary, but hey - neither were their cartoon incarnations.Overall, I'd have to give 'Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed' 6/10 - not a bad movie, but not the best I've ever seen.
If you are looking to relive some old time fun, watch cartoon network or something.The final thing that makes this movie livable, is no Scrappy Doo.
Third, as a fan of the cartoons growing up, this one looks more like true Scooby Doo. In the first movie, the monsters were not very interesting.
Although this was a great movie, I still liked the first Scooby Doo better.
Meanwhile, in this second `Scooby Gang' installment we find our five heroes (Freddie Prinze Jr. as Fred, Sarah Michelle Gellar as Daphne, Linda Cardellini as Velma, Matthew Lillard as Shaggy, and Scooby Do) getting back to their cartoon roots when a mysterious masked madman brings a collection of monster costumes (worn by previous Scooby-Doo cartoon bad-guys) to life to terrorize the town of Coolville, home of the Mystery Machine.
Fans of the Scooby-Doo cartoon series will certainly enjoy this film while others will get some cheap belly laughs..
'Scooby-Doo 2: Monster's Unleashed (2004)' isn't as good as the first film.
Scooby-Doo 2 (2004) ** (out of 4)The second and final film in the attempt to bring the animated classic to the big screen has Fred (Freddie Prinze, Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) and Scooby walking the red carpet as a museum housing the costumes to their greatest cases is about to open.
Suddenly a black knight comes to life and soon some of the gangs most famous monsters are coming after them.SCOOBY-DOO 2 is a minor improvement over the first film but it still can't measure up to the original series or many of the spin-offs that followed it.
The supporting cast does feature Seth Green, a strong performance by Peter Boyle and it was certainly nice seeing Alicia Silverstone.Fans of the original series will probably understand the monsters here better than kids perhaps watching this movie.
It was fun getting to see some of the old costumes brought to life in the current CGI work and for the most part I thought the special effects were good and especially on the Tar Man. There are still a few adult winks scattered throughout the picture but sadly the overall story is just dumbed down way too much for adults to really enjoy it.
Now, I move on to the sequel to the 2002 film, SCOOBY-DOO 2: MONSTERS UNLEASHED.I mentioned in my previous film review for the first Scooby-Doo film that the film was negatively received by critics, but was a hit with audiences and made a profit of $275 million dollars against it's $84 million dollar budget.SCOOBY-DOO 2: MONSTERS UNLEASHED is the sequel to the first film once again directed by Raja Gosnell and written by James Gunn.The plot shows the Mystery Inc. investigating the plans of a masked villain who wants to control the city of Coolsville using a machine to create monsters.Unlike the first film, this film featured several of the monsters from the television series, including the Black Knight, the 10, 000 Volt Ghost, the Pterodactyl Ghost, the Miner 49er and Chickenstein.The story is amazing and I think the writer once again successfully translated this script into a film that I enjoyed.
Now, I move on to the sequel to the 2002 film, SCOOBY-DOO 2: MONSTERS UNLEASHED.I mentioned in my previous film review for the first Scooby-Doo film that the film was negatively received by critics, but was a hit with audiences and made a profit of $275 million dollars against it's $84 million dollar budget.SCOOBY-DOO 2: MONSTERS UNLEASHED is the sequel to the first film once again directed by Raja Gosnell and written by James Gunn.The plot shows the Mystery Inc. investigating the plans of a masked villain who wants to control the city of Coolsville using a machine to create monsters.Unlike the first film, this film featured several of the monsters from the television series, including the Black Knight, the 10, 000 Volt Ghost, the Pterodactyl Ghost, the Miner 49er and Chickenstein.The story is amazing and I think the writer once again successfully translated this script into a film that I enjoyed.
James Gunn did a really good job with the script and Raja Gosnell directed this movie brilliantly.The visual effects, costume and production designs are really great, especially the way they created the monsters and it was really amazing and the CGI on the monsters and Scooby-Doo is just freaking awesome.My favorite scene is when Daphne fights the Black Knight.
James Gunn did a really good job with the script and Raja Gosnell directed this movie brilliantly.The visual effects, costume and production designs are really great, especially the way they created the monsters and it was really amazing and the CGI on the monsters and Scooby-Doo is just freaking awesome.My favorite scene is when Daphne fights the Black Knight.
Unfortunately, though it features much better F/X work, more "star" power (Seth Green, Alicia Silverstone and an under/misused Peter Boyle), a better handle on the characters by the returning cast (though none come close to matching the sheer brilliance of Matthew Lillard's Shaggy) and a story that makes good use of iconic baddies from the original animated series, it still only adds up to a marginal improvement over the first film.Little ones may enjoy the loud and zany antics, and Gen-Xers will surely get some nostalgia from seeing the various old school ghouls, but there's little here to recommend for anyone else..
Scooby and the gang Fred (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Shaggy (Matthew Lillard), and Velma (Linda Cardellini) have become the toast of the town in Coolsville.
Once again, the Mystery Inc. gang of Freddy (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini), Shaggy (Lilard) and that mumbling and bumbling CGI Scooby are back in the game trying to solve the case, even after becoming a total embarrassment at the press.
Actually, I think the fact that Scooby and Shaggy try to be like the rest of the gang is pretty good, but it just isn't QUITE enough to grab my interest.
As it turns out, Scooby-Doo 2 is the opposite of that.The part of the film I enjoyed the most was Matthew Lillard's performance as Shaggy (he also stole my attention in the original movie).
It created a mysterious and kookily fun mood for the film.Is Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed better than the original film?
Plot is not as great as the first Scooby Doo movie, but the acting is very good, so are the special effects and costumes.
As sequels go Scooby Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed is a good film.
Scooby Doo The Movie (the first one) worked on a couple levels, namely the farting dog & the excellent Matthew Lillard (he is Shaggy).
I'm a huge Scooby Doo fan and I personally think that the Sequel was better than the original.
If you and your family are looking for a funfilled movie to see, than Scooby Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed is your best bet!
I've seen most of the original cartoon, and that was a pretty repitious show, and I'm impressed that they didn't stick to routine, and provided an original Scooby Doo storyline that is ok....at times.Sadly, this movie is intended for kids though, with plenty of fart jokes, but contains little, very hard to notice drug references, which as a teenager, made me laugh a little.
Matthew Lillard was fantastic as Shaggy and in my opinion, it is him who makes the whole film - the rest of the cast, although they're OK, just plod along behind Shaggy (apart from Scooby of course, but I didn't count him as he's animation).Scooby Doo 2 is better because it's just so much more like the cartoon series, which is what the fans want afterall.
What makes this movie better than the first, is the fact its so more like the tradional Scooby doo cartoon, it has the classic running scenes, more scary figures, more scooby classic lines.
Well, Monsters Unleashed was a lot better than the original (Scooby Doo 3/10) but its still not as good as I hoped it would be.
This time around, Matthew Lillard, (there is no better Shaggy), gets to play more with Scooby.
not only has this film got jokes that weren't even new during the time of the first scooby doo movie, its also got the same actors.
|
tt0092699
|
Broadcast News
|
The film revolves around three characters who work in television news. Jane Craig (Hunter) is a talented, neurotic producer whose life revolves around her work. Jane's best friend and frequent collaborator, Aaron Altman (Brooks), is a gifted writer and reporter ambitious for on-camera exposure who is secretly in love with Jane. Tom Grunick (Hurt), a local news anchorman who until recently was a sports anchorman, is likeable and telegenic, but lacks news experience and knows that he was only hired for his good looks and charm. He is attracted to Jane, although he is also intimidated by her skills and intensity.
All three work out of the Washington, D.C., office of a national television network. Jane is drawn to Tom, but resents his lack of qualifications for his new position as news anchor. Aaron also is appalled by Tom's lack of experience and knowledge, but accepts his advice when finally getting an opportunity to anchor a newscast himself. Unfortunately, he lacks Tom's poise and composure in that seat, and his debut as an anchor is a failure.
Aaron acknowledges to Jane that he is in love with her while trying to dissuade her from pursuing a romantic relationship with Tom. As a massive layoff hits the network, resulting in many colleagues losing their jobs, Aaron tenders his resignation, and tells her he plans to take a job in Portland, Oregon. However, before he leaves, he briefly tells Jane of an interview Tom had conducted with a victim of date rape in which Tom appeared to be crying out of sympathy; Aaron quickly gives evidence that this was not authentic, then leaves. Jane later discovers, upon looking through the footage, that Tom's tears were indeed staged.
As Tom is at the airport leaving for London (where the network is transferring him), Jane angrily confronts him, saying that his actions were a breach of journalistic ethics and that she cannot in good conscience become personally involved with him. She no longer has either man in her personal or professional life, at least until the three of them reunite several years later.
|
romantic, satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
William Hurt is the affable but dumb new kid on the block, news anchor.The classical love triangle emerges with the stunningly witty and self deprecating Brookes in love with Hunter but she of course is attracted to Hurt.This film works on many levels.
This is personified by the meteoric career success of the Hurt character in contrast to Brookes relative decline.Despite being fifteen years old the film has some startingly relevant messages about modern news values and the continuing decline in journalistic standards.This film is a classic in every sense and it is difficult to understand why it has been so neglected.
She's so smart in the film (a rarity for a lead female) that you almost think if her only romantic choices are William Hurt's style-but-no-substance anchor or Albert Brooks's neurotic but intellectually arrogant reporter, she'd be better off with Robert Prosky.
Fortunately, the James Brooks script and direction are a joy throughout, culminating in two perfect scenes: one with Joan Cusack unraveling seconds before a tape feed, and a marvelous 360 (?) pan thru the studio showing a live news feed from producer to anchor in one shot..
And Albert Brooks walks away with every scene he's in- this triangle of people is beautifully drawn and compelling and made the whole movie soar above it's vital and important topic of the News, and how it's slowly being compromised in our nation.Watch this with NETWORK for a truly fun and frightening evening..
Not only is this a clever comedy, this is an interesting look at what goes on behind the scenes in the television news business.There are so many funny lines...a couple of my favorites:Ernie Merriman: (sarcastically) It must be nice to always believe you know better, to always think you're the smartest person in the room.
Aaron: No one invites a bad looking idiot to their room!The performances of Holly Hunter, Albert Brooks, and William Hurt were absolutely brilliant!
He isn't only the producer for "The Simpsons," he has some classic comedies under his belt -- "Broadcast News" is one of them.Although it doesn't match his later effort "As Good As It Gets," "Broadcast News" is still a very clever, funny and witty movie about a television broadcasting station and all the problems they suffer.
There's a great comedic sequence of physical humor where Joan Cusack is running around the building trying to rush a news tape to the editing room in a matter of mere minutes before it is to be broadcast live on TV.This isn't only very truthful in terms of how hectic broadcasting stations are operated, but also a skillful and honest portrayal of human beings.A low-key, subtle movie with good acting (especially from Hurt, who I don't always like so much) and apt direction..
Despite good performances (including an unbilled Jack Nicholson as a network Big Fish) and a literate screenplay, the characters are truly too old to be acting like such lovestruck juveniles.
Although significantly overlong, the film's content stands up quite well for the most part, with an interesting and informative insight into television news broadcasting and great characters.
The actress and actors selected to play these characters are superb choices, although William Hurt and Albert Brooks do more with their roles than Holly Hunter.
She loved it, was crying and was offended that I was not moved or impressed as she was.I like Albert Brooks but found William Hurt unconvincing as a store dummy and Holly Hunter to be absolutely grating on the ears and embarrassing in every shot of her.I found the story-line to be contrived to jerk tears and hit all the politically correct points of the 80s ( date rape and sensitive men).Save your time and go rent a Hitchcock film instead!Unbowed.
When the last one exits, the co-host of the event says quietly to HOLLY HUNTER: "I don't think there will be any Q&A." Subtle line in a brilliantly written low-key comedy, a farce about the show biz aspect of TV anchoring.WILLIAM HURT is the inept news anchor who finds himself working with HOLLY HUNTER as the network anchorman.
He proves to be a quick study as long as his earpiece is working and he's getting all the straight info from executive producer Hunter.Holly's other anchor friend (ALBERT BROOKS) helps by feeding her information she passes on to Hurt.
In this unpredictable comedy, there's no telling who Hunter (the neurotic heroine) will end up with.Fittingly, HOLLY HUNTER, WILLIAM HURT and ALBERT BROOKS were all nominated for Oscars (Brooks in supporting role), as was the film itself and director/writer James L.
The film focuses mainly on three individuals; 2 x male television reporters Tom Grunick and Aaron Altman (William Hurt and Albert Brooks respectively) and executive producer Jane Craig (Holly Hunter).
With both men employed at the television company, an awkward love triangle develops when Jane falls for Tom and Aaron falls for Jane...Sky Movies proudly boasts Broadcast News as being an Oscar Winning comedy and to be fair given the premise I didn't expect this to be in-your-face comedy and was looking for something that would prove to be suitably humourous.
This was an over-sight in the film's script, in my opinion.Tom Grunnick is too-nice-of-a-guy to be the malevolent, shallow, sensationalist manipulator of the public that both Albert Brooks' character and Holly Hunter's (eventually) make him him to be.
It seems like the director wanted to have his news and read it, too:A mellow, likable, moderately-intelligent, but good-looking sports caster is thrust into the role of anchorman, probably on his looks and connections, and is then accused by some of his closest workmates of shallowness and sensationalism, but we are given only one instance of Grunnick embodying and displaying this propensity.What we needed was to meet Tom Grunnick.
We know she is ambitious and her timing and inter-personal skills are good, but what are her ideals that Albert Brooks' character alludes to toward the end of the movie?
I don't really know when it was that TV stations began preferring to have handsome men as their reporters - regardless of the mens' IQs - but it was clearly a problem by the time that "Broadcast News" came out, and the movie does a really good job looking at it.
Portraying a love triangle between pretty boy air-head reporter Tom Grunick (William Hurt), intelligent but nervous reporter Aaron Altman (Albert Brooks) and producer Jane Craig (Holly Hunter), the movie pulls no punches.
I have a friend who works as a producer for a local news station and he advised that this is close to reality so kudos to the films writer and director for doing their research.Fun movie with a lot of insight into the World of Network News.
Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks are fantastic as the purists who believe in the old- fashioned honest way of delivering the news, and William Hurt is just as good as the up- start who would rather look good on camera.
And Albert Brooks is humble and hard working as an up and coming want to be news star who's just a reporter it's like he's behind the scenes.Aside from seeing the behind the scenes and inner working of news and breaking stories in the room the film blends with the relationships and love life's of the central characters and it's nice to see the legendary Jack Nicholson with some cameo work as the top nightly news anchor and the attractive Lois Chiles as a sexy news reporter who has a one night stand with William Hurt's character.
Jane finds herself falling for Tom despite her views.The great thing in this movie is that all three people are appealing and the actors inject their characters with humanity.
Brooks has made gems in 'Terms Of Endearment' & 'As Good As It Gets', but 'Broadcast News' easily ranks as his finest & most wonderful film to date.Performances in any James L.
It seemed like the romantic comedy, and I remembered I hated those, and had the full mindset of hating this movie.Boy, was I wrong.While this is a romantic comedy, it's acted by an amazing lead & supporting cast (Brooks, Hunter, Cusack, and Nicholson), and everything works well within itself.
The characters, played by Holly Hunter (Jane), William Hurt (Tom) and Albert Brooks (Aaron), are a dynamic trio of very different and conflicting personalities.
Hey, no one ever said Howard Cosell got by on his looks and charm.Broadcast News got nominated for Oscars in seven categories including Best Picture, Best Actor for William Hurt, Best Actress for Holly Hunter, and Best Supporting Actor for Albert Brooks among them.
He is also concerned that his good friend Jane maybe falling in love with Tom, despite her better judgement, as it becomes increasingly clear that Aaron has his own romantic feelings for her.This central romantic plot is set within the trials and tribulations of a TV news network office, where moral dilemmas and ethics are wrestled with quickly and where appearances and dramatic effect are becoming more prevalent and important.This is where most of the bite comes from with well-observed comment and scenes.
Brooks gets the best portion of them, in line with his character, but even the briefest conversations that are incidental and perhaps over-heard by one or more of the characters as they move through a crowded room, should be listened to.Hunter is a tour-de-force in this role for which she was rightly (and not alone) nominated for an Oscar, and for which she probably would have got if it was for a role in a film that didn't mock part of what had become a closely related industry - and against a strong performance from another actress in a more traditional feel-good, rom-com.Brooks is also excellent as the constantly frustrated and occasionally too-smug-for-his-own-good, Aaron Altman.Hurt, whilst possessing the looks and providing the personality required of his character, does not always convince that he is quite as dim-witted the character says he is or is supposed to be.
Sometimes i wonder why movies as dull as this get rave reviews and are nominated for major awards and all i can come up with with Broadcast News is that it was given great reviews when released because the columns were written by journalists who maybe could relate to the subject matter or maybe it's a case of the emporors new clothes....One review says how funny this film is and another journo says they same without deep down actually knowing what he or she found funny about it and i think from there on the adulation snowballed in my opinion without justification .
I didn't like "As Good as it Gets" very much, but I am a big fan of William Hurt and Holly Hunter's work, so I decided to watch this movie.
well, we have the superb actors Holly Hunter and William Hurt at the top of their game, and Albert Brooks was nominated for an Oscar for his portrayal of a TV reporter who wants to be an anchor.
(Joan Cusack, Robert Prosky and Jack Nicholson are also fun to watch.)As a woman what I found especially appealing (and so did many of my woman friends) about BROADCAST NEWS is that Holly Hunter's character is in a (hierarchical) position of power over both men, and therefore the familiar dynamic of the boss mentoring a new hire undergoes a sex change.
As a member of the broadcasting industry for nearly 25 years, I can attest that Broadcast News was an almost-perfect representation of "The Biz." The only flaw was that, in real life, characters like Tom Grunnick are even better looking, have bigger egos, are far more glib, are smoother readers, and in most cases, are more adept at hiding their shortcomings.Please understand, I am not suggesting that is true of all anchor people, but Aaron Altman's notion that "being out covering the stories is where the real action is" is also the facet of the business that requires the greatest talent.
Holly Hunter has given amazing performances, but she is at her finest as a workaholic news producer, torn between a handsome anchorman (William Hurt), and a down-to-earth reporter (Albert Brooks).
The story is rather bland and becomes even somewhat tedious near the end, but the acting and the dialogues are so terrific that I forgive the somewhat bland ending.The story is about 2 competing news men and one woman: William Hurt, Albert Brooks and Holly Hunter.
Brooks wrote and directed this comedy drama that stars Holly Hunter as network news producer Jane Craig, who finds herself attracted to a new(and handsome) newscaster named Tom Grunick(played by William Hurt).
Jack Nicholson also stars in a small role as a retiring veteran news anchor that everyone looks up to.Funny and intelligent film is not as moving or memorable as Brook's previous "Terms Of Endearment", but still works as an insightful look at network news, and human relationships, which doesn't end in the traditional way, though is still believable..
Feisty TV news producer Holly Hunter (as Jane Craig) desires dumb blond anchorman William Hurt (as Tom Grunick), but turns on non-telegenic reporter Albert Brooks (as Aaron Altman).
At the news station there are two reporters, Tom Grunick (Hurt) and Aaron Altman (Brooks), and both are very attracted to Jane Craig.
William Hurt, Albert Brooks and Holly Hunter portraying the principals in a complicated romantic charade at a television news station just doesn't click as well as it should.
Brooks has much game, chilluns.Pay special attention to the scene where Jane (Holly Hunter) admits to Aaron (Albert Brooks), that she's in love with Tom (William Hurt).
Albert Brooks, whom I admire greatly as a director as well as an actor, adds real flair to the role of Hunter's best friend, looking out for her best interests but being in love with her at the same time.The personal and the professional are sketched by James L.
The three main stars, William Hurt,Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks create a love triangle whilst working at the Washington bureau of a TV network.Tom Grunick(Hurt)is the handsome reporter who is being groomed to be a star.Jane (Hunter)is the producer who recognises that Tom lacks the intellectual gravitas to be a real journalist, but falls for him anyway.Aaron Altman(Brooks)is the man who shares her beliefs in journalistic standards is also the man who truly loves her.Holly Hunter was nominated for a Best Actress Academy Award ,but lost out to Cher(Moonstruck!).She was robbed!
The scales literally fall from her eyes.Wiliam Hurt's performance is less showy.He plays a man who is well aware that he is a himbo and a fraud,but is smart enough to know that his rise will be facilitated by people like Jane.He gives little hints of a man who is extremely calculating and is a complete narcissist.The film comments on celebrity, journalism,integrity and the commercial pressures on news in a medium that is focused on the bottom line.
Good romance comedy drama movie that coud have been a classic if it had a better ending.Good overall production and the acting performances was solid.Good vehicle for Holly Hunter.The last few minutes of the movie was terrible though and uncanny because the build up was an intelligent pleasurable ride.Like great sex without an orgasm.The Academy Awards thought so too apparently,nominating this movie many times but not giving it any statues.Only for big romance drama comedy fans,Broadcast news industry people and fans of the lead actors........
It can also be seen as a Rocky-like inspiration for those of us who feel that we are in a job that demands abilities that we can not provide as we may be able to thrive on our good looks and personality, if we have them.The film is about a handsome, likable news reporter, Tom Grunick (William Hurt) who unexpectedly enters the serious world of network news after humble beginnings covering sport for local television.
This is one of several flaws in an otherwise enjoyable film.The three central characters in the film of Grunick, Aaron Altman (Albert Brooks) and Jane Craig (Holly Hunter) are introduced at the start as children and already their personal traits are firmly established.
Leaving Holly Hunter to one side (which is probably the best place for her), the terrific William Hurt merely has to look good in order to succeed, just like the character he is playing.
In this movie, he satirizes the industry and how the media operates.Actors William Hurt, Holly Hunter, Albert Brooks give memorable performances.
Actors William Hurt, Holly Hunters and Albert Brooks play key roles as television news presenters in this film which also showed how a person's career choices are shaped by the childhood's experiences.
Albert Brooks gives a sharp performance and so does William Hurt as the two reporter rivals, Aaron and Tom. Also, Joan Cusack is very funny in one of her younger roles and finally, Jack Nicholson is excellent in his near "cameo." Overall, Broadcast News is an excellent film based on journalism and love.
"Broadcast News" is one of several newsroom movies made over the years, the story involves a talented reporter and writer (Albert Brooks) who the network brass clearly doesn't have on the fast-track because of his abrasive personality and lack of good looks, a rising star producer (Holly Hunter) who is great at her job but lacks social skills in the extreme, and a pretty face with no confidence in his reporting skills (William Hurt) is rising meteorically on the basis of his presentation and simple luck.The news reporting elements of this movie are fantastic.
The movie follows Jane Craig (Holly Hunter), a television news producer.
William Hurt, Holly Hunter, and Albert Brooks play a group of reporters and producer at a big news network.
William Hurt gives depth to a dimbulb anchor, but Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks walk away with the movie.
William Hurt gives depth to a dimbulb anchor, but Holly Hunter and Albert Brooks walk away with the movie.
A romance blooms between a green anchor (William Hurt; this was a great period for the actor), coming up from Sports, and television broadcast news producer (Holly Hunter; she has hardly ever been better) while both are rising professionally in their young careers in a DC station.
|
tt0300195
|
Mickey's Magical Christmas: Snowed in at the House of Mouse
|
After a successful Christmas Eve show, Mickey wishes the guests a safe trip home. However, Goofy points out that they and the guests cannot leave the House of Mouse as a snowstorm has blocked up all the exits. The guests are worried, but Mickey decides to hold a free-of-charge Christmas party for them until the conditions outside improve. Unfortunately, Donald isn't feeling the Christmas spirit; Mickey and Minnie decide to use Christmas-time cartoons they haven't shown yet to the guests to improve his mood.
The cartoons they show included Donald trying to ice-skate and constantly destroying snowmen Huey, Dewey and Louie are building in a competition, Pluto trying to get Chip and Dale out of Mickey's x-mas tree, the Mickey version of the Nutcracker, along with Ludwig Von Drake's "The Science of Santa", Mickey decorating his house in blinding lights that can be seen outside of town, and interviews about what everyone wants for Christmas or feels grateful for.
After all this, everyone, including villains like Jafar, are happy that everyone is enjoying Christmas. However, the crowd's mood quickly sours when Donald yells "hum bug!" to when Mickey asks if he's feeling the Christmas spirit. Mickey heads to the roof, where he tells Jiminy Cricket that all he wanted was for his friend to enjoy Christmas; Jiminy advises him to wish upon a star. Mickey does so and the star falls into his hands. Mickey returns to Donald, who he offers the honor of putting the star on the tree. Donald does so, instantly becoming jolly. The star magically begins redecorating the club, turning the reefs golden and giving the Magic Mirror a Santa hat, while turning Jafar's staff into a candy cane. Various languages saying Merry Christmas appear on the television as Mickey announces one last cartoon before a carol.
After Mickey's Christmas Carol, everyone gathers on the stage, singing "The Best Christmas of All"; the camera catches Hades, Hook and Jafar not singing, prompting them to do so once they notice. Mickey wishes everyone a Merry Christmas as Tinker Bell ends the film.
|
fantasy, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Some Good Moments.
First off, I thought all the animated shorts they played throughout this movie were great.
'Mickey's Christmas Carol' is one of my childhood favorites.
'Pluto's Christmas Tree' is another oldie and goodie.
The two new cartoons were great too.
It was pretty funny to see Donald being chased by an ice crack of all things in 'Donald on Ice.' And Disney's new rendition of 'The Nutcracker' was quite original and funny, especially with Donald playing the Mouse King (as you can tell, Donald is my favorite cartoon character).It's the in-between part that's a little dicey.
I'm a relatively new fan of the 'House of Mouse' series on Disney Channel, but truth be told, I was a little disappointed by this special.
I could tell that many of the scenes were just taken from previous episodes.Also, while I find most of the episodes to be pretty clever and funny, this one just seemed to be lacking some comedic pep.
Maybe this was done to concentrate more on Christmas sentiment.
However, I will say I was pleasantly surprised by the last musical number.
I thought it would be pretty corny and sappy, but it turned out to have the right amount of heart, and it made me laugh when the villains participated.So while it's not necessarily a Christmas classic, there are some moments throughout the movie I think you'll definitely enjoy.My IMDb Rating: 7/10.
Grade: B (Good).
The movie was not a rip off.
Mickey's Magical Christmas was not a rip off.
It just was remembering the good times the characters shared.And showed how beautiful friendship is.
I thought the movie was beautiful..
This video is just a collection of old Disney cartoons repackaged with very poor filler material involving many classic characters with boring one-liners.
Reminds me of when they have a "special" episode of a sitcom which is only recycled bits from the whole season.
Don't bother to buy this one.
Very poor, Walt.
Don't rip us off like that!.
Recycled material with lame filler and a lame gift..
If you've ever watched the hour-long "Magical World of Disney" show which had various Disney cartoons from the 1940s through 1970s played, you'll be familiar with what this video is.
The exact same stories shown the exact same way with a grand total of 3-5 new minutes of wrapper animation (with different voices than the segments, as well as poorer quality animation) make this one to avoid.The tape does include a little cardboard stand for a picture of some kind, but that's not really worth the money spent on this.
Go get Monsters, Inc instead -- your family will thank you..
I have no idea what this was supposed to be, but the end result was atrocious.
It certainly seems to fit in nicely with the current Disney run of "cheapquels" being cranked out at furious pace to squeeze a few more dollars out of their "properties", quality be damned.
Certainly whoever produced this misaligned heap of bouncing blobs set to jarring and annoying music was hired by ghouls in suits or possibly accountants to do a dirty job, and no love went into it whatsoever.
The direct-to-video animation is clumsy, the characters are ghastly and vague impersonations of themselves; worse, the storyline is retarded, so much that even my 5-year-old nephew (who made me watch this awful thing) could see that it was dumb and didn't "feel" like any of the classics.
The characters all have the same personality of ill-defined bouncing blobs without motivation, and the "story" couldn't have taken more than a few minutes to work out.
Indeed, this thing has all the sincerity of a street hustler and all the charm of a corporate powerpoint presentation.
The music was apparently provided by a handful of lounge entertainment dinosaurs armed with cheap Casio synths..
I liked it.
I don't think Mickey's Magical Christmas:Snowed in at the House of Mouse is the best Christmas movie nor is it among the best Disney has ever done.
It is though a decent movie and worth seeing if you like the show House of Mouse(I do), if you love Christmas(once again I do) or if you like Disney(once again I do).
This has been compared to House of Villains.
I will say I liked them both equally, both had their faults but both have their virtues.
I feel Snowed in at the House of Mouse is less rushed and has the better combination of shorts, while House of Villains had the better story and animation.So what were Snowed in at the House of Mouse's faults?
While less rushed, which is in some ways a good thing, the story does drag and does revolve a little too much around the shorts.
The animation on the whole is pretty decent, but I did not like how Belle and the Beast were animated, Belle is deflated and Beast is ripped of his majesty.
Also, it is a little too short.However, the animation as I have said apart from Belle and the Beast is decent, there are some nicely drawn characters and the backgrounds are lovely and colourful, and it sticks reasonably true to the animation style of the show like House of Villains does.
The animation in the shorts though is better than the animation inside the House of Mouse I feel.
The music is very nice too, especially loved the end song, and the ending was better than that of House of Villains(it wasn't as abrupt).
There is some nice dialogue, without being too sappy or going overboard with the humour, the voice work is pretty much excellent and it was wonderful seeing Disney characters such as Lumiere, Jiminy Cricket, Ariel, Jafar and Peter Pan again, and Mickey, Donald, Minnie, Daisy and Goofy of course.
What made this film though was the cartoons.
Donald on Ice was amusing, and matches the humour evident in the early Donald Duck cartoons.
Mickey's Christmas Carol and Pluto's Christmas Tree are both Christmas classics, while the take on the Nutcracker was a lot of fun, especially for Donald's Mouse King which was hilarious.Overall, I liked this film.
It's nothing extraordinary, but it is not a bad way to pass an hour or so of your Christmas holiday.
7/10 Bethany Cox. Snowed in at house of mouse.
I liked the Snowed in at the House of Mouse.
The House of Mouse is a fun format of Disney's cartoon stable.
It shows some original cartoons with the main group and overall appearances out of context that remind me of Who Framed Roger Rabbit at a toon club.
Would like to see more of the House of Mouse series.
There was a House of Villains of a similar style.
Good times.Disney's House of Mouse is an animated television series, produced by Walt Disney Television, that originally aired from 2001 to 2003, and ran for 52 episodes.
Mickey Mouse and his friends run a nightclub called the "House of Mouse," which shows Disney cartoons as part of its floor show.Many characters from Disney animated television series and films (such as Aladdin, Pinocchio, Peter Pan, Hercules and many more) have appeared on House of Mouse, most as guests and attendees.
Mickey Mouse is the club owner, while Minnie Mouse manages finances.
Other House of Mouse staff include greeter Donald Duck, reservation clerk Daisy Duck, head waiter Goofy, mascot Pluto, mechanical technician Horace Horsecollar, gossip columnist Clarabelle Cow, and parking valet driver Max Goof.
"The Quackstreet Boys," "Quack Sabbath," or "The Splashing Pumpkins," a musical band consisting of Huey, Dewey, and Louie, regularly performs.
Pete is also the greedy landlord of the club.
Pete often attempts to shut the club down for his own purposes by sabotaging the show, as Mickey's contract states that the club stays open only as long as the show goes on.Each episode explores the comic mishaps of Mickey and associates running the club, which are used as wraparounds for Disney cartoons (some of which are classic theatrical cartoons from the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, but most of which are reruns from Mickey Mouse Works).
This series is one of many Disney cartoon series made in Widescreen HD format.House of Mouse was on One Saturday Morning on ABC, and as of February 2006, this show is no longer airing on The Disney Channel, and as of September 2006, is no longer airing on Toon Disney..
Don't Bother with this Movie!.
I enjoyed Disney's Christmas release last year so I thought that I'd pick up this movie as well.
It's a complete waste of whatever you spend on it.
The movie is a poor compilation of only a handful of Disney Christmas shorts.
The best part of it is the obviously edited version of Disney's Christmas Carol and even at that it's not worth it.
This movie is a disgrace, don't waste your time..
Great movie!!!what are you all talking about?!?.
Okay...so I'm a Disney fan.
This is a great holiday movie with a touching lesson.
(that may be a bit overused in holiday movies.
Christmas is all about friends and family)I have to admit, the whole reused segments and in between animation is kind of boring, but they are classic tales from Disney and the in betweeners are fun to watch!
It's not everyday you watch movies with loveable characters side-by-side.
I think it's great that the other characters are able to chat with each other and take a break from their movie lives.
It's just like actors and actresses getting together at a club and watching other performances for a change.
The classic tales retold with that Disney magic is great and the classic features mix well with the newly animated (though not the best animation) shorts.But...
What are you other people talking about???
You obviously haven't seen the Saturday morning show, HOUSE OF MOUSE, which the movie is based on!!!!
Watch the show and you'll understand why all the characters are there and why cartoon shorts are shown!
Mickey and Donald run a CARTOON club!
Of course there will be cartoons shown!
With that said...this was okay for a Disney movie.
It wasn't the Disney company's best holiday movie(Once upon a Christmas was much better!!), but they seem to be running out of material.
I mean- Cinderella II, Hunchback II, Lady and the Tramp II, etc., coming soon- Dumbo II, Mulan II, 101 Dalmations II: Patch's adventuresomething like that], Tarzan and Jane...okay, it's weird I know all this stuff...Disney is running low on their magic.
Anyway, to sum it up...Magical Christmas was great and shouldn't be shunned so much by people who probably think Anastasia was Disney movie(believe me, most people think it is).
This movie wasn't awful by any means but it was pretty boring.
The main problem I have with this movie was that there's really no story whatsoever, it's just a bunch of shorts linked together.
Whoever decided to make this was really lazy and he/she put little effort into the film..
problems!.
Before I rip this thing apart, let me clarify that I do NOT, as many have accused, hate the Disney Company.
It's just that they're kind of like what a real-life Godzilla would be like.
WAY too big and often making mistakes that shouldn't ever been allowed to happen.
This video is one of them.I got a little disillusioned with the Mouse when their direct-to-video-sequel thing started.
They're rumored to have about eight more planned for the next few years.
At some point, I guess, somebody decided it would be funny to have EVERY Disney character ever in one movie.
this THING.
This monstrous THING!!!If the "Snookums and Meat Funny Cartoon Show" couldn't do it for you; if the ZOOG things that stole the Disney Channel couldn't do it for you; heck, if you are *looking forward* to "Back to Neverland"; then this will break you into a weeping blob of protoplasm faster than you can blink.
This here is the magic bullet for any Disney detractor.
You Disney fans finally know what we Looney Tunes fans went through with "Space Jam".The only saving grace is that for some reason, some wise fellow decided to use "Pluto's Christmas Tree" and "Mickey's Christmas Carol", in their entirety, to pad out this video.
Fast-forward to those parts and only watch them if you are forced to sit through this..
Disney characters having fun on Christmas!.
I' was excited to see my favorite characters from the movies I like .
Jafar Iago Simba and Aladdin aren't from the same movie they're all in a different one.
But when Daisy says that they have been snowed inside they walk to the door and see snow outside but Mickey then tells them that they will have their own party and everyone follows him except Donald.
And everyone tells Mickey what they want Jafar says the lamp get me the lamp!
Which is so hilarious and then he goes like it's good to see that Christmas is being enjoyed by all!
And his staff turned into candy which makes Iago smile.
And then he actually sings the Christmas song with the Heroes since he is a Hero instead of a Villain.
He sounds very good when he sings the song but he should have been in the front instead of the back.
He did sound nice in the song he should be just like that in every episode of the show especially since he was good in this episode..
classic oldies, slapdash binder makes an uneven show.
MICKEYS MAGICAL Christmas's nice bits are the classic DISNEYS' XMAS CAROL, an older short featuring Chip and Dale, a new sequence based on the classic Nutcracker Ballet (Ludrig Von Drake's a peppy spoiler), and a Donald Duck and Nephews "Holiday on Ice".
The vocals for all sequences work well, and the music is tuneful and energetic.Unfortunately, the overseas-produced animation for the scenes binding the shorts together is extremely uneven.
Baby-boomer's will be surprised by the Princess's screen bits being some of the weaker animation Disney has released.Fine for little children's holiday entertainment, but baby-boomer's may encounter some disappointments..
The T.V. Series Is So Much Ameliorative..
I wasn't satisfied nor content with this Disney holiday special.
I bought a VHS copy of it around the time that it was released and I played/viewed it only once, and haven't been interested in viewing it again since.
What a waste this is and the money I spent.
Because, of course, I was among those who anticipated so much more than what we got instead and was duped into purchasing it, without, at least, trying to search for and read reviews on some site first.
More, better stuff could've been done in this and I really like one Amazon reviewer's ideas of how it could've and should've been done a lot better in lieu of the results we did get.
How did some Disney people go from the outstanding Mickey's Once Upon a Christmas to the inferiority of this and why couldn't as much perfection be put into this???
Dern whoever came up with this dim idea and didn't even bother applying more effort.
In the main plot of this half of the House of Mouse holiday specials, after a while of watching cartoons starring Mickey Mouse and/or any of his friends, the Disney characters who make up the clientele get ready to leave emcee Mickey's club.
But then here's where the one problem ensues as evident and self-explanatory in the title: They're snowbound.
Donald Duck isn't into the holiday spirit for some reason or another (this is a loose end that is never tied and explained exactly, and resolved by getting to the bottom of it), so Mickey and the gang try to stir up some holiday cheer in him by showing more cartoons.
These include: the Walt era featurette Pluto's Christmas Tree, a few Mickey Mouse Works shorts and Mickey's Christmas Carol.
It seems that these take up a majority of the special and these are a waste, since none of them are new (or at lease newer) cartoons, and some of these can already be found on other DVDs (although they're only good if one doesn't already own a VHS/DVD copy that contains Pluto's Christmas Tree, also from one of the Walt Disney Treasures sets and more recently Mickey's Christmas Carol, as part of the Walt Disney Cartoon Classics Favorites line).
The Mouse Works featurettes can be seen in two Christmas episodes of House of Mouse as well ("Clarabelle's Christmas List" and "Pete's Christmas Caper"), in addition to that, the parts in the House of Mouse about what the guests wish for Christmas and what they're thankful for would later be recycled in those (if not vise-versa, not so sure which way or how that was done first).
And there's the odd moment of one villain, Jafar, saying "It's so nice to see everyone having a good time at the House of Mouse" or something to that effect, which is out of character.
The shorts played seem to be taking up more time of getting on the inside of what's happening in the club.
Donald does eventually cheer up in the end and the special concludes with the holiday sing-a-long "The Best Christmas Of All".
For the aforementioned run down and the reasons giving/explained by some of the other reviewers.
I wish I could've gotten the DVD instead (which I know I still can, but not necessarily for this sham-mockery that is supposed to be the prime attraction) for one of the bonus features (which includes the very first HOM episode: "The Stolen Cartoons", which is better).
All the above explanations are accurately why I prefer the show to this and the other holiday (Halloween) special, Mickey's House of Villains.
I don't recommend this to anyone but some kids who are below the preteen stage and may find this more entertaining than most older viewers.
Why must most things Disney touches nowadays turn to scat?
What another joke this was by the studio/company.
|
tt0472205
|
Watching the Detectives
|
The film opens on a dark film noir black and white scene where a 1940s style detective shoots a villain—for trying to return a late video. The lights come up, revealing that we are watching a commercial for Gumshoe Video, and the detective is Neil (Cillian Murphy), the store's owner, who is premiering the ad for friends at a party at his modest cinephile video store. His girlfriend Denise (Heather Burns), who appears in the commercial, does not show up at the celebration.
The next day, Neil meets Denise at a restaurant, but before he goes to the table, he gets a waiter (Steve Lemme) to spill a glass of water on her, just to watch her overreact. She is not amused by the prank, and tells him he needs to get his life together instead of just watching movies and playing immature games. He casually breaks up with her, telling her she is not enough like Katharine Ross in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.
Back at the store, Neil is watching a film with his friend/employee Jonathan (Jason Sudeikis), when femme fatale Violet (Lucy Liu) makes her entrance, turning his head. Violet has no identification or credit card for her rental deposit, so she persuades him to take $50 cash, which he puts in an envelope under his antique cash register. When she returns, she surreptitiously steals back the deposit, making him think he lost it, but she says he can take her out for a $50 dinner to make it up to her.
At the date, Violet arrives first and pretends that she has already gotten really drunk. When Neil does not try to take advantage of the situation, she reveals her joke and they proceed with dinner. At her urging, they go to a Media Giant store – his corporate competitor – and hide in a closet until after the employees lock up for the night, then they switch a bunch of DVDs into the wrong cases and knock over some displays while fleeing. The next day, they spy on the Media Giant and see an employee talking to a police officer. Later, police detectives drop by Gumshoe Video to question Neil about the Media Giant break-in. Once they have completely scared him, Violet appears and she and the "cops" begin laughing hysterically at the ruse. A flummoxed Neil secretly trails Violet back to her house, where they end up in bed, falling in love. The following morning, they go for a romantic swim.
Sometime later, Neil is leaving to meet Violet at the park when he runs into friends (Callie Thorne and Michael Yurchak) who beg to come along and meet his new girlfriend. Violet feeds them another party's picnic meal and leaves them to answer for it. Neil tries to make their next date quieter, by watching a basketball game, but a bored Violet then does not want to stay the night. Later, he goes to see a band play at Jonathan's bar and spies her flirting with a musician. Jealous, he stages a rock guitar scene for her at their next date. After they have sex, she reveals that she just staged the club scene and, before going to sleep, tells him about all the musicians she has dated, including a bald, Polish, avant garde musician (Richard Waddingham) who stalks her from city to city. Paranoid, Neil imagines that every bald white guy he sees is the stalker until Violet stages a scene where she has been tied to a chair by her ex, the Bald Giant, who turns out to be her friend Denis (Richard Waddingham). Frustrated by Violet's tomfoolery, Neil breaks up with her.
Neil runs into Denise and realizes that he treated her somewhat like Violet has treated him, and that he misses Violet and the excitement she created. So when she calls and tells him to come to her workplace, he does. She tricks him into stealing money from her job at an illegal casino, thinking it is another one of her fake scenes. He is shot at and chased. Neil is exhilarated by the crime, but Violet takes the money and lets him know he has been used. Neil is very distraught at another breakup, but Violet returns to say that the breakup was a joke, too. Neil is initially infuriated, but Violet convinces him that his life is more interesting and adventurous with her in it. They make up and drive off in the new car Violet bought with some of the robbery money.
|
cult, prank, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Like the summary says - Watching The Detectives is strange, quirky, cute fluff.
Watching The Detectives knows that so it veers off in a different direction and has some fun with the Romantic Comedy formula.
Think of Watching The Detectives as a well made Indie film and you'll be pleased.
It's already dated as the idea of a small, local video store catering to folks who like all kinds of movies is an idea whose time has unfortunately passed, but that's also part of its charm.Lucy Liu is great.
Cillian Murphy is OK (his look is more suited to post apocalyptic movies!!).
Cillian Murphy proves his versatility and Liu is cute as a button in this enjoyable but extremely lightweight comedy..
The premise is not original, the acting is good but not exactly to write home about and technically it's not a great accomplishment.
Lucy Liu fits the role of the play-in-the-field perfectly (her role reminded me of her character in Lucky Number Slevin) and Cillian Murphy really proved to be a surprise in a comedy role.
I've only seen his really intense, sometimes scary roles and couldn't believe he was going to be somewhat enjoyable as a light character but I was very wrong.The antics they get in to are fairly original and there even were several laugh-out-loud moments, for instance when the waiter is just a little too comfortable with spraying a glass of water on a woman he doesn't know on the request of a guy he doesn't know.
The following scenes are quite amusing too, as Cillian gets paranoid over every bald guy he sees.I mentioned some of the more original stuff above but there's also formulaic stuff present.
The relatively negative connotations concerning movie freaks certainly left a bad taste in my mouth after viewing, after all isn't that the target audience of these small films?
Also the fact that they can't differ people who watch sci-fi, anime and stuff from the people who enjoy quality movies (like the mentioned Seventh Seal or Casino).
Seems a bit ignorant.In the end, DTW is better than a lot of comedies but it never goes deep, we (us guys) just fall in love with Lucy Liu all over again and that's never a bad way to spend ninety minutes.7.5/10.
I do not want to tell you the end but it is worth it as there is 2 or 3 twists you will NOT see.Overall a fan of movies will love this and even a person who ONCE a week sits down for a movie will enjoy this cinematic Masterpiece.
Watching the Detectives - Neil (the very talented Cillian Murphy) owns a rundown video store that specializes in obscure B movies and film noir.
One day he meets an intense free-spirit girl named Violet (Lucy Liu) who plays pranks on him compulsively.
It even feels like the sort of film I would make, and doubtless director/writer Peter Soter speaks from experience.
The premise is enjoyable, as is the chemistry between Cillian Murphy, who is the show, and Lucy Liu. She perfectly plays the "crazy" girlfriend.
And I love myself, and love Cillian Murphy, so this film really spoke to me.The films message, which is to get out and enjoy life, might rub some film aficionados the wrong way for criticizing the wholeness of their lives, so their umbrage is understood, though unfortunate.
I suppose there aren't enough ironic film buffs out there and fans of Cillian Murphy, whose performance makes the movie.
Life getting in the way of watching movies is fun, funny and enjoyable.
He owns a small video store specializing in B-movies and other hard to find titles complete with a couch to just sit on and watch movies.
But life gets in the way.Intrigued by a cute girl who walks into his store and frustrated by the big video chain stores opening down the street, he follows her and ends up doing stuff.
Unfortunately for Neil, things that Violet (Lucy Liu) usually gets into are illegal by nature.
But fortunately for Neil, he's seen characters like Violet in his movies, and now he's given a chance to live them out.I liked the character of Neil a lot.
I didn't know that he could play ordinary with such a great comedic touch."Watching the Detectives" is a comedy for movie watchers - meaning you need to have seen classics like "Citizen Kane" and "Thelma & Louise" since this movie has a knack for giving away their endings.
Watch it of your own choosing, its hard to recommend a film that has good ideas but poor execution.
Neil (Cillian Murphy) runs a vintage video store with a small group of friends.
Good thing, too, for into his store walks a darling lass, Violet (Lucy Liu), who wants Neil to recommend a movie for a sick friend.
Knowing he likes mysteries, Violet makes herself into a femme fatale and scares the willies out of Neil, by faking kidnappings, hiring thugs, and more.
The scenery is pretty good, as are the costumes, and there is a few charming moments, such as the time Neil kisses Violet through a hole in the fence.
Therefore, if you think Murphy is handsome or Liu is intriguing, you might want to give this film a whirl.
This is an original movie with some amazingly funny and surprising moments, some preposterously bad acting and action, and a premise and resolution that really strains the imagination.
It's a movie that plays, rather joyously, at 'being dumb' (Lucy Liu's nipple pops out of her dress and remains there for a whole scene) but creates hysterical situations and carries them off thru the sheer pleasure of Murphy's enthusiasm.
Watching the Detectives: screwball comedy for the 21st century.
Watching the Detectives is a loving homage to the screwball comedies of the 30s and 40s, adopting the basic formula of Bringing up Baby, i.e. daffy broad woos uptight dork.
The dork is Cillian Murphy's Neil, an esoteric video store owner obsessed with being part of the movie reality he spends so much time the passive viewer of.
Along comes Lucy Liu's Violet, a moderately insane woman who doesn't need to watch movies because she is always starring in her own, and is determined to have Neil as her costar.
She involves him in a string of situations reminiscent of classic movies, noir and screwball alike, while attempting to help Neil realize she's the best thing that ever happened to him The movie is pleasant, though meandering at times, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
The story could have used a little stronger of an underlying plot arc to tie together the comic episodes beyond the basic premise of Liu's pursuit of Neil.
This plot arc component is what made Bringing up Baby, It Happened One Night, and other classic screwball comedies so good, the laughs occurring within a tight script.
Watching the Detectives' script is funny if a bit flabby, but Lucy Liu and Cillian Murphy deliver inspired performances amidst a talented supporting cast, and are able to make you forget the film's flaws and enjoy yourself.The central message of the film is good one for all of us who spend too much time watching and not enough time making our own movies..
Watching the Detectives has none of that.The premise of a video store geek swept off his feet by a quirky mystery woman is a good one but is never fully or adequately explored, thanks to a very weak script and the miscasting of the leads, not to mention the lack of any real visual story-telling style.
That's a major failing right there.But the main problem is we simply don't care about the main characters because the script and the actors (Murphy and Liu) fail to make them true or sympathetic in any real way.
So the film just becomes a series of episodes involving two people who seem, well, not terribly interesting.Oh, yeah, another thing: For a romantic comedy?
While the premise of the movie was most attractive to me: "A film noir buff has his life turned on end by a femme fatale with a big adventure in mind," and the casting of Cillian Murphy and Lucy Liu quite inspired, the execution was pretty ho-hum, and it's no wonder this movie went straight to video.Despite the premise, this movie's more of a twisted rom-com, in which Liu somewhat sadistically teases Murphy on by constantly lying to him about everything, and Murphy masochistically keeps going along like a puppy who's been whipped and likes it.
for a little while, and then you start wondering what kind of a fetishistic sex life they would have as a couple.There are a few weak tribute scenes to the film-noir genre, but the only truly geeky (and amusing) scene comes when a group of movie buffs try to guess where and why Liu stopped watching a videotape movie by looking at how much reel has been unspooled.I wish someone would give Lucy Liu a movie in which she's not portrayed as an Asian tigress, no matter how she does look like one..
This movie felt fresh, like a newly opened bag of jelly beans after years of eating chocolate covered almonds.
Lucy Liu and Cillian Murphy have fabulous chemistry, they're adorable and sexy.
I could watch them both all day, and in fact I watched the movie a second time, despite the slightly disappointing ending.
At one point, Violet (Lucy Liu) tells Neil (Cillian Murphy) that why she constantly seeks out for an adventure.
Well, I think her reason and the way this film go is very ironic.
But Neil's life is completely turned around when Violet walks into his store.
You bet."Watching the Detectives" is a cliché romantic-comedy to its core.
This movie will end pretty quick if Neil just said to himself "Forget about it, that girl is one of a nutjob !" After collaborating with many great directors recently (Danny Boyle's "Sunshine" and "28 Days Later", Ken Loach's "The Wind That Shakes the Barley" and Neil Jordan's "Breakfast on Pluto" to name a few), it's pretty weird choice for Cillian Murphy to make a movie with one of Broken Lizard comedy troop, Paul Soter.
By all means, He's not bad (as usual), but such a talent actor like him shouldn't be wasting his time in the movie like this.
lucy liu was so adorable in the movie ..
it way better than some of the movies which had previously masqueraded as comedies !!!!!.
The only reason I gave it a 6/10 is because Cillian Murphy is always a good performer.He is the only one to watch in this movie.
I thought that it could be a different type of romantic comedy,- it started interestingly enough- but after you got the point of this girl (Lucy Liu) being "nuts", it is going nowhere.
I really like her, but she was better in action movies, or playing a more serious character.
I think that the director and the stars tried to make it work because a story about this weird guy who lives a boring life unlike in the movies he watches (big surprise here...), falling for this 'border-line con'/ grasshopper,- sounded like an appealing and funny idea of a movie - but it didn't work.
However, there's a cute oasis called "Watching The Detectives", an indie film that charmingly destroys the conventions of courting.
Sunshine enters the store as Violet (the cooler than cool Lucy Liu of "Lucky Number Slevin", "Rise" and "Dirty Sexy Money") a quirky dame, who drags Neil into her eccentric atmosphere.
I think Kevin Smith (the View Askew saga) was lurking about somewhere as two video clerks converse about which's better: Japanese death anime or Korean snuff cartoons.Murphy and Liu, who slyly echo Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn from "Bringing Up Baby" (a favorite of mine), look like they're slumming, but with most of the scripts masquerading as good material nowadays, who could seriously blame them, and their performances are too sweet for words.
I rate most of the movies I watch but it's the first time I bother to comment, so here's this: this movie's hilarious.I was very pleased with Cillian Murphy whose trademark seems to be this 'real life' guy vibe he emanates, without ever striking you as 'white' or 'black', 'this' or 'that' or any kind of stereotype so many so-called actors will pull on over themselves like a coat, instead filling up his character from the ground up, and it feels so natural.Most of all, though, I was surprised by Lucy Liu, who I had never thought of as more than someone who'd stumbled into the business having unexpectedly found, or founded, a niche in the gorgeous-Chinese-face-with-an-attitude department up until now.
And then from the moment she first appeared on screen, I realised she could actually act, and at the end of the movie, I even think she's good at this!
I have a new respect for her, and really would love to see her in more things that would put her acting talents to good use, being a person and all, and not just, you know, kicking ass, snapping or glaring.So, again, the movie's a riot, feels fresh, and was very competently acted.
The only sad thing is that there's some kind of message, yeah, but the irony is you're sitting on your couch, watching it being fed to you, and all along you know it's not going to change your life.
This movie had a lot of hilarious moments and, thank god, unique funny characters that weren't the same old generic personalities.
This film is about being spontaneous, creative and adventurous every day, rather than the far more boring one-dimensional act of watching others (ie.
A movie by a member of Broken Lizard that rings a bit like "clerks".
I wondered the whole time how many scenes were inspired by old film noir stuff.
I liked the premise, the playful tone of Violets character and the best part?
The sets could have been lit better, more contrast to get that feel, the way the old movies looked with the characters in dimly lit rooms..
Still, though I find it very surprising that Cillian Murphy would do a film of this sort (a chatty, slapsticky, quirky American comedy), given his resume, he brings something to it that would have been missing otherwise.
Though his role of Neil is primarily reactionary (to Lucy Liu's nonstop pranks), there were some moments of his own that had me in stitches (pretending to be a rockstar smoking a joint, for instance!) Lucy Liu (am I spelling it right, I hope?) is riotous as Violet, the girl who immediately draws Neil, a film dork who owns a video store that specializes in rare, cult and classic movies that aren't avail on DVD, into her world of bor-ophobia and endless mischief.
If you don't laugh during the scene where the 2 noirish cops question Neil in his office, you may have the wrong sense of humour for the whole thing.After a while, though, the pranks begin to feel a bit forced, and the "robbery" towards the ending left me confused as to what was fake and what wasn't.
It's definitely not Cillian's best film, but that's not to say it isn't a cute role for him or that he didn't play it well.
The basic premise: Neil (Cillian Murphy) owns a small independent video store and lives passively in a world of make believe movies.
Violet (Lucy Liu) lives a life of adventure.
Most of her escapades are well thought out (My favorite being the picnic scene) and leave both the viewer and CM wondering just what's going on and how things will turn out.I wish we'd gotten more background story on Violet, maybe a little input on why she puts the moves on this particular guy, but it's thoughts like that ...
Usually, when I think of romantic comedies, I think of films with recycled lines, main characters who are hardly engaging at all, and a bland, overused storyline of them meeting, hating each other, are forced to spend time together, fall in love, fall out, and then one magically knows where the other person will be at that exact moment so they can run over there and confess their undying love.
However, this film, is surprisingly original and even though it has an out there story line, shows what relationships are like in real life.
The main character being Neil, a young man who has a run down video shop in the middle of his town who is competing with the big mega video store (and lets be honest- we all know someone like this in our own hometown).
This film has some brilliant, funny lines and scenes that actually make you laugh out loud (thinking of the scene where Violet 'breaks up' with Neil, and he's in hysterics while playing cricket).
This film could've done a lot better with a better director and maybe a better script at times, but overall it is a good film with brilliant actors, and it is one of those small little films that just make you happy to watch them..
It was nice to see a love story that didn't devolve to the level of something like "What happens in Vegas." I thought Lucy Liu and Cillian Murphy were both excellent, and as a male I must say that Lucy Liu was unbelievably cute (in a hot way) in this movie.
And for those of us who watch a lot of movies, new and old, there are some great nods to classics of the past.
Different and really good for a low-budget romantic comedy.
He watches movies and relates real life to movies and like a lot of people he gets bored with real life.
Something to really bust out of real life and maybe even more scenarios where they put themselves in few movie scenarios.
|
tt1579932
|
Bayonetta
|
=== Setting and characters ===
Bayonetta takes place in Vigrid, a fictional city in Europe. The title character (voiced by Hellena Taylor) is a witch who shapeshifts and uses various firearms, along with magical attacks she performs with her own hair by summoning demons to dispatch her foes. She awakens after a 500-year sleep near Eggman's tombstone and finds herself in an unfamiliar area with no memories of who or what she is. Over time, she begins to remember what caused her current predicament. 500 years before the incident that caused Bayonetta's memory loss, there were two factions preserving the balance between darkness and light in the world: the Umbra Witches, who are followers of darkness, and their counterparts, the Lumen Sages, who are followers of light. The factions shared two distinct treasures, the 'Eyes of the World' (separately named the 'Left Eye' and the 'Right Eye') which they used to oversee the just passage of time. Both factions mysteriously disappeared from Vigrid under unknown circumstances. Bayonetta still has an ornate piece of jewelry which contains a small red gem, and believes this gem is the Left Eye of the World. While searching for the Right Eye, she often receives flashbacks that make her remember what caused her current predicament.
A male character known as Luka (ルカ) (voiced by Yuri Lowenthal) had met Bayonetta as a child, and is now a possible love interest for her. Other characters include Bayonetta's rival and fellow Umbra Witch Jeanne (ジャンヌ, Jannu) (voiced by Grey DeLisle), who wields four guns like Bayonetta; Rodin (ロダン, Rodan) (voiced by Dave Fennoy), the owner of a bar called the Gates Of Hell where Bayonetta can buy various weapons and items; an informant named Enzo (エンツォ, Entso) (voiced by Chick Vennera) who looks and sounds similar to actor Joe Pesci, and provides comic relief; a young girl named Cereza (セレッサ, Seressa) whom Bayonetta meets early in the game; and the main antagonist Balder (バルドル, Barudoru) (voiced by Grant Albrecht).
The realms Bayonetta inhabits are the game's different settings, which borrow from Dante's Divine Comedy: Paradiso (heaven), which generally takes the form of a heavenly yellow or golden valley or palace and is the home of the "Angel" enemies she faces; Purgatorio (purgatory), a metarealm that functions as an "in between" for metaphysical beings and stands alongside yet outside of the plane humans exist on (all beings in and outside of Purgatorio take on a transparent, watery appearance); and Inferno (hell), which is the game's realm that contains infernal demons of the sort that Bayonetta herself occasionally summons with her Witch powers. Further research uncovers that the Witches actually drew most of their power from the demons that exist in Inferno.
=== Story ===
In the present day, an informant named Enzo has joined up with Bayonetta, a witch who was revived twenty years ago from the bottom of a lake and has no memories of her past. Owning one half of the "Eyes of the World", Bayonetta leaves for Vigrid when Enzo informs her of rumors the other half is there.
Afterward, Bayonetta confronts another Umbra Witch named Jeanne, as well as a young man named Luka; the former seemingly has ties to Bayonetta's past, while the latter blames Bayonetta for his father's death. Bayonetta then battles through Vigrid before encountering Fortitudo, one of the four Cardinal Virtues, and defeats him.
Making her way through the Crescent and Sunrise Valleys, Bayonetta finds Jeanne conversing with Temperantia, the second of the Cardinal Virtues; after defeating Jeanne, she then meets a lost child named Cereza. Much to Bayonetta's frustration, the child believes she's her mother and follows her; after eventually returning to the human world, Bayonetta leaves Cereza with Luka and confronts Temperantia, whom she defeats. Continuing her search for the Right Eye, Bayonetta follows Luka and Cereza down Prominence Bridge in an attempt to reach the island known as Isla del Sol; she is attacked by Iustitia, the third Cardinal Virtue, and defeats him.
The trio board a Valkyrie jet headed for Isla Del Sol, only for Cereza to become lost. After finding her and fighting Jeanne again, Sapientia, the final Cardinal Virtue attacks and downs the jet, and Bayonetta defeats him. The three then head for Isla del Sol by helicopter, and then by missile. When they reach the island, Bayonetta is confronted again by Jeanne, who explains Bayonetta was a child born from an Umbra Witch and a Lumen Sage, which was forbidden and resulted in Bayonetta being ostracized. Bayonetta defeats Jeanne, who reveals the reason Bayonetta possesses the Left Eye is because she has accepted her fate. Bayonetta hands Jeanne the gem she had been carrying, making her remember she is Cereza, and that Jeanne was once her friend; it was Jeanne who sealed her away, giving Bayonetta the gem to protect her and the Left Eye. After Jeanne then sacrifices herself to save Bayonetta, she continues through the tower with Luka and Cereza.
Upon reaching the top, Bayonetta finally meets Father Balder, the last of the Lumen Sages. Balder reveals he is Bayonetta's father, and that he plans to reunite the three universes by resurrecting Jubileus, the Creator; however, since Bayonetta could not remember her past, Cereza was sent back to her to help her remember, allowing Balder to use her as the "left-eye". After revealing he was responsible for the death of Luka's father, Balder throws him to his death, before fighting Bayonetta among rubble falling from the tower. Bayonetta ultimately manages to defeat Balder, before saving a falling Luka and Cereza.
After making a time portal to return her younger self home, Bayonetta returns to the present, only to collapse after regaining her memory; seemingly unharmed, Balder transports himself and the unconscious Bayonetta towards the statue on top of the tower, beginning the resurrection of Jubileus. As the statue launches into space, Jeanne reappears after earlier escaping both death and Balder's control narrowly. She ascends the launching statue on her motorcycle by riding along the surface; after reaching Bayonetta, she saves her, only for Jubileus to come alive. Jeanne floats away from the statue, leaving Bayonetta alone to fight the deity. Bayonetta eventually defeats Jubileus by summoning Queen Sheba, who punches the deity into the sun. As the statue left behind by Jubileus plummets towards Earth, Jeanne is revealed to be alive, and after destroying the last of the Jubileus statue, Bayonetta and Jeanne end up in a free-fall towards Earth; after surviving the descent, the epilogue shows them continuing to battle against the Angels.
|
pornographic, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Best Action game in years. I'm not usually one to play action games, more of an rpg fan, but there was something about this title that simply drew me in. Bayonetta isn't just another hottie with weapons, she knows how to use them and this game proves that over and over again.I'll admit the plot is a bit simplistic. You are a witch who woke up at the bottom of the lake 20 years ago with no memories of your past, all you know is that every once in a while, angels try to send you to hell. Your henchman Enzo has located a rare gem that may clear up events of your past, so you set out on a journey to the island of Vigrid, a place filled with memories.The cut scenes are over-the-top action-packed, and a little reminiscent of how Dante would roll in Devil May Cry. But Bayonetta actually makes it look good! Still, the best part is naturally the action. Combat has a very smooth flow to it that allows for a high number of combos with which to dispatch your angelic antagonists. Weapons ranging from simple handguns to claws, to swords, and even a whip, Bayonetta should have something in her repertoire for just about anyone. Not to mention, you can attach weapons to either your hands or feet in order to create some very unique combat combinations.But don't be fooled, this isn't exactly a ride in the park either. The first play-through on normal is probably not that much of a challenge for anyone familiar with the genre, but that doesn't cover the extra content. There are portals to the angel's world all over the place with difficult challenges to complete, two harder difficulty modes, and several out-of-reach secrets that will require dexterity and acumen to discover. Best of all, almost everything you do has some manner of reward attached to it, so be prepared to spend a lot of hours on this.All in all, I haven't had this much fun beating up things in a long time. The dialog is cheesy, the action is ridiculously bloody, and Bayonetta's boobs are way too huge for a human, but when put together this is a very potent combination. So put down DMC 4, forget about Dante's Inferno, get this game!. Bayonetta is one cool video game character!. This game was made by the same group that came up with the Devil May Cry series. Of those games I have played through the first one and played the second one a bit. This game though was better than those two games to me mainly due to the fact Bayonetta is a lot easier to control and it is very easy to perform really cool attacks. That is always a plus to me as I hate having to push some off the wall combination just to see the game character do something neat. The story was also better than the first Devil May Cry game. I only give this one a nine instead of a ten because they still have that annoying trophy thing at the end of each level making you feel bad when you do not get a high score, that and the boss battles sometimes were a bit of a pain as at points I was wondering what I was supposed to be attacking. Overall, the game is great though as Bayonetta is trying to solve the mysteries of her past that she as long forgotten. She goes to this country where the Lumen Sages and Umbra Witches once lived. She is a Umbra witch and she is quite powerful, her main enemies are angels though there is also a strange woman named Jeanne that pops up from time to time and seemingly has ties to Bayonetta. Throw in a reporter named Luka whom has been tracking Bayonetta because of an incident that occurred where it appeared that his father was killed by Bayonetta. She has to fight her way through hordes of angels with weapons she gets from a barkeep in a bar called Hell's Gate, she uses guns, swords and a variety of other weapons that she can pick up from the fallen angels and use to her advantage. The combat as I have said is easy and fun, it is quite something to watch this cute game character do a pole dance while dispatching enemies. You have a few stages where you do different things as well as there is a motorcycle level and a level where you are flying on a missile. All in all a very fun game and I certainly would not mind playing another game featuring this character though the ending was nice and complete so that if there is not one I can live replaying this fun action game.. Diva May Cry. If there's something that is missing form the lexicon of the good folks at Sega its probably the word subtlety. They where asked to produce a vaguely annoying azure tinted spiky git and they delivered. They where asked to realise a iconic 2d fighter game with graphics like a motion capture flick book and we got mortal combat, then the gaming industry grew up a little and they know full well that if they need to keep gamers hooked what they really need to do is produce a game with a capable, realistic female role model.Unfortunately they got the design brief on opposite day and we have ended up with Bayonnetta a game so camp that you expect to see a park ranger walk across the screen and so brimming with try hard sexuality that all that it needs to make a whole generation of anime-video gamer geeks sterilise them self's from self inflicted masturbation wounds is a citreous shaped controller.You assume the role of the titular Bayonnetta, who looks like a cross between Sarah Palin and a pole dancer with stilts for legs, she's a witch with a capital B. The plot is as impenetrable as a vestal virgin but if I can read a brief history of time I'll give it a go here:- Bayonnetta woke up with a very convenient form of narrative amnesia, only knowing that she was a witch and clad in a leather cat suit (made of her own hair...) started to kick the livening crap out of angles that look a little like the covenant would if they where dressed by the pope using Liberachi's bling. The irritating pound shop Joe Pesci character who sends you off to pick up some magical McGuffin (the eyes of the world), we're later introduced to Jeanne who's meant to come across as an enemy but since she was in a pre game scene as your alliy and also helps you fight the angels she seems to port in it comes across as kind of lame, in fact all the major NPCs in the game have a identity crisis there's this guy with girly hair and a doctor who scarf who ether wants to kill her or give her a ride on he's broom stick....and yes I did jut make a pun that bad. There's also a little girl who is somehow both a younger version of herself and her own daughter... okay, you know when I said that I understood the plot? That was a lie.The game is utterly bonkers from the insane plot to the freak you the hell out looking enemy's to bosses that are the size of meteors. One place that the game dose do well is the realistic and visceral combat... you know I can't even finish that sentence she has guns on her feet and jumps around the screen like a hyperactive dominatrix on the amphetamines' only diet raining down death and destruction on anything white and gold, 'though fair play to diva-may-cry, sorry Bayonnetta, at least someone has made a game without feeling the need to have it viewed through a used coffee filter (yes I'm looking at you grand theft auto 4). Some attention has been Paid to the difficulty curve, the same level as say running head first into a brick wall....at full speed. No sooner do you get into your stride then you run into some golden cocked beast that opens a celestial can of whop-ass on you.There are some nice touches here and there, during loading screens the game allows you to practise your myriad of combos, that's great but when your own your own its one thing, when your surrounded by the good lords finest it quickly descends into pointless and repetitive button mashing, the whole thing is interspersed by quick time events.There's 2 schools of thought on QTE's one is that they are a worthwhile and graphically pleasing addition to games that hark back to the days when you needed quick reflexes as well as strategy and if well executed can make you feel like your in your own personal movie, the other is that there the very sperm of stamen that has gestated in the minds of lazy games designers who want to knock out as many title and produce decent looking "in game graphics" for online trailers.Three guesses witch school I am part of? Although there not all press x to die, some are press B to make the other guy die (painfully and nastily) and of course some press Y not to die.While we're on the standard features list there's a thing called witch time that operate like bullet time, a feature only marginally less common in action games now than a fuc*ing box. The interface is nice to look at but in-between the QTE's and the insane button mashing you sometimes end up squinting at a tiny little black leather clad matchstick taking on a god.there are also some vehicle segments, one rather nice one where you jump from car to car speeding along the highway, a couple on a motorbike and one on a missile
yes a missile.Bayonnetta is pretty standard and yes, it flows nicely but lets be honest here it doesn't bring anything new to the party, it in the world of video games is just one of the many party goers, not with the band, not one of the star guests, but also not one of the sad drunks pukeing into the plant pots.. Still one of the most garbage games to ever exist. I played it when it originally came out and I just loathed it then. In fact, Microsoft just gave it away for FREE with XBL Gold. So I opted to try it again and see if my memories of it were maybe just too harsh.Nope. Truthfully, I had given it a 3 all those years ago. I lowered it to a 2 because this crap game was even worse than I remembered.It still seems like 70% of the game is corny cut-scenes with hyper-proportioned and degrading characterizations of females. Bayonetta herself is an overly-sexualized nun or witch or lady-of-the-evening or who-knows-what. But it is just an unflattering, anti-social and puerile depiction of a distaff protagonist. I can't say how much I detest the very core heroine of this festering trainwreck. Modern attitudes on gender make her portrayal and appearance even more deplorable because of her purely objectified nature.The gameplay is atrocious. The button-mashing has never registered correctly. It is entirely broken or overly precise. Either way, the combat is dreadful and boring because it just seems like randomness whenever you manage to lands hits, even with the lock-on activated. And there's so so much of the same fights. It never varies.Bad conception. Bad execution. Bad game.
|
tt0304142
|
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
|
=== Plot ===
The most evil and powerful dark wizard in history, Lord Voldemort, murders James and Lily Potter but mysteriously disappears after failing to kill their infant son, Harry. While the wizarding world celebrates Voldemort's apparent downfall, Professor Dumbledore, Professor McGonagall and half-giant Rubeus Hagrid place the one-year-old orphan in the care of his surly and cold Muggle uncle and aunt, Vernon and Petunia Dursley and their spoilt and bullying son, Dudley.
For ten years, living at number Four Privet Drive, Harry is treated by the Dursleys more like a servant than a member of the family and is forced to live in a cupboard under the stairs. Shortly before his eleventh birthday, a series of letters addressed to Harry arrive, but Uncle Vernon destroys them before Harry can read them, leading to an influx of more and more letters. To evade the pursuit of these letters, Vernon first takes the family to a hotel, but when the letters arrive there too, he hires a boat out to a hut on a small island.
It is Harry's eleventh birthday and at midnight, Hagrid bursts through the door to deliver the letter and to tell Harry what the Dursleys have kept from him: Harry is a wizard and has been accepted into Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, where Hagrid is groundskeeper and Dumbledore is Headmaster. Hagrid takes Harry to a hidden London street called Diagon Alley, where he is surprised to discover how famous he is among the witches and wizards, who refer to him as "the boy who lived." He also finds that his parents' inheritance is waiting for him at Gringotts Wizarding Bank. Guided by Hagrid, he buys the equipment he will need for his first year at Hogwarts and as a birthday gift Harry receives a pet owl from Hagrid (which he names "Hedwig").
A month later, Harry leaves the Dursleys' home to catch the Hogwarts Express from King's Cross railway station. There he meets the Weasley family, who show him how to pass through the magic wall to Platform 9¾, where the train that will take them to Hogwarts is waiting. While on the train, Harry meets two fellow first years, Ron Weasley, who immediately becomes his friend, and Hermione Granger, with whom the ice is a bit slower to break. Harry also makes an enemy of yet another first-year, Draco Malfoy. Draco offers to advise Harry, but Harry dislikes Draco for his arrogance and prejudice and rejects his offer of "friendship".
At Hogwarts, the first-years are assigned by the magical Sorting Hat to houses that best suit their personalities. While Harry is being sorted, the Hat suggests that he be placed into Slytherin which is known to house potential dark witches and wizards, but when Harry objects, the Hat sends him to Gryffindor. Ron and Hermione are also sorted into Gryffindor. Draco is sorted into Slytherin, like his whole family before him.
Harry starts classes at Hogwarts School, with lessons including Transfiguration with Head of Gryffindor, Minerva McGonagall, Herbology with Head of Hufflepuff, Pomona Sprout, Charms with Head of Ravenclaw Filius Flitwick, and Defence Against the Dark Arts with Quirinus Quirrell. Harry's least favourite class is Potions, taught by Severus Snape, the vindictive Head of Slytherin who seems to loathe Harry. Harry, Ron, and Hermione become far more interested by extracurricular matters within and outside of the school, particularly after they discover that a huge three-headed dog is standing guard over a trap door in a forbidden corridor. They also become suspicious of Snape's behaviour and become convinced that he is looking for ways to get past the trapdoor to whatever it's hiding.
Harry discovers an innate talent for flying on broomsticks and is appointed as Seeker on his House’s Quidditch team, a wizards' sport played in the air. His first game goes well until his broomstick wobbles in mid-air and almost throws him off. Ron and Hermione suspect foul play from Snape, whom they saw behaving oddly. For Christmas, Harry receives an invisibility cloak from an anonymous source and begins exploring the school at night and investigating the hidden object further. He discovers the Mirror of Erised (backwards for "desire"), in which the viewer sees his deepest desires becoming true.
Thanks to an indiscretion from Hagrid, Harry and his friends work out that the object kept at the school is a Philosopher's Stone, made by an old friend of Dumbledore named Nicolas Flamel, which grants its user immortality, as long as it's constantly used. Harry is also informed by a centaur he meets in the forest that a plot to steal the Philosopher’s Stone is being orchestrated by none other than Voldemort himself, who would use it to be restored to his body and come back to power. When Dumbledore is lured from Hogwarts under false pretences, Harry and his friends fear that the theft is imminent and descend through the trapdoor themselves.
They encounter a series of obstacles, each of which requires unique skills possessed by one of the three, and one of which requires Ron to sacrifice himself in a life-sized game of wizard's chess. In the final room, Harry, now alone, finds Quirrell, who admits that he had tried to kill Harry at his Quidditch match against Slytherin. He also admits that he let a troll into Hogwarts. Snape had been trying to protect Harry all along rather than to kill him, and his suspicious behaviour came from his own suspicions about Quirrell.
Quirrell is one of Voldemort's followers, and is now partly possessed by him: Voldemort's face has sprouted on the back of his own head, hidden by his turban. Voldemort needs Harry's help to get past the final obstacle: the Mirror of Erised, but when Quirrell tries to grab the Stone from Harry his contact proves lethal for Quirrell. Harry passes out and awakes in the school hospital, where Dumbledore explains to him that he survived because his mother sacrificed her life to protect him, and this left a powerful protective charm on him. Voldemort left Quirrell to die and is likely to return by some other means. The Stone has now been destroyed. The school year ends at the final feast, during which Gryffindor wins the House Cup. Harry returns to the Dursleys' for the summer holiday but does not tell them that under-age wizards are forbidden to use magic outside of Hogwarts.
=== Main characters ===
Harry Potter is an orphan whom Rowling imagined as a "scrawny, black-haired, bespectacled boy who didn't know he was a wizard." She developed the series' story and characters to explain how Harry came to be in this situation and how his life unfolded from there. Apart from the first chapter, the events of this book take place just before and in the year following Harry's eleventh birthday. Voldemort's attack left a lightning bolt-shaped scar on Harry's forehead, which produces stabbing pains whenever Voldemort is present. Harry has a natural talent for Quidditch and became the first person to get on a team in their first year.
Ron Weasley is Harry's age and Rowling describes him as the ultimate best friend, "always there when you need him." He is freckled, red-haired and quite tall. He grew up in a fairly large pure-blood family as the sixth born of seven children. Although his family is quite poor, they still live comfortably and happily. His loyalty and bravery in the face of a game of Wizards Chess plays a vital part in finding the Philosopher's Stone.
Hermione Granger, the daughter of an all-Muggle family, is a bossy girl who has apparently memorised most of the textbooks before the start of term. Rowling described Hermione as a "very logical, upright and good" character with "a lot of insecurity and a great fear of failure beneath her swottiness". Despite her nagging efforts to keep Harry and Ron out of trouble, she becomes a close friend of the two boys after they save her from a troll, and her magical and analytical skills play an important role in finding the Philosopher's Stone. She has bushy brown hair and rather large front teeth.
Neville Longbottom is a plump, diffident boy, so forgetful that his grandmother gives him a Remembrall, although he cannot remember why. Neville's magical abilities are weak and appeared just in time to save his life when he was eight. Despite his timidity, Neville will fight anyone after some encouragement or if he thinks it is right and important.
Rubeus Hagrid, a half-giant nearly 12 feet (3.7 m) tall, with tangled black hair and beard, was expelled from Hogwarts and his wand was snapped in half (resulting in him never to use a wand again), however Professor Dumbledore let him stay on as the school's gamekeeper, a job which enables him to lavish affection and pet names on even the most dangerous of magical creatures. Hagrid is fiercely loyal to Dumbledore and quickly becomes a close friend of Harry, Ron and, later, Hermione, but his carelessness makes him unreliable.
Professor Dumbledore, a tall, thin man who wears half-moon spectacles and has silver hair and a beard that tucks into his belt, is the headmaster of Hogwarts, and thought to be the only wizard Voldemort fears. Dumbledore, while renowned for his achievements in magic, he shrugs off praise, he is aware of his own brilliance. Rowling described him as the "epitome of goodness".
Professor McGonagall, a tall, severe-looking woman with black hair tied in a tight bun, teaches Transfiguration, and sometimes transforms herself into a cat. She is Deputy Headmistress, and Head of Gryffindor House and, according to the author, "under that gruff exterior" is "a bit of an old softy".
Petunia Dursley, the sister of Harry's mother Lily, is a thin woman with a long neck that she uses for spying on the neighbours. She regards her magical sister as a freak and tries to pretend that she never existed. covers a narrow mind and a fear of anything unusual.
Dudley is an overweight, spoiled bully, and cousin of Harry Potter (who uses Harry as his punching bag).
Draco Malfoy is a slim, pale boy who speaks in a bored drawl. He is arrogant about his skill in Quidditch, and despises anyone who is not a pure-blood wizard – and wizards who do not share his views. His parents had supported Voldemort, but changed sides after the dark wizard's disappearance, claiming they had been bewitched. Draco avoids direct confrontations, and tries to get Harry and his friends into trouble.
Oliver Wood is Harry's Quidditch captain for the Gryffindor Quidditch team. He plays as keeper.
Professor Quirrell is a twitching, stammering man who teaches Defence Against the Dark Arts. Reputedly he was a brilliant scholar, but his nerve was shattered by an encounter with vampires. Quirrell wears a turban to conceal the fact that he is voluntarily possessed by Voldemort, whose face appears on the back of Quirrell's head.
Professor Snape, who has a hooked nose, sallow complexion and greasy black hair, teaches Potions, but would prefer to teach Defence Against the Dark Arts. Snape praises pupils in Slytherin, his own House but seizes every opportunity to humiliate others, especially Harry. Several incidents, beginning with the shooting pain in Harry's scar during the start-of-term feast, lead Harry and his friends to think Snape is a follower of Voldemort.
Filch, the school caretaker who knows the school's secret passages better than anyone else except, possibly, the Weasley twins. His cat, Mrs. Norris, aids his constant hunt for misbehaving pupils.
Other members of staff include the dumpy Herbology teacher and Head of Hufflepuff House Professor Sprout, Professor Flitwick, the tiny and excitable Charms teacher, and Head of Ravenclaw House, the soporific History of Magic teacher, Professor Binns, a ghost who does not seem to have noticed his own death; and Madam Hooch, the Quidditch coach, who is strict, but a considerate and methodical teacher. The poltergeist Peeves wanders around the castle causing trouble wherever he can.
In the book, Rowling introduces an eclectic cast of characters. The first character to be introduced is Vernon Dursley, Harry's uncle. Most of the actions centre on the eponymous hero Harry Potter, an orphan who escapes his miserable childhood with the Dursley family. Rowling imagined him as a "scrawny, black-haired, bespectacled boy who didn't know he was a wizard", and says she transferred part of her pain about losing her mother to him. During the book, Harry makes two close friends, Ronald Weasley and Hermione Granger. Ron is described by Rowling as the ultimate best friend, "always there when you need him". Rowling has described Hermione as a "very logical, upright and good" character with "a lot of insecurity and a great fear of failure beneath her swottiness".
Rowling also imagined a supporting cast of adults. The headmaster of Hogwarts is the powerful, but kind wizard Albus Dumbledore, who becomes Harry's confidant; Rowling described him as "epitome of goodness". His right hand is severe Minerva McGonagall, who according to the author "under that gruff exterior" is "a bit of an old softy", the friendly half-giant Rubeus Hagrid, who saved Harry from the Dursley family, and the sinister Severus Snape. Professor Quirrell is also featured in the novel.
The main antagonists are Draco Malfoy, an elitist, bullying classmate and Lord Voldemort, the most powerful evil wizard who becomes disembodied when he tries to kill baby Harry. According to a 1999 interview with Rowling, the character of Voldemort was created as a literary foil for Harry, and his backstory was intentionally not fleshed-out at first:
The basic idea... Harry, I saw Harry very very very clearly. Very vividly. And I knew he didn't know he was a wizard. [...] And so then I kind of worked backwards from that position to find out how that could be, that he wouldn't know what he was. [...] When he was one year old, the most evil wizard for hundreds and hundreds of years attempted to kill him. He killed Harry's parents, and then he tried to kill Harry—he tried to curse him. [...] And—so—but for some mysterious reason, the curse didn't work on Harry. So he's left with this lightning bolt shaped scar on his forehead and the curse rebounded upon the evil wizard, who has been in hiding ever since.
|
good versus evil
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Excellent Game.
This game, where you control Harry Potter, is set at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
I liked it a lot because it is like you are actually taking a tour of Hogwarts.
It was also fun because there are so many secret passages with surprises that it makes the game always a challenge.
Finally, I liked it because it's not terribly easy, especially when you're in the Quidditch game, and that also makes it very interesting and fun to play..
very,very good game.
I am a hardline online gamer, have been for 5 years.
I bought this game because 1; i like the books, and 2; it seemed a gentle enough game to introduce my son, all of 3 years and 10 months, into the educational values of a decent computer game with a good, non-violent story attached.
This game is great, and my son loves it ( i control Harry with the direction keys, my son casts spells on switches, trees, doxy's and gnomes etc with the mouse.
His hand/eye co-ordination is developing a treat).
This is a thoroughly engaging, well thought out and imaginative game.
The graphics and lighting are pleasing, the attention to detail is authentic and amusing (example; wizard card details), the levels are well designed and their variety has a good balance and is close in feel and plot to the first book.
It;s a great kid's game, and adults may well enjoy it too.
I certainly have.btw, of special note should be the music by Jeremy Soule which is absolutely superb, far better than the movie's score in my opinion, and whoever the voice talent was who did a ripping John Cleese impression for the voice of Nearly Headless Nick deserves a round of applause..
Potter casts the magic to gamers.
The best version of the first Potter game is definitely on the GBA, which has the most RPG elements of all the systems.
It truly captures the feel of being at Hogwarts with a grand sense of adventure and exploring and it never lags all the while GBA: 8/10 The PC version is the most easy, most basic version of the game and takes no more than 3 hours to beat.
And yet it's super fun!
PC: 8/10 The Play Station port is certainly where the graphics are at their lowest point, but they are easy to forgive, as the game play presents itself as a fun and challenging experience worth playing, making this one the best of the console versions.
Play Station: 7/10 Later on in 2003, they decided to release Sorcerer's Stone on next gen consoles which brought in better graphics, but also a lesser quality.
The Game Cube and Xbox ports were at least decent, you could tell they put in some effort and tried here.
But they didn't have the sense of wonder and magic the other versions before had.
They aren't great, but they end up alright.
Game Cube and Xbox: 6/10 The Play Station 2 is the worst port of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.
It is dull, boring and ever so predictable.
I had very little fun and I had enjoyment, but not enough to call this game a good one.
It's just a forgettable, mediocre button-masher.
Play Station 2: 5/10 But I'm sure you've noticed at the top of this review, there is an 8/10.
Yes, I am a ridiculously huge Harry Potter fan.
Yes, I probably added an extra star for nostalgia.
But the PC and GBA versions are done so well, proving there can be good licensed games every once in a while.
Magical they are indeed.
Magical they are indeed.
And for that reason, I think Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone video game deserves an overall rating of an 8/10..
great way to see harrys world for yourself..
I have played this game and i must say that i am amazed how close it is to the book.
for those who havent read the books but are fans of the first movie i would suggest that you read the book first as there are some tasks in the game that where not in the movie.
the potions game on the way to the stone is a perfect example.
even though i love the game i give it a 8 as i have never been able to complete it straight to the end with out using the lvl cheat to get past fluffy but i still recommend it to anyone who is interested in a game that challenges the mind while entertaining the senses..
Excellent adaption of the book.
Wonderful as a book, this, the first of the Harry Potter stories has been very skillfully turned into a screen delight.
The sets, the effects, the cast are very true to the book.
Some adaption to the plot has occurred, but with no detriment to the story.
This is a movie for all ages..
Actio Gameplay !.
I finished the seven books in a row and felt orphan of this marvelous wizarding world.
As I waited for the next last two movies to watch them all (so far I have seen only the 1,2 and 4), I decided to play the video game with the kid.We found this first opus great because the game has amazing graphics: as someone else said, it is like a virtual visit of Hoggwarts.
In addition, the gameplay is easy and it is made for kids: the level asks for quickness and a bit of reflexion.On the other side, the game has major flaws as well: first, I don't think it uses the John Williams' theme and it is a pity.
And above all, some levels are impossible to finish: the quidditch games, the troll chase and for sure, the fight against Voldemort!
In conclusion, a good game but it needs the six other to be perfect!
|
tt0960152
|
Acorralada
|
The background for the novela is that Octavia Irazabel is the owner of a giant perfume factory, has an amazing mansion, and an enormous fortune, however none of it is hers. Years ago, she stole everything she now owns from Fedora or La Gavoita. As well as stealing her fortune, she also stole Fedora's two daughters and gave them away. Octavia's husband killed Fedora's husband and the two of them, with the help of Octavia's sister, Yolanda, blame Fedora for the murder. Fedora is unfairly locked away in a jail cell while Octavia kills her own husband and tells Yolanda to remain quiet or she'll kill her too. Fedora's two daughters, Diana and Gaby, end up in the hands of an elderly woman who receives them and money to keep the girls and to never say anything. The woman is known to Diana and Gaby as their grandma. Octavia has three children: Max, Larry, and Paola. During a business trip, Octavia became pregnant and the result was Paola. Due to Paola being a "product of sin", Octavia treats her terribly.
The novel begins two years prior to the present day. Maximiliano Irazabal, the oldest son of the Irazabal family, is celebrating his recent marriage to the beautiful Marfil, while his friends Camila and Gerardo look on with something less than best wishes for the pair. They were both jilted by Maximiliano and Marfil for each other. Gerardo happens upon Marfil while she's talking to Bruna on her cellphone, reminding her not to forget about her birth control pills. He confronts her and attempts to blackmail her into continuing their relationship, lest he tell Maximiliano that she's lying to him about getting pregnant. When Marfil refuses, he attempts to have his way with her. Camila stumbles upon them and, hoping to win back Maximiliano, informs them of their "tryst." Maximiliano punches Gerardo and warns him that he'll kill him if he ever lays a finger on his wife again. Before they can make it out of Gerardo's mansion, Gerardo pulls a gun and shoots at Marfil. The shot only grazes her, but she plunges into the pool, seemingly dead.
Across town, at the nearby prison, a young woman named Fedora Garces Soriano receives some good news. She's a free woman, after being behind bars for years, accused of killing her husband. But the crime was actually committed by another person—rich businesswoman Octavia Irazabal, Maximiliano's mother. Thanks to Octavia's treachery, she has lost her entire fortune, her perfume business, and her two daughters. She manages to find a job as a lounge singer at a local watering hole, and renames herself "La Gaviota".
In yet another household, Diana Soriano and her sister Gabriela (Gaby) are getting ready to go to Diana's graduation from nursing school, where she has graduated at the top of her class.
Fast forward to two years later. Max and Camila have resumed dating, but she is getting impatient with his reticence at getting remarried to her, despite his wife Marfil having been declared dead of a cerebral hemorrhage brought on by Gerardo's murder attempt.
Meanwhile, Gaby has found a job at the Irazabal mansion as a maid, and has a crush on Max's younger brother Larry, but is heartbroken when she learns that Larry is engaged to Pilar. Gaby discovers that Pilar is actually cheating on him with another man, Kike, but keeps the information secret because it's not her place as a servant to tell him. His half-sister, Paola, however, also discovers them together, and is nowhere near as reserved. Unfortunately for Larry, she doesn't say anything either. At the wedding, Pilar hesitates to take the vows, and eventually runs out of the church and onto Quique's motorcycle, leaving poor Larry heartbroken and confused. Larry soon discovers that Gaby is deeply in love with him. In an attempt to forget Pilar, Larry marries Gaby in Las Vegas. He soon realizes it was a mistake, his mother and Bruna treat Gaby really bad but Larry does nothing. Gaby leaves the mansion and moves back in with her grandma. After she leaves Larry realizes he does love her but doesn't have the guts to stand up to his mother. Pilar returns and asks Larry for forgiveness. He accepts and the two begin dating. During a party Gaby shows up with Kike making Larry jealous. Larry attempts to talk to Gaby but due to Fedora watching her Gaby insults him and continues to ask for drinks at the same time she flirts with him. This makes Pilar jealous, she begins to argue with Gaby. Gaby then turns around and kisses Larry, she follows that up by throwing her drink in Pilar's face. Later on Larry tells Gaby that he loves her and wants to get married by the church so that they can move away from all the hate going on. Gaby agrees. On the wedding day Gaby is waiting for Larry. As Larry is driving to the church Kike runs out, Larry steps on the brakes. Kike then throws himself on Larry's car and pretends to be run over. Pilar calls the cops, Larry is then arrested. The whole "accident" had been a plan by Pilar and Kike because Pilar wants Larry back and Kike wants to have whatever Larry has. Gaby runs out of the church crying upset that Larry left her at the altar. Meanwhile, Larry is in jail crying because he feels that Gaby hates him. Pilar then gets pregnant with Kike's child but she claims its Larry's. As time goes on Fedora, who has now been revealed as Diana's and Gaby's mother, makes Gaby marry Kike. After the wedding Gaby runs off Larry and the two spend time together but when Gaby returns Kike is furious and claims she made him look like a fool. He then rapes her and forbids her from ever seeing Larry again.
Just as her nursing instructor predicted, Diana has become a skilled and popular nurse at the local hospital, one that has attracted the attention of womanizing doctor Ignacio Montiel. One day, he calls her into his office and suggests that he comes by his apartment one night to discuss nursing, suggesting that she is his first choice for a trauma nurse spot. Diana is slightly suspicious, but accepts Ignacio's offer all the same.
Arriving at Ignacio's apartment later that evening, she finds it lit by candlelight, and is even more suspicious of Ignancio's intentions. He offers her a drink, but she declines and suggests that he not drink either, since he's performing surgery the next day. Her suspicions are confirmed when she catches a glimpse of him pouring something from a small vial into her drink. Diana takes the tainted drink, flings it in Ignacio's face and informs him that she saw him spike her drink. Ignacio drops all pretense of subtlety and professionalism and attempts to force her. Diana knocks him onto the couch and throws melted wax in his face, setting the apartment on fire in the process. She flees, but a slow elevator allows him to catch up with her. She shakes him off, and he falls down the stars. Diana runs away, not bothering to see if Ignacio's still alive. Later on, while commiserating with his friend Andres, he conspires to frame Diana for theft and attempted murder, using Andres as a false witness.
The next day, Diana gets a surprise visit from Ignacio, accompanied by two cops who arrest her for aggravated robbery and attempted murder. She ends up sharing a cell with "La Gaviota", who is in jail herself after stopping Andres from slashing Caramelo, the bar owner's daughter, when she cuts him off. Fedora tells Diana her story, and the two women become fast friends, and Fedora offers to defend Diana. When she is released after the charges against her are dropped, Fedora convinces the bar owner, Paco, to bail Diana out of jail. He doesn't understand why, but Fedora tells him that Diana reminds her a lot of herself. Diana is grateful to Fedora and Paco. Unfortunately, she is called into the nursing director's office, where she is told that she will be suspended pending the outcome of the trial. Outraged that nobody will believe her innocence, she quits, but not before slapping Ignacio and letting him know where he stands with her.
Maximiliano suggests that his mother hire a nurse for Octavia's aging mother-in-law, Doña Santa, who is suffering from senility. Octavia is opposed to the idea, preferring that the poor old woman rot away in a mental ward, but she consents anyway. Diana calls Gaby to tell her that she quit, then Gaby tells her that she can get her the job caring for Doña Santa. Octavia is cold towards her, but her sister Yolanda is impressed with her, so Diana gets the job.
When Maximiliano first meets Diana, he's somewhat taken aback. He swears he's seen her before. And indeed he has...being led away in handcuffs, sobbing her innocence while his friend Ignacio looked on. Of course, he doesn't know this, yet, but since that day, he's been unable to get her out of his mind. He wins over his heart with the kindness and respect with which he treats Doña Santa. Gaby tells Diana about a room in the house that is under constant lock and key, and only the head maid Bruna and Maximiliano go in and out of it due to the fact that Marfil, thought by all to be dead but really in a coma. Upon the hiring of Diana, Bruna, the actual mother of Marfil and her twin sister Deborah though no one knows this, shows an automatic disliking to her because she is very pretty and could make Max fall in out of love with Marfil and fall in love with her. In an attempt to continue to live a lavish lifestyle Bruna calls Deborah and pleads her to return to Miami so she can take Marfil's place and fake being Max's wife. Deborah returns, fakes waking up from the coma and pretends to being Marfil.
Paco is carrying a torch for Fedora, but she keeps him at arm's length, devoting herself to finding her two daughters and avenging herself upon Octavia. Paco is also the real father of Paola but neither he, Paola and his other daughter Caramelo know this. Carmelo marries Pancho, brother of Diego and son of Lala. However he also marries Paola, without either of the girls knowing. When it is revealed Caramelo and Paola hate each other and fight. Later on, when Paola is running away from her mom she gets hit with a car. Yolanda rushes to tell Paco but doesn't know why he should care, Yolanda then tells him that Paola is his real daughter. At the hospital Octavia admits to keeping this secret. Paco and Caramelo stay with Paola and say sorry for everything and that they love her. Paola then dies. Paco yells at Octavia and tells her that she hates her for keeping from him and Caramelo that Paola was his daughter.
Diana's and Maximiliano's love is all consuming, and soon Diana reveals that she is pregnant with his son. She later married Diego, a man who was deeply in love with her, but she only saw as a friend. After the wedding, Ignacio shot Diego as revenge for losing the trial, leaving him paralyzed below the hips, and in a wheelchair. Marfil was left with a woman known as Isabel, the aunt of Deborah's husband Andrés. Marfil goes to Houston, so that she can receive special treatments, but she later returns to Miami to reclaim her rightful place. She kidnaps Deborah, and locks her in a cabin. She eventually imprisons Diana there, too. Deborah managed to switch places with Marfil by knocking her unconscious. Marfil's original plans were to take her far away to a dangerous jungle, presumably the Amazon Rainforest. The plane that was taking Diana, Marfil, Andres, and Ignacio crashed, but the four managed to survive. Andrez and Ignacio got in a fight, and shot Andrez in the leg. Then they split up, Diana, trying to run, tripped, and got amnesia. She was found unconscious by a man who working in a Convent. The others thought that Diana was lost, and presumed her to be dead. Diego's legs healed little by little, and eventually he was able walk. Maximiliano got enough information to figure out Diana's location in the jungle. They went to the convent, and there they found Diana, who was not fully healed from her amnesia. They escaped from the convent, and Max and Diana went back to Miami. Back in the jungle, Ignacio tried to drown Marfil, thinking she was Deborah. The same man who found Diana found Marfil, about to die in the river. Once in the convent, she disguised herself as a nun, and called Andres in Miami to come and save her. Deborah had already taken Marfil's place. In an act of vengeance, Marfil kidnapped Deborah, locked her up in the same cabin, Andres threw gasoline all over the cabin, and burned the cabin down, leaving with Marfil. Max, who was in the hospital after an injury, had a vision in a dream of a woman who looked like Marfil, but was not her. Will the good guys win? Or will evil hold everyone in its clutches?
|
revenge, suspenseful, murder, sadist, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I don't recommend this soap opera.... (Sorry, my English is not that good but here goes) Seriously, this has to be one of the MOST DUMB and WORST ACTED soap operas of our time. Uff, I don't even know how they can air this. Even the song is so mediocre. Not only is the acting HORRIBLE but the storyline is of the worst too. With this kind of acting, nobody would even believe the story...they are so rigid/stiff when acting. And to think that they must have spent more money by having produced this in the United States. If there had been voting for less than 1, I'd give it a -10! Of course, this comment is not intended to offend, but to simply give you an idea that this soap opera is one of the worst that I've watched in my life.. Great Soap Opera!. First off I don't know what people where watching in 2007-2008 but I was head over heels for this soap opera. The story line is not predictable so that is good you just never know the outcome and that is exactly what keeps viewers interested. In my opinion the cast is very fit for this series, they all start off pretty am-mature and you see how they evolve into great characters. This has got to be one of my favorite Soap Opera's or probably the best in my taste. I would highly recommend it. And if you are watching it now please take in mind that the series is 4/5 years ago so the way they dress is different then today's style. Also take in mind that the young actor's where barley kicking off their acting careers and now if you happen to recognize them (which i'm sure you will )they have become one of the best actor's out here in Spanish TV with a great demand of popularity.. Dumb novel with stupid machismo ideas (contains mild spoilers). This soap opera is ridiculous! How on earth can a woman love a man that has beat and RAPED her????? In this soap opera the male protagonist rapes and beats the female protagonist and what happens. He says he is sorry and she falls completely in love with him. Dumb. He also beats up people and is a bad guy but is put as a model to follow.The acting is horrible and feels cheap. Characters are 1 dimensional and unrealistic. and the topic in general is "silly young girl falls in love with bad macho man that beats her up"Another topic that is not addressed properly is the difference in ages. One older woman falls in love with a younger man, only to have the younger man miserably break up with her.
|
tt0109134
|
Anjaam
|
Shivani (Madhuri Dixit) is an air hostess for Air India. She meets Vijay Agnihotri (Shahrukh Khan), the son of a wealthy industrialist in a disco club. He tries to get friendly but without any success. Later he meets Shivani in an airplane and instantly falls in love but she shows no interest in him. This does not stop Vijay and he continues to pursue her, only to be rejected every time. Vijay informs his mother that he intends to marry Shivani. When they approach Shivani’s family with a proposal, they witness that Shivani had married another man named Ashok. Vijay is now heartbroken and shocked. Shivani and Ashok decide to move to America.
Four years later, Vijay still cannot forget Shivani and repeatedly turns down marriage proposals brought by his mother. He comes across Shivani again and Ashok who have a daughter named Pinky. Vijay befriends Ashok with fake airline project as the hope of getting closer to Shivani. Ashok is totally oblivious to Vijay's real intentions, to the extent that he does not believe Shivani when she tries to convince him of what Vijay is planning against them. One day, Ashok kicks Shivani out of their house after they have an argument. Vijay witnesses this and severely beats Ashok, leaving him unconscious. When Ashok is being treated in the hospital, Vijay removes the oxygen mask keeping Ashok without oxygen supply, thereby killing him. Shivani attempts to convince the police that Vijay is responsible for Ashok’s death. However, Vijay bribes his friend, Inspector Arjun Singh, to provide an alibi, meaning Shivani could not be believed and Vijay is released without charge. Vijay then approaches Shivani's house and begs her to say she loves him. When she refuses, he frames Shivani for his attempted murder and she is sentenced to three years in prison whilst Pinky is placed under the care of Shivani's sister and drunkard brother-in-law (Tinu Anand). Her brother-in-law treats Pinky extremely badly which eventually causes her to run away with the help of her aunt. Vijay accidentally kills Shivani’s sister and daughter by running his car over them. Shivani learns about their deaths and realizes Vijay is the one who killed them. Shivani decides go to any lengths to seek revenge. In an attempt to escape, she makes a complaint about the brutality of her prison guard. Again her plea is ignored. In prison she comes to know that she is pregnant with Ashok's child . When the prison guard learns that Shivani tried to complain, she gives her a severe beating which causes her to have a miscarriage. Shivani soon kills the prison guard by dragging her to the gallows and hanging her by her neck. But as there is no evidence, she is not convicted for that.
Three years later, Shivani is released from prison. First, she goes to her brother-in-law's house and kills him by choking him with rupee notes and chewing off a significant amount of flesh from his arm. Inspector Singh learns about the murder and suspects Shivani. Singh misbehaves with her in a barn, but she sets the barn on fire, killing Inspector Singh. She then searches for Vijay where she comes to know that he has moved to Tikamgarh. She then goes to work at a hospital for the mentally ill and finds Vijay, who had become paralyzed in the car accident after running over Shivani's family. She volunteers to look after him and rehabilitate him. When cured, Vijay begs Shivani to say she loves him. She opens her arms to him. Whilst they embrace, she stabs him and then starts attacking him for everything he did. She confesses that she made him better for one purpose: to kill him. (She says it's a sin to kill a handicapped person, who cannot defend himself.) Eventually, they both dangle from a cliff (with Vijay holding onto Shivani’s foot). Vijay says that if he falls to his death he'll take Shivani with him. Deciding that it is not necessary for her to live as long as Vijay is dead, Shivani lets go of the ledge causing both of them to fall off the cliff to their deaths.
|
tragedy, revenge, murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0094118
|
Teen Wolf Too
|
Todd Howard (Jason Bateman), the cousin of Scott Howard, has recently been accepted into Hamilton University on a full athletic scholarship on the recommendation of Coach Bobby Finstock (Paul Sand), who was Scott's basketball coach at Beacontown High. Finstock's hope is that Todd has the family genes to become a werewolf and turn Finstock's new struggling boxing team into championship contenders. Having never been much good at sports, and because he is more interested in being a veterinarian, Todd is certain that Finstock has the wrong guy. During a meet and greet reception of school alumni, Todd has his first "wolf-out" while dancing with a seductive hostess. At first, Todd is horrified by his "family affliction", and fellow students begin to harass him. Then, during his first boxing match, after nearly getting knocked out, Todd has his second "wolf-out" only this time he is able to display his supernatural agility and strength and has a dramatic come from behind victory, thus earning the admiration of the students as well as the strict Dean Dunn (John Astin).
With his newfound fame comes girls, top grades and even the dean's car but as the year goes on, Todd realizes that he is losing his friends and self-respect. Todd seeks out advice from his uncle, Scott's father, Harold Howard (James Hampton), who helps Todd comes to terms with his responsibilities and prepares him for the championship. Todd also reconnects with his girlfriend, Nicki (Estee Chandler), who helps him regain his focus of being humble. Todd then decides that he will fight his championship match against Steve "Gus" Gustavson (Robert Neary), who Todd had prior issues with, as himself rather than the wolf much to the dismay of all except his uncle, girlfriend and Professor Tanya Brooks (Kim Darby) who unbeknownst to Todd is also a werewolf. After losing round after round, and nearly getting knocked out, Todd is tempted to become the wolf until he sees Nicki mouth the words "I love you" to him. This gives Todd the strength to overcome Gus and knocks him out to a roaring ovation.
|
cult
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
I am going to start out by admitting that even though I think the original Teen Wolf is a pretty stupid movie, I actually like it quite a bit.
The first film wasn't especially good or commercially successful, so it seems pointless to have even considered making another chapter in the Teen Wolf saga.
Stiles, who was corny but funny in Teen Wolf, has been replaced by an actor who isn't nearly as convincing or amusing.
Anyone who hasn't seen Teen Wolf will probably not be able to make sense of the plot, not that any of them would actually watch this ridiculous film in its entirety.I could probably write a fairly long essay on the problems with this movie, but I'm limited to 1000 words here.
and "Teen Wolf Too" is undoubtedly one of them.It follows pretty much the same plot as the first movie, which was itself a recycled formula.
in Teen Wolf Too when Jason Bateman (as the Wolf) runs across the park, leaps through the air in slow motion, and comes down with a Frisbee in his mouth-all without losing that stupid hat he had on!Oh, but this film is peppered with other fantastic gems.
The only thing I can figure is that he is one of many alien infiltrators sent to Earth to use bad movies to brainwash people into a zombie-like trance, making way for an alien take over.
And to think that people complained that Return of the Jedi was too much like Star Wars...They obviously hadn't seen this movie, which is basically the exact plot of the original with different actors.
Jason Bateman turns into the werewolf in the middle of a boxing bout and the whole school starts cheering for the wolf, without even thinking 'wow, a dude just turned into a werewolf, that's a little unique'.
Possibly because the cast had seen the original Teen Wolf and knew that it is possible for college sports stars to morph into werewolves when they face adversity.
Unfortunately the rest of the film is pretty weak, with alleged jokes misfiring at regular intervals and Teen Wolf singing 'do you love me'.
Don't really have to say anymore about that
I wont give away the end, just in case people are reading this and thinking 'wow, its been out for 18 years but it's only now that I feel the need to get amongst this cinematic masterpiece', but will Teen wolf decide to face the world as himself or as the wolf?
You can't top a film like 'Teen Wolf.' All you can do is defile its existence by producing a sequel like this.
I'm sorry, but "Teen Wolf Too" is just a bad excuse for a sequel to a movie that wasn't that great to begin with.
Turns out that the Dean has assumed that Todd can do for the college boxing team what Scott did for his high school basketball team what with him being a werewolf and everything.
Overnight Todd is a star in the ring and on the campus – but can he manage this sudden change?When I read overly negative reviews of the first Teen Wolf film I can only silently shake my head and wonder what the same viewer makes of the sequel.
I say this because, as basic as the original film is, Teen Wolf Too/Two/2/whatever is like the makers condensed the original film to the basics and then just put that out on as little money, time and effort as possible.
The wolf makeup is also really bad – never great of course but in Too it looks like a mask purchased at a corner store.With all this it is no surprise that the cast can do nothing with it.
The only value the sequel has is making the first Teen Wolf film seem more fresh and filled with fun that it was..
As if the cheesy first film starring Michael J Fox wasn't bad enough, some dink in Hollywood decided that a second must be made despite the fact that there were many obvious signs not to make it.
He turns into a wolf, parties, gets really good at sports, learns a lesson, and then wins as himself instead of using the magic powers Oden inferred upon him and discovers that the longtime girl friend is the hottest chick in the movie.
One such one was Teen Wolf Too. I seem to remember enjoying it, probably cos it was about boxing and i liked fight films at that age like any boy (my favourite movie series was the Karate Kid).
I didn't remember much about it, but must have liked it cos I then rented Teen Wolf, the original, to see where it had come from.
We love you and your furriness!') D) Why being a werewolf helps you be good at Basketball/Boxing.Saying all that, Teen Wolf is okay.
But it's like they took the main plot points of the original and said 'Okay, we got that scene, well let's set it here but make as little effort as possible, i mean we're only remaking Teen Wolf, no one cares if it's good.' The result is a mess of awkward, tired, unfunny scenes that only make sense when you see the original and realise that's what they were trying to achieve.
But i'm glad i saw them the wrong way round again, because this really makes Teen Wolf look like Back to the Future.Oh, and the point of my story is that I then realised my taste as a kid was obviously not that bad, cos I had seen this twice and then stopped.
If you thought Teenwolf was good, just you wait and see how his cousin, played by Justin Bateman ,portrays a new role for the howlingly funny series of movies!
I'd say the high point of the movie comes when the wolf, with all his new college buddies, dances to a musical montage of "Do you love me (now that I can dance)"....Here's to hoping for a Teenwolf Three coming out soon!!!!.
I saw this movie once in 1987 and I watched it a second time in 2003 and I still think that this is one sequel that should not have been made.
Fox and this movie proves that theory to be true.Teen Wolf Too is a text book example of how to make a horrible sequel to an average movie.
In Teen Wolf Too, the actors who portray 'Styles' and Coach Finstock seem as if they are actors who are doing bad imitations of Jerry Levine and Jay Tarses.Once I got past all of the returning characters being re-cast (with the exception of Harold Howard and Chubby), I still couldn't enjoy this movie because the story is no different than it was in the first movie.
Like the first film, they cover up the lack of plot by including several montages of Teen Wolf Too doing amazing things and being loved by his peers.
The only thing good about the DVD is that you can flip it over and watch the original Teen Wolf.
On the other hand, the worst thing about the original Teen Wolf DVD is that this waste of time is on the flip side of it..
Teen Wolf Too is so bad that it makes part one look like an Academy Award winning film.
It's note for note the exact same film as Teen Wolf, with boxing replacing basketball (and Jason Bateman as a fourth string Michael J Fox)But more importantly, I'm one of the four people in this country who saw this in the theaters.
Think of the first movie then take away good acting (except Chubby's character played by Mark Holton - he was funny) take away humor and throw originality out too.
In the first movie we saw Michael J Fox's wolf rise to fame, here we see his cousin (what a lame excuse to make another film when the original actor doesn't want to do another) first fail as a wolf then decide he doesn't even want to be a wolf.
The sporting storyline is almost exactly like the first film except it's boxing, not basketball this time.
The idea of a teen aged were wolf may have had a little live left in it if all the same actors signed and more time was given to writing a decent story and script.
What Teen Wolf Too provides:Chubby and Uncle Howard return for the sequel - The worst rendition of "Do you love me" ever recorded, then lip-synced by Teen Wolf Too at a party where he jumps 30 feet in the air, backwards, onto a balcony * One of the great movie mullets of all time - thank you Stuart Fratkin * Frog fight * John Rocker's acting debut * Will Smith's acting debut * Two-sport athlete Chubby goes undefeated as team's heavyweight boxer and is on the fencing team, giving us the most far-fetched dual-sporting career for a college athlete * Teen Wolf Too catches a frisbee in his mouth, then signs autographs * Three consecutive montage scenes with no dialogue * Professor Tonya Brooks * The "I'd like to change some classes" scene.
Well, I love Teen Wolf, and I absolutely hate this movie.
I thought that it was much more interesting in the first movie for a boy to find out that he was a werewolf when he thought werewolves were a myth than in this film were a college guy finds out he's a werewolf when he thought he wasn't like all the other freaks in the family.The other thing this film lacked was an endearing love story like the charming affair between Boof and Scott.Save yourself some pain--watch Teen Wolf twice instead of watching Teen Wolf Too..
Teen Wolf was a cute, warm hearted and fun little movie that had some nice little moments and the added bonus of the always reliable Michael J Fox starring in it.
I think that the thing that bugs me most about this film is the fact that someone somewhere thought that the great cinema going public would be that sad and that stupid that we wouldn't see this for the 'lets milk this and run' movie that it actually is.
Annoyingly Teen Wolf Too is included on the Teen Wolf DVD which is a shame as i'd rather have seen some special features, extras etc from the first movie instead of valuable space being taken up by this sorry sequel.
When you add a fat slob like Holton to a great, highly realistic script, bad hair, porn moustaches and feathers, and mesh hats, what more can you say than this movie is funny.
If you watch teen wolf too expecting a good movie - you have missed the point.
I saw the first "Teen Wolf" movie when it first came out on video.
The fact that it's taken me more than twenty years to see the sequel should tell you what I thought of the first movie, even though I was in the target audience (teenagers) at the time.
It's a lazy sequel, for one thing following the basic plot of the first movie (Teen is a loser, teen finds out he can change into a werewolf, teen gets drunk with power, teen becomes a real jerk, teen realizes he's been a jerk, teen plays in sports tournament at climax intentionally not using his werewolf powers.) To make matters worse, this time around this plot moves at a snail's pace, with only sporadic attempts at humor (all of which crash to the ground.) Jason Bateman here is a bland presence, alternately being whiny or befuddled.
Most of the supporting characters are back, many played by different actors.Scott Howard from the first film, couldn't and I'm sure didn't want to be here, so instead we have his cousin Todd.
It is just a college version of the original "Teen Wolf" that deems it unnecessary and unworthy of a sequel.
However, I really like Jason Bateman and I think he's good in even this film.
Yes it's no good as a sequel and there's alot of problems but if this was the original and no first film had been made then I think it would have done pretty well.
Teen Wolf Too is the same movie as the last except everything about it is worse
Some people enjoy this movie but I couldn't I tried I really like Jason Bateman but this is one of the worst things hes been in
Fox another Teen Wolf film was certainly in the offing.
Teen Wolf Too (1987) * (out of 4)Todd Howard (Jason Bateman), the cousin of the teenage werewolf from the first film, finds himself in college on a sports scholarship even though he doesn't play sports.
When it turns out Todd is a werewolf, his entire life changes.TEEN WOLF was a film that most people make fun of or look at as a piece of trash but I've always had a soft spot for it.
Yes, it's quite stupid but at the same time it was a fun movie with some good performances and for the most part it featured a character that a lot of young people could connect with.
The film has a couple cast members from the original but even they can't add much here.TEEN WOLF TOO is just a really lousy movie that was made to try and make money off of the original.
The only answer is, it happened in the successful Teen Wolf Movie too.
The movie was a terrible sequel to the original Teen Wolf, which was corny, but it has something good.
A Teen Wolf Too Far. If you have watched Teen Wolf, then change out Michael J Fox for his wolf cousin Jason Bateman, replace basketball with boxing and move everything to college not high school and there is no need to watch this pointless sequel.
I didn't really think much of the first TEEN WOLF - an '80s high school comedy starring Michael J.
Indeed, there's nothing much to see here other than a lame re-run of the first movie, with an added ROCKY-style boxing plot to add some action to the inanity.The problem with TEEN WOLF TOO is that it feels flaccid and badly dated as a high school comedy.
I watched this when I was about 14 years old, as a follow-up to Teen Wolf (which I don't really remember at all, but must've liked well enough to see this).And yes, it sucked.
Fox - what a surprise!) is basically a re-hashing of the original, only instead of having basketball as the sport in this, I believe boxing is (it's been a while since I saw the film.
Anything one could remotely need to know about the "Teen Wolf" phenomenon was covered in the Michael Fox original.
Well, you can imagine my surprise!This film has the same atmosphere and the same cinematography as the first one, which really makes me feel like they put some hard effort into keeping up the good name of "Teen Wolf"Once again, the performances are superb.
If you liked the very first "Teen Wolf" and if any lady viewers thought Marty (sorry, but I love "Back to the Future" so much!), AKA young Michael J.
Fox, was cute, then y'all will love this next movie in the series, "Teen Wolf Too." But wait!
How did Jason Bateman steal Mr. Fox's spot as the teen wolf?
Teen Wolf Too is the greatest movie I've ever seen!.
It is amazing to me that a movie as awful as "Teen Wolf" could make enough money to warrant a sequel.
It's one of those great bad movies.Jason Bateman's hair basically makes the movie worth your while, as does the shoddy special effects and semi-awful wolf costume.Particularly notable moments include the horrible sound editing during the first boxing match, and the moment in which Todd first transforms.Plus, there's a musical number!
I really liked Teen Wolf but after watching this movie I realized it was the charm of the star and the novelty of the concept that made that movie entertaining.If you are a Jason Bateman fan like I am though it is nice to see him in his early days when his talent was getting formed.
A guy named Chubby got a fencing scholarship.This movie is to Teen Wolf what Saved by the Bell: The College Years was to Saved by the Bell - a painful reminder that this show sucks.
Clean-cut college freshman Todd Howard (blandly played by Jason Bateman) becomes the star of the boxing team and the most popular guy on campus after he discovers that he's a werewolf.
Teen Wolf Too starts as teenager Todd Howard (Jason Bateman) arrives at Hamilton University on a sports scholarship because of a recommendation from boxing coach Finstock (Paul Sand) who is under pressure from Dean Dunn (John Astin) to win some trophy's & get Hamilton University noticed.
Fox, Teen Wolf Too doesn't star Michael J.
Fox & is basically more of a remake than an original film that tries to expand & develop the ideas seen in the original Teen Wolf & instead just blatantly copies them.
No, not because it is about a bunch of guys that get outrageously drunk and have to piece the previous night together (though if they had thrown a werewolf into it, it might have made that movie somewhat more interesting) but rather because it is an exact duplicate of Teen Wolf, to the point that we pretty much know exactly what is going to happen.
The new Coach Finstock acts almost like a completely different character but he's still funny.If you look past small things such as Coach Finstock and Chubby going from basketball to boxing, characters being replaced by new actors, no Micheal J Fox and rehashed story of the 1st movie, you may enjoy this film.
|
tt0456144
|
Lage Raho Munna Bhai
|
Murli Prasad Sharma alias Munna Bhai (Sanjay Dutt), a gangster who is in love with the voice of Janhavi (Vidya Balan), a radio jockey, devises a plan to meet her when she announces a quiz contest featuring the life and beliefs of Mahatma Gandhi, to be aired on 2 October, the birthday of Gandhi. To prepare for the contest, Munna's sidekick Circuit (Arshad Warsi) kidnaps and bribes a group of professors to provide the answers for Munna. After winning the contest, Munna is granted an interview with Janhavi wherein he presents himself as a professor of history and a Gandhi specialist. Janhavi subsequently asks Munna to present a lecture on Gandhi to a community of senior citizens who live in her home, called the 'Second Innings House.' To prepare for this event, Munna engages in intense study at a Gandhi institute. For three days and nights (and without food or sleep), Munna reads about the life and ideologies of Gandhi.
It is during this period that the image of Gandhi (Dilip Prabhavalkar), addressed by his nickname "Bapu" ("father"), appears and offers help and advice to Munna. Gandhi encourages Munna to tell the truth about himself to Janhavi, but Munna resists this advice. With Gandhi's help, Munna succeeds in impressing Jahnavi and cultivates a new lifestyle based upon Gandhism. Munna starts to co-host a radio-show with Janhavi and Gandhi's image, guiding his audience to use Gandhigiri to solve everyday problems.
The film has several subplots. One of the most prominent of these details the story of Lucky Singh (Boman Irani) and his daughter Simran (Dia Mirza). Lucky is an unscrupulous businessman who employs Circuit and Munna Bhai to conduct underworld activities for him. His daughter, Simran, is engaged to marry Sunny (Abhishek Bachchan), the son of the powerful businessman Kkhurana (Kulbhushan Kharbanda). Kkhurana is superstitious and his activities are controlled by his astrologer, Batuk Maharaj (Saurabh Shukla), whose particular use of numerology led Kkhurana to add an extra "K" to his real name (Khurana) as well as to the conclusion that the 'Second Innings House' would be the most auspicious place for Sunny and Simran to live. Maharaj also convinces Kkhurana to reject the marriage between Simran and Sunny when it is revealed that Simran is considered to be a manglik (an individual whose Vedic astrological makeup is believed by some to be devastating for marriage, mostly leading to the death of the spouse after a certain calculated period of marriage). Lucky appropriates the 'Second Innings House' by sending Munna to Goa (keeping him out of the way) and then blackmailing him to let the matter pass or risk losing his love Janvi. In response, Munna launches a "non-violent" protest to reclaim the house. He calls this protest "Get Well Soon, Lucky" and asks his radio show's audience to send Lucky flowers (red roses especially) to help him recover from the "disease of dishonesty".
During this time Munna tells Janhavi the truth (via a letter he gives to her). Heartbroken, Janhavi leaves Munna. Munna receives another setback when he is tricked by Lucky into revealing his conversations with Gandhi before a public audience. At this conference, Munna finds that only after he has learned something about "Bapu"'s life can the Gandhi image talk about it, which serves as proof for a psychiatrist in the audience that Munna is delusional. Gandhi's monologue at the end of the film, however, questions this conclusion. Munna, despite these defeats, continues to use Gandhigiri, a decision that transforms Lucky, revives Janhavi's affection, and resolves Simran's marriage. Lucky Singh eventually becomes a student of Gandhigiri and is greeted by Gandhi's image not long after he has begun to study "Bapu"'s life. Immediately he calls for a photograph to be taken of them together; this perplexes the photographer, who cannot see the Gandhi image.
|
cult, romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0095169
|
For Keeps?
|
In Kenosha, Wisconsin, Darcy, editor at her high school paper, and her long-term boyfriend Stan are in their final year of high school and already have been accepted at good colleges; before Darcy goes to the University of Wisconsin to study journalism, she will go on a trip to Paris with her mother for her graduation present, while Stan will go to Caltech to study architecture. With the help of Darcy's best friend Lila, Darcy and Stan spend a weekend together, where they sleep together, and Darcy becomes pregnant. They announce the news at Thanksgiving, and neither Darcy's mother Donna, who was abandoned by her husband and brought up Darcy alone, nor Stan's Catholic parents are very supportive. Respectively, they urge the young couple to have an abortion or give up the baby for adoption. Darcy plans to have an abortion, but does not go through with it, much to Stan's relief.
At Christmas, the kids announce their plans to keep the baby, causing a break between them and their parents. They rent a decrepit apartment and get married to the cheers of their friends, despite the fact that without parental consent the marriage is not legal. At the urging of her high school guidance counselor, who explains that other girls will want to emulate her and become teenaged mothers themselves, Darcy drops out of high school but works toward her GED. Prom is interrupted by Darcy's water breaking; although baby Thea (short for Theodosia) is healthy, Darcy suffers from post-partum depression, unable to even hold her daughter, and Stan struggles to pay the bills on a part-time job salary. Only when Darcy hears an intruder (who turns out to be Stan's father) and picks up her baby protectively, does she break from her depression.
Without telling Darcy, Stan sacrifices his Caltech scholarship because there is no married housing at the school for undergraduates. Although Stan takes a second, dead-end job, the bills pile up, and the couple finally moves in with Donna, which alienates Stan and Darcy, and causes Stan to start drinking heavily. Local neighborhood girl Michaela informs Darcy of the scholarship deception so she enlists Stan's best friend Chris in a plan to ensure he take the scholarship and go to college after all. The plan entails throwing out Stan and annulling the marriage. Stan reconciles with his parents, but is heartbroken over the split with Darcy, who doesn't change her mind but becomes visibly angrily at her mother's cold attitude.
At Darcy's night school graduation, Stan arrives to inform Darcy that he has applied for scholarships to the University of Wisconsin–Madison for them both. Darcy lets slip her role in the Caltech deception with Chris, and Stan chases after her as she drives away. Darcy finally tells Donna that Stan is a good man, that she loves him and Donna can either embrace them as an entire family or watch them live their lives without her; Donna finally gets over her past and says she loves and supports Darcy fully. They reconcile, go forward on their plans to attend college in Madison in the fall, and remark Thea will have a very early curfew when she is a teenager. Stan says ten p.m. and Darcy says eleven p.m. Then they say if she is really in love her curfew will be eight p.m.
|
romantic
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0091795
|
Promise
|
Mikael (Oscar Isaac) is an apothecary who lives in the small Armenian village of Sirun in the southeast part of the Ottoman Empire. In order to help pay the expenses for medical school, he promises himself to the daughter of an affluent neighbor, receiving 400 gold coins as a dowry. This allows him to travel to Constantinople and attend the Imperial Medical Academy.
There, he befriends Emre, the son of a high-level Turkish official. Through his wealthy uncle Mikael also meets Ana (Charlotte Le Bon), an Armenian woman raised in Paris, who is involved with an American reporter for the Associated Press, Chris Myers (Christian Bale). In due course, Mikael falls in love with Ana just as international tensions begin to rise with the outbreak of World War I. Mikael temporarily manages to avoid conscription in the Ottoman army through a medical student exemption with the help of Emre. But when he tries to save his uncle from imprisonment during the roundups of April 24, 1915, he is detained and sent to a prison labor camp himself.
Mikael eventually escapes the camp, returning to his village only to find the Turks have violently turned on their Armenian fellow townspeople. His parents, and particularly his mother, persuade him to marry his betrothed and seek refuge in a remote mountain cabin where she soon becomes pregnant. A difficult pregnancy leads Mikael to bring his wife back to the care of his mother in the village. There he learns that Ana and Christopher are at a nearby Red Cross facility and he goes to seek their help for his family to escape the imminent Turkish threat.
Departing the mission with a group of orphans, they head back to Sirun to retrieve Mikael's family. Along the way, however, they encounter a site of a massacre, as it becomes clear all of Sirun's inhabitants, including Mikael's family, save his mother, have been killed by Turkish troops. Chris is captured by Ottoman troops and sent back to Constantinople, charged with being a spy and slated for execution by authorities; with the help of Emre, and through the intercession of American Ambassador Henry Morgenthau, he is released and allowed to depart for Malta. Once there, he boards the French cruiser Guichen, as it prepares to set sail along the Ottoman coast. For helping Chris, Emre is executed by firing squad.
Escaping pursuit, Mikael, Ana, and the orphans join a large group of refugees determined to fight off the Ottoman army on Musa Dagh. As they fend off repeated assaults, Mikael's mother succumbs to her wounds and is buried on the mountain. The refugees hold on long enough to escape on the back side to the coast as the Guichen comes to their rescue. But as the launches return to the ship, a Turkish artillery barrage throws Ana and Yeva, the young daughter of Mikael's uncle, overboard. Mikael jumps in after them and is able to rescue Yeva but Ana drowns.
In a voice over, Mikael recounts that he adopted Yeva and together they settled in Watertown, Massachusetts. During Yeva's wedding reception in 1942, with the Armenian orphans who have now grown up in attendance, Mikael presides over a toast, wishing good fortune to their families and the generations to come.
|
violence, romantic, melodrama
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0452681
|
The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause
|
Carol/Mrs. Claus is teaching a class of young elves and begins telling them a story of her life with Scott Calvin/Santa Claus. The couple are expecting their first child as Christmas Eve approached. Scott invites his in-laws, Sylvia and Bud Newman, to the North Pole, along with Scott's former wife, Laura, her husband, Neil, and their daughter, Lucy. Meanwhile, he is summoned to a meeting of the Council of Legendary Figures, consisting of Mother Nature, Father Time, the Easter Bunny, Cupid, the Tooth Fairy, and the Sandman. Jack Frost also arrives, jealous that he has no holiday or special occasion in his honor. Because he has been promoting himself during the Christmas season, Mother Nature suggests sanctions against him. When Santa says he is dealing with how to get the in-laws to come without revealing that he is Santa, Jack Frost negotiates a light sentence of community service at the North Pole, helping Santa and the elves put up various Canadian-themed paraphernalia, as Carol's parents believe Scott is a toymaker in Canada.
However, Frost's ultimate goal is to trick Santa into renouncing his position. When elf Curtis inadvertently reveals the Escape Clause, Frost sneaks into Santa's hall of snow globes and steals one containing Scott as Santa. If Scott holds the globe and says, "I wish I'd never been Santa at all," he will go back in time and undo his career as Santa. When Lucy discovers this, Frost freezes her parents and locks her in a closet. He then orchestrates situations that make Scott think he must resign to make things better.
Frost tricks Scott into invoking the Escape Clause and both are sent to Scott's front yard in 1994, when Scott caused the original Santa to fall off of his roof and had to replace him. Frost causes the original Santa to fall off the roof and grabs Santa's coat before Scott can, making Frost the new Santa. Scott is sent back to the present day, where he has been CEO of his old company for the last 12 years and business takes priority over family. Laura treats him coldly and explains she and Neil divorced, revealing that the new timeline has affected other people as well. Scott also learns he and Carol never married and Carol moved away years ago.
Scott goes to find Lucy and Neil, who are vacationing at the North Pole, which Frost has turned into a touristy resort. Christmas is now "Frostmas", the elves are miserable, and the reindeer are confined to a petting zoo. When Scott finds Lucy and Neil, Neil expresses his resentment for Scott's causing the separation between Neil and Laura. Scott confronts Frost as Santa Claus and tricks Jack Frost into recording his voice stating the Escape Clause. Scott has Lucy steal Frost's snow globe and bring it to him; when Frost finds out and takes the globe back, Scott plays the recording of Frost saying, "I wish I'd never been Santa at all", invoking the Escape Clause and causing Scott and Frost to be sent back again to 1994. Scott restrains Jack long enough to let the Scott Calvin of 1994 get the coat, making him Santa Claus again and taking him back to the North Pole in the present and the family where no time has passed.
Scott as Santa reconciles with his family and Jack is arrested by elf police. He reveals he cannot unfreeze his victims unless he is unfrozen himself. Scott convinces Lucy via a snow globe he had given her earlier of her warmly hugging a snowman, to give Frost a "magic hug" to unfreeze and reform him. The "Canada" ruse is dropped and Scott appears as Santa to Carol's parents. With two hours remaining before Santa must leave for his Christmas deliveries, Carol goes into labor.
Back to the present time, while Carol is telling the tale to her students, Scott walks in to reveals his baby boy, Buddy Claus.
|
satire
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
All and all, a good way to kick off the holiday movie season.Other notes of interest: The actress playing Mrs. Clause is on the T.V. show Lost now.
The story is fine, a nice pleasant easy to follow plot with help from some nice additions to the cast, especially Alan Arkin as Santa's father-in-law.Tim Allen continues to impress as the big man himself and Martin Short is great as Jack Frost.
I strongly recommend this one as a holiday pleaser and whilst a number of adults will sigh at the films relatively corny ending I strongly recommend staying around for the bloopers during the final credits.Overall I would definitely say that this is a movie worth seeing, ignore the critics and make your own mind up on this one, you wont be disappointed..
The absence of David Krumholtz was unmoving, for he provided a lot of stability to the plot lines in the other movies.I did however, enjoyed Martin Short as Jack Frost.
And of course Tim Allen....he is superb as Santa Clause.Overall, the movie was so, so.
If anyone want to see a good Christmas movie, I would recommend Home Alone 1,2, Miracle on 34th Street, and The Santa Clause 1,2..
Strained, forced, uninteresting and poorly conceived.Tim Allen created a great character in the first film - the 2nd was pushing it - this 3rd outing was simply vengeful.The idea was bad; its execution is worse - to subject movie audiences to this type of tripe should be illegal, if not unconstitutional.
Tim Allen wasn't funny, Martin Short was REALLY annoying as usual, and the head elf this time around is a little nervous guy with a lisp.
Spencer Breslin as Curtis, has grown into his role (and gotten a deeper voice in the 4 years since part 2), but he just doesn't have the same screen presence as Kromholtz.The film moves along at a quick pace, and Martin Short steals every scene that he's in as the devilish Jack Frost, who learns a valuable lesson about himself by the end of the movie.
Eric Lloyd is underused as Scott Calvin's son, but Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson are delightful once again in their original roles.I'm not going to ruin any plot twists in the film, but there is an interesting homage to "It's a Wonderful Life", that provides a revealing look at a parallel reality that could have occurred if events had not transpired as they do in the first film.I'll close by saying that this is a fun family film, and definitely one that the kids will enjoy.
Also Jack Frost (Martin Short) wants to take over Xmas so he plots to have Santa wiped out of Scott Calvin's history.
Santa Clause 3 all looks rather false and phony.Actors like Alan Arkin, Judge Reinhold and Wendy Crewson are wasted with this kind of material and really should have been allowed to have more freedom with their limited roles.At the very least it rounds-off a neat little family Xmas trilogy.
So Santa (Tim Allen) decides to bring her parents (Ann-Margret, Alan Arkin) to the North Pole along with Santa's ex and her family (Judge Reinhold, Wendy Crewson, Liliana Mumy).
Scott Calvin/Santa Claus is preparing for another Christmas at the North Pole when a mischievous Jack Frost (Martin Short) has plans to take over his place as the head of Christmas.
Curtis the Elf is more annoying than he was in the second film, the little girl Lucy (who has really taken over Charlie's role as the "cute kid") is really irritating at times, and Jack Frost himself is a very blah villain who really just adds nothing to the movie.I was a teenager when I watched Santa Clause 3 the first time, and during it I was wondering what I would've thought of it as a young child.
Basically Santas wife Mrs Clause is about to have a baby yadda yadda yadda Jack Frost comes into the picture there's a horrible It's A Wonderful Life ripoff where he sees what it would be like if he was not Santa Claus.The entire movie was abysmal boring like getting your teeth drilled without the novocaine basically.
I understand that Christmas movies are normally heart-warming sweet and touching.But seriously this movie was TOO sweet it made me gag through most of it it was like being bombarded by gumdrops and cotton candy as it devoured me.The acting was awful everyone involved the ending was as stupid and cutesy as it could possibly get .Ugh even writing about this travesty of a Christmas movie makes me gag .I had such high expectations for the third one too and it let me down big time.My entire family was bored to death my mom even fell asleep during it so did my dad.Tim Allen looked angry bitter and bored throughout the entire movie the kids were extremely grating and couldn't act at all especially that red haired girl who played his niece in the film.It stinks I can't give this less then 1-star but since I can't this will have to do even though it deserves a -10.Oh and pay attention throughout the movie there is absolutely no chemistry with anyone just forced unfunny stale boring deliveries over and over again.
I wish that this were not the end of the Santa Clause franchise because these films provide good holiday entertainment.
I'm now going to summarize the whole film in a few words, there is a bored Tim Allen, Canadian jokes, an annoying, over the top Martin Short, flatulating reindeer, pratfalls, and bad acting.
Basically, Jack Frost wants to take over the holiday season because he feels he doesn't get enough attention, and then the Mrs. Clause's in-laws come to visit, so the entire factory goes undercover as a Canadian toy making factory.
It has great plot, great acting, awesome ending, Personally I think it was the best Santa Clause movie so far!
The first film Tim Allen did in this series, "The Santa Clause" was not a great movie by any stretch, but it was an entertaining film and one of the more imaginative and clever Christmas movies ever made.
I saw this film not too long after it was released last year, and I can say without a doubt, it deserves better than a three star rating.Tim Allen stars as Santa once again, this time regretting ever taking the job, hence the title "The Escape Clause." It was also a treat to see Martin Short playing Jack Frost, who envies Santa and wants his job.
Don't they know that kids watching this movie actually believe Tim Allen could be Santa Claus?
But for us parents who like to hold on to the idea of Santa Claus in our children's eyes as long as we can, this movie sure as hell didn't help!.
Now I don't mean the whole Santa Clause thing, I love that idea about the movies, like the Polar Express, I love making kids believe or still believe because it brings the cheer into Christmas.
The 3rd North Pole adventure has to deal with Jack Frost trying to take over Christmas, and of course, Santa coming to the rescue.
I mean at the end of the day the movie is a good Christmas film and does what it has to do.
My family and two little girls have watched the entire trilogy of Santa Clause movies every year since they were born.
And when each child has seen the first movie when Tim Allen first becomes Santa, and the second movie, when he find his Mrs. Clause, they are excited to see that they are going to have a baby and anxious for Frost not to mess anything up.
Our family has enjoyed watching this trilogy for 12 years and I hope others will see them for the fun and magical Christmas movies that they are!.
I'm happy that it spent most of it at the north pole unlike number 2 it had more humor and added a few new characters like jack frost and Alan Arkin who made this film extra special
now the plot isn't anything knew and you can guess whats coming in the first 15 to 20 min but it has a great meaning when the end comes now The and Lucy made me smile every time she came on to the screen really the best part of the movie and now one ot anyone could ever have played santa like Tim AllenI recommend this to anyone who loves the santa calus you wont be dissapointed.
"The Santa Clause 3: The Escape Clause" is one of the most patchy, disjointed and all around messy family films to have come out in recent years, and that fact that it's excused all too often because it's "just a silly movie for kids" is just disconcerting and worrying.
Now stuck in an alternate time-line where Frost has assumed the role of Santa Clause and has turned the North Pole and Christmas at large into a kitschy way to make money and attain fame, Scott must figure out a way to make things right once again and restore Christmas to its former glory.To give credit where it is due, there are a few charming elements at play that keep the film from imploding into a complete train-wreck.
Santa Tim. i really enjoyed this,, sure it's not as good as the first two,, I get that,, but lot's of good laughs,, good heartfelt story,, plus the idea of putting Jack Frost into the storyline was pretty cool.
Tim Allen as usual does a wonderful job as Santa,, really can't think of anyone else that I would want to be playing Santa Clause in the movie,, storyline wasn't too bad,, maybe not quite as good as the other 2 ,, but you have to love the relationship that he has with his boy,, there is some sadness is the movie..
My favorite happens to be "The Santa Clause 2," because of the romance aspect, plus young Lucy is adorable and it was neat to see Charlie 8 years later.Martin Short is great as Jack Frost, it's a real treat to see Ann-Margret and Alan Arkin as Carol's parents and it's great seeing all the originals from the first two films back for the third (a rare feat in Hollywood).The overall trilogy is absolutely great and fun for the entire family to watch, plus all the extras on the DVDs are a lot of fun, too..
It's occasional burst of energy aside, there's not much more to anticipate, just another endless slew of gimmicks to keep the audience attending.As in the previous SANTA CLAUSE movies, this third adventure follows another loophole in Scott Calvin's (Tim Allen) commitment as the Jolly Ol' Saint Nick.
Santa Clause 3 not only turns the series into a little-kid Christmas tale movie, but shows how unafraid Tim Allen is of ruining his reputation for money.
As a matter of fact it's more for 9 year olds since the best character in the film is Jack Frost played by Martin Short.
The only worthwhile thing that happens with Jack as Santa is he turns the North Pole into an amusement park.The movie is just plain boring and not funny and would only fascinate a 9 year old.FINAL VERDICT: Definitely a sequel to miss..
Furthermore, Martin Short was great as Jack Frost, he stole the show.Gotta admit, all those kids and the returning figures from the previous movies are kinda annoying (except for Judge Reinhold, that guy is hilariously bad, and therefor..good) OK so it's nothing really special, but it's nice to see on the holidays...and that's why it's made in the first place, right?.
All the while Jack Frost is going about the North Pole silently scheming a way to get Scott to use the Escape Clause so he may then become Santa, which he inevitably does.
I feel that Bernard just added a kick of flavor to both the Santa Clause 1 and 2 and without him it appears to me the magic just sort of vanished mostly because Tim and David made an excellent team of comedy and now that David is gone and there's no Bernard the funny seems to fade away.The bloopers were not that funny either and about 10 minutes into the movie my cousin started asking me "Is this over yet?" and "Wheres Bernard?" As a matter of fact a lot of kids and parents were saying it wasn't the same without him.So if you and your kids can handle it without Bernard in it and Bernard is not your kids favorite character then go see it,But if your kids or you LOVE Bernard and he is everyones favorite then don't go because you will miss him..
thank god for martin short he really suites been the bad guy and should do a lot more maybe he could do a serial killer in his next role, Tim Allen again pulls off being the big guy.he has a warmth about him being Santa, but the rest of the cast let the film down,but maybe you can only work with whats put in front of you.the best thing in the film is jack's hair.i'm getting my hair like that its cool, ice cool!!!!!
Mrs. Claus is having a baby, her parents visit the North Pole and while Santa's juggling all that, Jack Frost is out to steal Christmas away too.
I always like their north pole set and I think it's sweet that the elves are played by kids in these movies.
I think it adds a nice touch for kids to enjoy and think "Hey, I could help out Santa!" There are enough jokes for adults to have a good chuckle at and Martin Short, Alan Arkin, and Ann-Margaret are all great in their roles (Alan Arkin alone made me laugh just be sort of reacting to the North Pole).
I ejoyed Mrs. Claus (her name escapes me but I could probably just look it up on here) and I always think Tim Allen is good Santa..
It is lighthearted, amusing (found ourselves chuckling many times) and just good fun.We did miss Bernard and wonder why he wasn't in this movie - Martin Short was outstanding, as always.If you are looking for something a little silly but fun for everyone, I would recommend.
I loved all three of The Santa Claus movies, they were all really good!
this movie is not that great.i found the story too banal(ordinary).there's not much originality here.it's a combination of many other movies.it's equal parts a Christmas Carol,It's a Wonderful Life,How the Grinch Stole Christmas,and Even The Cat in the Hat movie.the movie isn't very funny,but there is a bit of slapstick that works.this movie is,i felt,overly sentimental and preachy.in fact,i felt like i was watching a 90 minute commercial on how important family is.now,don't get me wrong.family is very important.i just find that subtlety works best with these movies.this was just way too heavy handed for me.but there is some good news.the movie has a great visual style.i mean,it looks fantastically magical.and Martin Short is terrific as Jack Frost,the baddie of the piece.he's not really scary,more mildly disconcerting than anything,and even a bit sad.i also like the look they gave him.this movie is also a bit of a tearjerker.anyway,this is a case of style over substance.and while it's not nearly as mean spirited or creepy as part 2,i still don't think it was as good.the negatives just outweigh the positives.for me,The Santa Clause 3 is a 4/10.
The only Character that was worth watching - and only part of the time - was Martin Short who plays Jack frost.
With so many possible story lines available on a Christmas theme, whoever came up with idea of Jack Frost trying to steal the Santa title needs to look for another job.
The first Santa Claus: It was a new, original and entertaining movie, full of funny jokes that will make the whole family laugh their sides off.
Overall, the movie fed us well, even if the food consisted of eye candy, ear candy, and tear candy.The plot basically consists of Santa Allen juggling his expecting wife, her bemused parents (Ann-Margaret and Alan Arkin) who complain of insufficient family time, and the machinations of the devious original Cold Miser himself, Jack Frost (Martin Short).
I think it would have been nice if Bernard the Elf, had been able to leave his "Numbers" chalk board long enough to give Santa a much needed hand in the Supporting Best Guy Friend role.The problem with the film for me, was that this time out I felt the script writers dumbed the movie down far too much.
The trailers were set out for the whole movie to be about Tim Allen to figure out a way to become Santa Claus again.
The Santa Clause 3 is a good movie for anyone to get into the Christmas spirit.
Tim Allen and co return for one final outing as the modern day Santa and his extended family have to put up with Jack Frost trying to take over Christmas.After the first two films in the series this third instalment was always going to have high standards to beat and although this is a good attempt it fails to do this.
The film overall felt a little rushed and a little slapped together like perhaps they didn't really want to do another but were forced to.Tim Allen is still the perfect Santa Clause.
Jack Frost played by Martin Short is desperate to get it and in doing so destroys the workshop and goes back into Scotts Past and alters it so he can be Santa.While not as good as the first 2 entries this is still a film that I still recommend it because it is funny and a very good story but is really cliché when it comes to the ending.
|
tt0287351
|
Un burattino di nome Pinocchio
|
The story begins with an inventor named Geppetto making a robot, Pinocchio, as his son. Meanwhile, an evil mayor named Scamboli is building a technological city called "Scamboville" to get rid of nature. He also hates all children, except for his beloved daughter, Marlene. When Marlene expresses concerns to Scamboli about there being no space for children to have fun, he sets out to make a kids-only theme park called "Scamboland".
That night, Geppetto and Spencer the Penguin are preparing to make Pinocchio come to life. But Scamboli has seized control of the city mains to light up his theme park for the Grand Opening, so, Geppetto has no choice but to steal his electricity. Suddenly, Scamboland has a power outage and the children leave. After Pinocchio comes to life, much to his family's delight, Cyberina the fairy appears. She decides to grant Geppetto's wish to turn Pinocchio into a real boy if he learns about right and wrong.
The next morning, Pinocchio is walking his way to school with Spencer when he meets up with Zach, Cynthia and Marlene. Marlene challenges Pinocchio to an Imagination game, hosted by Cyberina. Marlene wins the game, but Pinocchio snatches the medal from her. As he runs away, he comes across Scamboli's robotic henchmen, Cabby and Rodo, who take Pinocchio to see Scamboli. While they talk to each other, Pinocchio says, "Life would be great if kids were more like us", sparking an idea in Scamboli's diabolical brain.
With the true opening of Scamboland, he makes Pinocchio into an attraction, but when Geppetto gets word of this, he tries to convince him to come home. While Pinocchio performs at a concert, Scamboli kidnaps Geppetto. Afterward, all the children board a roller coaster ride called "A Whale of a Change", which transforms all of them into "Scambobots". Meanwhile, Pinocchio gives Marlene her medal back and befriends her, and they spend the night together at Marlene's private garden.
As they awaken the next morning, Marlene is crestfallen to find that Scambobots have destroyed her garden. Hearing Pinocchio laughing at her dismay, she gives the medal to him and revokes her vow of friendship. But Pinocchio, realizing that he had accidentally helped Scamboli, leaves to find his Dad. He returns home, but finds that his father isn't there, but Spencer is. He tells Pinocchio that he went off to get him, so they head off to find him, only to find Scamboli turned Geppetto into a robot to kill Pinocchio. After Spencer blinds Scamboli with his camera and steals the remote that controls Geppetto and the other Scanbobots, Pinocchio and Spencer hide out in the "Tunnel of Danger" ride, where Scamboli manages to trap them. Marlene arrives and helps Pinocchio to avoid the tunnel's many dangers. However, Scamboli incapacitates Marlene, so he can kill Pinocchio with a laser gun. Pinocchio uses the medal to shield himself from the laser, causing the beam to reflect back at Scamboli and destroy his weapon. Meanwhile, Cabby accidentally gave Geppetto the remote that controls all Scambobots, getting them fired. Geppetto then commands the robots to get Scamboli.
Scamboli attempts to escape in Cabby's shuttle, but is caught by a Scambocop. It tosses Scamboli inside a shuttle and flies down to the Whale ride. Pinocchio, Geppetto, Marlene and Spencer go to turn the robots back into children. Soon it's Geppetto's turn, but Scamboli presses a button to stop the machines. Pinocchio goes inside the whale and tries to fix it. Pinocchio finds the out-of-reach button, so he begins to tell a lie about his personality . Once he reached it, Scamboli was caught on the cart. Pinocchio then realizes that everything was his fault. Cyberina appears, Pinocchio tells her that he has learned about Right and Wrong and turns Pinocchio into a real boy and Geppetto back into a human. Suddenly, Scamboli, turned into a robot, appears and Marlene was shocked. Cyberina borrows Cynthia's "Funbrella" to make sunshine and bring all the plants Scamboli has destroyed. It ends with Spencer taking a picture of Pinocchio, Geppetto and Marlene.
|
fantasy
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Best adaptation of Collodi's masterpiece.. Of all the many animated and live action adaptations of Carlo Collodi's timeless masterwork on the mischievous puppet, this is by far the best. It is the most faithful to the book showing Pinocchio not as an innocent passive child like in Disneys version but as a spoiled lazy brat who gradually gets wiser as the film continues. Many elements from the book that were disregarded as too dark in most other adaptations were included;SPOILERS.Pinocchio killing the cricket for lecturing him.The fox and cat in the guise of assassins hanging Pinocchio from a tree.The death and resurrection of the blue fairy.The encounter with the green fisherman.Lampwick (Lucignolo) dying of exhaustion after years of servitude to a farmer as a donkey.END SPOILERSThe acting is top-notch for an animated film. The animation itself has a very European feel to it, while the musical score, while an acquired taste in some cases, always convey the correct moods.A definite must for fans of the book which faithfully retains the harsh lessons inherent in the original work, yet disregarded in other "sugary" adaptations.
|
tt0395802
|
Veergati
|
Hawaldar finds an abandoned new born baby boy in the gutter of Kamathipura, a red light area of Bombay. A prostitute, meanwhile gave birth to another baby boy. She decides to educate him and requests Hawaldar to give him a father's name. Hawaldar's wife does not accept the child and leaves for her parents home. Hawaldar adopts the child and names him Ajay while the prostitute's son is named Shlok. Both are admitted to School and become friends. Shlok does well in studies whereas Ajay takes up gambling. Shlok falls in love with Pooja, daughter of J.K - a millionaire. Ajay does not believe in love and is a cynic. Havaldar tries his best to get Ajay a job but Ajay finds that it is difficult for him to work in a corrupt society. Ekka Seth is a terror in the prostitutes basti and he exploits the innocent girl and forces them into prostitution. Shlok graduates and completes his M.B.A. Ajay wins a crore rupees in gambling and encourages Shlok to pursue his project. Ekka and his men abduct and kill Hawaldar's daughter.Ajay decides to avenge this and proceeds to kill Ekka's men and frees the sex workers from his clutches. He then takes on Ekka and manages to kill him, but is grieviusly wounded in the fight. The final scene shows Ajay dying to protect his brother and attaining martyrdom.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
An Underrated Gem in Salmans career. I never quite understood the sheer indifference by majority of viewers to this film. its an excellent dramatic action film in the mould of Krantiveer and Agneepath with its cynical take on the societal corruption in the 90s.Smart and hard hitting dialogues.superb performances from the cast with a special mention to Kulbhushan Kharbanda and Akhilendra Mishra. But it is Salman who has the best actorly moments throughout the film. His confrontation scenes be it with his father or Villain are excellent. He gets the angry brooding persona just right.If karan arjun was a trailer , this is a full 3 hour film of that intense kickass attitude.. brilliant. If you want to see a performance that demands great acting this film is for you. If you want to see a typical bolywood movie watch some rubbish like chalte chalte or something like that.Salman Khan is brilliant from start to end.His persona, his character and delivery of dialogues hits the mark every time.I know its hard to keep a straight face and he does it successfully, he is a man that disassociates himself with everything yet deep down he is more sociable than anybody.His acting is not over the top, there are slight variations in posture, facial and his language that he uses to great affect to show the characters feelings.Brilliant film. brilliant acting.Sudesh berry enjoyed his special appearance as well Divya Dutta.I have backups of this DVD when I bought i don't want mine getting lost.. Grim and Violent Drama. In this grim and violent drama, Salman Khan plays Ajay, abandoned as a baby and raised by a police officer. Despite his adopted father's kindness, Ajay finds life difficult and grows up serious, hard, and deadly. When he tangles with the local crime boss, Ajay's family and friends are targeted. Ajay then becomes a vigilante and sacrifices all to free his community.Unlike the typical Bollywood film, there is no romance or comedy. It is strictly drama, addressing serious issues such as forced prostitution, government corruption, and the near impossibility of rising from poverty to a decent life. Khan's character carries the weight of the world on his shoulders, and Khan doesn't smile once until the poignant last five minutes of the movie. While this is not a movie I'd ever watch again, it is powerful, and I'm glad I've seen it.. My only review to date. This is the only review I've written to date. The low rating of the film compulsed me to write a review. The film is amazing. One of my favourite films of all time. Some of the best dialogues I've heard. Basically it's a film in the mould of Muqaddar Ka Sikandar (another one of my favourite films). It's about the harshness of life. If you believe that life is always a challenge but you must still do good no matter what the recompense then this is the film for you.
|
tt4044464
|
Avouterie
|
Samuel (Sean Faris) returns home to find his wife Ashley (Danielle Savre) cheating on him with Damien (Mehcad Brooks) on their anniversary, holding them captive at gunpoint on a hot New Orleans day, while he decides their fates.
At first, Samuel shoots both of them, but then finds himself re-experiencing the events in his mind. Instead of shooting them, he forces Ashley and Damien to disclose about their personal lives and their sexual encounters. From them Sam learns that Damien has a wife, Jasmine, who is two months pregnant, and that Ashley's abusive ex-boyfriend was actually her ex-husband (It is not clear if Ashley is a bigamist). Sam calls Jasmine (Steffinnie Phrommany), to have sexual intercourse with him to show them how he felt about being cheated upon. Samuel justifies his decision to kill Damien using his religious beliefs and Russian Roulette. Ashley and Sam proceed to enjoy their anniversary with Damien's dead body less than 5 feet away.
Sam later finds himself back in reality, just after burying Damien beneath the roses. He regrets his previous actions and his possible choices in his mind. But overall he killed his wife and Damien.
|
revenge
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
You can feel the anguish in this film....
The film begins with Sammy returning home early from work to surprise his wife with gifts on their anniversary.
He finds her home early and she is "getting busy" with another man.
He quietly closes the door, goes and grabs his guns then comes back up stairs...The question that comes up is: Who has the right to judge?
Does Sammy have the right to judge?
Just because someone betrays us, are we supposed to take the law into our own hands?
Or does this go deeper than that.
Is it Justice Sammy wants?
I appreciate the excellent acting given by the characters.
Their response to the situation: the anguish, the hurt, the sadness and pain could be felt in this film.
I gave this film a high rating because of topic matter and acting skills.This film contains all kinds of graphic language, violence, and nudity.
Just a warning..
Interesting movie.
I found this movie to be very entertaining and well acted.
Lots of tension trying to determine whether he is going to shoot one or both of the adulters.
I found myself thinking that you really couldn't blame him if he did, given the circumstances.
Regarding the accents that some have a problem with, who cares.
That really shouldn't detract from the movie at all..
Unwatchable.
Sean Faris should win an award for the worst Louisiana accent ever.
He sounds like a southern Texas teenage girl going with that trendy vocal fry voice.
Wtf. How could anyone who has ever been to New Orleans think that was OK?
I might consider watching the movie again.
I'd have to mute the audio and turn on subtitles.
Terrible....
Pretty much ruined my whole day.
Sad because the plot seemed like it would be interesting.
I'm going to drink away any memory of that horrible voice.
What a waste.
How many lines do I need for this?.
How many lines do I need for this?.
How many lines do I need for this?.
How many lines do I need for this?.
An awkwardly acted and poorly written mess..
Not every film you see is something you've been anticipating for a long time.
Sometimes you see a movie and think "hmm that looks interesting." Such was the case for Adulterers.
It's safe to say most people will go into this film with that mind set and hopefully they'll remember that this film is an independent project with a lower budget.Right off the back, it's important to know this script is all over the place.
Dialogue in most scenes feels so off it's difficult to listen to.
It doesn't help when the acting feels so overdone that it's not being delivered.
There are several occasions where some tension will build only to be torn down by the following line being terribly delivered or a reaction from the characters that feels completely unbelievable; cringe-worthy even.The premise itself is simple and a perfect set up for a thriller.
Your average guy comes home on his anniversary to find his wife cheating on him and the rest of the film experience is to find out whether or not he kills them.
Moving along the story, you learn certain "twists" about certain characters which keeps things interesting and new.
A few of these attempt are indeed interesting.
The rest feel out of place and make you ask "Wait...
what?" Outrageous and disturbing behavior/content aside, you may wonder why you're sticking around to see how it ends.Here are some almost strengths.
Yes, there are a few of those.
As mentioned before, despite how bad the writing might be, the filmmakers do a good job and holding on to you to see how it ends.
Tension does indeed build enough so that you're a part of the thrill ride.
The progression and structure of the story itself is compelling.
Granted, it's obvious the filmmaker was trying desperately hard to be a Scorsese/Shyamalan (early Shyamalan).
However, it makes for a solid and thought-provoking ending to the film.
Aside from the "strength" it's hard to recommend this film to anyone who's looking for an absolutely fantastic thriller.
It won't be found here but if you're searching around Netflix and have nothing to watch.
There might be worse films to use an hour and a half with..
Stop it with the AWFUL Louisiana "accents" Hollywood!.
It was a decent premise and could have made a good film but from the opening credits, the guy sounded like he belonged in Steel Magnolias as opposed to being in New Orleans.
Everyone has heard New Orleans accents by now and they should know they aren't dripping in sweet tea & magnolias.
Get it right and maybe, MAYBE I could watch the film again.
Not only was it a terribly fake accent from all who attempted it, it was SO FORCED -- sometimes there, sometimes not.Other people might like it better than I did if they can ignore the accents or don't care that they're fake.
I've seen worse acting at a local high school, and the plot was plausible and interesting..
Yea team!
yea adultery!.
This film is an excellent textbook example of the bankruptcy of fundamentalist Christian morality.
The plot is straightforward: a man comes home from work on his wedding anniversary and finds his wife having sex with another man.
He pulls a gun on them and the rest of the movie is the conversation they have while he decides whether to kill one or both.
A loving marriage is clearly defined as one in which nobody cheats.The man calls the wife of the adulterer, who runs over and denounces her husband and then has the first man has sex with her in front of her husband and the first man's wife.
They are seriously tortured over this—witnessing their spouse having sex with someone else (as punishment?
for their having sex with someone else?) It turns out that the husband's boss repeatedly raped the wife when she was in highschool and she let him because her father worked for him and needed the job and she loved her father.
The movie gets her shot but leaves the completely unremorseful boss scott free.
I guess the difference is she is a woman and he is a man; or, he is a capitalist and she is just a worker.So the definition of married love and fidelity is that penises stay out of extramarital vaginas.
This is supposed to be morally inspiring and indicating the spiritual wonder of the old testament.The horror of forced sex on the highschool girl is suggested as the source of her infidelity.
This isn't a psychological analysis, however; it's just cause/effect, and she blames herself for it.
Also, the bizarre sex between the good husband and the betrayed wife of the adulterer is just shown as something that happens—doesn't seem to affect either the wife or the husband.None of these people pay attention to the bible, although they can quote chapter and verse.
Their reactions and their decisions appear to be completely independent of scripture, although scripture is quoted.
So one has the sense that this movie is directed to nominal fundamentalist Christians and gives them an excuse for various sexual activities on the grounds that they had a bad childhood, suffered abuse, etc.
Further, the movie implicitly condones the cold-blooded murder of two people..
I'm from Louisiana....& those accents were AWFUL.
How did they make an entire movie without anyone telling them they weren't in Alabama or something?
Makes the movie pretty hard to watch and totally unconvincing.
Ew. Every single time Samuel spoke, I cringed.
I was born and raised in southern Louisiana and no one I have ever know sounds like that haha.I would not recommend to anyone.I really can't even write ten lines about this garbage movie..
it's pretty dull and inauthentic.I hope I've written enough at this point.
Watch it for fifteen minutes before you turn it off like I did.
You will be let down.:).
Do not watch this movie if you are in about relationship.
Yes there are sometimes in the movie that are very shocking and satisfied I personally went through something similar To tell you the truth I would did the exact Same check this movie out it is original
A lot of Over-acting in this movie.
I've seen many bad movies in my life, but this one is probably on the top 10 worse movies i've ever seen.I mean, the over-acting from all actors made me wana cring.
Firstly, that Sean Faris guy is just awful in everything he does.
Starting with the way he is acting all romantic while on the phone with his wife, and also the way he is Mr.Friendly guy at his work, and finally as Mr.Angry at his wife.
He also tries to show-off his muscles every time the cam is on him lol.I also got disgusted with the amount of sweat in that room.
Just Imagine the smell :-S.anyhow, Bad movie, not worth watching.
One spoiler only.
First of all, to the concerns of the "fake" accents, Sean Faris is actually from Texas, so the complaint that he sounded Texan is a bit silly in my estimation.
Who is to say he didn't live in Texas in some earlier time not dealt with in the movie?
Second, the guy has an amazing range and does some very believable roles on such diverse networks as Hallmark and Lifetime.
Some absolutely great people and some not-so-nice.
But all complex.
I think he is very underrated and, although not difficult to look at, he is far more than eye candy.
Also as to the reviewer who complained about him showing his muscles, he happens to be a fitness expert in real life.
He in my opinion was not showing off to the camera but simply looks good from any angle.
As to the movie itself it is one you have to watch constantly in order to follow, and that is actually part of the power of it.
Much of the dialogue is done without musical background and causes one to pay more attention.
The only spoiler I will say is that you are left, even at the very end, not knowing for sure exactly what parts were fantasy and which were actual memories or conversation.
The writing could have been slightly better but even that not bad for the most part.
I found myself invested in all 3 of the main characters and honestly sympathetic to each..
Mistake vs choice?.
I thought all 3 actors were really good.
The intensity and range of emotions of all 3 seemed so real that I had to keep reminding myself that it is just a movie.
This movie really hit home as I once had a cheating & deceptive wife.
A lot of things go through your mind initially.
When adulterers get caught, they almost always say: "I'm so sorry, I made a mistake.
What's really going on is they are not sorry for cheating on you.
They are sorry that they got caught.
Cheating is a " Choice" not a mistake.
This is what I think this excellent movie is telling us.
Walking in on something like this makes you feel like your heart, along with your trust is ripped out of you.
The husband in the movie had a right to be angry.
However the way he is showing his anger via violence is wrong.
The best thing to do is just leave the two adulterers and file for divorce.
That's what needs to be done.
There is no way of trying to put the pieces back together.
The relationship will always have painful scars.
This movie is one that every potential adulterer should watch..
Don't hate me.
Sammy (Sean Faris) who has to work a double, comes home at lunch to surprise his wife (Rebecca Reaney) only to get more surprised as he catches her in the act with another man (Mehcad Brooks).
At gun point we get their biographies and intimate details of the affair.
This is a soap opera drama which is basically a three man play.
Okay for what it was, I just didn't find it entertaining.Based on true events in New Orleans, although I am sure this scenario has been played out more than once.Guide: F-bomb, sex, nudity (Rebecca Reaney)
|
tt0060668
|
Marat/Sade
|
Set in the historical Charenton Asylum, Marat/Sade is almost entirely a "play within a play". The main story takes place on 13 July 1808, after the French Revolution; the play directed by the Marquis de Sade within the story takes place during the Revolution, in the middle of 1793, culminating in the assassination of Jean-Paul Marat (which took place on 13 July 1793), then quickly brings the audience up to date (1808). The actors are the inmates of the asylum; the nurses and supervisors occasionally step in to restore order. The bourgeois director of the hospital, Coulmier, supervises the performance, accompanied by his wife and daughter. He is a supporter of the post-revolutionary government led by Napoleon, in place at the time of the production, and believes the play he has organised to be an endorsement of his patriotic views. His patients, however, have other ideas, and they make a habit of speaking lines he had attempted to suppress, or deviating entirely into personal opinion. They, as people who came out of the revolution no better than they went in, are not entirely pleased with the course of events as they occurred.
The Marquis de Sade, the man after whom sadism is named, did indeed direct performances in Charenton with other inmates there, encouraged by Coulmier. De Sade is a main character in the play, conducting many philosophical dialogues with Marat and observing the proceedings with sardonic amusement. He remains detached and cares little for practical politics and the inmates' talk of right and justice; he simply stands by as an observer and an advocate of his own nihilistic and individualist beliefs.
|
avant garde, violence, atmospheric, insanity, philosophical, claustrophobic
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Because I show this film to classes, I've seen it dozens of times and I'm continually intrigued by it because each viewing reveals new meanings as it seems to weirdly comment on the current day's events that occurred long after it was written and filmed.
The first viewing is often disorienting because it piles so much historic-socio-sexual-political content up with so much odd directing and extreme acting style that it is hard to grasp at first, but repeated viewings suck you in like an intellectual's Rocky Horror Picture Show, and some theatre junkies learn to sing along.The Film of the Royal Shakespeare Company production of Marat/Sade (1967) is considered a classic avant garde 1960's drama in the style known as "Theatre of Cruelty".
It stars Glenda Jackson as Charlotte Corday (now Dame Glenda Jackson, MP), Ian Richardson (of "House of Cards" fame) as Marat, and Patrick Magee (Clockwork Orange) as de Sade.As the title implies, the film is entirely a play-within-a-play where most cast members depict both a character from the French Revolution as well as an insane asylum inmate playing that character.
While the film (like the later comedy-drama about deSade, "Quills") addresses censorship, it is primarily concerned with a debate between Marat as a sort of representative of revolutionary radical communism, and de Sade as a nihilistic existentialist frustrated with his own, and society's, violently cruel urges, as well as the futility of revolutionary action to improve mankind.
Great moments include a comic "orgy" scene where the inmates sing "What's the point of a revolution without general copulation?" in a round like "row-row-row your boat" and mime a vigorously improbable group sex event fully clothed, Magee's various speeches on the nature of man: "What we do, is but a shadow of what we want to do...", Richardson's unblinking intensity as he waits for the knife to "kill" him, and Jackson, doing a little dance trying to capture the knife from de Sade while he teases her with it in an effort to get her in his arms.
Add to this the delightful theatricality and musical numbers (yes there are many musical numbers!) and it is little wonder that the play on which the film is based has regularly been performed all around the world ever since it was written..
(I also saw the movie a few years after it was released.)Marat/Sade is an amazingly original and stunningly powerful philosophical and psychological descent into one of the most complex periods of recorded history, the French Revolution, the Terror that ensued, and the rise of Napoleon and his empire.
The multi-layered ideas come thick and fast; I had to watch the movie over two nights because there's so much to think about, and some of the words and images are so overwhelming.Of the Royal Shakespeare Company actors in the film (little known at the time), Glenda Jackson had the most notable subsequent career, but Ian Richardson (Marat) has also done remarkable things (and he's so young here, you may not recognize him).This is not a movie for casual entertainment, but if you care about history and the deepest questions of good and evil and free will, you'll find much of value here..
The French Revolution being the main theme, echoed by various inmates' views of it, as well as several forays into philosophical thinking of man's condition.
Plenty of symbolism, hard to draw a line where reality ends and madness begins (is it history, the play, the actor, the character, the madman, the script, etc.).
The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade (1967/Peter Brook) **** out of ****"He who kills without passion, is a machine."- Marquis de Sade (Patrick Magee)What does one look for in a film?
It is basically a filmed play about the French Revolution and the last days of Jean-Paul Marat (Ian Richardson).
But after the second act, the inmates have secretly taken over, and he is forced just to watch in horror, as are we...the audience.It is very hard to classify this film.
This gives you the feeling that you must sit up and listen, or they will be angry with you."Marat/Sade" is the most unique, and most ghostly film I have ever scene.
I know little or nothing about the French Revolution, but I have seen this movie several times.
MARAT/SADE is the film version of a play that arose from an actor's workshop exploring various theatrical theories expressed by French actor-director-writer Antoine Artard, who extolled a style of performance he described as "theatre of cruelty"--which, broadly speaking, consists of an assault upon the audience's senses by every means possible.
Ultimately, and although it makes effective use of its setting and the cinematography mirrors the chaos expected of such a situation, the film version of MARAT/SADE is less a motion picture than a record of a justly famous stage play that offers a complex statement re man's savagery.The story of MARAT/SADE concerns the performance of a play by inmates of an early 1800s insane asylum, with script and direction by the infamous Marquis de Sade.
(While this may sound a bit far-fetched, it is based on fact: de Sade was known to have written plays for performance by inmates during his own incarceration in an asylum.) The story of the play concerns the assassination of the revolutionary Marat by Charotte Corday, but the play itself becomes a debate between various characters, all of which may be read as in some way intrinsically destructive and evil.
Since all the characters are played by mentally-ill inmates of the asylum (the actor playing Marat, for example, is described as a paranoid, and the actress playing Corday suffers from sleeping sickness and melancholia), the debate is further fueled by their insanity, unpredictability as performers, and the staff's reactions to both their behavior and the often subversive nature of the script they play out.Patrick Magee as de Sade, Glenda Jackson as the inmate playing Corday (it was her breakout performance), and Ian Richardson as the inmate playing Marat offering impressive performances; indeed, the ensemble cast as a whole is incredibly impressive, and they keep the extremely wordy script moving along with considerable interest.
Even so, it will be obvious that the material works better as a live performance than as a film, and I do not recommend it to a casual viewer; its appeal will be largely limited to the literary and theatrical intelligentsia.
Marat/Sade is quite simply one of the best movies I have ever seen.
The fact that a good portion of events described in the movie aren't historically accurate, doesn't mar the precise and razor sharp script (an English translation of a German Play).
I'll end with a quote from the beginning of the movie, "...see Marat debating with De Sade, each one wrestling with each other's views.
A film of a play about a play put on by the inmates of the Asylum of Charenton in France, 1808, as directed by the Marquis de Sade (played by Patrick Magee).
The man who runs the asylum sits on the side (behind the bars) and occasionally walks out onto the stage to calm his residents down, or to castigate the Marquis for including certain undesirable notions in his play.
The subject of the play is the nature and importance of human cruelty as demonstrated by the French Revolution (which ended some 15 years earlier), but which continues on, even to the present, far beyond the actual setting of the play.
Besides Magee, Glenda Jackson deserves special praise for her performance as the narcoleptic inmate who plays the executioner of Marat.
A very unusual movie, but French Revolution buffs most likely will have a better understanding of this ultra intellectual movie than most people!.
Patrick Magee (A Clockwork Orange) plays the Marquis de Sade (the founder of sadism), who directs a play performed by people in an insane asylum as a form of a therapeutic psychodrama.
The Marquis de Sade is there as a political prisoner and traces the history of the French Revolution in the play he has written.The viewer sits outside the bars of a large bathroom cell, where the play is performed, as part of the gentry who watch the play for entertainment.
Charlotte Corday, played by Glenda Jackson (Lost and Found) in her starring film debut, has narcolepsy, a condition characterized by brief attacks of deep sleep.
Corday at the end of the play murders Jean Paul Marat in his bath tub with a dagger.Interwoven throughout the play is the Marquis the Sade's interpretation of the French Revolution.
By the way the actual title of this movie is The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade.
In an insane asylum, the Marquis de Sade directs Jean Paul Marat's last days through a theater play.
As others have noted, this film can be enjoyed by anyone but probably has much more significance for those who grasp the politics and philosophy of the French Revolution.
Unlike Any Movie You Will Ever See. Peter Brook, for many years the artistic director of the Royal Shakespeare Company, has more than once astounded the theater world with his interpretations of familiar plays by Shakespeare and others.
Marat/Sade, which I'd seen previously on stage, is a Brechtian political drama about the French revolution performed in a madhouse under the direction of the notorious Marquis de Sade.
But the real brilliance of Brook's choices is captured best by Glenda Jackson, who appears as a victim of narcolepsy cast in the role of Charlotte Corday, Marat's assassin.
Other brilliant performances are turned in by Michael Williams as the Herald who announces key scenes; Robert Landon Lloyd as Roux a cleric turned revolutionary who is seen most of the time in a strait-jacket because of his violent behavior, John Steiner as Monsieur Depere, a sexual predator who lusts after Jackson's Corday and a quartet of three men and a woman in comedia del' arte garb who comment on the action in song and verse.It is a bizarre film, difficult to watch at times, but brilliant in its execution.
This film and play were especially popular in the 60s, because at that time you could get an audience by promising lots of violence and sex on stage (although this movie is mild compared to the current crop).
The actors in the original production (look for Glenda Jackson's comments) hated the play because it was so harrowing and demanding; it grates upon the audience, too.
If you enjoy lots of pretentious posing, shouting, and gratuitous rudeness, then submit yourself to this agonizing bit of cinema.One good thing: watching this film finally clarified for me where the Bonzo Dog Band got the song line: "We are normal and we want our freedom!" Which is what I began to shout about 20 minutes in....
With all the outrageousness on the screen, with the layers of her characterization -- a deeply disturbed woman putting in great effort to parrot her scripted lines in a staccato voice -- she truly disappeared into this "inmate" portraying the role of Charlotte Corday.I've watched it again today for the first time in almost 40 years.
It was hard for me to follow the film because I know very little about the French Revolution and also because of my english competency.
It's shrill, endless and stagey.But it's conceits (The context and meaning of the murder of French Revolutionary figure Marat by Charlotte Corday, enacted as a play by post-revolutionary mental patients & penned by the similarly imprisoned Marquis de Sade) are unique and provocative.
The play within the play has musical numbers; a trifle given to Corday (Glenda Jackson) as de Sade supplies her with the murder weapon is really nice; "...but love meant something...
to you, ...I see, and something much different to me..." The bench duet between Charlotte and her sex-crazed nemesis is memorable.You will need a working understanding of the major players of the French Revolution and a willingness to listen to Marat expound on political theory at length.
There's plenty to think about and though the Bourgeoisie are clearly portrayed as villainous swine, it still doesn't offer any easy answers to the long, painful aftermath of the French Revolution.Sadly, Patrick McGhee (A Clockwork Orange) is the type of leading man who would never again be seen after the advent of focus-groups and the blockbuster.
Allegedly good actors horrendously overacting: Glenda Jackson, Patrick Magee, Freddie Jones, and Ian Richardson (he of the unblinking stare) are all terrible.3.
The Marquis de Sade (Patrick Magee) puts on a play of an assassination for an audience.
The acting is great across the board but Magee, Ian Richardson and Glenda Jackson (in her major film debut) are exceptional.
The movie is disturbing--I realize these are all actors playing roles but they're so good that you believe everything you're seeing.
In many ways Marat/Sade functions far better as the play with a play because it gives the actors a chance to interact with the audience, in many productions the actors have wandered out into the theatre and done a fairly comprehensive job of breaking down the 'fourth wall'.
Richardson shines as does Jackson and Willians but Magee, his weary features making a perfect de Sade is magnificent and it's a shame he couldn't be coaxed into doing more film roles.So, RADA wannabes, think you can handle a role?
Others I can think of include A Clockwork Orange, Women in Love and The Devils (the latter, almost impossible to get on DVD these days, but I have a copy!).I had not seen Marat/Sade for decades until my daughter (doing a degree in drama production) found her university making a production of it with she cast in the Glenda Jackson role.
Good film adaptation of a brilliant play.
but overall it's a surprisingly good job of translating the first Broadway production to the screen.(I have both the Caedmon complete recording of the Broadway production and a copy of the film, and I've played de Sade, so I'm a bit more aware of the details than most viewers would be.
Alas, I can't read German so I can't compare any of these to the "real" original.) If you can find a good live production of Marat/Sade, see it.
But most telling was the fact that my wife went to bed without me -- for the first time in 12 years -- because it disturbed her in/out dream cycle to the point of pushing her over the edge.I can't recommend this movie.
There is a weighty drag on the human spirit because the characters are actually mental patients in the time of the Marquis de Sade.
The most engaging performance was that of Patrick Magee, who was already a seasoned film actor at the time, and I truly believe he helped bring much of the cinematic qualities.
This movie is about a play the inmates of a Charenton lunatics asylum are supposed to perform in 1808, under the direction of the former marquis De Sade, one of them.
The main character is Marat, a nobody, who became one of the most blood thirsty leaders of the French Revolution.
Part of the reason what makes this movie so unique is the actors & actresses having to act like their in a asylum and from what conditions they (inmates/patients) have and to act with those conditions.
the camera work played the eyes of what you saw as not all inmates had really a role they were the background sound effects or group to in-act the story as they were in a steamer room/wash room and the room was well used.
To commemorate the anniversary (and to show off the hospital's own special brand of art therapy) a group of inmates at Charenton Asylum perform a play recreating Marat's last days, written and directed by the infamous Marquis de Sade.
Directed by Peter Brook and performed by the Royal Shakespeare Company, it's a filmed version of Peter Weiss' play of the same name.
The three main players--Patrick Magee (de Sade), Ian Richardson (Marat), and Glenda Jackson (Corday)--are all outstanding.
What I can't get over is that these actors had already performed these roles on stage umpteen times before they made the film.
That they performed such a challenging play night after night with the same kind of talent, intensity and passion you see on the screen is remarkable.Marat/Sade is definitely a polarizing film.
De Sade (Patrick Magee) directs the inmates of the Charenton insane asylum in a play about Charlotte Corday's murder of the radical journalist Jean Paul Marat.
Though the action takes place in one setting (the asylum's bathroom...Marat was in fact killed in his bathtub), director Brook keeps his camera moving and the film, though essentially a filmed stage play, takes on the feel of a fevered action movie.
The Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as Performed by the Inmates of the Asylum at Charenton Under the Direction of the Marquis de Sade.The title pretty much sums up this powerfully visualized "play", set in 1808, during France's supposed success rate at educating the insane.
This play by de Sade which is a scathing dissection of the French Revolution using Marat as the voice for the war as the Marquis takes the role against it.
Morality obviously being this is a play from Marquis de Sade is also under the microscope as those that are insane fulfill certain roles under the celebrated masochist's direction.
The cast is so good, they really convinced me I was watching a directed play using loonies!.
The dramaturg, Gideon Lester, stated that "It is an inmate PLAYING Marat, who is only mouthing words WRITTEN by de Sade." This puts a completely different spin on the play, and I notice in the comments herein that others think that man in the tub is ACTUALLY Marat.
|
tt0804492
|
The Hottie & the Nottie
|
Nate Cooper is unable to get it together with women. But he also cannot forget his first crush: The tall, attractive, blonde Cristabel Abbott, from their time in elementary school. Nate sets out for the beaches of California and meets up with his geeky best friend Arno, whose mother has an unnatural amount of information about Cristabel, and perhaps an unusual relationship with her son.
Cristabel jogs on the beach every day with many suitors trying to catch her eye, including an albino stalker. But she's still single, and there is a reason: Cristabel is still best friends with the same short, unattractive brunette girl whom Nate also knew in elementary school, June Phigg.
Nate reintroduces himself to Cristabel and they hit it off. However, Cristabel refuses to go on a date with Nate unless June has a date as well. Nate sets out to find a boyfriend for June, but men recoil at the sight of her. One day at the Santa Monica Pier, Johann Wulrich, an attractive dentist who works as a part-time model, appears in their lives. He seems to want to do a makeover on June when he apparently sees her inner beauty. However, Nate believes that Johann is a threat to his shot for Cristabel, since Johann is almost perfect. Eventually, with June dating Johann, Cristabel finally begins dating Nate, per his original plan.
Over the next few weeks, as Nate and June become friends and she emerges from her cocoon, with her face and appearance transforming into that of an attractive woman whose beauty begins to compare with Cristabel, Nate slowly realizes that June may be the girl of his dreams. Nate tells this to Cristabel, who is happy for June. Nate then tries to find June, and finds her, telling her how he feels.
|
romantic, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
OK, I'm not going to bash this film based on Paris Hilton, I admit, I don't like the girl, but I'm not going to base my comment on that alone, I think it's unfair.
I love how Paris Hilton isn't even the main character and yet she is first billed, you know that she paid good money for that or wouldn't be in it, big woop, her as an innocent charity loving girl, that's believable.Nate Cooper is a man that just can't seem to move on in life, after 20 years he returns to his home town looking for his first grade crush, Cristabel.
June has bad teeth, bad skin, bad nails, bad hair, just all in all, it's bad, so Nate does everything he can to get June a guy, but it's more difficult than he could ever expect, until he finds out that love isn't everything he thought it might be.The script is predictable, stupid, could've been written by a teenager and was very hypocritical, which you will see what I mean if you watch this movie.
I actually had an open mind and just thought to give the movie a shot, but she just is such a horrible actress, like beyond horrible, I'm not just saying that because of who she is, just I know you'll believe me.
This is a movie that really shouldn't have been made or if Hollywood wanted it so much, get different people, please, before they do something like cast Paris...
Money DOES NOT equate talent (or common sense in the case of Hilton).This movie has little plot and Hilton's zombie-like "acting" puts the deep freeze on anything you might want to get out of the film.
The title is also stupid, and sounds about as mature as the actual script is, which is the maturity you might find in an elementary school bathroom.Nate Cooper (Joel Moore, who seems to be a mixture of John Heder and Mike White) is dumped by his girlfriend and decides to go to Los Angeles to find and date Christabelle Abbot (Paris Hilton), the girl he was attracted to in the first grade.
Several times I had to turn away from the screen when they would base the humor around June's hideousness, because I felt like I was going to throw up.The script is bad, unfunny, and along with that shows no development in character whatsoever.
The back-up cast is also terrible, including one guy, who plays Nate's stupid friend, who thinks he is so cool, he's credited as The Greg Wilson, after all it's super cool to put a "The" in front of your name.I watched this movie, because I thought it might be one of those "So bad it's funny" experiences that you enjoy laughing about later with friends.
I know that Paris Hilton is in it but you can tell from her performance in House of Wax that she can actually act, she should be seen as a proper actress for some roles.
Unfortunately, the sheer volume of votes by people who haven't bothered to see it means this review will probably get lost and ignored, but I think this film deserves better than it's getting so I'll try anyway.I won't go over the plot because that can be seen above, except to say that its the usual love story sort of thing.
From the outset it's not difficult to predict what will happen in the end, the acting of Paris Hilton isn't what I'd call good but it's by no means teeth grindingly bad either, and the characters (especially June and Johann) have been taken to the extreme in terms of looks and talent respectively but that is no bad thing.
If you put your mind to it, I'm sure you will impress most of us but make it a comeback wait a few years, don't just keep making half-assed attempts in many movies otherwise there will be a day when not even ANY director will hire you.After her performance in HOUSE OF WAX, I'm not surprised many people didn't want to see this movie, but they should have still given the movie a rating based on the other actors abilities not just Hiltons and based on the story.
That scene between the other two actors (JOEL MOORE and CHRISTINE LAKIN) showed that there WAS evidence of good acting, and that this movie could have done better.So, if you like Romantic comedies and can spare Hilton in this, then I would say, see this movie.
Paris Hilton wasn't the best but considering the expectations gave a good performance.The plot is a bit shallow-Guy going after the hottie but has this 'nottie' in his way- but it sends out a good message.Although I don't think it is the best movie out there by a long shot I think if people got past the fact Paris Hilton is in it they would be pleasantly surprised.Don't judge it till you see it..
No. But it is a watchable, nice film, and she isn't bad at all in her role.It is actually a story about a guy who loves a hot girl (Hilton), and then gets slowly involved with her unattractive friend (Christine Lakin).
I'm certain that if some actress who is not famous for being famous is playing Hilton's role, that this movie would have like 5.0 average rating instead of 1.9.
Hey, I like to indulge in a bad movie just as much as the next person but I have yet to see a bad comedy that doesn't cause physical and mental pain when watching it and this movie is about as painful as they come.Premise: Christabel(played by Paris Hilton)took a vow of celibacy but after meeting up with her high school heartthrob, Nate(played by Joel David Moore) she plans to break that vow.
Without a doubt, Paris Hilton would be, and should have played, the role of Nottie if this movie was going to garner any sort of attention in the mass media.
It's not as eyebleedingly bad as Uwe Boll, but it certainly ranks among next to it.Unless you like cruelty to people who aren't as distinguished as you are, or stress the fact that "Girls, if you want to look good for your Boy, surgery is the best way to go," which is terrible to even consider even as a moral, then go ahead and see this movie.But if you're smart, go see Star Wars or something again..
I felt like the entire movie was a Paris Hilton commercial of some sort.It's hard to ignore the camera work that used all sorts of filters to make the very average looking Paris into the "hotty".
This movie shows me that Hollywood is entirely f-ed up and especially when they devote the time and resources to push crap like this and actually think people will enjoy it.I would like to punch Paris Hilton in her ugly face for making and producing this self-aggrandizing turd of a movie..
I don't understand the hate, if its bad because they "make fun of ugly people" or is exaggerated, then there are movies a lot more offensive and gross than this one and they still have a better rating.
I still remembering the first time when i saw the film in 2008 after i heard so much about it ( the worst film of the year ) so i thought i'm gonna see something you can called disaster, but it was good one making you laughing , yes there is at some points over acting from Paris Hilton especially at the party scene when she is wearing a wedding dress but for( God Sake) she wasn't that bad( remember she isn't Meryl Streep and i gave it 10 not because the movie deserve it but because to many people attacked it without any reason ( just because they don't like Paris Hilton) i hope it will get much better reviews in the future , and ask everyone to give it what it is deserve.
The movie is one that actually makes you laugh and genuinely feel good at the end.The whole story of a childhood crush with the possibility of making that dream come true is a fantasy many of us still think about.
Normally I would vote 7 for this movie, but since it did not deserve to be bad, I gave 10 points.I think it reflects a real problem in today's world, but in a funny way.
I'm not a Paris Hilton fan and her acting wasn't the best but yet i still really liked this movie.
Maybe it's because i'm a romantic at heart that i liked this movie but i really would watch it again and will be telling friends and family to take the time out ignore the reviews and watch the movie.I give this movie 9 out of 10 and i don't normally rate movies that high but this movie left me with the feel good factor.
It is not fair at all to see a fantastic movie with sexy Paris Hilton (the girl whom I love) getting extremely low votes and being too under-rated!.Plot of The Hottie & The Nottie: Nate Cooper just cannot get it together with women.
The Hottie & The Nottie Is A Lovely Movie & My Darling Paris Hilton Is As Sexy As Ever.
In my opinion this movie gets an extremely low rating because people don't like Paris Hilton.
If you still don't like it and you want to rate it then try watching "birdemic" or "going overboard" first as these should be the standard for judging all one star movies.
I know a lot of people hated this movie because of Paris Hilton.
lets face it I bet 90% of all the people that are bad mouthing this movie are just Paris Hilton haters and God Knows that she has plenty of those.
No, I do not think this is a masterpiece, Oscar worthy or anything like that, but to say it was bad is just wrong !This is a decent comedy that deserves to be watched because of the message, not because people wan't to check out the bottom 100 - Where it does not deserve to be !Paris Hilton surprised me in this !
No offense Paris, but you shouldn't be an actress.Anyway - I rolled the film all to the place, where Christine Lakin becomes herself (without the ugly mask) and now I will have to watch those 30mins for like 100 times to get enough from Christine :D Why couldn't she be 10 years younger :( Anyway - this film looks like some low-budget crap.
The fact that people hate Paris Hilton so much that they would come on here just to vote down this movie is more than a shame, it's criminal.
I may not be much of a movie critic,but even I can tell that this movie SUCKS!it's absolutely horrible,in extremely many ways .Paris Hilton shows us once and for all that she can't do anything good than sex tapes.Her acting is horrifying.In the firs part,"June"has such a disgusting look that I barely made it through.Christine Lakin acts a little bit better,but she can't make much of a differenceAfterwards,this is supposed to be a romantic comedy.How romantic is the fact that a guy just wants to sleep with a girl,but has to pass a monster first?The movie only gets romantic in the last part,when SUDDENLY both"June"and "Nate" fall in love with each other.How come?obviously,thanks to June's new look.HOW ROMANTIC!!!.
I think a lot of people are letting their opinion of Paris Hilton influence their opinion about the movie.
it really changed the way I looked at beauty.I think it's a beautiful movie, inside and out, and I can only assume that people hate Paris Hilton so much that they all jumped on the bandwagon against this movie.
I also enjoyed (of course) looking at Paris Hilton, who does a surprising job playing herself quite well and I especially enjoyed Christine Lakin, who was just very sweet and innocent.All in all, one of my favorite movies since 2000.
I mean, it was an horrible movie of course, but cute at the same time.Paris Hilton (who I love for being so dumb) was dreadful, and the one that played Johann too.
Luckily, Joel Moore and Christine Lakins comedy skills saved the movie.I know it's not like that The Hottie and the Nottie will be remembered as a good move, but I think the reason so many people hate it is because Paris Hilton's in it.It was awful, but it was a whole lot better than the Scary Movies (and all the ones from those writers) and A Cinderella Story.
If you like Paris Hilton and enjoy watching her on the silver screen, don't miss this film, it will hold your interest and keep you entertained.
It was a pretty good movie.Paris Hilton is actually quite decent at acting for never even really going to school.
Some people have slated this movie saying its not very good, but to be honest once you've watched it 7 times its actually very funny.
The acting is a bit poor and most of the jokes aren't laugh out loud, when they're even there to begin with; but I never had that sense of the movie being actually painful to watch, which is to me the real mark of an awful film that deserves to be trashed at the level this has been.The biggest flaw of course is that the "Nottie", even with all the makeup they put on her, doesn't look much worse than Paris Hilton; and definitely not gaspingly ugly as she's meant to be.
Has any of you actually seen the movie, it's about much more than just an ugly and a beautiful girl, it's about finding someone special and looking beyond what they look like and seeing them for who they really are on the inside, and for most people doing that is a lot harder than they are willing to admit.The point the movie is trying to make is that to find the perfect person you need to look a lot deeper than their outside to really get to know then and sometimes the person you least expect might just surprise you
The plot is simple yet entertaining; the movie would however do a lot better especially in the ratings department if Hilton was replaced by someone with a better reputation.
The only problem is, he has to get her ugly best friend a date to get near this hot girl.I was expecting another Paris Hilton's narcissistic ego boosting film, but I was so wrong.
Often we do judge people by their appearance, and ironically a Paris Hilton film reminds us that this is not right.Maybe there is little acting, but the pleasant sets and the youthful energy balances it and makes "The Hottie & the Nottie" a nice popcorn flick.
This movie has joined the list of movies Considered The Worst Ever.To me a movie is bad if it is unengaging and without worth.I have seen WAY WORSE films.Paris Hilton is something of a guilty pleasure for me.
But it was not unbearable to watch.I think most people voted this so low because it's a Paris Hilton movie.
Other fact that made the movie's quality worst was the script, it was made only to made Paris Hilton look smarter than she really is.
The acting unsurprisingly by Paris Hilton (not even half as good looking as her character is meant to be in movie) was terrible but I have to say I was relatively impressed with Christine Lakin's (The Nottie) performance who was miles above the rest of the crew and I was disappointed to see her resolving to a movie like this.
I think that Paris Hilton should "Throw in the towel" and discontinue her acting career as the 2 movies in which she has been the main character (Pledge This!
This film easily achieves Worst "Actress" for Paris Hilton, but the horrible support of the main actor Joel Moore on her side, the no-brainer screenplay, the childish script (if you look in the quotes section, see if it feels like the way ACTUAL human beings would normally talk), and the horribly wrong direction is not helping her out.
Joel Moore looks and acts the part perfectly and is even able to wring new layers of laughs out of a sitcom level scene that has him trying to make up a name for a fictional friend who might be interested in dating the Nottie (the "Cole Slawsen" scene was where I finally gave in to the slapdash charms of this movie).Paris Hilton isn't even the main female character.
Is it a surprise that Paris' Hilton character is desired by 99.9999999% of the people in this movie, and is the nicest, most beautiful person inside and out of them all?
"The Hottie and the Nottie" is one of those hypocritical films that pretends to make the case that beauty is only skin deep - only to turn right around and prove the opposite.Cribbing at least a portion of its story from "The Taming of the Shrew," the movie stars Paris Hilton as Cristobel, a drop-dead gorgeous "hottie" who has put her own love life on hold until her grotesquely unattractive best friend, June ("the nottie"), can get some guy to go out with her.
I think it says a lot about this film that Paris Hilton is amongst the better performers.
Maybe it still deserves to be in the bottom 100 but, it's not on the level of like Date Movie , which actually has a better rating than this thing.
How Paris Hilton does movies, I will never know.I fail to see what's so funny, romantic or charming about this film.
Whenever you see a film with Paris Hilton in it, you should know better but to see it..
Paris Hilton just can't act however this isn't her worst performance yet, that would go to 'pledge this'.What i think is that Cristabel clearly had an ulterior motive like stand in front of an ugly person and you would look hotter.
|
tt0074564
|
Gator
|
Following the events of White Lightning, Gator McKlusky (Burt Reynolds) has just been released from prison and is living in the Okefenokee Swamp with his father and daughter. In New York, a federal agent named Irving Greenfield (Jack Weston) is conferring with the governor of Georgia (Mike Douglas) about problems in the county of Dunston, which has been taken over by a corrupt racketeer named Bama McCall (Jerry Reed). Knowing that Gator is an old friend of McCall's, Greenfield proposes picking him up and coercing him into working with the agents to gather tax-evasion evidence against McCall. To persuade the governor, Greenfield reminds him that an election is coming up, and having "cleaned up" Dunston County would look good on his political resume. The governor is convinced and gives Greenfield "whatever he needs."
In the Okefenokee, Greenfield, accompanied by the local sheriff and other agents in boats and a helicopter, attempt to pick Gator up but wind up being led on a high speed chase through the swamp during which most of their vehicles are destroyed. Finally, Gator is cornered and, under threat of prison for himself and a foster home for his daughter, agrees to cooperate with the agents.
Gator and Greenfield travel to Dunston County, whereupon Gator meets up with McCall at a political rally and is immediately given a job as a bag man, or "collector" in McCall's protection racket. He also takes notice of an attractive female TV newscaster named Aggie Maybank (Lauren Hutton), who is trying to gain notoriety and has a sense that "something is up" in the county, and a semi-crazy "cat lady" named Emmeline Cavanaugh (Alice Ghostley), who is protesting local politics. After treating Gator to a taste of the high life and a fancy dinner, McCall discreetly calls a member of the police force and asks him to check on Gator to find out what, if anything, he is up to.
Later, Gator witnesses firsthand McCall's racket operation, which consists of business owners being forced to either pay monthly protection fees, or run the risk of being beaten, killed, or having their businesses destroyed by McCall. Local police and fire officials, also "on the take," neglect to offer any help for the citizenry who are victims of McCall's methods. Gator winds up feeling compassion for the businesspeople and doesn't agree with McCall's strong-arm tactics. He also discovers that McCall and his friends are using drugs to seduce underage girls in a local brothel. Eventually, McCall receives a phone call back from the police officer who was checking up on Gator.
Greenfield, meanwhile, is also trying to fit into the local community by hanging out in a local bar and trying to make conversation, but his New York ways make him obvious as an outsider. The corrupt police officer, having found out that Gator and Greenfield are working against McCall, passes the word along to McCall's henchmen, who attack and beat Greenfield as he leaves the bar, landing him in the hospital.
Still determined to get a story, Aggie Maybank finds out that Greenfield is in the hospital and, attempting to visit him, runs into Gator in the hallway. She tries to interview him about what she's heard, but he refuses to talk to her even though he is clearly attracted to her.
Gator then meets with McCall, tells him he doesn't like what he's seen and that he "wants out." McCall, apparently hoping to get his old friend out of town without trouble, responds by giving Gator a drink laced with a sedative and telling him he will wake up in his car, which will be at the county line pointed toward home. Gator passes out and wakes up in his car, but instead of leaving, he determines to go back to make sure McCall is brought to justice.
Gator meets up with Aggie Maybank, who informs him that Emmeline Cavanaugh, the "cat lady," had recently been fired from a job at the courthouse. They meet Emmeline, who readily agrees to help out because she "detests dishonesty." She informs them that there are tax records, which would prove the corruption of not only McCall, but the mayor as well. Under cover of darkness, the three sneak into the courthouse (using Emmeline's stolen keys, and with her two cats in tow) and into a basement room where they start gathering evidence. A security guard hears the noises and triggers an alarm, which results in police descending upon the building. They manage to escape with the bound volumes of records, and get away in a patrol car which was inadvertently left with the keys inside. After picking up Greenfield at the hospital, they make their way to a beach house belonging to relatives of Aggie's.
The foursome spends most of the night going over the records. Eventually Gator and Aggie decide to slip out for a romantic interlude on the beach. When they return, Greenfield sends them off to find a phone with which to call his boss and get more help into town. Within moments, Bama McCall, who has been informed by the police about the stolen records and has surmised where the group might be hiding, arrives at the beach house. He kills Greenfield with a sawed-off shotgun and sets the house (and all the tax records) on fire. McCall's henchman attempts to haul Emmeline out of the house, but she escapes and runs back inside to rescue one of her cats, and also dies in the fire.
Upon returning and seeing the burning house, Gator and Aggie make their way to a motel on the outskirts of town, where Gator calls McCall on the phone and, after telling him that "not all" of the records were destroyed in the fire, demands $2000 and a plane ticket home in exchange for the records. He tells him where he is, and to bring the money and ticket to him and "Don't bring that nasty ol' gun." McCall agrees to the deal. Gator, anticipating that McCall is not going to honor the deal, booby-traps the motel room, and waits outside in hiding. McCall arrives with one of his henchmen, and sends the man to the motel room to kill Gator, but the henchman dies in the resulting explosion. Gator then confronts Bama, now defenseless without his bodyguard or his shotgun. A wild chase around the motel parking lot ensues, eventually leading to a lengthy fistfight on the beach, during which Gator finally subdues Bama (apparently breaking his neck).
A day or two later, Aggie's story about the events has aired on the "CBS Evening News" and Gator arrives at Aggie's home to find her in a celebratory mood. She tells him that due to the recognition she received for her reporting about the Dunston County events, she's been offered an interview in with a news organization in New York. Gator tells her he loves her, but they both realize that their vastly different lifestyles would make it impossible for them to be together for the long term; they reluctantly decide to go their separate ways.
|
violence
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0105594
|
Till Death Us Do Part
|
The film begins in September 1939 shortly before World War II begins. Alf Garnett, a dockyard worker, and his wife Else have been married for only a few weeks, and are already weary of one another. Alf gets called up for military duty but is turned down because he's in a reserved occupation. The film depicts their lives during the London Blitz. Else eventually gets pregnant to Alf and Else's shock, and they have a baby daughter, Rita, in 1942. The war ends in 1945 with a huge street party and Alf, characteristically, gets drunk.
Midway through the film it advances from the end of World War II to the 1966 General Election. Rita is now a young woman and engaged to Mike Rawlins, a long-haired layabout from Liverpool. Alf dislikes him because of his support for the Labour Party. Mike and Rita marry in a Catholic church, further angering Alf. At the wedding supper he fights with Mike's family. But Alf and Mike grow a bit closer, attending the 1966 World Cup final together.
The film ends in 1968 with the family moving to a new tower block in Essex after their East End neighbourhood street is demolished.
|
murder
|
train
|
wikipedia
| null |
tt0093267
|
Intervista
|
Interviewed by a Japanese TV crew for a news report on his latest film, Fellini takes the viewer behind the scenes at Cinecittà. A nighttime set is prepared for a sequence that Fellini defines as “the prisoner’s dream” in which his hands grope for a way out of a dark tunnel. With advancing age and weight, Fellini is finding it difficult to escape by simply flying away but when he does, he contemplates Cinecittà from a great height.
The next morning, Fellini accompanies the Japanese TV crew on a brief tour of the studios. As they walk past absurd TV commercials in production, Fellini’s casting director presents him with four young actors she’s found to interpret Karl Rossmann, the leading role in the maestro's film version of Kafka’s Amerika. Fellini introduces the Japanese to the female custodian of Cinecittà (Nadia Ottaviani) but she succeeds in putting off the interview by disappearing into the deserted backlot of Studio 5 to gather dandelions to make herbal tea. Meanwhile, Fellini’s assistant director (Maurizio Mein) is on location with other crew members at the Casa del Passeggero, a once cheap hotel now converted into a drugstore. Fellini wants to include it in his film about the first time he visited Cinecittà as a journalist in 1938 during the Fascist era. Past and present intermingle as Fellini interacts with his younger self played by aspiring actor, Sergio Rubini. After the crew reconstruct the facade of the Casa del Passeggero elsewhere in Rome, a fake tramway takes young Fellini/Rubini from America’s Far West with Indian warriors on a clifftop to a herd of wild elephants off the coast of Ethiopia. Arriving at Cinecittà, he sets off to interview matinee idol, Greta Gonda.
Seamlessly, the illusion takes over the realities of moviemaking as the viewer is thrown into two feature films being directed by tyrannical directors. But only for a short while; for the rest of the film, Fellini and his assistant director (Maurizio Mein) scramble to recruit the right cast and build the sets for the film version of Amerika, a fictitious adaptation that Fellini uses as a pretext to shoot his film-in-progress. This allows Fellini/Rubini to go back and forth in time to experience filmmaking first-hand including disgruntled actors who failed their auditions, Marcello Mastroianni in a TV commercial as Mandrake the Magician, a bomb threat, a visit to Anita Ekberg’s house where she and Mastroianni re-live their La Dolce Vita scenes, screen tests of Kafka’s Brunelda caressed in a bathtub by two young men, and an inconvenient thunderstorm that heralds the production collapse of Amerika with an attack by bogus Indians on horseback wielding television antennae as spears.
Back inside Studio 5 at Cinecittà, Intervista concludes with Fellini’s voiceover, “So the movie should end here. Actually, it’s finished.” In response to producers unhappy with his gloomy endings, the Maestro ironically offers them a ray of sunshine by lighting an arc lamp.
|
psychedelic, autobiographical, flashback
|
train
|
wikipedia
|
Elegiac "rememberance" of times past, great companion piece to "Amarcord".
An elegiac look-back by the Maestro on where his films were shot (Cinecitta), Intervista has the most meta-fictional plot devices Fellini's used yet.
--It features Fellini himself, shooting a film "recounting" a location (as in "Roma") but here he is more forefront.
--The rather casual stream-of-consciousness meandering of the happenings hearkens to "Amarcord," which is similar to this, with a wistful look back on the past, with fascists, bus rides, buxom women, etc.
"Intervista" truly seems like an alternate draft of "Amarcord" with Fellini personally added.
--The "young Fellini" going on an interview, being shot by Fellini during an interview in present day, and the playful and insistent 3rd-wall being broken every so often.--And of course Marcello and Anita as themselves.
Its reflection on his work, himself, and making films makes it one of the most playful, subversive, and autobiographical films in Fellini's late career.(Originally a t.v. production, it displays a smaller scale that can only be attributed to the budget (too bad) and a need to make things "play" on a smaller screen.
Intervista is an amazing film.
It takes the shape of a fake documentary, in which Fellini looks at, and pokes fun at, his entire career.
In the end it is an homage, not to himself, as other reviewers have suggested, but to film itself.
Praise for a medium which never ceases to amaze viewers and film makers alike with it's capacity to project and create our dreams..
To sum up a life of film making.
So to sum it all up, Fellini seems to be saying in this film, he lived for movies.
Like a long train ride as a passenger, a lover, a player, a commentator he lived through it all and had his moments.
When Marcello Mastroianni says to Anita Eckberg while watching the fountain scene from La Dolce Vita with the party at her mansion that for one moment they made magic, it seemed to sum it all up.
For the actors, the film maker and for us the audience, there were moments that were magic.
This film is a great movie makers collage of his memories of his life.
Like the film studio around which Fellini's life revolved and which gave him all those great memories he shared with us here..
Wow--such a low rating for such a nice little film!.
This was the second to last film the famed director, Fellini, made and it was his most personal.
Instead of being a traditional film, this is much more like having a personal visit with him as he shows you around Cinecittà Studios in Rome.
Sometimes he talks to the camera (or in many cases, the fictional Japanese crew interviewing him--a plot device to represent the audience), sometimes you just watch somewhat random scenes as they are shot and other times you watch Fellini and his friends as they reminisce--such as when Marcello Mastroianni pops by the set and Fellini, impulsively, takes him on a road trip to see Anita Ekberg.
While this all seems unscripted and at the spur of the moment, it was all staged for the film but it has a real home movie quality about it.
At Ekberg's home, all of Fellini's guests view scenes from LA DULCE VITA (starring Mastroianni and Ekberg) and there is a very strong nostalgic air about the party.The total effect of all these elements was a lot like climbing inside Fellini's mind and it also gave a lot of amazing insights into the film making process.
Because of this it was a lot like Truffaut's DAY FOR NIGHT, though a bit different because DAY FOR NIGHT stuck more to a traditional script (a movie about a movie being filmed) and seemed a lot less frivolous and fun.
Fellini's is more of a "warts and all" and appears to be more spontaneous and ad-libbed--though because of some of the grand sets and the visit to Ekberg's, it obviously was staged to look spontaneous.
DAY FOR NIGHT is rated higher, but because of all the sentimentality of INTERVISTA, I preferred it slightly.While I have never been a huge fan of Fellini, I have seen most of his films and really enjoyed having some insights into his psyche.
Most of it came as no surprise (such as the use of phallic imagery--Fellini's sexuality was never repressed in his films), but some was very sweet and charming.
It was nice to see him as both director and actor--so why is the film rated so poorly??!!
By the way, when the film was made, Miss Ekberg was 56 years-old and Mr. Mastroianni was 63.
This was cruel and shallow, as most women would die to look that ravishing at 56 and most men would love to be a charming old rogue at 63!
It's not really fatness, it's development." Bravo.PS--If you like this film, try watching Vincenzo Mollica's documentary on the film that's included on the DVD for INTERVISTA.
It does a nice job of explaining some of the plot elements and features clips not only from this movie but several other Fellini films.
My favorite part was learning that Miss Ekberg's plunge into the Trevi fountain in LA DULCE VITA was done in February!!.
a magic, nostalgic film.
Intervista is one of the best films I've ever seen.
The strong sense in all Fellini films that reality is like a big, sad circus is even stronger in this film because fact and fiction, past and present become so confused.
And isn't that maybe quite a realistic view?There is not only the usual sense of nostalgia: because the film looks back at decades of Fellini nostalgia, the nostalgia is double.
Who can watch the older Anita and Marcello looking back at La Dolce Vita with dry eyes?
The only possible critic could be that the film is, like all Fellini movies, little coherent, but then, isn't that as well like life itself?Intervista maybe isn't the most famous Fellini films, it certainly is one of the better ones and with that one of the best films in cinematographic history..
One of Fellini's most underrated, most personal and most interesting films.
For me, it does fall short of Fellini's most classic movies like Nights of Cabiria, La Dolce Vita, 8 1/2, Amarcord and La Strada.
But it is one of Fellini's better later films along with Ginger and Fred and When the Ship Sails On, and I connected more to Intervista than other Fellini's like Casanova, Juliet of the Spirits and especially Satyricon.
Intervista is superbly directed by Fellini, restrained yet insightful, and the visuals are gorgeous.
The music is brightly characterful and sweepingly beautiful, and the basic story is very interesting in its balance of past and present blurring, studio reality and cinematic illusion as well as being packed with numerous jewels of the screen.
It is also one of Fellini's most personal in its nostalgic themes, and balance of humour, surrealism, restless action and beauty.
But what makes it especially so is the poignant climax, a beautifully staged reunion between La Dolce Vita stars Marcello Mastroianni and Anita Ekberg.
Not one of the classics of Fellini, but underrated and interesting.
9/10 Bethany Cox. The End of a Golden Era. While shooting a movie about his arrival to Cinecittà to interview a famous star, Federico Fellini is interviewed by the Japanese television.
Fellini highlights and revisits the beginning of his career portrayed by the young actor Sergio Rubini in the early 40's.
Then he casts new characters for his next movie, "Amerika", from Franz Kafka.
Later Marcello Mastroianni performing Mandrake visits Fellini and his producers, cast and crew and together they pay a visit to Anita Ekberg in her country cottage.
Last but not the least, Fellini foresees the end of the golden era to the cinema industry with the competition of the television.The beautiful and simple "Intervista" is a nostalgic "movie of a documentary of a film-making" that envisions the increasing competition to the television in this segment and consequent end of the golden era of the cinema industry and mostly of the movie theaters.
The climax of the story is certainly with the unforgettable and most famous scene of the Italian cinema with Marcello Mastroianni and Anita Ekberg in the fountain of "La Dolce Vita".
I would give a penny for the thoughts of Anita and Marcello while seeing that magic moment of their youth again.
The magic of movies and the magic of life according to Fellini.
"Intervista" ("Interview") takes life and movies to an unimagined extent.
An nostalgic journey into memory, experiences and life in the way Federico Fellini sees them.
And he asks those kind of questions: "What's real in movies?
Even more: "What's real in life?" Defying, joking, molding, constructing and deconstructing films and the human existence, Fellini challenges and fascinates viewers through four intertwined segments which echo his work, his art and his early memories when of his arrival at the famous studio Cinecittá, way before of becoming the cinematic author of "Amarcord" and "Satyricon".The movie is composed of showing the behind the scenes of a movie directed by the maestro Fellini; the movie itself (film within the film) and its long and confusing process of shooting; the interview documented by the Japanese crew who hears the director's stories that later are intercut with scenes of a young Fellini (played by the lovable Sergio Rubini) living his first experiences at Cinecittá while interviewing a impressionable film star.
They're all mixed into an magical and dreamy imitation of life.But how can one distinguish what's scripted and what's real?
The reunion between Marcello Mastroianni and Anita Ekberg, 27 seven years later after "La Dolce Vita" is wonderful, almost brings tears to our eyes.
They play themselves in the movie, watching the characters they played in another Fellini classic, when they were very young.
That's the film's magic, to capture both these stars in different situations and periods of life, all captured in a beautiful frame where Marcello can play magic tricks and prepare a delightful and nostalgic surprise to Anita and then watch the famous sequence of the Fontana de Trevi that the two performed in 1960.
It's a perfect fusion of realities, facts and fiction friendly put together in one single film.One of Fellini's finest and a treasure to be sought.
Watching Fellini's "Intervista" is a mixed bag--sadness, frustration because it is not better...
I'm not sure there is a more poignant moment in the movies than the scene of a wrinkled Marcello Mastroianni and obese Anita Ekberg wistfully watching their former youthful black & white selves in "La Dolce Vita" being projected on a makeshift screen.
That scene alone is a richly-charged commentary on time, memory, regret, self-delusion, love, missed opportunity, life and death--unlike any other I have ever seen..
A Later Fellini.
Cinecitta, the huge movie studio outside Rome, is 50 years old and Fellini (Sergio Rubini) is interviewed by a Japanese TV crew about the films he has made there over the years as he begins production on his latest film.Something about Italian cinema...
Except for the fact it is completely fictionalized, beyond the actors who are essentially playing themselves.I do love these sort of films, because it really shows the Italian love of cinema.
In Which Fellini does for Cinecitta what he did for Rome in "Roma".
"Intervista" means interview and naturally that's not at all what this is.Fellini does start off with a fictional interview with a Japanese TV crew but the movie develops to include a recreation of his own first trip to Cinecitta (as a journalist to interview a famous actress), a look at the process of making a Fellini film, reminiscences of his own previous movies, cinema in general and the music of Nino Rota, sideswipes at TV and advertising and the silly questions asked by journalists.We jump about between several layers of 'reality' - the fake 'interview', the '30's recreation, the creation of that recreation, real people playing more or less fictionalised versions of themselves.
At one point we have Fellini-surrogates Mastroianni and Rubini, and Fellini himself, all in a car together.The film lacks the epic sweep and spectacle of "Roma", perhaps due to its genesis as a TV film, and much of it will mean little to those unfamiliar with Fellini's earlier work.
Nonetheless, there is much to enjoy, from Rubini and Mastroianni's discussion of masturbation, through the scenery-painters' rather blunt dialogue, to the rightly acclaimed and very poignant scene of Mastroianni and Ekberg revisiting "La Dolce Vita".In fact the Mastroianni/Ekberg scene probably sums up the whole film - a wistful look back at past glories and a perhaps rather rueful look at where Fellini, and the rest of us, had arrived at by 1987..
Nostalgia is the name of the game for Marcello and Anita in one of Fellini's best and most underrated..
A joy to watch from beginning to end, a visual gem, a masterpiece; one with which the master confounds the skeptics, shows he's still in top form.
I don't remember any other Fellini containing such breathtaking scenes, astonishing in their exuberance and richness in color as that in the oriental set with Maharajahs and elephants or those carrying such evocative power as that of the two aging European sex symbols of the 1960s watching themselves on a white sheet, shedding a few tears and drinking to the good old times.
Oh, and that final sequence of the cast and crew huddling inside the plastic tent during a storm, the collective soul going from joy and euphoric enthusiasm to muted, thoughtful melancholy, while bathed all with the music coming from the back of the truck under the rain.
There's also something surreal about that haunting scene, under the rain, behind the rain, that makes it stay with us for a long time, forever: the girl blowing it away in her saxophone and the boy taking it away at the piano, both framed by the big box of the vehicle; a beautiful portrait of ineffable energy and youthful poetry.
Oh, and also nobody, nobody but Fellini himself could have done a better job playing The Maestro at his best, with the juices of creativity pouring through each one of his pores.This is Fellini at his best, the full essence of his genius distilled in a single cinematographic piece, where he reaches his own outer limits.
I'm not a film scholar or a psychologist, but to me that means that at this point Fellini had finally become master of his space, that he totally owned his surroundings.
He was free at last to do pure cinematographic art without being burdened by ghosts from the remote past, by the heavy load of unsolved traumas; he had finally exorcised his demons—even the resident fascist here is a nice, inoffensive little old man—and so become the filmmaker he always wanted to be.
It is in this film where the master has reached his peak.
Intervista is a cinematographic gem from beginning to end.
The world can do without 8 ½ but it absolutely needs Intervista.
Because here we see the real man, Fellini in all his humility and humanity, a man in love with movies and people.
I have seen enough movie shootings in public places to know that this can be at times a very stressful activity and tempers tend to flare during difficult times but I don't have any doubt that the joy and enthusiasm his collaborators show working with him here is real.
I can't possibly imagine Hitchcock or Kubrick getting away with the same thing and I'm even less sure we would have wanted to watch their respective "Intervistas".
But Fellini not only shows us how he shoots movies, he makes us also part of his team, we become—in the flesh of the Japanese journalists, the young actors, the crew—part of his family.
Already in the introductory shot he makes clear we are his invites in that metaphoric opening wide of the gates of Cinecitta and in the fact that he's himself the one to greet us, no some subordinate or studio bureaucrat.
will be the real deal.Another thing I loved about Intervista is that it is a movie that doesn't take itself seriously, probably to the image of his creator.
There are some hilarious moments that can only be seen as his ironic or sarcastic comments about movie directors in general or even himself: For ex., the director who won't settle for anything less than a pear for lunch.
I found also the commercials very good and very tasty, said to have been Fellini's concepts.
And finally, the score, a put pourri of some scores of other Fellini's films, the kind of music you'll like to be the last thing you hear when leaving this world.In all, perhaps not the best but certainly the most beautiful, most joyful, of all Fellini's.
In America, the best proof of this nostrum is the awarding of the lifetime Academy Award to a film director, or actor.
Apparently, Europe is not immune to such worthless laurels either, for, in 1987, Federico Fellini's disastrously bad film Intervista won the Cannes Film Festival's Fortieth Anniversary Award and the Grand Prize at the Moscow Film Festival.
In it, one can see many pastiches from earlier Fellini films, much as Ingmar Bergman cribbed ideas and scenes from his earlier masterpieces for his disastrously bad last film Saraband, the way Akira Kurosawa tossed random ideas together for Dreams, and the way Woody Allen has constantly reworked themes from his 1970s and 1980s great films into his last decade's worth of mostly mediocrities.
That said, even the worst of Allen's recent films, like The Curse Of The Jade Scorpion, were better than Intervista.
Fellini might take some solace in the fact that Intervista is a better film than Bergman's incest-ridden Saraband, but it's a minor comfort, at best, and this shoddy film still falls well shy of even Dreams.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.